win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Is the SOAKER cover similar to Storm's MONSOON???  (Read 812 times)

Ric Clint

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1681
Is the SOAKER cover similar to Storm's MONSOON???
« on: December 31, 2004, 07:04:04 AM »
I'm not talking about whether or not this Monsoon soaks up oil and disapates it like the Soaker does... but does this Soaker cover cause a ball to roll early?

I know the Monsoon is slightly softer in hardness of coverstock, but what about the Soaker's hardness?

There's another post about how the pearl Monsoon cover possibly makes a ball roll earlier, or digs in earlier, than just the average pearl ball that has, say, the Cureylon pearl cover. Click below for the link:

http://www.ballreviews.com/Forum/Replies.asp?TopicID=70655&ForumID=13&CategoryID=2

And I was wondering if this is possibly the case with the pearl Soaker covers like what's on the Thing Returns?

The Thing Returns is suppose to be a go long and turn hard ball just like what the Storm Recharge is suppose to be... but some are saying that the Recharge actually rolls earlier than it's suppose to since it's got the Pearl Monsoon cover on it. So I'm wondering if the Pearl Soaker cover makes a ball react similar, in a sense, to what the Monsoon does? Or does the Soaker Pearl balls still in fact actually go long?

Are the pearl Soaker and pearl Monsoon similar as far as ball reaction on the lanes?




 

Ric Clint

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1681
Re: Is the SOAKER cover similar to Storm's MONSOON???
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2005, 11:11:26 PM »
Thanks. I just didn't know what to think of the Thing Returns and if it would get down the lane clean enough.

It been said that it went long and was clean through the heads... but seeing as how this Soaker coverstock appears to be... I'm wondering about it. I really want one.