Custom Bats Cricket Forum

Companies => Off-the-shelf companies => Gray Nicolls => Topic started by: Cover_Drive on April 06, 2016, 04:37:22 AM

Title: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Cover_Drive on April 06, 2016, 04:37:22 AM
Three monsters, which one would you buy?

XP80:
(http://www.cricketcentre.com.au/images/prodimg/310082_1.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v6fgguuNpo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v6fgguuNpo)

50+:
(http://www.cricketcentre.com.au/images/prodimg/310015_1.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=35&v=JExhg2qb2nA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=35&v=JExhg2qb2nA)

Warner's Kaboom:
(http://www.cricketcentre.com.au/images/prodimg/310107_1.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2cYiNuCjMk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2cYiNuCjMk)
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Cover_Drive on April 06, 2016, 04:39:40 AM
Personally, I would go for 50+ and I am very tempted to get that.

I hope Kingsgrove get it for cheaper than GCCC.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: smilley792 on April 06, 2016, 04:51:43 AM
One of each please.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Six Sixes Cricket on April 06, 2016, 05:23:38 AM
Is the 50+ and warners the same or warners slightly bigger?
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: aussie.kooky on April 06, 2016, 05:26:44 AM
XP80 is a great T20 shape. We are spoiled for choice in Australia , but boy ..... we pay through the roof.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: langer17 on April 06, 2016, 05:53:53 AM
They look the same. I prefer the stickers on the 50+ though. The XP80 wins for me though.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Buzz on April 06, 2016, 06:14:19 AM
I am not sure I could lift any of them!
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: well past my peak on April 06, 2016, 07:08:08 AM
Xp80 over the others but perhaps the Xp70 would be more manageable, as my prefer weight is around 2'8

From GCCC you'll be paying through the nose. Maybe a cheaper option to get one mapped via B3.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: well past my peak on April 06, 2016, 07:12:25 AM
Is the 50+ and warners the same or warners slightly bigger?

the handles are different lengths, warners being cut down
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: tim2000s on April 06, 2016, 08:56:26 AM
They all look like variations on the same shape with alterations to suit weight. Take the biggest, then reduce edge sizes and amount of concaving and you end up at the other two.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Neon Cricket on April 06, 2016, 09:13:07 AM
So who fancies buying all 3 and letting us get them mapped by B3? haha
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: skip1973 on April 06, 2016, 09:22:50 AM
Personally, I would go for 50+ and I am very tempted to get that.

I hope Kingsgrove get it for cheaper than GCCC.
Will be around the same.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: skip1973 on April 06, 2016, 09:25:03 AM
XP80 is a great T20 shape. We are spoiled for choice in Australia , but boy ..... we pay through the roof.
Try and get bats these size and quality for less anywhere else.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: skip1973 on April 06, 2016, 09:26:27 AM
Xp80 over the others but perhaps the Xp70 would be more manageable, as my prefer weight is around 2'8

From GCCC you'll be paying through the nose. Maybe a cheaper option to get one mapped via B3.
There are options below the the XP 70 as well.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Blazer on April 06, 2016, 10:07:15 AM
Is it just me or that XP80 looks like H4L tempo or MH distinction in heavier weight ?
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Batbuddy99 on April 06, 2016, 10:33:14 AM
According to the GCCC website the xp80 will be available in 2lb9oz!!!
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Leno on April 06, 2016, 11:37:47 AM
I'm going to have to get our overseas to get the xp80 for me
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Churchy1989 on April 06, 2016, 11:38:00 AM
They look rather heavy....2:14 ish
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: WalkingWicket37 on April 06, 2016, 11:52:03 AM
According to the GCCC website the xp80 will be available in 2lb9oz!!!

80mm spine  and 2lb9

I hope it has 40mm edges and a full profile!
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: raza147 on April 06, 2016, 11:55:53 AM
must be very overdried to get it to that weight
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: dilscoop on June 01, 2016, 08:07:59 AM
So who fancies buying all 3 and letting us get them mapped by B3? haha

1 down
2 to go
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: FattusCattus on June 01, 2016, 08:29:44 AM
They just don't do it for me - massive bats and all that, but the middle seems ridiculously high, as do the prices.

I'm sure I'd do the toe on one of these with my dicky timing on my stodgy UK tracks.

And the branding on the Kaboom is hideous.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: dilscoop on June 01, 2016, 08:32:36 AM
They just don't do it for me - massive bats and all that, but the middle seems ridiculously high, as do the prices.

I'm sure I'd do the toe on one of these with my dicky timing on my stodgy UK tracks.

And the branding on the Kaboom is hideous.

Its all a experience
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: dilscoop on June 01, 2016, 08:33:25 AM
Voting is very close, we need a winner
First to 20 wins
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Ams4287 on June 01, 2016, 09:13:04 AM
Buy the XP80 to compare vs the M&H distinction - oh and after some of your posts keep out of the sun
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: FattusCattus on June 01, 2016, 10:17:36 AM
Its all a experience

I believe the phrase you are looking for is "it's all an expense"  :)


Oh - and as Cleo McDowell once said - "stay off the drugs son!"
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: shamelessshaun on June 01, 2016, 10:24:58 AM
Drugs are bad, mmkay!
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Red Ink Cricket on June 01, 2016, 10:26:04 AM
I've got a couple of huge clefts in stock so am going to see what I can do in making replicas of these. They aren't overly light but will be interesting to see what can be made
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Marc28 on June 01, 2016, 10:55:17 AM
I may sound like a party pooper
But should bats like this be legal.
I mean I play div 7 cricket if I came out with one of these
I would get slaughtered or do the slaughtering
But I do like the nostalgia of the 50+
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: ppccopener on June 01, 2016, 11:12:41 AM
I may sound like a party pooper
But should bats like this be legal.
I mean I play div 7 cricket if I came out with one of these
I would get slaughtered or do the slaughtering
But I do like the nostalgia of the 50+

there's a Beastie boys video where the parent's return home at midnight and smash up the stereo system, breaking up the party.And that's just happened here.

 :)    yes they should be made illegal...now where is my tin hat?
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: Marc28 on June 01, 2016, 11:59:30 AM
Didn't mean to shoot the post down
Obviously.
Just couldn't imagine batting with a bat that huge
Or could I
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: InternalTraining on June 01, 2016, 01:24:05 PM
Shapes of 50+ and Warner look identical to me. XP bats look interesting as they don't have large edges and some concaving; with that shape you are conditioned to play with the middle of the bat and it is great for bouncy pitches. I'd opt for XP80.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: TangoWhiskey on June 01, 2016, 02:43:03 PM
I genuinely don't think the size of the bat matters. Speaking from a physics point of view, it just doesn't make any sense that two bats weighing the same but in different proportions would hit the ball any differently out the middle, save for the natural variances in the willow.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: WalkingWicket37 on June 01, 2016, 03:14:55 PM
I genuinely don't think the size of the bat matters. Speaking from a physics point of view, it just doesn't make any sense that two bats weighing the same but in different proportions would hit the ball any differently out the middle, save for the natural variances in the willow.

You could argue the bigger one wouldn't hit the ball as far if the bat came down at anything other than a dead straight angle, and the bigger dimensions would result in greater wind resistance.

We are off course talking minimal margins here, and that something that literally just popped into my head
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: ppccopener on June 01, 2016, 03:23:58 PM
You could argue the bigger one wouldn't hit the ball as far if the bat came down at anything other than a dead straight angle, and the bigger dimensions would result in greater wind resistance.

We are off course talking minimal margins here, and that something that literally just popped into my head

is it not force into the bat-and then into the ball?  a bat weighing 3lb used by a 10 stone bloke wont hit the ball off the square. a 3lb bat used by chris gayle will do.

is this not why most club players cannot hit the ball further with a heavier bat-presuming you are not overly very physically strong.

I'm hitting the ball harder and further with a bat weighing 2lb 9oz than any bat ive used at 2lb 11 or 12oz.

is that not it?

 :) :)
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: TangoWhiskey on June 01, 2016, 03:26:49 PM
Volume isn't what make the ball fly into the distance, it's the force. Don't recall any formulae where "something */ volume = force", but then I only did A level physics so I'm no Einstein.
Title: Re: XP80 vs 50+ vs Warner's
Post by: dilscoop on June 01, 2016, 04:11:47 PM
Work = force x distance