I still have the L/M New Standard and Yeah Baby Diamond Particle balls.They have held up well over the years and continue to perform well today. The New Standard is still my Benchmark and most versatile ball that I have.

I still have the L/M New Standard and Yeah Baby Diamond Particle balls.They have held up well over the years and continue to perform well today. The New Standard is still my Benchmark and most versatile ball that I have.

I still have my original 15 lb. NS from 2006; sold the Yeah Baby as it hook far too much and required too much oil for me. I did get a 14 lb. NS. Polished or dull, it's one for the history books.

I like particle pearls like the storm depth charge, hammer big blue pp (I think that's the name), and my lane masters black pearl blue ocean.... did well with these balls in tourneys past.

Not sure if these are the same "particle pearls" because the depth charge had the length and hard almost sharp backend.

First off, you are correct about the Big Blue, though I believe it was just called the Big Blue Pearl (it was the blue/yellow swirl). Also, I thought those were one of, if not the first, to use the Gas Mask core, but I could be wrong on that. I bought them brand new, when they would give you the Free Big Blue spare if you bought the Solid and Pearl; but traded the 3 for a NIB Cuda/C.

As for the Depth Charge, I never threw it, though I can't believe I forgot to add the El Nino 2000 into my love of Particle pearl balls. The Depth Charge and El Nino 2000 had similar covers if I'm not mistaken. Both my El Nino 2000 were very smooth off the break, though after I had my first one drilled that way, I couldn't even fathom trying any other drilling on my NIB one I drilled last season...just an absolute beast when the heads dry up and there is carrydown at the breakpoint.

I have considered drilling up my NIB X-Factor Ace, but since I have the El Nino 2000 and the Visionary New Breed Particle Pearl in the bag, not sure I'd need to....but that Raven does seem interesting!

was actually talking to my boss about the death so to speak of particle balls. In the early 2000's they were all the rage. Anyways he told me A) they tended to die out much quicker. B) in 2007ish when USBC changed the requirements for the softness of bowling balls, particle material wasn't really able to used as much because it was to soft.

Please explain (B) to me. I don't remember that change in softness requirements. Particle balls weren't any softer or harder than any other reactive resin balls, that I am aware of. Adding particles to the resin didn't make it softer or harder, that I recall ...

was actually talking to my boss about the death so to speak of particle balls. In the early 2000's they were all the rage. Anyways he told me A) they tended to die out much quicker. B) in 2007ish when USBC changed the requirements for the softness of bowling balls, particle material wasnt really able to used as much because it was to soft.

Number 2 would be interesting to see an official source on this. I don't remember anything along those lines. Also, I know of 2 balls that have been produced since 2007 (for sure) that have particle in it. Incinerate and Pure. Wanna say Incinerate has 3% load...

Never Learn....

Read this USBC press release at the link I provided. I hope this clears up your question...

http://usbcongress.http.internapcdn.net/usbcongress/bowl/equipandspecs/pdfs/articles/Newbowlingballspecificationwillaffectmanufacturersnotbowlers.pdf

Unless I am laboring under a misapprehension of the subject -
Thank you, but no. I do recall the roughness requirements, but that's not what he said. He said hardness/softness; that's a completely different element/factor. Roughness did not affect particle balls any more than it affected resins balls.

NRG has some particle, or so I've heard. I can only speak to what I know. My Incinerate chews up a pattern @1500

Never Learn

I should have explained more, but my intention was to provide the ONLY update USBC has made to covers, which is the roughness...nothing to do with the hardness/softness of a cover. So I agree with your point that I have not heard (or have already forgotten) if there was an change to a max/min on cover hardness/softness.