I've thrown both, drilled similar but not exactly the same. Wicked was drilled with the pin above the ring and the CG a bit farther to the right than the Rip's CG. Rip had the ring finger drilled partly into the pin and CG stacked below. Pretty close - close enough to compare anyway.
Comparing them, both are strictly medium oil balls, being a bit too strong for drier and not near enough ball for heavy. Rip is a bit cleaner up front, although a polished Wicked is a close second. For me the Rip was a bit more angular. Between the 2 balls I prefered the Rip. Both hit well, although I did see a 200+ bowler leave a 5-7-10 once with a sanded Wicked (never never never sand a Wicked - buy a real oil ball instead)
When Bowling This Month rated these balls, their hook scale was different, so you can't make that comparison, but the other numbers are pretty darned similar:

RG =     Rip 3.3  Wicked 2.8
Diff =   Rip 8.3  Wicked 7.3
Torque=  Rip 5.5  Wicked 5.0
Length=  Rip 6.0  Wicked 5.5
Backend= Rip 12.5 Wicked 12.5
Hook= Different Scales and Different Era

Bowlers Journal also rated them (at different times of course):

Box Lane Condition =   Rip-Medium Light  Wicked-Medium
Cover Aggressiveness = Rip-77   Wicked-77
Cover Versatility =    Rip-74   Wicked-80 (expected since Rip is pearl)
Core Versatility =     Rip-79   Wicked-77
Overall Hook =         Rip-81   Wicked-80

I trust that's enough info for 'ya??