BallReviews

Equipment Boards => 900 Global => Topic started by: JJp9976 on January 05, 2012, 12:36:58 AM

Title: 900 Global coverstock ratings
Post by: JJp9976 on January 05, 2012, 12:36:58 AM

How has the system for rating coverstock strength held up in terms of consistency from year to year?  For example, is the S70 cover from the original Break still the same strength as the S70 from the Nuts?  The reason I ask is because I can find some good deals on discontinued balls from the past few years but want to be able to accurately assess their place in my arsenal.  

Any experiences and thoughts would help me out.  Thanks.

Jeremiah

Title: Re: 900 Global coverstock ratings
Post by: qstick777 on January 05, 2012, 09:46:55 AM

This has been answered before - and if the site actually had a search function I could go back and find the exact answer!

 

Anyways, IIRC, coverstock ratings are fairly consistent.  The rating takes the strength of the core AND coverstock into consideration.  So, the S70 on the Break/Eagle may not be the same coverstock as another cover/core combo rated at S70, but the overall strength would be similar.

 

In a way that is confusing, because it's almost like other company's "hook" ratings instead of an actual rating of the coverstock.

 

If I'm wrong I'm sure somebody will correct me.

Title: Re: 900 Global coverstock ratings
Post by: tdub36tjt on January 05, 2012, 11:42:12 AM

Don't think that is completely true. In fact you look at the Break and Break Pearl both s70 covers and the Break is way stronger.....I kind of ignore the ratings to be honest cause I have never really thought that they were all that accurate. Not that they are way off but they aren't the end all be all of the strength of the ball. I do wonder if the s70 cover on the Break and the s70 on the Nuts are the exact same cover. Not sure on that....