Ok, correct me if I'm wrong cause I'm a youngin' and haven't been around the bowling realm as long as some of you, but as far as I know, Columbia 300 never used a mass bias... 1st off, why haven't they used a mass bias, do they think there is an advantage of not marking the mass bias? Yes, I know all ball (except for plastic, I think) have a mass bias, you just have to find and mark it, but I've never seen Columbia 300 mark their mass bias', why do you think that is? and since they have never done it before, to my knowledge, why do I see a mass bias marking on the new Drive? Is there something that's a little more special to this ball? well I know that's a lot of questions to answer so I guess I'll stop there (btw, not like it would matter, but it's mass bias marking is marked very similar to the Freak line and other track equipment, interesting...)

His question was why doesn't Columbia mark mass bias not why don't they use assymetric cores.  I personally don't know if they have marked it in the past or not. I thought they did.  The only Columbia balls I have ever had were symetric so.
--------------------
I should just quit bowling, oh wait I already tried that.
Now that I am back and my Saws are sharp again, I am ready to cut some wood.

FYI The Drive is a pearlized version of the Alter Ego, which has been documented here.

There have been previous asymmetric/mass bias balls.See my first reply in this thread.

Do your research to save yourself a lot of trouble: see Bowlingballreviews.com and Discontinued balls under Columbia's own website.

--------------------
"We get old too fast, and too late, smart."

ttt