Author Topic: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ? (Read 5628 times)

302efi · « **on:** October 27, 2006, 04:31:12 AM »

I see a few posts where some people say Activator is stonger then PK18, then I see other post where PK18 is stronger the Activator ?

Is the following statement true or false ?:

PK18 is stonger OVERALL, more agressive in oil, earlier breakpoint and Activator gets through the heads better, allowing for more push..More backend (in general.

True or false ?
--------------------
Roto-Grip & Lane #1

When faced with a difficult situation, Jesus asks himself, "What would Chuck Norris do?"

Robo-Arm bowlers SUCK...

Edited on 10/27/2006 9:34 PM

charlest · « **Reply #1 on:** October 27, 2006, 01:49:39 PM »

IN the most GENERAL sense, I found it to be very true.

Activator type balls seem, to my eye, to act like many other companies' polished particle pearls.

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

HamPster · « **Reply #2 on:** October 27, 2006, 03:29:56 PM »

Your statement is true . . Activator does get through the heads better, but revs up in the mids and is smoother on the backend. PK18 wants to start hooking earlier, and whenever it does start hooking, it's sharper. I wouldn't say that one is necessarily stronger than the other, they just allow for different reaction shapes. Let's just say that PK18 LOOKS more aggressive at least.
--------------------
Overdose, lethal metal level in my blood, it freely flows, embrace the pain, crush the suffering and cleanse it with the river surging through your veins.

crankncrash · « **Reply #3 on:** October 27, 2006, 03:32:58 PM »

What Hammy said

shelley · « **Reply #4 on:** October 27, 2006, 03:36:14 PM »

I remember seeing a post from BrunsRich saying that PK18 was earlier, smoother, and stronger while Activator was cleaner, later, sharper, and weaker.

Why no dull, solid PK18 on a low-RG core like the Inferno's for heavy oil instead of the UI or ScI? You'd give up the backend that "everyone" wants.

SH

shelley · « **Reply #5 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:30:41 PM »

quote:
i was just thinking the same thing when i opened this. if PK18 is stronger than Activator, why is it not used on the high end lines?

A few reasons, some good some cheesy. PK18 isn't new and shiny. It's old, and no matter how relevant it still is to today's conditions, not matter how awesome it is, it's still old. From a marketing perspective, people have been seeing PK18 on balls for a long time, and putting it back in their high-end line might be seen as stagnating.

Second, putting it on their high-end line would leave the mid-priced line without a primary coverstock. PK17 isn't strong enough for what they seem to be trying to do, and Activator costs more than PK18, so costs would go up for the mid-range balls. They couldn't necessarily put PK18 on both, because that would blur the distinction between the high-end and mid-range. They don't differentiate with expensive, fancy asymmetric cores like, say, Storm or Track, so they'd hurt their high end stuff by sharing the coverstock.

Finally, there have been great mid-priced PK18 balls that have the lower RG that the top-end seems to favor. The Bruiser comes to mind. That's not that old, so putting out a heavy-oil, dull, low-RG (the Wizard/Nemesis were mid-RG) solid PK18 would be seen as releasing a dull Bruiser for $200+.

Just a few guesses. I'd like to see what a PK18 with the current Zone core would be like.

SH

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:37:46 PM »

Question......Was the Time Zone not PK18? Hello?
--------------------
Steven Vance
Former Pro Shop Operator

If anyone out there is worried about the scores being too high, try duckpin!!

Joe Jr · « **Reply #7 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:38:35 PM »

quote:
i was just thinking the same thing when i opened this. if PK18 is stronger than Activator, why is it not used on the high end lines?

Because making a ball that hooks a lot isn't what Brunswick considers "High Performance". Activator reads the backend differently then other Pearls, like charlest said, it acts more like a pearl particle cover.
--------------------
- Joe
Formerly Brunswick Lefty
Banned under the user name Richard Cranium

Joe Jr · « **Reply #8 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:39:09 PM »

quote:
Question......Was the Time Zone not PK18? Hello?

Yes PK18 was on the Time Zone.
--------------------
- Joe
Formerly Brunswick Lefty
Banned under the user name Richard Cranium

qstick777 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:43:24 PM »

quote:
Just a few guesses. I'd like to see what a PK18 with the current Zone core would be like.

Hasn't that been done with some of their international balls? I can't remember, but I thought that they used PK18 on those balls but used a different name?
--------------------
Best post ever:http://www.ballreviews.com/Forum/Replies.asp?TopicID=74110&ForumID=16&CategoryID=5

Search Ballreviews entire database here: http://www.bowling-info.com/Search.html

shelley · « **Reply #10 on:** October 27, 2006, 04:49:12 PM »

quote:
Hasn't that been done with some of their international balls? I can't remember, but I thought that they used PK18 on those balls but used a different name?

Maybe. I don't really count overseas releases since they're not readily available in the US. Obtainable, yes. Easily? No.

And yes, PK18 was on the TZ, but that didn't have the current Zone core. It's core had a higher RG and lower degree of asymmetry (higher spin times, lower RG-diff).

SH

Strider · « **Reply #11 on:** October 27, 2006, 05:11:12 PM »

quote:
PK18 would probably be so much better on the Zone or Inferno lines.

Yeah, I doubt Brunswick's R&D guys know what the heck they're doing.

--------------------
Penn State Proud

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive

MegaMav · « **Reply #12 on:** October 27, 2006, 05:26:41 PM »

PK18 is THE BOMB.

ive been throwing activator for a while now, i just used my dad's Rhino PTE, and oh man, It's like a love affair starting all over again.

Joe Jr · « **Reply #13 on:** October 27, 2006, 05:44:46 PM »

quote:
quote:
PK18 would probably be so much better on the Zone or Inferno lines.

Yeah, I doubt Brunswick's R&D guys know what the heck they're doing.

LOL yea tell me about it. Quick give this kid Billy O's job.
--------------------
- Joe
Formerly Brunswick Lefty
Banned under the user name Richard Cranium

MegaMav · « **Reply #14 on:** October 27, 2006, 06:19:06 PM »

quote:
Plus, you have my old LT-48 pearl and RRFuze. The Fuze line with it's AR covers was the tweaked PK18 just before actiivator took off..

I had to!
2 unique pieces, both have great track records.

used Raging Red Fuze + used LT-48 Gold Pearl for NIB Quantum Raven.

blockbuster trade!

Thanks again, I hope the Raven is working out for you.

Author Topic: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ? (Read 5628 times)

302efi

Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

charlest

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

HamPster

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

crankncrash

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

shelley

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

shelley

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

TWOHAND834

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

Joe Jr

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

Joe Jr

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

qstick777

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

shelley

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

Strider

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

MegaMav

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

Joe Jr

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?

MegaMav

Re: Is PK18 really stronger then Activator ?