differences in coverstock

[boatman37]

So I see pearl, solid, reactive, hybrid (am i missing any?). So what is the difference in them and why choose one over the other?

[RobLV1]

So I see pearl, solid, reactive, hybrid (am i missing any?). So what is the difference in them and why choose one over the other?

The whole solid/hybrid/pearl thing is the greatest marketing coup known to man. The inherent differences are so minor that a very slight surface adjustment render them virtually identical. Imagine the elation for the marketing guy that came up with the idea to sell three products, all virtually identical, to the same customer. He's still laughing all the way to the bank!

[boatman37]

The whole solid/hybrid/pearl thing is the greatest marketing coup known to man. The inherent differences are so minor that a very slight surface adjustment render them virtually identical. Imagine the elation for the marketing guy that came up with the idea to sell three products, all virtually identical, to the same customer. He's still laughing all the way to the bank!

Good point...lol. I have seen people say they bought 2 of the same ball, one solid and one pearl. Just wondered why you would need both and what the difference was.

[RobLV1]

One word: surface. If you look back a few years, Storm came out with the Rocket, a ball with a hybrid cover material, finished to 1500 abralon with Step 2 polish. A few months later, they introduced the Sky Rocket, a pearl ball with the same core and the same OOB finish. If you look at the BTM ball reviews for the two balls, you will see that they were identical. This was a result of the same OOB finish. Next, they came out with the Rocket Ship, same core and a solid cover material. It also had a totally different finish. It was totally different from the other two releases as a direct result of the surface, not the fact that it was a solid.

[bowl1820]

So I see pearl, solid, reactive, hybrid (am i missing any?).

First off remove reactive from that list.

The main coverstock materials are: Rubber (Which is old, but can still be found in play.), Plastic (Polyester), Urethane, Reactive Urethane (aka: Reactive Resin), Particle (Which is a Reactive cover that's had microscopic pieces of material added to it).

There are some old lesser know ones, like Epoxy or Acryllium (which was used like for the old Ebonite Omega Acryllium) but they never really went anywhere (so don't worry about them).

With the exception of the Rubber and Plastic, you could have Solid, Hybrid and Pearl versions of the rest example:
A Urethane "Solid", A Urethane "Pearl", A reactive "Hybrid", Particle "Pearl" etc.



So what is the difference in them

A Solid is basically just the base coverstock resin the ball is made of.

A Pearl is the base resin with a additive, Typically either powdered pearl or liquid pearl.

Now do those additives affect the balls motion? There has been many discussions and debates about that and it's not been definitely answered. It just depends on who you ask example.

According to Mo Pinel (he's well known in the bowling industry if you don't know who he is) who currently designs balls for Radical, he says "If you use powdered pearl, you will NOT add length, just increase the shape of the breakpoint. If you use liquid pearl (mother of pearl), you will definitely add length. At Brunswick, it's all about the base resins and the additive packages that determine the effect of the cover on the shape of the ball motion."

A Hybrid is basically a combination of a Solid & a Pearl (IMO It's just a Pearl with less pearl material than a pearl. Let's just call it "Lite Pearl"), with the idea that it will read the mid lane like a solid and have the backend reaction of pearl.



and why choose one over the other?

Well originally the idea is/was that you got a Solid for the oil and Pearl for the dry. When reactive came out the same idea was basically applied to it.

A lot of players look to pearls when they want more of a skid/snap reaction, While you can get a skid snap with a solid it's usually easier with a pearl.


IMO about Solid/Hybrid/Pearl

You can polish a solid all you want and get it to act more like a pearl, But your not going to turn it into one. You can sand a pearl all you want and get it to act more like a solid, But your not going to turn it into one.

Can you take a Solid and a Pearl version of the same ball and put the same surface on them and have them react exactly the same? It's all going to depend on what ball's they are.

Here's from personal experience, Pyramid bowlings force line of balls. The Force (solid), Force Pearl and the Blunt Force (the hybrid) the only difference in them is solid/hybrid/pearl everything else is the same.

I have the Blunt Force and the Force Pearl and they are layed out as close to exactly the same as I could get and have rolled them with the same surface texture on the same lanes and condition.

While both balls had basically the same shape of motion, The Force Pearl was noticeably longer before it made it's move.

Another example was the Rotogrip Nomad's the only difference solid/hybrid/pearl, the rest was the same even the OOB. I had them they did not react the same.

So as you see the whole solid vs hybrid vs pearl subject is not necessarily all that cut and dried.

[boatman37]

Clear as mud....lol. But like Rob said in my other thread about my new Conspiracy, there are so many variables that it is hard to compare 2 balls. But what you said does make sense.

[Tony]

Since it's clear as mud, I'll give my take on it, in a basic viewpoint .

The pearl ball with out of box finish will slide longer before making it's move, the thought being it will conserve more energy , (thought to be an advantage for slower speed bowlers) and hit harder, it's also better matched for medium oil the solid ball polished will do the same thing.

The solid with OOB finish will make it's move sooner, maybe too soon for slower speed bowlers if it rolls out before reaching the pocket, and is better matched for heavier oil, the pearl ball surface can be adjusted to accomplish the same thing.

If you're willing and able to make your own surface adjustment either ball can be made to do the same thing.
The hybrid is a compromise between the two.

This is my take on it and isn't intended to contradict any of the prior comments, mostly it's just a slightly different way to say the same thing.
If you don't intend to make surface changes get the ball that more closely matches your game.

[Amyers]

Ignore Solid, Pearl, Hybrid it's BS. Pay attention to surface as Rob stated. Their may be a 1 board difference if you had them all with the same surface you aren't one board accurate anyway lol. Simply realize surface is king and you control the surface. You'll be much better off and no more waiting for them to bring out the pearl or solid version of what you want.

[bdpeters]

nice post Boatman. great info. as one fairly new to all of this I was basically wondering the same thing.

[Goose]

Bowl1820.

Increase the shape of the breakpoint.

Can you explain this part of your thread please?

[RobLV1]

This thread seems like a good time to reintroduce an old topic: Understanding modern bowling balls. There are only four factors that influence how a particular bowling ball will work for you: core, cover material, layout, and surface.

Here are the important things to consider: manufacturers tell you everything about the core (shape, symmetry, low RG, and Differential(s)), they tell you nothing about the cover material other than in the most general terms (everything else is marketing rhetoric), the layout is nothing more than how the core is positioned within the ball (stick to one or two layouts that work for you), and the surface finish which is the only thing that can be easily changed once the ball is drilled. The bottom line is that if you take a little time to learn about cores, learn to ignore the marketing rhetoric about the cover formulation, find one or two layouts that work for you and stick with them, and get rid of the notion that there is anything sacred or special about the OOB finish, you'll find that choosing and setting up a bowling ball is very simple. There's no magic involved!

[djp1080]

This thread seems like a good time to reintroduce an old topic: Understanding modern bowling balls. There are only four factors that influence how a particular bowling ball will work for you: core, cover material, layout, and surface.

Here are the important things to consider: manufacturers tell you everything about the core (shape, symmetry, low RG, and Differential(s)), they tell you nothing about the cover material other than in the most general terms (everything else is marketing rhetoric), the layout is nothing more than how the core is positioned within the ball (stick to one or two layouts that work for you), and the surface finish which is the only thing that can be easily changed once the ball is drilled. The bottom line is that if you take a little time to learn about cores, learn to ignore the marketing rhetoric about the cover formulation, find one or two layouts that work for you and stick with them, and get rid of the notion that there is anything sacred or special about the OOB finish, you'll find that choosing and setting up a bowling ball is very simple. There's no magic involved!
Rob, I bought a Storm Sky Rocket (15 lbs.) with an RG of 2.54 and Differential of 0.46 with a pearl coverstock a couple of years ago. I was expecting it to go a bit longer than my Hy-Road and to provide a snappier backend. While I had it, it did seem to go a bit longer like the BTM suggested, but it wasn't snappier like I expected. I gave it away to another fellow in our senior league. I decided to pick up a Hy-Road Pearl with an RG of 2.57 and Differential of 0.46 which is practically identical to the Sky Rocket. I had seen the Hy-Road Pearl on the lanes before elsewhere and I was impressed on it's snappy reaction. I've found that it was more what I expected and is a bit more snappy on the backend. It has a little different shape and reaction than the Hy-Road. It seems to skid a bit longer than the Hy-Road and more rounded on it's reaction for me.
Since the Sky Rocket and Hy-Road Pearl use the pearl R2S coverstock, it seems to me that there's some magic between the two balls. Both were laid out the same with 50 x 3 3/8 x 25. I've wondered what accounted for what I perceived as different reactions to these two balls. I'm pleased with the Hy-Road Pearl BTW.
I bought a SoniQ with an RG of 2.47 and differential of 0.47 which uses the R2S coverstock. I was surprised to see it have a much longer length rating in BTM evaluation. I was expecting it to pick up better in the midlane and finish quite strong even on the fresh. For me it's a ball that I can use once transition sets in on our THS men's league and then it's something that finishes quite nicely. I would suppose that the first ball out of the bag should be the Hy-Road hybrid cover and then switch to the Hy-Road pearl or SoniQ once the lanes start changing a bit. Again, I've wondered what I'm missing on the SoniQ and what I've perceived of it.

[Tony]

The bottom line is that if you take a little time to learn about cores, learn to ignore the marketing rhetoric about the cover formulation, find one or two layouts that work for you and stick with them, and get rid of the notion that there is anything sacred or special about the OOB finish, you'll find that choosing and setting up a bowling ball is very simple. There's no magic involved!

Sounds good, do you have or can you direct us toward some information on core , the properties and what each one will contributes toward ball reaction and performance and what balls are suitable for what bowlers or conditions.

[RobLV1]

Rob, I bought a Storm Sky Rocket (15 lbs.) with an RG of 2.54 and Differential of 0.46 with a pearl coverstock a couple of years ago. I was expecting it to go a bit longer than my Hy-Road and to provide a snappier backend. While I had it, it did seem to go a bit longer like the BTM suggested, but it wasn't snappier like I expected.

What led you to expect that the Sky Rocket would provide a "snappier" backend?

[RobLV1]

Sounds good, do you have or can you direct us toward some information on core , the properties and what each one will contributes toward ball reaction and performance and what balls are suitable for what bowlers or conditions.

I wrote an article for BTM several years ago. It's entitled, "This ball's too weak, this ball's too strong, this ball's just right!" The article is available to subscribers on the BTM website. If you are not a subscriber and can't avoid to become one (about $40 a year), I'll be glad to answer any questions that you may have right here. Just ask what you want to know.

[djp1080]

I thought that a pearl type of coverstock with the polished 1500 grit finish like the Hy-Road has would grab the dry boards a bit quicker than the hybrid cover.

[djp1080]

Another point is BTM shows the Sky Rocket to have very good ratings for dry conditions and the Hy-Road Pearl shows poorer results for dry conditions. Wondered why that was, too...

[RobLV1]

I thought that a pearl type of coverstock with the polished 1500 grit finish like the Hy-Road has would grab the dry boards a bit quicker than the hybrid cover.

As I said earlier, I firmly believe that the type of cover material (solid, pearl, hybrid) has much less effect on ball motion than the manufacturers would have us believe.

[RobLV1]

Another point is BTM shows the Sky Rocket to have very good ratings for dry conditions and the Hy-Road Pearl shows poorer results for dry conditions. Wondered why that was, too...

Okay, I'm going to stick my neck out here and make an educated guess. One of the sites where I researched the HyRoad made reference to a part of the core with a different density that allows the cover to be thicker than on other balls. Since the RG's are purely based on measurements (in inches) of the X and Y axis of the core, it would seem to me that adding more weight within the core would make the ball more center-heavy, thereby changing how soon the ball rolls without actually changing the low RG measurement. Does that make any sense?

[djp1080]

The difference of the internals of the Sky Rocket and the Hy-Road Pearl seems to be the cover thickness and the slight difference in RG measurements. Perhaps the concentration of the mass in the Hy-Road makes a difference along with the thickness of the cover. The Hy-Road balls essentially have a very thick cover and no filler. Maybe that's what makes them different. Don't know...

[bowl1820]

Bowl1820.

Increase the shape of the breakpoint.

Can you explain this part of your thread please?

Since Mo Pinel made that statement, He would really need to be the one to explain what he meant by that.

But I take it to mean it will make the ball little sharper at the breakpoint, because the powdered pearl gives the ball more surface roughness due to the mica flakes giving it a little more bite or at least something along those lines.

[djp1080]

One other interesting thing I've observed is something Rob mentioned about Storm's Reign On. The Reign On indeed uses the same coverstock that the Hy-Road uses; however, it's a slightly different core with similar RG and differential, but it comes with a 4000 grit matte finish vs. a polished 1500 grit shiny finish. I have both and both are laid out the same. I polished up the Reign On to see if I could get it to react similarly to the Hy-Road once upon a time, but it wasn't even close. The Reign On's BTM review has it listed as a 12 for length rating and a higher total hook rating than the Hy-Road. With polishing the Reign On pretty much became a spare ball for me. Actually as I recall it's reaction was similar to what I found with their Sky Rocket. I've sanded the Reign On back to it's 4000 grit matte finish and I doubt that I'll try going back to the polish with it. I used Storm's Reacta Shine which I've used on the Hy-Road as well. Recently switched to Motiv's Power Gel 5000 grit polish and it works pretty well in a size 16 oz. bottle.

[RobLV1]

Your observations confirm two very important points. First, the surface is the most important factor in determining ball reaction. Second, while the RG and Diff are very important factors in the core, you can't overlook the shape of the core. Very similar numbers with dissimilar shapes often yield very different ball reactions.

[djp1080]

Rob, Okay! Yep, surface definitely is likely the most important factor in determining ball reaction.
I've not read much mentioning the shapes of the cores yielding different types of reactions or I just skipped that part of the discussion. :)
What you've said makes me think that my thoughts on the subject weren't too far off and that the core shape makes quite a bit of difference, too. I'd sure like to understand which shapes would benefit me and my style. :)
I've relied on the reviews by BTM magazine and I'm glad that it still exists. I was only saddened by your decision to not write as many articles for them and retire from publishing.
I had to do another experiment with balls. I picked up a Hammer Dark Legend hybrid ball and hoped it would give me a nice ball to allow me to move farther left on the lane and target the 3rd or 4th arrow with plenty of energy to get back to the pocket; however, it wasn't a hook monster like I thought it might be. I looked at how it was prepared at the factory and after many sessions with in on the lanes, I decided I needed to make a change to it's cover. So I got out a 3000 grit pad and then a 4000 grit pad to get the Clean n'Sheen compound off of it and got it looking more of a matte finish. Previously the ball didn't have much of a reaction while targeting board 9 or 10 from a laydown of about board 14 or 15. The asymmetrical differential didn't seem to do much of anything on the backend either. Once I made the change in cover the Dark Legend came to life. I had to move farther left and the differential actually made a difference on the backend now. I was about ready to get rid of this big black rock. It became a decent bowling ball that I read about in BTM... :) I just had to clean the compound off and get it to around 3000 to 4000 grit on the cover. I'm still learning...

[RobLV1]

Rob, Okay! Yep, surface definitely is likely the most important factor in determining ball reaction.
I've not read much mentioning the shapes of the cores yielding different types of reactions or I just skipped that part of the discussion. :)
What you've said makes me think that my thoughts on the subject weren't too far off and that the core shape makes quite a bit of difference, too. I'd sure like to understand which shapes would benefit me and my style. :)
I've relied on the reviews by BTM magazine and I'm glad that it still exists. I was only saddened by your decision to not write as many articles for them and retire from publishing.
I had to do another experiment with balls. I picked up a Hammer Dark Legend hybrid ball and hoped it would give me a nice ball to allow me to move farther left on the lane and target the 3rd or 4th arrow with plenty of energy to get back to the pocket; however, it wasn't a hook monster like I thought it might be. I looked at how it was prepared at the factory and after many sessions with in on the lanes, I decided I needed to make a change to it's cover. So I got out a 3000 grit pad and then a 4000 grit pad to get the Clean n'Sheen compound off of it and got it looking more of a matte finish. Previously the ball didn't have much of a reaction while targeting board 9 or 10 from a laydown of about board 14 or 15. The asymmetrical differential didn't seem to do much of anything on the backend either. Once I made the change in cover the Dark Legend came to life. I had to move farther left and the differential actually made a difference on the backend now. I was about ready to get rid of this big black rock. It became a decent bowling ball that I read about in BTM... :) I just had to clean the compound off and get it to around 3000 to 4000 grit on the cover. I'm still learning...

The easiest way to determine what shape cores work for you is to look at the balls with which you've had the most success over the past few years. I think that you will see some consistency in the shapes of the cores in these balls. For years, I couldn't use cylindrical shaped cores to save my life!

As for my writing, I recently tried an experiment that has worked pretty well. I took a Brunswick Twist; a very, very non-aggressive reactive ball, and had it drilled like it would be for a lefty with negative side weight. The result is that the drilling took most of the very weak core out of play, giving me a reaction that is very similar to my plastic ball, but with a little "pop" at the end for carry. The ball skids, hooks, stands up to face the pins, and stays there. If I can get to the point that I can average high enough, I may start to bowl in some competitive leagues once again. If I can do that, I may be able to start writing again.

[Albundy]

I look at the lane condition class on bowling ball.com..so my hybrid is medium and my solid or pearl says med to heavy oil. So I presume my hybrid would be for the 3rd game .