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

Author Topic: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno  (Read 3773 times)

OldBowler

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 25
Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« on: April 21, 2004, 07:06:02 AM »
Have had tremendous experience with the Inferno except on carry-down conditions.  Does anyone have a clear answer on the difference between an Inferno wet-sanded to 800 grit and a Ultimate Inferno out-of-the box?
--------------------
Old Bowlers Do It Without Massive Revs
Logged

 

a_ak57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10584
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2004, 10:10:31 PM »
Original- pearl
Ultimate- solid

The solid is better at handling carrydown than the pearl, so the UI will be stronger, with more mid-lane and less backend, on carrydown.  You could also polish it up for a kick-a§§ reaction on the same conditions as the original, too.

Hope this helps.
--------------------
a_ak57
Worse....much worse!
Logged

agroves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4939
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2004, 11:32:13 PM »
I replied to your message.

andrew
--------------------
FUFU
"Act like you've been there before"
Logged

Monster Stitch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1490
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2004, 12:32:37 PM »
I have both balls.Just got the Ultimate and polished it also. The Ultimate definitely has a high mid lane rev and strong backend. I have never had a ball rev up in the backend before. For a resin it is very impressive. As for the Original it works ok on Carry down. Perfect go to ball when the Raging is not finishing.
Logged

PikevilleBwl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2004, 06:37:22 PM »
Plan and simple OldBowler: It looks like the same ball but the Ultimate is a solid ball instead of a polished up ball. If I was you the best carrydown ball out of both is the Ultimate Inferno no questions ask. Ultimate Inferno should be in every serious bowlers bag cause it is one hell of a ball.
Logged

pjr300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1487
  • Live from the Bowling Capital of the World!
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2004, 07:42:56 AM »

Bob and Jonathan, any idea why a polished UI will have midlane and backend than the original? I thought it was the same coverstock and weight block.

BTW, I have an original and an Raging and like them both quite a bit....


--------------------
pjr300
live from the Bowling Capital of the World
Logged
pjr300
Specs and Transaction history in my profile...

a_ak57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10584
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2004, 11:02:57 AM »
No, they don't have the same coverstock.  Like I said, UI is solid, Original is pearl.  That's the difference.  Pearl doesn't mean polished, if that's what you think.
--------------------
Damnit I can't wait for Halo 2 to come out!!  
Logged

pjr300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1487
  • Live from the Bowling Capital of the World!
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2004, 01:16:32 PM »

Sorry, I didn't make that clear... I know the UI is solid. I was wondering how a polished UI compares to the original Infirno.


--------------------
pjr300
live from the Bowling Capital of the World
Logged
pjr300
Specs and Transaction history in my profile...

Strider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6759
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2004, 01:36:55 PM »
quote:
Even with a pretty high polish, the ultimate is stronger in the midlane than the original.  Considering they have the same core I get more difference in look between the two than I would have expected between a solid and pearl version of the same ball.  As much as I like the original, the Ultimate out performs it on longer heavier oil patterns.  It seems to rev up quicker which doesn't make sense, but thats how it looks.


Looks like Bob already answered the question.
--------------------
Penn State Proud

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive
Logged

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2004, 07:10:05 PM »
As others have already said, over and over again, a pearlized resin will not act like a solid version of th esame ball even if it is sanded to the same grit as the solid. The factors that make it "pearlized" make it skid like a solid does not.  That is just the way it is. Please know this to be true. It is not a matter of beief. End of story.
--------------------
"We get old too fast, and too late, smart."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

pjr300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1487
  • Live from the Bowling Capital of the World!
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2004, 11:23:03 PM »
quote:
As others have already said, over and over again, a pearlized resin will not act like a solid version of th esame ball even if it is sanded to the same grit as the solid. The factors that make it "pearlized" make it skid like a solid does not.  That is just the way it is. Please know this to be true. It is not a matter of beief. End of story.


I was attempting to drill down a bit more on the comments by Bob Hansen, which stated "Considering they have the same core I get more difference in look between the two than I would have expected between a solid and pearl version of the same ball" and "It seems to rev up quicker which doesn't make sense, but thats how it looks."

In addition, the BTM hook rating on both the UI and the Inferno is the same (50). I found that a bit unusual, hence the desire for more rea-world info.



--------------------
pjr300
live from the Bowling Capital of the World
Logged
pjr300
Specs and Transaction history in my profile...

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Inferno Versus Ultimate Inferno
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2004, 08:48:55 AM »
quote:

I was attempting to drill down a bit more on the comments by Bob Hansen, which stated "Considering they have the same core I get more difference in look between the two than I would have expected between a solid and pearl version of the same ball" and "It seems to rev up quicker which doesn't make sense, but thats how it looks."

In addition, the BTM hook rating on both the UI and the Inferno is the same (50). I found that a bit unusual, hence the desire for more rea-world info.
--------------------
pjr300


You have to realize also that that number is a distillation of information from a committe of bowlers. Plus that numbers represents not an absolute number with which you can compare both balls. It repesents the best possible preformance of that ball in its most perfect intended condition with the strongest posisble drilling. The overall maximum hook number for any two balls will never be the same for any two bowlers on the same condition. That is also why BTM has added, a few years back, the interpretation of each of the 3 bowlers as to which oil pattern (DRY/MEDIUM/HEAVY) the ball performs best on. And those numbers is only how those bowlers felt that day.

All told the opinion we give here and the professional opinions BTM gives in their reviews are still only general impressions, which is why we need to take EVERY number they print, every word they say and every word people here say to draw an approximation of the ball for you.

--------------------
"We get old too fast, and too late, smart."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Pages: [1]
« previous next »