Anderson Bat Q & A

[DunninLA]

Re: "Swing Weight" vs. Scale Weight

I think I may have a lucky experiential advantage over most posters that allows me to comment on this -- I bought my DD a "cage bat" so her 2005 RKT could be saved for practices and games. The Cage Bat was a Rawlings Liquid Plasma double walled aluminum model from 2006 model FPLMPM, Green in color and bought on closeout for $120 I think. Her RKT is 32/23. Her Rawlings is also 32/23. The RKT weighs more, but feels the same when swinging it.

Here is the KEY>>>> The Rawlings has an inch SMALLER double walled hitting area than the RKT. Why does a Rawlings knock-off of the RKT have a 1" smaller hitting area (not good)? The Rawlings doesn't have a weighted knob! I haven't measured it exactly, but it looks like the Rawlings is 12" hitting area vs 13" on the RKT (whatever, it is more than an inch shorter). The Rawlings has a normal knob. By putting a very dense and heavy knob to counterbalance the inch longer double wall on the RKT, Anderson gave the batter a bigger hitting area than the Rawlings gives (which we still have).

I would assume that any company trying to get a very long double walled hitting surface would hit the same problem Rawlings did... without the counter weighted knob, as a designer you have to shorten the length of the double walled part of the bat, or else it will be too end loaded.

Bottom line: weighted knob = 1" longer hitting area.

[Tumblebug]

Re: "Swing Weight" vs. Scale Weight

I think I may have a lucky experiential advantage over most posters that allows me to comment on this -- I bought my DD a "cage bat" so her 2005 RKT could be saved for practices and games. The Cage Bat was a Rawlings Liquid Plasma double walled aluminum model from 2006 model FPLMPM, Green in color and bought on closeout for $120 I think. Her RKT is 32/23. Her Rawlings is also 32/23. The RKT weighs more, but feels the same when swinging it.

Here is the KEY>>>> The Rawlings has an inch SMALLER double walled hitting area than the RKT. Why does a Rawlings knock-off of the RKT have a 1" smaller hitting area (not good)? The Rawlings doesn't have a weighted knob! I haven't measured it exactly, but it looks like the Rawlings is 12" hitting area vs 13" on the RKT (whatever, it is more than an inch shorter). The Rawlings has a normal knob. By putting a very dense and heavy knob to counterbalance the inch longer double wall on the RKT, Anderson gave the batter a bigger hitting area than the Rawlings gives (which we still have).

I would assume that any company trying to get a very long double walled hitting surface would hit the same problem Rawlings did... without the counter weighted knob, as a designer you have to shorten the length of the double walled part of the bat, or else it will be too end loaded.

Bottom line: weighted knob = 1" longer hitting area.

And there you have it.

It appears that Wilson stopped the Rawlings infringement of their patent. I don't see it offered in the new product line. I wouldn't be surprised. The Multi-wall concept is pretty well nailed down by DeMarini (Wilson), Worth and Anderson. That's an interesting story all by itself . . .

[Blades356mm]

Umm not that I would but... Does rolling a techzilla help with break in time or not? I know on my daughters tech there was a time when it really started sounding different and hitting better. She's a small slapper so it took forever to get to that point. Is there a faster way? Thanks

[Tumblebug]

Umm not that I would but... Does rolling a techzilla help with break in time or not? I know on my daughters tech there was a time when it really started sounding different and hitting better. She's a small slapper so it took forever to get to that point. Is there a faster way? Thanks

OMG! Dude, don't do it!! You are not breaking in an aluminum bat by rolling it; you are putting undue stress on the aluminum and adding absolutely no performance. An aluminum alloy is subject to metal fatigue. When you flex the material beyond the yield point you are doing damage. For the same reason you shouldn't hit it in a batting cage with the harder, denser and heavier urethane balls, you shouldn't use a rolling machine. The trick is that the two walls need to work independently to get the best out of the performance. the assembly process creates some interference between the walls that tightness limits the performance. The engineering tolerances are what make some take longer to seat than others. My suggestion is to hit infield grounders and outfield fly balls in practice. The controlled swing in stronger hands should do it in a single practice. Listen to the sound at impact. You are listening for the change in sound.

[dittoz]

This is probably one of the best threads HB has ever had. Whether or not one is an Anderson fan (I most assuredly am!), the ability to talk directly with the long-haired professor is HUGE!

This whole weight thing is of great interest to me. My kids have swung Anderson bats since back in the day when Nate offered up a test/demo group for 2-1/2" Little League baseball bats. I was sold the moment the first flaming Techzilla BB bat came out. As my MIDDLE moved to HS where he continued to swing Andersons, my DD was coming up through FP and at 11 started swinging her first RT. It was a 30" bat and while a bit heavy for her with the end-load, she still hit well with it. We also had the black PT, but it seldom saw use.

She's a short stick of a kid these days at 14. 5' 1/2" and 75 pounds with rocks in her pockets. (See here for what I'm talking about - http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr283/lerner5/pre_Ball-Squish_web.jpg) Her mechanics (when she does it right) are excellent and she often hits the ball 175' as the outfielders are pulled in. Unfortunately, she's doing it with a 31" CF3 because the "balanced" green Techzilla was just too heavy for her. I tried having her swing a -9 CF3 and she had no issue with it, but when I bought her the TZ it swung like a much heavier bat and she just couldn't catch up to faster pitching.

I (sort-of) understand a bit of the explanation offered as to the weight, dual rotations, etc in the TZ, but I have to say that when it comes to being put into practice, the psychological part just isn't working, at least not in the manner intended. She went out there expecting to hit the ball harder and further, and she VERY much wanted to use the TZ, but I could see that the 31" TZ was not working for her in game situations. The added mass clearly hit the ball harder for her and on predictable machine pitches, she was absolutely killing it, but in game situations it was a no-go.

I'm waiting for the growth spurt to kick in, at which point we'll likely go back to the TZ, but for now the composite CF3 just works better for her. Thoughts...?

[RT4ever]

Umm not that I would but... Does rolling a techzilla help with break in time or not? I know on my daughters tech there was a time when it really started sounding different and hitting better. She's a small slapper so it took forever to get to that point. Is there a faster way? Thanks

OMG! Dude, don't do it!! You are not breaking in an aluminum bat by rolling it; you are putting undue stress on the aluminum and adding absolutely no performance. An aluminum alloy is subject to metal fatigue. When you flex the material beyond the yield point you are doing damage. For the same reason you shouldn't hit it in a batting cage with the harder, denser and heavier urethane balls, you shouldn't use a rolling machine. The trick is that the two walls need to work independently to get the best out of the performance. the assembly process creates some interference between the walls that tightness limits the performance. The engineering tolerances are what make some take longer to seat than others. My suggestion is to hit infield grounders and outfield fly balls in practice. The controlled swing in stronger hands should do it in a single practice. Listen to the sound at impact. You are listening for the change in sound.

Great advice here.

Besides the fact that it's CHEATING, I wouldn't recommend rolling your bat to anyone!

How long is the typical break-in process? I have a brand new original slowpitch Rockettech... how many hits would you say it would take for it to be broken in?

And yes, I agree with the above poster. It's been a real treat to be able to talk to someone who makes the bats we all love!

[DunninLA]

dittoz -- somebody with a pint sized daughter has no right to talk about hitting in softball!

Just funnin with ya. Well, I've got a pint sized daughter too, my 2013 (or '95 (August) as called here). She has ALWAYS been the lightest and shortest girl on her teams. She's above average fast but not super fast so the possibility of making her a slapper was abandoned. Last year at this time she was 4'10" and 75 lbs. This year she grew a lot and is up to 5' 2" and 95 lbs. And this year she hit her first legitimate HR (left center, over a standard depth center fielder.) I'd say her longest balls drop at about 170' or so.

Anyway, she hits with a '05 31" RKT, a 31" Synergy SCN1B, and sometimes a White/Purple 31" Stealth of a teammate. Next year it is up to 32" with perhaps the 31" RKT staying another year. She can use her sister's old 07 32" RKT if she wants, 32" Demarini Phenix and a 32" Purple/White Stealth.

I believe proper hitting mechanics and a little bit of strength allow a hitter to use an end-loaded bat quite effectively. I think if an end loaded bat produces too many popups or late contact, the issue is one of using too much arm in a swing and not enough explosive rotation of hips/torso.

But that's the subject for another thread.

[dittoz]

Thanks Dunnin - sounds like our DD's are very similar; Mine just needs the added weight and muscle...

I agree with your statement about the mechanics, but if flaws are accentuated by a given bat such as the balanced TZ then it seems the same "weight" CF3 would neccesarily be different given for the different swing. Not saying it is a MUST be situation, but if the experience and results are different...

My guess is that with 170' - 175' max shots out of a CF3, that the added mass of a TZ or even an RT c/would push the ball another 15' - 20' with a properly contolled and executed swing.

[Tumblebug]

This is probably one of the best threads HB has ever had. Whether or not one is an Anderson fan (I most assuredly am!), the ability to talk directly with the long-haired professor is HUGE!

This whole weight thing is of great interest to me. My kids have swung Anderson bats since back in the day when Nate offered up a test/demo group for 2-1/2" Little League baseball bats. I was sold the moment the first flaming Techzilla BB bat came out. As my MIDDLE moved to HS where he continued to swing Andersons, my DD was coming up through FP and at 11 started swinging her first RT. It was a 30" bat and while a bit heavy for her with the end-load, she still hit well with it. We also had the black PT, but it seldom saw use.

She's a short stick of a kid these days at 14. 5' 1/2" and 75 pounds with rocks in her pockets. (See here for what I'm talking about - http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr283/lerner5/pre_Ball-Squish_web.jpg) Her mechanics (when she does it right) are excellent and she often hits the ball 175' as the outfielders are pulled in. Unfortunately, she's doing it with a 31" CF3 because the "balanced" green Techzilla was just too heavy for her. I tried having her swing a -9 CF3 and she had no issue with it, but when I bought her the TZ it swung like a much heavier bat and she just couldn't catch up to faster pitching.

I (sort-of) understand a bit of the explanation offered as to the weight, dual rotations, etc in the TZ, but I have to say that when it comes to being put into practice, the psychological part just isn't working, at least not in the manner intended. She went out there expecting to hit the ball harder and further, and she VERY much wanted to use the TZ, but I could see that the 31" TZ was not working for her in game situations. The added mass clearly hit the ball harder for her and on predictable machine pitches, she was absolutely killing it, but in game situations it was a no-go.

I'm waiting for the growth spurt to kick in, at which point we'll likely go back to the TZ, but for now the composite CF3 just works better for her. Thoughts...?

I am an engineer and therefore I tend to look at things in terms of being a system designed to do a job. The batter and bat are a combination of components with a myriad of variables that make up a system. As a whole the batter’s mechanics and MOI, as well as the bat’s length, weight and MOI are a balancing act in terms of fitting the batter with a semi-perfect impact component in their dynamic personal system.

Your problem may simply be that the TechZilla is too long. There is no race to get to the longer lengths. Tony Gwynn, 5’ 11” and 200 lbs, used what he called his “peashooter,” a Louisville Slugger bat (Model C-263) that was (as measured when accessioned by the Hall of Fame) 32½ /32 and one of the shortest (and therefore lightest) models ever made for MLB players. Your daughter, 5' 1/2" and 75 lbs, is using a bat that is only 1 inch shorter than Tony Gwynn.

The question becomes hand position in the early swing with the longer bat. The farther her hands are from her body the less advantageous the extra weight becomes. If her hands are slightly outbound the added total weight will drag them even farther out and the mechanics break down. Once the mechanics begin to break down the extra weight becomes difficult to handle. The short-compact swing not only allows for a heavier bat at a higher speed it allows the hitter to make better small in-swing adjustments for better contact.

For what it is worth, I have two pieces of advice for you. Try a 30” TZ until the 31” makes sense. Buy a wood bat and do all of the static work (static work doesn’t require pitch timing such as tee and soft toss) with the heavier wood bat concentrating on doing the short-compact-stroke (hips and hands to contact) mechanics as perfectly as possible. The heavier and less forgiving wood bat will give great feedback to the hitter and the adjustments become obvious. In the same session go back to the TZ and live pitching to work timing. The difference in just a few sessions will have you buying Anderson bats for life.

[Tumblebug]

Great advice here.

Besides the fact that it's CHEATING, I wouldn't recommend rolling your bat to anyone!

How long is the typical break-in process? I have a brand new original slowpitch Rockettech... how many hits would you say it would take for it to be broken in?

And yes, I agree with the above poster. It's been a real treat to be able to talk to someone who makes the bats we all love!

The typical break-in process is between 25 and 125 impacts. Remember you are listening for a change in the sound. The slowpitch model may be more because the walls are thicker. I break mine in by pounding it off a tee. and turning it after every impact. Remember that you are dislodging one wall from the other and turning the bat is important.