How fragile is a Powerdome Outlaw?

[Muscles220]

Not too sure where to post this. Just how fragile is a Powerdome Outlaw? I put a flat spot the size of my hand on a 32oz Cu31 Powerdome with a U-trip Distance ball back in the day. I sold my Green Cu31 Ritch's bats and made a rule not to swing Powerdomes under 80 degrees. I've never had a C405 Powerdome, and certainly not an Outlaw. I really don't care to ruin the 32oz Outlaw I just picked up, so I need to assess just how careful I need to be. Thanks in advance. The league that I can swing it in uses any .44 COR, so we're hitting .44 Hot Max's and Dudley .44/525's. Also, are the C405 Ritch's and C405 Powerdome noticeably more durable than the Outlaw?

 

[xjarcher]

Those bats were made for much harder balls than the 44 balls. I don't think I'd swing them if the temp was in the 40s but otherwise you should be okay.

 

[jbo911]

Those bats were made for much harder balls than the 44 balls. I don't think I'd swing them if the temp was in the 40s but otherwise you should be okay.

This couldn't be more wrong.

If you get two swings you're lucky. It exceeds 120 bpf, and was made at a time when the only way to make a bat hotter was to thin the walls.

I wouldn't hit anything but 52s if you want it to last.

 

[Muscles220]

Those bats were made for much harder balls than the 44 balls. I don't think I'd swing them if the temp was in the 40s but otherwise you should be okay.

Harder than the .44/525 Dudley and .44/575+ Evil? Admittedly, the .47/500 Thunderheat that ruined the Cu31 Powerdome had a far superior cover compared to anything made today.

 

[jbo911]

Just because we were hitting 525s doesn't mean they were made for it.

 

[Muscles220]

This couldn't be more wrong.

If you get two swings you're lucky. It exceeds 120 bpf, and was made at a time when the only way to make a bat hotter was to thin the walls.

I wouldn't hit anything but 52s if you want it to last.

Do think it actually exceeds 1.20 BPF? If it ever did, what ball was that with? A .47/500? An ASA .47/525? That should be close to a '90's softball. I'm not entirely certain what was hit in the '90's. People say they were rocks, but U-trip allowed .47/500's well into the 2000's. I hit plenty of .47/500's when I was a stronger hitter than I am now using a 30oz Green Ritch's with no warranty. My experience has been that more endload means a more fragile bat if you can move it. Hence the busted 32oz Blue Ritch's. On the other hand, they say the lower COR is harder on bats, and this is 32oz AND lacked a warranty. When I started playing I picked up a Reflex Rebel that supposedly exceeded 1.20 BPF. There is no doubt that it was a good single-wall, but there was also no doubt that the Catalyst beat the pants off of it. Admittedly it was 26oz and nearly anything 4oz heavier should have had a serious advantage. I later tried a 30oz Supercell2 that claimed to be 1.30BPF. I was completely underwhelming, and in no way seemed superior to a 32oz Powerdome. The point is, I'm not sure that any of those bats exceeded 1.20 BPF. It stands to reason that they could simply be bats that were made a littler thinner, not submitted for testing, avoided association stamp fees, and warranty returns, and therefore highly profitable, but not much hotter. If anyone could have exceeded 1.20BPF, it would have been LS. The other two bats could be underwhelming responses from the other two marketing departments.

 

[jbo911]

You are confusing real life results with test results. Ass went to bbs because of the flawd in the bpf test.

Yes i believe it exceeds 120. No, i dont think that translates to the game with any balls. I've owned two, and outhit them with several other singlewalls.

 

[Muscles220]

Which single-walls outhit them?

Could you explain the mechanism by which you could make a bat fail the test without it being a very good bat?

I don't remember procedures for BPF

I believe the BBS test fails to consider the increased bat speed that a person will induce when swinging a light bat, therefore allowing bats that are far hotter in the hands of the player than in the machine. It also seems to be the reason that many ASA bags are not available in heavier weights or with heavier endloads.

The BBCOR test is quite good, taking into account, although imperfectly, MOI.

Again, I really don't remember details on how the BPF test is performed. I still have never looked through testing procedures and seen any reason that a high testing bat would actually suck. I can see how a lower testing bat might exceed it in human hands, but a high testing bat should still be a very good bat. If that's the case, and the Outlaw actually exceeded 1.20 BPF, then what balls did it do so with? U-trip bats are not tested with the same balls today that they were back then, and even if the bat exceeded spec back then, I highly doubt that it would today. Just curious on your angle. Not trying to be a turd.

 

[Muscles220]

I appreciate the replies by the way.

Did your Outlaws survive or did you send them to the grave?

 

[xjarcher]

I had a ritches superior advanced player that was used on red dot titans for 3+ seasons with no issues. I used it for league hitting 44's for a couple seasons. It was in great shape when I sold it. I don't know what the titans were but a 47 seems like a sock in comparison. Anyone know what the numbers were on the titans?

 

[Muscles220]

I had a ritches superior advanced player that was used on red dot titans for 3+ seasons with no issues. I used it for league hitting 44's for a couple seasons. It was in great shape when I sold it. I don't know what the titans were but a 47 seems like a sock in comparison. Anyone know what the numbers were on the titans?

Cool. Which Ritch's was that? The ATPSR, the SB2, or was there a version of the TPSAP that I was unaware of? What kind of temps was it? Did you ever manage to dent any other bats?

 

[jbo911]

I'm just saying that a 1.22 bat with a dime sized sweetspot will be outhit by a .88 bet with a 6 inch sweetspot 90% of the time. All numbers completely made up.

In 2004, when the new testing came out hundreds of people swore the ddw was a 100 mph bat, hottest ever, etc. Not one demar was banned by asa as being over 98.

The original ultra maxload passed the first bpf test.

 

[Muscles220]

I'm just saying that a 1.22 bat with a dime sized sweetspot will be outhit by a .88 bet with a 6 inch sweetspot 90% of the time. All numbers completely made up.

In 2004, when the new testing came out hundreds of people swore the ddw was a 100 mph bat, hottest ever, etc. Not one demar was banned by asa as being over 98.

The original ultra maxload passed the first bpf test.

I totally agree, but the original Ultra maxload was not tested on the entire barrel length, and had a spot that would have exceeded 1.20 BPF. It is completely different I cheat the test by hiding performance than to cheat the test by inventing performance that isn't there. The Outlaw has a balance point very similar to other Powerdomes, so there was no manipulation of COM and COP to cause it to be tested on its hottest point while other Powerdomes were cheating the test. While DeMarini Double Walls didn't exceed 98mph, the likely did beat all non-Ti single-walls. I see no reason that the Outlaw should have a sweetspot significantly smaller than any other Powerdome of similar barrel length. If it exceeded 1.20, then it should perform very very well so long as the ball used is as good as the one used when it was tested. Of course that doesn't mean a person will hit it well, but I love Powerdomes. My experience with two other single-walls that claimed to exceed 1.20 BPF was that they were not much better if any better at all, than identical single-walls that failed to boast such performance.

 

[louconn]

the correct answer is 3. they are a solid 3 on the fragility scale. i hope this helps.

 

[Muscles220]

Supposedly mid '90's single-walls tested as high as 94-95mph. I don't know if those bats were Cu31, C405,Sc500 or C555. I do know that 7050 and 7075 are considered equivalent to Cu31 and C405 respectively. Cu31 and C405 are trademarked names of alloys, while 7050 and 7075 are engineering designations. The 7050 and 7075 have the same stiffness, but 7075 has a higher yield strength. That means that the 7075 can be deflected farther without incurring permanent deflection. That also means that same shape, same thickness, same weighted bats made from the two alloys would have equal performance during sub-damaging impacts, but the one made from 7075 could handle harder impacts without incurring damage. It also means that assuming the same forces will be involved using either bat, the 7075 bat could be made to have equal durability and higher performance, or of course even less durable and even higher performance. The strength difference is not huge though, and I highly doubt that it would allow for a 98+ mph bat without seriously compromising durability. I wish I knew how the C405 Powerdomes compared to the Cu31 Powerdomes in actual thickness, but since I don't, I'd love some info on caprative durability in other people's experience.

 

[Muscles220]

the correct answer is 3. they are a solid 3 on the fragility scale. i hope this helps.

Lol. I love it! 82.6 degrees should be suitable for .44/525's, about 84 degrees for .44 Hot Max's and as low 65 for .52's. That's the info I needed. +1

 

[jbo911]

I totally agree, but the original Ultra maxload was not tested on the entire barrel length, and had a spot that would have exceeded 1.20 BPF. It is completely different I cheat the test by hiding performance than to cheat the test by inventing performance that isn't there. The Outlaw has a balance point very similar to other Powerdomes, so there was no manipulation of COM and COP to cause it to be tested on its hottest point while other Powerdomes were cheating the test. While DeMarini Double Walls didn't exceed 98mph, the likely did beat all non-Ti single-walls. I see no reason that the Outlaw should have a sweetspot significantly smaller than any other Powerdome of similar barrel length. If it exceeded 1.20, then it should perform very very well so long as the ball used is as good as the one used when it was tested. Of course that doesn't mean a person will hit it well, but I love Powerdomes. My experience with two other single-walls that claimed to exceed 1.20 BPF was that they were not much better if any better at all, than identical single-walls that failed to boast such performance.

I don't know what any of that has to do with what i posted. The outlaw exceeded the standard. I was mentioning the ultra to show how flawed the test wss. At no time on no swing with anyball will the outlaw outhit an ultra.

 

[xjarcher]

Temperature range 50-100f. They were team bats and got lots of cuts. Personally, it's just a bat swing it or donate it to a museum. If it breaks, buy another bat.

 

[Muscles220]

I don't know what any of that has to do with what i posted. The outlaw exceeded the standard. I was mentioning the ultra to show how flawed the test wss. At no time on no swing with anyball will the outlaw outhit an ultra.

It has to do with how the Ultra got around the test. The original test, only tested a single location on the bat based upon COM and COP. The Ultra Maxload hid it's hotness by manipulation of the COM and COP to cause the testers to test a part of the barrel that would pass. The opposite cannot be done. You could not manipulate COP and COM to cause the tester to test a part of the bat that does not exist. If the bat actually exceeded 1.20 BPF, then it should be a very high performing bat, and least when hit on the best location. If the COM and COP are similar to those of other Powerdomes, then then the same location would be tested on other Powerdomes. Therefore, if it truly failed, then it should be truly superior to other Powerdomes. I suspect that the Outlaw did not actually exceed 1.20 BPF, and that it was simply marketing. I do not doubt that it is thinner than other Powerdomes, although who really knows? If it actually did exceed 1.20 BPF, then I'm sure I'll really like it and hope I don't break it.

 

[Muscles220]

Temperature range 50-100f. They were team bats and got lots of cuts. Personally, it's just a bat swing it or donate it to a museum. If it breaks, buy another bat.

Oh I'm gonna hit it! I have a nonsensical passion for single-walls and have been looking for one of these for years. It's one of only three that I've ever seen in that weight, so I want to make sure I enjoy it, not destroy it. I've never hit a C405 Powerdome because I've never seen one over 30oz for sale and even those are usually a little high, for my taste since I already have a few Cu31 Powerdomes, a VT and have hit plenty of Supercells, but I'm certainly in the market for one that isn't an Outlaw at the right price. I was just looking for info like "we hit these balls in these temps and they lasted" and "we hit those balls in those temps and they busted". I'm starting to get a little info to that effect, so that's great. I definitely won't be hitting it below 80 degree. I may use the Cu31 Powerdome at that temp and save the Outlaw for even warmer temps if that's the kind of feedback that I get. I won't likely ever own a bat just to look at. A bat should be enjoyed.

 

[GrinningBear]

I'm just saying that a 1.22 bat with a dime sized sweetspot will be outhit by a .88 bet with a 6 inch sweetspot 90% of the time. All numbers completely made up.

In 2004, when the new testing came out hundreds of people swore the ddw was a 100 mph bat, hottest ever, etc. Not one demar was banned by asa as being over 98.

The original ultra maxload passed the first bpf test.

The Outlaw legitimately exceeded 1.20 as tested back then. I was on a tour of the Hillerich and Bradsby (LS) factory and they had one on display in a glass case the year before they released. They gave me numbers but I don't remember exactly. Few thousandths thinner than the other C405+ Powerdomes, including the darker Ritch's.

The thickness on the earlier Ritch's was wildly inconsistent. If you got one from a Ritch's player or a TPS team they were made thinner. Disposable. And don't forget The Dungeon was real. When the guy running it passed recently everybody at a high level of the game back then confirmed it. Not that it was a big secret. Who knows what they were when he handed them back. Like Mickey at the Steele's factory. Both could probably tell you YOUR bat, but those guys handed back a ton of bats.

The sweetspot is really the key. When I caught the sweetspot on the TPS, none of my other single walls were close, except for the ones I pestered Major players for. Twenty feet difference between it and the blue or black/red Lighthouse maybe. Maybe a little less on the Grover. I hit some golf shots off my shins that I knew were only because of the bat.

I had mine for less than a year with no damage, until someone stole it. I wasn't playing but I took BP several times a week, with all 4 or 5 guys using it, and there was a grad party every weekend, with everyone using it.

I never saw one boat oar right out of the wrapper like some of the Ritch's or earlier Powercells or the Steele's 180 decibel XLT ting.

But they certainly have the potential.

Some other BPF 1.2 plus--namely the Outlaw Springsteel, which was bad, and that Easton Rebel which was horrible--were obviously false advertising. That's why they tanked. In the case of the Rebel independent tests proved it didn't come close to failing.

 

[GrinningBear]

Summer in Ohio back then was generally 80-90, moderate humidity, stretches near 100. Nights generally were less hot but not crisp.

The balls were the hardest we could find with the thinnest covers. All manufacturers. Lot of sawdust balls, too, which are heavy.

 

[Muscles220]

^^^^ Awesome awesome info! Thanks a ton. Like I said, if anyone could have made C405 exceed the limits in a single-wall, it was LS. You really make me want some other C405 Powerdomes too.

I had an Outlaw Springsteel. It was terrible. It was pretty wavy when I got it, and assumed that too much wave may have hurt it. I just picked up a 32oz Speingsteel, and let me tell, I LOVE the weighting. The only day I hit, it extra sucked. The balls had been in a very hot trunk for hours though, and came off of all bats with much less zip that usual. I do wonder though, if doubling the friction by adding the third wall(two wall to wall interfaces instead of one) just made the whole concept a flop.

Dare I ask? What was The Dungeon?

 

[GrinningBear]

Hopefully I didn't make any of them sound durable. I just haven't seen an Outlaw pancake right away. I think the Ritch's had such terrible paint flaking because they didn't expect the bats to last.

The Dungeon was the little shop where the player model bats were made and modified. They only called it that because it was in the basement. And because you could see where they made the custom bats for MLB players but the guide would tell you to your face there's no such special area for softball.

 

[Muscles220]

Hopefully I didn't make any of them sound durable. I just haven't seen an Outlaw pancake right away. I think the Ritch's had such terrible paint flaking because they didn't expect the bats to last.

The Dungeon was the little shop where the player model bats were made and modified. They only called it that because it was in the basement. And because you could see where they made the custom bats for MLB players but the guide would tell you to your face there's no such special area for softball.

Interesting. As far as paint flaking, I'm sure the mirror finish on the barrel didn't help adhesion at all.

 

[GrinningBear]

The Springsteels were pretty good if you compressed them. It usually didn't work on alloys but if you squeezed it enough to bend that curled sheet of springsteel inside it would stay like that and you'd have a gap between it and the outer wall. Like a shaved doublewall. Rolling it wasn't enough to deform the springsteel. Compression and rolling were both legal back then.

The Powerdome I've had an eye out for years is the C405 Dirk Androff. Not very endloaded but it hit SB12's better than the good balls.

 

[gaternation]

All of the bats previously mentioned were turds. They had micro small sweet spots that only worked because the balls back then were red dot, blue stitch etc... either the bats became triangles or were like hitting lamp posts.

 

[Muscles220]

The Springsteels were pretty good if you compressed them. It usually didn't work on alloys but if you squeezed it enough to bend that curled sheet of springsteel inside it would stay like that and you'd have a gap between it and the outer wall. Like a shaved doublewall. Rolling it wasn't enough to deform the springsteel. Compression and rolling were both legal back then.

The Powerdome I've had an eye out for years is the C405 Dirk Androff. Not very endloaded but it hit SB12's better than the good balls.

Very very interesting. I wonder if I could hit a ball hard enough this winter to get the same effect. I also wonder if they seem to suck now because of the steel coil rusting together a little. Hmmm.

 

[Muscles220]

All of the bats previously mentioned were turds. They had micro small sweet spots that only worked because the balls back then were red dot, blue stitch etc... either the bats became triangles or were like hitting lamp posts.

I have to disagree a little, but not a lot. On single-walls that I have hit, the sweetspot is nothing like a double-wall, and then even less like a comp. It is however anything but impossible to find. If I get BP a couple times a week, I find the sweetspot quite well. I've hit many a HR with a 32oz Powerdome using U-trip distance balls in warm temps. I've hit them in BP with .52's, but can't use them in games requiring current U-trip balls. By the same token, I flattened one the day I went 381' with it, and that's easily my best shot with an aluminum single-wall. I would certainly say that you cannot achieve the same distance with a Cu31 single-wall that you can with a multi-wall or composite, because it will break before that point. And certainly composites will hit socks far better. At the same time, with decent balls a good single-wall is no farther from a double-wall than it is from a hammer or a cyclone.

 

[Muscles220]

A hard ball will ruin ANY high performance aluminum singlewall quickly. Common sense.

That may be, but the league where I can use them is in the middle of summer. We play more games over 100 degrees than under 85 degrees.