Author Topic: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS (Read 18820 times)

haff · « **on:** July 13, 2010, 11:59:57 AM »

I took my used DANGER ZONE ball in to get fit and the the pro shop driller said he could make it fit but this ball is like 20 years old.. "DANGER ZONE bowling balls will not work well on synthetic lanes" the pro shop told me.
IS THIS TRUE?

leftybowler70 · « **Reply #31 on:** August 07, 2016, 11:14:46 AM »

Although I have purchased the recent one from Brunswick, I did happen to find a old special edition one on a rack at a nearby center, I used it in my fall league this past year on 39'-41' ft house patterns, and it performed like a standard benchmark ball with decent midlane read.

But as some of you mentioned, definitely not the same as back in the day; will drill the new one in a few weeks to get a feel of the oldie vs newbie.

charlest · « **Reply #32 on:** August 07, 2016, 11:51:25 AM »

Quote from: bergman on August 07, 2016, 10:54:20 AM

I had the original DZ when it came out in 1995 /96. It was a very popular ball at that time. I had a lot of success with it. I brought it out of cold storage earlier this year to see how it performs on today's conditions. As it turned out, it went straight as a dart. Quite different from how it used to perform 20 years ago.

Small wonder! 20 years ago, it handled medium to medium-heavy oil mostly because of the polished stock cover; Otherwise it would have handled true heavy oil. Today it should handle medium-light to true medium oil, for the average revs, average ball speed bowler, with its polished surface. Sanded, it can handle more oil.

Try sanding it. PK 18 responds well to a variety of surfaces.

Also since it is 20 years old, for God's sake do an oil extraction and true resurfacing and test its true self, not some old oil soaked relic, especially if you're comparing to some new modern ball.

billdozer · « **Reply #33 on:** August 07, 2016, 03:00:09 PM »

dis is from 2010 lolololololololololol

bergman · « **Reply #34 on:** August 07, 2016, 11:23:15 PM »

I did an oil extraction on my old DZ as well as a complete resurfacing. I tried to
get it close to its original condition. When it was new, I used it off and on for the better part of a season and then moved on to newer releases. However the primary reason
it does not perform as it once did is due to the fact that the lane oils of today are being applied with more volume than in those days. In addition, the oils of today are in general, slicker than they were 20 years ago, so I never expected it to perform as well as it once did. I also have an 18 year old Columbia Pulse that also was a great performer18 years ago, but it's simply not, on today's conditions-- again, no big surprise, and for all of the same reasons as the old DZ. That's why i caution my students who search for a ball that performed well for them years ago. They should not be disappointed if it does not perform as it once did on the conditions it was once
designed for.

charlest · « **Reply #35 on:** August 08, 2016, 05:50:46 AM »

Quote from: bergman on August 07, 2016, 11:23:15 PM

I did an oil extraction on my old DZ as well as a complete resurfacing. I tried to
get it close to its original condition. When it was new, I used it off and on for the better part of a season and then moved on to newer releases. However the primary reason
it does not perform as it once did is due to the fact that the lane oils of today are being applied with more volume than in those days. In addition, the oils of today are in general, slicker than they were 20 years ago, so I never expected it to perform as well as it once did. I also have an 18 year old Columbia Pulse that also was a great performer18 years ago, but it's simply not, on today's conditions-- again, no big surprise, and for all of the same reasons as the old DZ. That's why i caution my students who search for a ball that performed well for them years ago. They should not be disappointed if it does not perform as it once did on the conditions it was once
designed for.

Ok, I had no idea you had done that and in the 90% case of posts like yours, people hadn't; So I thought I ought to suggest it.

Unless you're speed dominant, I would never say that the DZ was a dart on today's environment; that's an extreme exaggeration. Yes, it is not longer what it once was. Neither is the Pulse, as great as they both once were.

Author Topic: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS (Read 18820 times)

haff

DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS

leftybowler70

Re: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS

charlest

Re: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS

billdozer

Re: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS

bergman

Re: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS

charlest

Re: DANGER ZONE NO GOOD ON SYNTHETICS