Follow
Donate to HeyBucket.com - Amount:

Welcome Anonymous !

Your Fastpitch Softball Bible
 

Fastpitch Discussions

Anderson Bat Q & A

What's on your mind?

by Tumblebug » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:11 pm

PDad wrote:A friend told me about how they stood on a ping pong ball that was covered with a thin layer of the Nanotek material and it didn't dent. Can you expand on that?


that's right. with a .003" layer, About the same thickness as a human hair, the nano covered ping pong ball will withstand a 300 lb man standing on it. If I knew how to get it done I would put a little video on youtube. it's pretty freaking amazing. The other thing that is amazing is how well it bounces.
Tumblebug
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:32 pm

by Tumblebug » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:12 pm

Donnie wrote:I am so glad to be a part of Team Anderson. Our 14u team will gladly field test the bats.
Team Anderson 95



That will definitely happen!!!!
Tumblebug
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:32 pm

by Tumblebug » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:14 pm

RT4ever wrote:I would also like to volunteer myself as a bat tester :D


RT, where are you located? Are you close enough to meet at a field near Placentia, CA?
Tumblebug
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:32 pm

by RT4ever » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:31 pm

Tumblebug wrote:
RT4ever wrote:I would also like to volunteer myself as a bat tester :D


RT, where are you located? Are you close enough to meet at a field near Placentia, CA?


Unfortunately, I am not. I'm in Daly City, CA. Near San Francisco. :cry:

It's ok, I'm more than content with reading what limited reviews are available. I would love to see, as you were talking about above, a Youtube video of the Nano-treated ping-pong ball!
RT4ever
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:01 pm

by RT4ever » Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:35 pm

Tumblebug wrote:
RT4ever wrote:
Tumblebug wrote:
RT4ever wrote:
Tumblebug wrote:Can you talk about why Anderson Bat Company decided to make the NanoTek a singlewall bat vs. a multi-wall bat (ie. RocketTech, Techzilla)?


good question, the main reason is that I can make a singlewall NanoTek lighter with phenomenal performance and the development time is much shorter. The NanoTek FP will be the leapfrog technology that will move Anderson technology past composites. The NanoRocketech and the NanoTechZilla hybrids are farther down the road because the juggling of variables to create a well balanced product with all the advantages of Nano and multiwall design is gonna be a bit trickier but I think it will leapfrog any technology out there today. That and patent issues are a bottleneck right now.


Are there any durability concerns in regards to the fact that the NanoTek will be a singlewall?


Not at all, the Nano material is signficantly harder, stronger and more elastic.


Wow, incredible. This bat can't come out soon enough!!!
RT4ever
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:01 pm

by jimm » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:35 pm

My daughter would love to field test at the 18 Gold level. We live 3 miles from your facility.
jimm
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:12 am

by Tumblebug » Sun Aug 02, 2009 11:33 am

jimm wrote:My daughter would love to field test at the 18 Gold level. We live 3 miles from your facility.


Contact us directly to be a part of the list of testers. Who we use is based on their ability to articulate their preferences, the consistancy of their hitting, and their availability. Their affiliation to travel or college programs is unimportant.
Tumblebug
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:32 pm

by RT4ever » Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:51 am

Mr. Anderson,

Previously you stated that the break-in period for a Rockettech was anywhere from 25 to 125 impacts, and that the bat will sound different at that time. How does this compare to the break-in time for the Nano? I would imagine that because the material used in the Nano is stronger, more durable, etc., that the break-in time would be longer. I imagine the barrel will make a different sound, as well.

In regards to performance, would it be fair to say that the Nano has more pop than the Rockettech and Techzilla?
RT4ever
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:01 pm

by Tumblebug » Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:47 am

RT4ever wrote:Mr. Anderson,

Previously you stated that the break-in period for a Rockettech was anywhere from 25 to 125 impacts, and that the bat will sound different at that time. How does this compare to the break-in time for the Nano? I would imagine that because the material used in the Nano is stronger, more durable, etc., that the break-in time would be longer. I imagine the barrel will make a different sound, as well.

In regards to performance, would it be fair to say that the Nano has more pop than the Rockettech and Techzilla?


You're not really getting the Nano-thing yet. This is not like any technology you have seen before. It is an ultra thin layer of material that becomes part of the underlying substrate at the atomic level and is virtually a single wall design. A single wall bat does not break in, so the Nano is hot out of the wrapper. Because I can strengthen the structure exactly where I want and create a flexural fulcrum wherever I want, I can make it perform in ways I couldn't with other methods. We are exploring the possibilities. The overall performance will be as good or better than the Rocketech with a wider, more forgiving, effective hitting area and the with the durability challenges solved.
Tumblebug
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:32 pm

by RT4ever » Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:03 am

Oh right right... sorry... it's early, it's Monday... brain hasn't kicked in yet haha. No break-in period for singlewalls, as there is nothing to break in haha.

I need coffee.
RT4ever
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Fastpitch Discussions