What, exactly, is the difference between a $70 bat and a $700 one?

[LongHopCassidy]

Shameless nightwatchman here, so I'll never know the difference beyond your anecdotes.

Right now I'm touting a Kashmir willow ICC-certified POS, and I couldn't really imagine how much further or faster a FC quality bat could hit a ball - assuming the same shot is played to the same delivery.

What do you think? What's the main selling point of a top-quality bat?

[jan]

There are some bats which are just superb when you hold them in your hands. They usually cost +300 £ and the guys have had them for many years. They last long and thats the main reason people buy them imo. They may feel better in hand and may hit further than cheaper bats and may surely prove you can afford it but the longevity is the most important when investing loads of pounds imo.

...an opinion from a guy wielding a 60€ CA bat

[Hurricane]

i don't even know what you would get for $70 - I think it would break on you. I think a better comparison may be a $300 bat vs $700.

I spent $300 on my bat. my team mate just spent $700. He got it custom made - and requested that the meat be put down low in the bat because thats where he hits the ball. I don't think he could have found a bat off the rack to meet his requirements.

As far as I am concerned my $300 bat is as good if not better than anyone's on the team. When guys borrow it to hit out catches to the team I always catch them admiring the bat afterwards.

[benchmark00]

$630

[Spikey]

Originally Posted by Hurricane

i don't even know what you would get for $70

a Kashmir willow bat...

[Daemon]

Originally Posted by benchmark00

$630

Came in just to post this, wac.

[MrPrez]

Originally Posted by Daemon

Came in just to post this, wac.

This.

[wellAlbidarned]

It's not a choice between a $70 bat and a $700, the $200-300 price range is what most amateur cricketers go for. As for the question, it's the quality of the wood. Cheaper Kashmir bats are made from fast-growing Indian willows, which are softer and therefore transfer force between the batsman and ball less efficiently.

[Dan]

I had this discussion with a guy from my local cricket shop, regarding $300 bats vs $700 bats.

From what I recall, the $700 bats actually last less time - they're compressed less to maintain a greater 'ping', I guess you could call it. In essence, the ball flies off the middle a bit faster and harder, which is what you want at FC level.

$300 bats are compressed a little more, and are generally made from slightly harder English willow - the bat lasts longer, however the ball doesn't come off it quite as well.

Its rather irrelevant, really - unless you're playing 1st Grade/FC cricket there's no reason why a $300 bat wouldn't do.

A $70 bat, on the other hand, shouldn't be used for anything above U/10s.

tl;dr - more expensive bats don't last as long

[wellAlbidarned]

That makes no sense based on everything I've learned about bats and physics. Happy to be proven wrong if you can back it up.

[Hurricane]

Yeah the $70 bat just sounds so damn nasty. IT must be a new thing these Kashmir willows - when I was growing up a $70 bat was a bat that was painted yellow and the paint gave it a protection against the wear and tear of the ball.

[uvelocity]

it's not actually $630, you need to consider the standard deviation of a $700 bat

also the $630 could have been spent buying 7 other bats which could have scored a further 400 runs, which would obviously mean it's better to buy 8x $70 bats and spending the rest on hookers.

tldr; I don't blame you

[Batmaster]

$70 bats these days are mostly kashmir/junior/indoor cricket bats.

And people got it all wrong by saying expensive bats don't last long. Some brands press their bats softer so they perform better but their lifespan is shortened. CA is a good example. Some bats cause $700 because of name, basically, you can pay $499 in smaller name brands and get same quality. You can't compare 1 guy bat for $700 that is probably made by a softer pressing bat manufacturer to one that cost $300 that's probably made by a harder pressed manufacturer. I've used bats from various brands, and the general thing is, if one is pressed a certain way, you can be sure the others are done nearly the same way in the same brand, only that the higher end ones are more beautifully crafted, better sweet spots etc and a bit stronger as the top end willow is of better quality. If you meet a $700 one that's pressed soft in a particular brand, you can sure bet the cheaper ones in that brands are pressed soft as well. Harder pressed bat makers will press their international players bat softer for ultra performance though.

Some of the best pressed bats nowadays are made by Champ Sports in India, not a popular brand, but their bats are strong and have bullet like sweet spots. I think RS and GM also lasts for quite a while.

[wellAlbidarned]

I still cannot figure out how the **** a softer bat = more power.

[Batmaster]

its simple mate, english willows are resilient by nature, which is why it hits a cricket hard ball compare to non resilient woods like green heart. The harder its pressed, the less resilient it is. Softer it is pressed, the more resilient nature is retained therefore ball pings out better. Ofcourse, a hard press with decent oiling can soften to wood to give some more resilient nature, so pressing alone may not be the only factor but that's the general theory.