win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: C systems vs Sieges  (Read 4032 times)

J_w73

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2554
C systems vs Sieges
« on: March 12, 2010, 08:59:29 AM »
What differences am I going to see between the 2.5 and 3.5 C- systems vs the Sieges? Seems both of these balls are for heavy oil.
From what I see the Siege is a lower RG ball.

Also how would the cover strength compare to that of the Cell or Visionary Immortal Solid. Both of these covers were way too strong for the conditions I see around here. Neither of these seemed very versital..

How versital are the C-systems and the Sieges.. or are they very condition specific.
--------------------
18 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, 15 deg axis tilt, varied rotational axis deg.. usually 45+
HighGame 300 x 4, High Series 808
Book Average 205,PBA Xperience 185
Logged
350 RPM, 17 MPH

 

clovismaul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 330
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2010, 05:44:11 PM »
I like the Python over the Seige and the System balls. But thats my opinion
--------------------

Who Shoots 650 without shooting a duece?
Logged
Leon's 300 Club
Located inside
AMF Rocklin Lanes
2325 Sierra Meadows Dr.
Rocklin, Ca 95677
916-912-9178

J_w73

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2554
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2010, 07:17:36 PM »
quote:
I like the Python over the Seige and the System balls. But thats my opinion
--------------------

Who Shoots 650 without shooting a duece?


I could see that the Python would be a more versatile ball being a weaker cover..
For me , stronger balls seem really condition specific..
medium balls I can slow down and give it more hand to hook it on heavier oil.. and speed up and change hand release to get the ball to get down the lane and hook on dry..
Heavier oil Strong cover balls have to be the exact right condition to use..
Too oily and the ball still doesn't hook for me ... and too dry the ball just burns up getting down the lane and has nothing left for the backend..or it is just too early...
--------------------
18 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, 15 deg axis tilt, varied rotational axis deg.. usually 45+
HighGame 300 x 4, High Series 808
Book Average 205,PBA Xperience 185
Logged
350 RPM, 17 MPH

RSalas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2010, 01:22:10 PM »
The C-(System) balls are stronger off the break than anything I've seen in the Brunswick line in a long time.

The Sieges are more even from front to back, like the asymmetric Zones were.
--------------------
Ray Salas
Brunswick Amateur Staff
http://www.brunswickbowling.com
Logged
#TweetYourScores

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2010, 01:33:18 PM »
FYI The Sieges have a MUCH stronger intermediate differential: .030", vs the C-System's .017". That could be a big difference in breakpoint government.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

timw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2010, 01:52:51 PM »
what effect does a higher differential have?  moreflare? more hook?
thanks for any answer
Logged

baer300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2010, 02:27:21 PM »
quote:
what effect does a higher differential have?  moreflare? more hook?
thanks for any answer


higher differential equals more hook potential because of more track flare.

OP... I have to echo Ray, C Systems are more angular than the Siege.

Charlest... The difference in the MB strength will be a difference in the reaction. I have an Evil Siege drilled 65x5x25 that corners pretty hard compared to my other one drilled 50x5x60. The C System's lower MB will not change reactions quite as much but still will see a difference.
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation
Logged
Adam Baer
Track Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2010, 03:21:25 PM »
baer300,

Well, there are several implications of the stronger mass bias (Inter. Diff.). It can make the breakpoint stronger than a lower MB strength ball, but a lot depends on the rest of the ball's design specs, plus, of course, the bowler's delivery/release specs. Plus the range of MB placements and drill angles are more restricted for a set of bowler's delivery specs, as compared to a lower mass bias strength ball.

In this case, the C-System's design seems (to my eye) to have much more backend, caused solely by the coverstock, than a Siege's backend (original or Evil Siege), no matter the MB placement. I drilled my 2.5 "almost" Rico, with no weight hole and once medium oil has been burned away, the ball does a "Left turn NOW, Clyde!" and I have to put it away.

--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

baer300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #8 on: March 14, 2010, 09:03:52 PM »
Yes Charlest you are right. You got alot more into detail than I did. I have to agree with the cover on the C Systems. One of my 3.5 is drilled RICO and still corners.
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation
Logged
Adam Baer
Track Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #9 on: March 14, 2010, 09:18:25 PM »
quote:
Yes Charlest you are right. You got alot more into detail than I did. I have to agree with the cover on the C Systems. One of my 3.5 is drilled RICO and still corners.
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation


I prefer balls with a more controlled reaction but do have a few with strong backends. My 2.5 is drilled close in overall concept to a Rico without being such. I can easily tell when the lanes are too dry for this ball by the amount of backend I get. It's easy to see breakpoint get almost ridicuous.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

mj79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #10 on: March 14, 2010, 09:46:34 PM »
quote:
Strictly my opinion here.  

C-System = Money

Siege = Waste of money
--------------------
www.myspace.com/its_just_dave
Check it out and add me if you want!



ahhh yea thats a pretty bold "opinion"
Logged

baer300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
Re: C systems vs Sieges
« Reply #11 on: March 15, 2010, 01:27:14 PM »
I personally like the Sieges better than the C Sytems. I can contol the breakpoint alot better. This is my personal opnion and how I see the balls reaction. I tend to not like it when a ball dives sideways off the spot. Dont get me wrong I think the C Systems are great balls and have watched alot of good matches with them. I need more volume and length for me to use mine.
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation
Logged
Adam Baer
Track Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
Pages: [1]
« previous next »