[Innova] The mythical Innova ROC

[Lumberjack504]

The working theory when the Roc went from Sanny to Ontario to Rancho was that the problem with the Ontario's was that they had too much dome so they started out less HSS. Rancho Rocs are not supposed to be flat (sorry flat-top weirdos) but the dome is supposed to be mild.

Along into the mid '00's Rancho DX Rocs started to get domey. You had to be careful of the dome when you bought them. The easy test for that is the drumming test; you hold the disc in both hands with your thumbs on the dome and press down. If it makes an audible sound when the dome pops back, it's "drumming". Drummer Rocs are a matter of degree; a slight drum can be OK, but a loud "thwop" with a visual where you actually see the dome pop back is bad. Those Rocs are too domey, they are not going to start out HSS enough to be a good Roc.

So we already knew before Star Rancho Rocs were a thing that too much dome in a Roc was bad.

Star Rancho Rocs generally take drummer Rocs to the next level; the top is popped into a ridiculous pup tent of a dome to the point where the dome is distorted and there is a groove top-type appearance to the disc. Pop-top Rocs de facto are drummer Rocs; they are going to make a huge "thwop" sound. You don't have to do the drumming test to know, though. They are so domey that their cartoonish appearance tells you right away to steer clear. They are not good Rocs, they are nowhere near HSS enough to be a good Roc.

There have been Star Rancho's with the correct dome so it's not impossible to have one (USDGC Rocs generally are not garbage) that is a very good Roc. They are the exception in my experience; I've never actually seen a decent Star Rancho Roc in person.

The only Star Roc I personally have owned that was not hot garbage was ironically a Star Ontario Roc that had significantly less dome than any Star Rancho Roc I've seen and flies like butter. That Star Ontario Roc has made me continue to fondle the Star Rancho Rocs when I see them on the off chance that they are not garbage; I'm assuming if you had a Star Rancho that actually molded up correctly it would be amazeballz. I've never seen one, though.

100% agreed on the ideal roc profile. My favorites are slight mild domed Dx with a touch of pliability. They just go forever and feel perfect in the hand.

I do have one star rancho that I currently bag. It's pretty darn flat, making it an outlier. It's a beefy roc and bookends my cycle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jupiterboy]

Current F2 Star X3 vs Rancho. Just in this afternoon.

The X3 looks flat like the DX. Could be sweet.

 

[Dgp1689]

I think I am going to switch to the roc3 for my midrange, and just use them in different states of wear. For those of y'all that have done this, about how long does it take to get one to beat in to straight with a touch of US?

 

[Manzer]

Double post

 

[Manzer]

I think I am going to switch to the roc3 for my midrange, and just use them in different states of wear. For those of y'all that have done this, about how long does it take to get one to beat in to straight with a touch of US?

DX Roc3 is pretty close to that off the shelf.

 

[thecandydan]

I think I am going to switch to the roc3 for my midrange, and just use them in different states of wear. For those of y'all that have done this, about how long does it take to get one to beat in to straight with a touch of US?

Like Manzer said, if it must be a Roc3 then try DX for that "touch of US." DX won't take long at all . . . like somewhere between out of the box and a few rounds.

I've thrown Gstar, Star and Champ Roc3's a *lot* and have never have gotten one beaten to where you want. Still "straight with a touch of OS" for me. Really beat in ones have a bit of turn but still mostly just straight with a small stable finish. And yes I was trying to get a premium plastic Roc3 to that point of being able to throw hyzer flips and hold long anhyzers. But they never got to the place I wanted.

So I use a Verdict for more stable shots and a KC Pro Flat Top Roc for less stable ones. And that flat top Roc pretty much feels and flies like a DX Roc3. Roc3 equivalent of mine would probably be the tour series color glow ones. Little better than DX plastic and I'll bet it would still beat in to do the "touch of US" shots you want.

 

[EllEstar]

I think I am going to switch to the roc3 for my midrange, and just use them in different states of wear. For those of y'all that have done this, about how long does it take to get one to beat in to straight with a touch of US?

I bought a pair of Roc3s from a dude that's been bagging like 5 discs for 2-3 years, including those 2 Roc3s, a DX and a Champion. The DX is possibly the most understable max weight midrange I've thrown and the Champion is like a seasoned Mako3, just better; always finishes if you put it on a touch of hyzer, mostly just wants to go straight but holds anhyzers brilliantly.

I'm not sure you can season a Star/Champ Roc3 enough for it to become truly understable, like hyzer-flip to turnover understable.

 

[Streets]

My throw has gone to **** so grabbed two fresh Dx Rocs and tossing them around my home course to iron out some issues. They've seen a lot of damage and one's already straightening out for me.

 

[kevdiv48]

My throw has gone to **** so grabbed two fresh Dx Rocs and tossing them around my home course to iron out some issues. They've seen a lot of damage and one's already straightening out for me.

what weight? you're usually a less than max weight guy iirc.

 

[Streets]

what weight? you're usually a less than max weight guy iirc.

174 bottom stamps, embossed

 

[Three Putt]

what weight? you're usually a less than max weight guy iirc.

174 bottom stamps, embossed

Lol, I always laugh when people act like my Roc stash is a goldmine. 172g, folks. I throw 172g. :|

*DGCR collectively turns their backs on me in disgust*

 

[acrosley]

Does weight really matter that much for mids and putters? I can understand drivers since they have to fly a certain speed and lighter weights are easier to get up to speed. But is there an appreciable difference between a 180g Roc and a 170g Roc?

 

[Alexplz]

Spoiler for Portland Open

Spoiler

Shoot on hole 18 final round - it was such a rollercoaster to see GG throw OB with the sidearm right after Simon left the door wide open. I'm a fan of both of these guys. Glad I tuned in to the post production without any spoilers, what a nail biter.

As Jerm mentions though, a safe backhand Roc3 turnover would have been the play for GG.

 

[Alexplz]

Does weight really matter that much for mids and putters? I can understand drivers since they have to fly a certain speed and lighter weights are easier to get up to speed. But is there an appreciable difference between a 180g Roc and a 170g Roc?

No, but it's a slippery slope. Nothing matters that much. Relatively speaking, weight probably matters very little for such a stable mold like a Roc. On something more squirrely like a Sidewinder weight matters more.

For Rocs I think if you found something with an ideal combination of PLH and dome etc, it should hopefully be easy to settle on something outside your ideal weight range. I have to admit I am extremely picky when it comes to weight ranges, but I would be fine with anything 170-180 if I were shopping for mids.

 

[kevdiv48]

Does weight really matter that much for mids and putters? I can understand drivers since they have to fly a certain speed and lighter weights are easier to get up to speed. But is there an appreciable difference between a 180g Roc and a 170g Roc?

Windy conditions is where I've noticed the difference with Rocs. Max weights do have added resistance to turning compared to low 170's. Conversely, lighter weights carry better in tailwinds than heavier ones (some of my longest mid range throws have been with low 170 DX Ranchos in a tailwind).

 

[Three Putt]

Windy conditions is where I've noticed the difference with Rocs. Max weights do have added resistance to turning compared to low 170's. Conversely, lighter weights carry better in tailwinds than heavier ones (some of my longest mid range throws have been with low 170 DX Ranchos in a tailwind).

It's the basic answer right there; you can apply the same principal to Aviars and TeeBirds and...and... The max weight gives you more control into the wind, the lighter weights give you more distance with the wind. It actually holds true all the time, but it's really noticeable in windy conditions.

 

[EllEstar]

It's the basic answer right there; you can apply the same principal to Aviars and TeeBirds and...and... The max weight gives you more control into the wind, the lighter weights give you more distance with the wind. It actually holds true all the time, but it's really noticeable in windy conditions.

I actually think there's a speed break point relative to the air where lighter weight discs start giving you less distance due to the reduced momentum fighting the air resistance.

It probably varies a bit based on disc, nose angle and air density but I think for decently thrown drivers it's in roughly the low 60s (relative to airspeed).

I probably throw low to mid 60s on power throws and I don't normally get more distance with lighter discs, definitely get less distance with them in headwind and definitely get more in tailwind. The DD video with Eric Oakley throwing lighter discs seems to support it, too.

However on controlled shots and putts I almost always get more distance with lighter discs, unless I miss my angle.

 

[wims]

A heavy disc thrown at 60mph is going to fly further than a light disc thrown at 60mph due to drag and inertia

 

[EllEstar]

A heavy disc thrown at 60mph is going to fly further than a light disc thrown at 60mph due to drag and inertia

Yeah, but a person who throws a heavy discs 60 mph will probably throw a light disc a little faster, which equals it out to a certain point at least.

 

[smoothplayer]

A heavy disc thrown at 60mph is going to fly further than a light disc thrown at 60mph due to drag and inertia

The heavier disc is going to have a tougher time staying in the air though as well, the disc is trying to lift, "glide" and stay aloft. A heavier disc could fly shorter then a lighter version in theory. It would be interesting to see which one goes further based on the disc model and speed if throw.

I know my uncle throws some light weight discs and I've tossed a few of them and was surprised how much they glide/stay aloft. I think that the glide might make up for the lack of weight but just maybe only at slower speeds? There could be a crossover point as well. The 70 mph throw might slow down much quicker and the glide can't make up for the initial loss. Where as the 45 mph throw the glide makes up for the slower initial velocity?

Interesting things to think about.