Brunswick had the Danger Zone, Inferno & Mastermind.
Hammer had the Black Widow and the Vibe.
Roto-Grip had the Cell and the Nomad.
Storm had Hy-Road and the Virtual Gravity.
AMF had the Night Hawk.

Each of these balls was such a mainstay for that manufacturer, that many, many versions of each of these very famous series were manufactured. They rode the coattails of the original.

It seems like Ebonite's one "famous" ball was the Vortex 2, the basis for the Gamebreaker and Cyclone series. Now it's 15 years later; the Vortex 2 was introduced in 2000. They seem to be stuck with this as their sole legacy.
It almost appears as if this is the only item keeping Ebonite afloat these days.

I'm sure every Ebonite fan will claim several other balls are equally great; while that may be true, no other ball comes close in sales, which is the bottom line.

I know there are some very talented people still at Ebonite; why can't they hit that magic formula again? Is it just marketing or is there some other reason?

This is not a rant; it's more a statement of sadness, that a once great company has not been able to rise from the ashes, as has most other ball manufacturers. I wish I knew why. Except for a Cyclone, I have not found one Ebonite brand ball that was truly useful for me int he past 10 years or so.

The results are not made public and are kept pretty confidential.  All it shows is total units by price point and month.  It is not broken down by manufacturer. 

i think ebonite should use the gb 10.7 cover on as many balls as they can. its their version of r2s. everything they use it on is a homerun. the one, GB,GB2, cyclone, playmaker, SR300 (i liked that ball)

i forgot about the NV line. they sold a lot around here. everyone i saw seemed to like them , especially the total NV and Complete NV

Cheech

6/11/15
your wish will come true

Could this reference have something to do with this post:
http://www.ballreviews.com/ebonite/gamebreaker-2-pearl-t308091.0.html;msg2528436;topicseen#new

This brings up another issue, especially when it comes to value.

For some manufacturers now, the name also helps to extend the value of a line of bowling balls. For example, Brunswick just resurrected the Rhino Pro line and re-released the Gold Rhino Pro. C300 brought back the U2. Hammer brought back the Burgundy.

Obviously, none of thee balls are of the same cover, core, and finish of their originals, but they did bring back something more unique: trust in the brand of the ball, as its reputation has preceded it...

However, nothing from Ebonite in this case. Of the three mentioned above, the U2 would have been the oldest, dating back to 1990. Gold Rhino Pro was 1993. Ebonite has been rather silent on this; not as if they are required to do something, but quite the opposite. They haven't jumped on the bandwagon.

They have some good lines they could do this with: Thunderbolt, Crush, Nitro, Turbo. If half of EBI has done climbed on board with this, I'm surprised Ebonite hasn't.

I know they just revived (more like 'extended') the GB series, but between that, and the Cyclone, it never really was 'dead'. And comparing the time it first came out to the releases of the first U2, Rhino Pro and Burgundy, they are still new and relevant.

BL.

Don't forget AMF came out with a new Cobra and King Cobra that are a few decades old as well. Same as the others, same name, completely different ball.

3835

good point. This even further proves the point. It isn't as if Ebonite doesn't have the solid lines to do this with, but is interesting that they HAVEN'T done this.

BL.

Sorry, guys, but, for me, the new Gold Rhino, and the Cobras, are virtually totally unrelated to the original balls by the same name. Their ball reactions seem totally different. Their naming was solely a marketing ploy by both manufacturers to take advantage of possibly gullible bowlers. I think that's sad and disreputable.

We know. That's the point. It isn't that they are related to the original balls, because we know that different technology went into today's version of those balls. The point is that the name and the reputation of the name of the ball precedes the ball itself and how it rolls on the lane. Ebonite and Track are the only brands left under EBI that have not gone down that route, where Hammer, C300, Brunswick, and AMF have.

BL.

Funny.....I have an old Angular One which I still absolutely love. I had an original One which I once shot 289 with, so I bought a re-make One, and hardly ever use it because the reaction of that ball is completely foreign to me. I also own a Cyclone, with maybe 10 games on it, but I never throw it because I don't match up to it!

I still have two old Vortexes however, that roll excellent, just like the day I bought them. I have a Savage that still hooks like crazy.  It used to be one of Ebonite's heavy oil balls, but in today's environment it is more of a medium condition ball.

EBO has got to take a look backwards and see what worked in the past, to get through this present and into the future! (and not just a name change)

I'll agree with that. I'd love to see a Nitro/R, Turbo-X, or something of that nature make a comeback. I remember asking Kim Terrell something about that around the time the Total NV came out, which she stated then that they weren't entertaining the idea at that time. That was 8 years ago, so that could change.

But I used to bowl league with Dave Wodka back in the late 90s/early 2000s, and while he would throw and market new balls for people to use, he always kept his go-to ball in his bag, which was the Matrix Dynasty. He'd talk to you about everything in the Apex line, the Optyx line, and the TPC line, but always pulled out that Dynasty, which confused the hell out of me because the house we were at was a heavy oil house at that time.

I honestly don't know what the answer should be, though I agree that they should look back at what worked and sold for them and hit the drawing board.

Anyone know how well Brunswick's LT-42 (I think that's the right one.. the Petraglia ball?) sold? If sold well, could they put together a ball for Earl?

BL.