Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Companies => Custom companies => B3 Cricket => Topic started by: procricket on November 24, 2014, 06:07:38 PM
-
Been Messing around with my new design DW3...
With the help of streaky i have 2 potential designs but which one....
Bat A
which will come out at 2-8 and a half at 370 cleft i'm told.
(http://i61.tinypic.com/rk811v.png)
Bat B
Now for something a bit different again same again 2-8 and a half at 370
(http://i62.tinypic.com/2eqaqad.png)
-
Think I prefer the 2nd design mate, both look nice though.
If you want to send a free sample of each I'll let you know which I prefer ;)
-
Constructive information time i have been looking at the square bats with small spines recently it will have a square flat toe as that's what i use.
Feedback both positive and negative is good.
-
Prefer b. Less weight up at the shoulders.
-
How about less concaving and less edge on bat 1 Dave?
Or are you looking for a bat with a bit more concaving than what you've been using?
-
What are the typical characteristics of the B3's DW 3 profile? What are you trying to improve upon in these changes?
Both bats seem to have a Mid-low sweet spot... Bat B might pick up a little bottom heavy which may assist with bat speed.
-
I like bat a. Just a gut reaction
-
What are the typical characteristics of the B3's DW 3 profile? What are you trying to improve upon in these changes?
Both bats seem to have a Mid-low sweet spot... Bat B might pick up a little bottom heavy which may assist with bat speed.
Not trying to improve on the dw 1 and dw2 just wanted to try somethig new.
I was sat at work bored so I did a drawing and seeing a few Asian players with square bats like Bat A but bat B is the original and I asked streaky to drop the spine 5mm and he did the rest which I really like.
The holy grail for me is the 1271
-
Bat B is what I would prefer, has more wood where its needed.
Subtle changes would make it ideal - Reduce edges by 2-4 mm that will allow less concaving, square toe - makes the bat look bigger and get rid of the spine near the toe will improve the pickup. Also, add nice even bow like Salix to the specs...
-
B for me but no spine near the toe would be something to explore.
-
B for me but no spine near the toe would be something to explore.
Done the duck bill done unfortunately that's why I'm going spine through the toe I think. With the spine goin through and weight all round it elongates the middle.
Think I may for bat A will check
-
If you're looking to try something new, I would suggest playing around with con caving in a bat. See, how you can maximize the sweet spot while concaving the bat in the right places to reduce the weight.
What is so special about the 1271 profile? Doesn't perform better than other designs? Is the profile conducive to faster bat speed? Yes, I know, it is the Jonathan Trott profile but still.
Not trying to improve on the dw 1 and dw2 just wanted to try somethig new.
I was sat at work bored so I did a drawing and seeing a few Asian players with square bats like Bat A but bat B is the original and I asked streaky to drop the spine 5mm and he did the rest which I really like.
The holy grail for me is the 1271
-
I only tend to use the toe for marking my stance and throwing at a Yorker.. In that circumstance If it goes for 4 it will be off the edge so I'm not too fused about extending the middle towards the bottom... I would have thought Putting some of that wood lost by getting rid of the spine handle side of the balance point would help with pick up... It must be hard to get something "new" though... I always thought that with the current trend for con caving then someone would produce an anti scoop shape. Concave low and high on the bat but full in the middle.
-
Bat A and offset the edge further down the bat, that would then look perfect
-
Not the biggest fan of either shape. The DW2....now that's a shape!
-
Bat A for me bud, can imagine it picks up very well and has very good sweet spot coverage
M
-
Just realised bat a is similar to the bat I just shaped myself. I was trying to spread the wood out as much as possible
-
If you're looking to try something new, I would suggest playing around with con caving in a bat. See, how you can maximize the sweet spot while concaving the bat in the right places to reduce the weight.
What is so special about the 1271 profile? Doesn't perform better than other designs? Is the profile conducive to faster bat speed? Yes, I know, it is the Jonathan Trott profile but still.
Because of the distribution in weight the middle is literally the whole bat and by that i mean there is no real bigger "sweet spot" just the whole thing and the construction makes it pick up very very well.
The 1271 is really special better than any profile i have used and i have used a lot and scored runs with many but that profile is a one off it really is.
CRICKET BATS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT COVERAGE NOT A SWEET SPOT EVERY BAT HAS A MIDDLE BUT NOT TO MANY HAVE COVERAGE...
As for concaving been there and done that interesting me currently is the scoop as i have used one of them and it went miles but How i mean it went miles...
-
Not the biggest fan of either shape. The DW2....now that's a shape!
Agreed but sometimes it time to try something new the DW2 is great i have one and i agree i prefer it over the most shapes and is a mini version of the 1271.
I have tried to keep the weight down on this one.
-
Because of the distribution in weight the middle is literally the whole bat and by that i mean there is no real bigger "sweet spot" just the whole thing and the construction makes it pick up very very well.
The 1271 is really special better than any profile i have used and i have used a lot and scored runs with many but that profile is a one off it really is.
What is the minimum weight bat you can make in 1271 profile?
CRICKET BATS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT COVERAGE NOT A SWEET SPOT EVERY BAT HAS A MIDDLE BUT NOT TO MANY HAVE COVERAGE...
As for concaving been there and done that interesting me currently is the scoop as i have used one of them and it went miles but How i mean it went miles...
Why do bat makers remove wood from different areas of the bat? I think they do it to bring the weight down so that the bat can be swung easily and also held comfortably by the batsman. I like concaved bats because they are easy to swing. I have a bat with a lot of coverage but man oh man is it difficult to swing.
-
Bat A bears a passing resemblance to the Newbery Thruxton. I have a 5 star which is still one of my best bats. Excellent coverage and the lower spine height does not sacrifice ping. I would go for that one Dave and make one for me while you're at it! :D
-
Of the two, I prefer profile A
-
Bat A for sure. Simply because other things beside the sweetspot area also make a good cricket bat. Strong shoulders and toe, a long middle, weight is distributed evenly, the pickup and feel would be good as well.
-
B for me. I always think less weight in the shoulders helps with the pick up.
-
B for me - may not pick up as well as a, but i like having the weight behind the sweet shop (!) and 2lbs 8 is light anyway
-
B for me - may not pick up as well as a, but i like having the weight behind the sweet shop (!) and 2lbs 8 is light anyway
400 density cleft (plus double binding on the bottom of the handle!) and it'll be a nice weight!
-
400 density cleft (plus double binding on the bottom of the handle!) and it'll be a nice weight!
Ideal
-
Dunno why, but the profile of bat A reminds me of the GM Six6. I know you're a big fan of coverage, so I think A would work better! But, B seems to have the meat around where your personal hitting zone is, so it's a tough one...
A edges it for me, I feel it will have a more stable hitting area. :)
-
Bat A for me. It will help in pick-up.
-
I am the B type.
-
Final Design
(http://i61.tinypic.com/160ougz.png)
(http://i62.tinypic.com/dnhil2.png)
2-8 and a half finished
-
A mix of the two BOOMMM
-
Brilliant thinking , really intrigued what the actual bat will look like ... Great work Dave :)
-
This looks very nice.
Once a cleft is found, I will share what I've been cooking up with Mr. Bacon.
Final Design
([url]http://i61.tinypic.com/160ougz.png[/url])
([url]http://i62.tinypic.com/dnhil2.png[/url])
2-8 and a half finished