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

Author Topic: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps  (Read 4883 times)

mrteach3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« on: December 12, 2006, 09:44:41 PM »
A good friend of mine is looking for something to replace his, yes it is true, Fire Quantum.  He wants something with a similar core, as well as whatever is closest in terms of coverstock.  I have been having a tough time finding info on it besides knowing what the core looks like.  Need RG numbers and coverstock info.  Any ideas would be appreciated.  Thanks in advance.

--------------------
Who needs a 300 or 800, when I have a 294 and a 295!?!?!

Edited on 12/13/2006 6:58 AM
Logged

 

dizzyfugu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7606
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2006, 06:29:50 AM »
IMHIO, what comes closest from current Brusnwick balls is the Rampage: same coverstock (PK18 pearl), but higher RG and more differential. In the end, it should come up similarly strong with a little different reaction shape.

For some numbers: http://www.123bowl.com/ball.asp?ballid=724

bowlingball.com has some FQ remakes on sale, I think?
--------------------

DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
Team X website & more about me
"Put some make-up on your face
 Make this world a better place!"
Kahimi Karie, 'Good morning world'
Logged
DizzyFugu ~ Reporting from Germany

mrteach3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2006, 06:41:34 AM »
Thanks dizzy.  I had a feeling that it was PK18, but wasn't sure.  Bowlingball.com does have the remakes on sale, but I have always been a little skeptical about remakes compared to the real thing.    Thanks for the link.
--------------------
Who needs a 300 or 800, when I have a 294 and a 295!?!?!
Logged

Pupubowlingcho

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2006, 08:52:01 PM »
try to find a Bruiser...
Logged

crankncrash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2006, 09:49:23 PM »
It is NOT PK18 it is actually a blend of PK18 and PK17 and the ball is pretty well copied by bowlingball.com, I have one. I think theirs are true pk18 cause it reads a TOUCH earlier, but polish cures all.  I like mine, and it still opens up the lane like the original. It is the best replacement you will find as it is essentially the same ball.
Logged

Next Level PS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1874
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2006, 10:37:33 PM »
Blazing Inferno.
--------------------
Next Level Proshop
Union, NJ

"THE BOWLERS WILL NOT BE DENIED"

Logged
Next Level Proshop
Union, NJ

"THE BOWLERS WILL NOT BE DENIED"

www.lovedoublesonline.com

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2006, 04:06:54 AM »
quote:
It is NOT PK18 it is actually a blend of PK18 and PK17 and the ball is pretty well copied by bowlingball.com, I have one. I think theirs are true pk18 cause it reads a TOUCH earlier, but polish cures all.  I like mine, and it still opens up the lane like the original. It is the best replacement you will find as it is essentially the same ball.


Even back in 1998, Brunswick reps said it was PK 18.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Logged
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

crankncrash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2006, 08:09:07 AM »
well i talked to them about a month ago and thats what they told me, so whatever u want to believe.
Logged

mrteach3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2006, 06:54:24 AM »
Thanks guys for the feedback.  Anyone have an opinion if a Toxic would fit the bill.  I just drilled mine yesterday and haven't been able to throw it yet so I can't compare the two.  He came up with that suggestion.  I thought it might be a little stronger.
--------------------
Who needs a 300 or 800, when I have a 294 and a 295!?!?!
Logged

BrunsBob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 640
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2006, 03:19:44 PM »
mrteach,

  No need to be skeptical of any Brunswick remakes. If it is indeed a remake (actual color, label, name, etc.), we make them exactly to specs as they were made originally, including coverstock material. If a ball is remade several years after it's original introduction (ex: Danger Zone), some bowlers see a lesser reaction than what they were used too back then. This is due to the advancements in oils and lane surfaces. What was possibly the monster of a ball back in its day can now appear as almost a spare ball in some cases when used on todays conditions.

  Also, I'm am not aware of any PK18 and PK17 mixtures,  but I have only been with Brunswick a little over 3 years and have not heard of any such combination. If I hear differently I will pass that along.

RoB LaW


--------------------
I'm gettin' old, I'm hurtin', but I've got Brunswick balls.......Color me competitive.
Logged

mrteach3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2006, 05:16:03 PM »
Thank you much Mr. Lawrence.  I will pass the info off to my friend.  We are still deciding what we are going to do.  If you happen to speak to one Frank Maresse soon, tell him that Tyson said hello.  
--------------------
Who needs a 300 or 800, when I have a 294 and a 295!?!?!
Logged

crankncrash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Attn: Brunswick Ball Reps
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2006, 04:30:16 PM »
The remake is sick, if thats the ball he likes then go for it.  Toxic is not the same motion, earlier and less angular in my opinion.  BrunsBob,  if you recall all the talker/spec sheet said was "highly reactive"  Now that said when I called Brunswick about a month ago specificly to find out what it was I was told that it was a PK18 and PK17 blend, the original Danger Zone was the PK18 strait up.  Now could I have gotten bad information. Maybe, but I see this reaction as real wierd for a PK18 pearl of which I have had a few.  So take it all for what its worth, but why try to replace a ball with something else if you can get EXACTLY the same reaction back again?
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »