Newest polish experiment

[sprocket]

Well, I dug out on old Columbia 300 Complete Chaos from about 1999. I found this ball on the ball rack many years ago and basically traded it for one of my old balls. I found it on our fun day for the last day of league and rolled 745 with it right off the rack. I then took it home and cleaned it. It never was the same and I have seldom tried it since. Removing the oil with soap and water caused it to hook too much for me. When I moved in with it, it didn't hook enough. Over/under was a big problem. I sanded it to roughen the surface and be able to play further in but that made it worse. I don't recall what surface I brought it to but it wasn't overly dull and it still hooked right out of my hand. Since it was a second hand ball anyway I just gave up on it.


But now I have my new love of POLISH! The ball is in great shape so I sanded it to 400 then 600,800,1500 rubbing compound and Meguire's Ultimate polish. I know, not exactly bowling ball polish but it works for me.

This ball shines up real nice but doesn't look pearl or anything. I just now has a nice smooth finish. I measured its layout with my crude method using a flexible ruler and I get basically 85 4 5/8 45 which would be a control layout for me. Most balls that I borrow or get used and don't redrill end up having a control layout for me because my PAP is so far out and the drill angle ends up being quite large.

But a control layout is exactly what I want because I am pretty rev dominant and I want to use polish and not layout to get the ball down the lane. It has worked well on two other balls and now I look forward to trying it on this ball tomorrow morning. I also got my bowling shoe repaired so that should help too.

[bowl1820]

but doesn't look pearl or anything.

That's because it's a Particle ball

[sprocket]

Well it WAS a particle ball. I don't think I was supposed to use sandpaper on a particle ball but I don't care about that. If I have effectively negated the particles, so be it.

What I really meant when I said it doesn't look pearl is that it is shiny but not THAT shiny. It's not glowing. I think it might be pretty hard to over polish a ball with this cover stock. I think there's a limit of how smooth it will get. I don't think there's a danger of it skidding 60 ft.

[Stormed1]

If ypu used abralon or saiir to sand the particles will still be in play

[bowl1820]

If you used Abralon or Siaair to sand the particles will still be in play

Sandpaper wears away both the resin and the particles and would reduce the aggressiveness of the ball.

Abralon/Siaair would be better than paper, because it's not hard backed so wouldn't wear away both as much.

If you want the most aggressiveness use Scotch-Brites, they wear away the resin and leave more of the particle showing.

From there you can adjust with polsih

[MICHAEL]

experimenting with ball surface, and polish!! Just a foot note: MAKE SURE YOU KEEP GOOD RECORDS of each ball, and what you did to each THAT WEEK!

I have a notebook, and without out the records, IF,,, IF something turns out GREAT! I want to be able to repeat it again! LOL

Most people that do this have a spinners, but you have a spin cycle.... LOL.... very funny, and lots of creativity!!

I agree with your thoughts on polish! I use reacta shine by storm, and rough buff by Brunswick! Both have a huge difference on the break point of my balls.

[sprocket]

Well, that ball still didn't work very well. It looks so... lopey. The distance between the flare lines is bigger than on any other ball I own. I think that means the differential is very large, right? That just doesn't seem to work for me very well.

It doesn't look like it revs up, yet it hooks a bunch. Because it doesn't get into a strong forward roll it doesn't carry. I know, add surface. But I have already done that and it still looked similar. It isn't worth the trouble for a 13 year old ball, especially since I plan on winning a new ball here.

[bowl1820]

Well, that ball still didn't work very well. It looks so... lopey. The distance between the flare lines is bigger than on any other ball I own. I think that means the differential is very large, right? That just doesn't seem to work for me very well.

The ball has a medium Rg (2.539) and a high differential Rg (.069) to create 6-9 inches of flare

It doesn't look like it revs up, yet it hooks a bunch. Because it doesn't get into a strong forward roll it doesn't carry. I know, add surface. But I have already done that and it still looked similar. It isn't worth the trouble for a 13 year old ball, especially since I plan on winning a new ball here.

Maybe try the skip a grit: 500/2000 (Sand 4 ways thoroughly with the first grit and sand two ways quickly with the second grit.)

This reaction is a very good benchmark reaction as the ball has enough topography to still generate friction in medium to light oil, but not enough to cause the ball to read too early in most cases. This finish delays the hook transition, allowing for a strong entry angle.

[dnhoffman]

So, on this topic - I resurfaced my motiv primal rage after about 60 games because it wasn't getting the same recovery when I missed outside. I did 500 6 ways for 10 sec, then 1500 6 ways for 5 seconds and then polish.

Ball was reacting well enough but nowhere near that OOB recovery from the outside it used to have. Wondering why, is it the polish I'm using (Valentino snake oil) or something else?

[bowl1820]

Valentino snake oil is pretty close to the Motiv Polish, depending on how much your using that should be okay. Might need a de-oiling also.

I'd say it's the under laying grit I'm guessing the surface is still kind of rough , so it's smoothed out the reaction.

I'd try smoothing the grit more, go longer on the 1500. Also 4 sides are plenty. That might make it a little more angular, but that's just a guess without seeing it.