I was absolutely shocked at the backend this thing has. I'm not accustomed to that from a Lane #1 ball, or from anything that comes out of the old Columbia plant in Texas.

I didn't bowl with it enough tonight to be able to do a full review, but I wanted it to fit between the Tsunami and the Evolution, and that's what it does. It's stronger overall than the Tsunami but goes a lot longer before it makes the turn (I took it to 1000 Abralon plus a coat of Track Clean and Polish before using). It's not quite as clean through the heads as the Evo but I like the backend move a lot better. It's a lot more predictable.

And this ball just has a humble ol' label drill on it. Pin is up over the ring, CG under the middle and the MB on the thumb's track side.

Backend, backend, backend, plus great pin carry. Carries better than the Evo.

Jess

p.s.: For those that care, I'll be updating my wrist injury on the Misc. forum after dinner.

My issue with the covers is that, in my experience, covers on Columbia-poured balls are some of the weakest in bowling (or, more accurately, covers on stuff that comes out of the Texas plant). The cover on my Evo, for instance, is pretty weak, as was everything I used to get from Columbia and AMF prior to the switchover to 900Global.

I can't remember whether Columbia or 900G poured the XP, but it still came out of that same plant, so I'm pretty surprised by its reaction.

I'm not a huge Brunswick fan at all, but for my game, Brunswick covers were a good match for most Lane #1 cores. The Bomb cores didn't work so well for me, but everything else did.

Jess