Author Topic: Urethane comparisons (Read 3647 times)

mma1027 · « **on:** October 11, 2011, 12:02:39 AM »

Can anyone do a comparison or maybe just list the tendencies of the urethane products out there please

mainzer · « **Reply #1 on:** October 11, 2011, 02:07:52 PM »

Almost all Urethane products even pearl Urethanes are earlier rolling than reactives. They are very condition specific, short patterns and very burned up patterns are where you will see the best results with a Urethane ball. The reaction is smooth and even rolling, you will have to play in friction or very close to friction to get the ball to bounce back. I usually go more up the back of the ball to get it to go farther down the lane before reacting to the friction and also I slow it down.

As stated on short patterns with alot of friction at the backend of the pattern Urethanes can be very useful for people with higher rev rates. Also a Urethane will be a very good spare ball so you can use them to kill to birds with one stone in your bag, dry lanes and a spare ball all in one.

MainzerPower

strikestriketapped · « **Reply #2 on:** October 11, 2011, 02:31:07 PM »

I really like the Natural for a true Urethane reaction. I also have a Avalanche Urethane that I like, but find it to be stronger than the Natural and also more responsive on the backend due to it being a pearl urethane. If you want something buttery smooth and early rolling, go with the Natural. If you like something with a bit more backend reaction, go with the Avalanche Urethane. Of course, other urethanes such as the Ogre Urethane, Blue Hammer, etc will all do the job.

txbowler · « **Reply #3 on:** October 12, 2011, 11:58:38 AM »

I wish hammer or someone would come out with the pink hammer again. I'd tried the ogre urethane and it is still too early and strong compare to my old pink hammer. I would like a really hard shell urethane coverstock.

Edited by txbowler on 10/12/2011 at 1:05 PM

mainzer · « **Reply #4 on:** October 12, 2011, 01:48:26 PM »

The Original Desperado gets good length with a slight coat of polish.

txbowler wrote on 10/12/2011 11:58 AM:I wish hammer or someone would come out with the pink hammer again. I'd tried the ogre urethane and it is still too early and strong compare to my old pink hammer. I would like a really hard shell urethane coverstock.

Edited by txbowler on 10/12/2011 at 1:05 PM

MainzerPower

RyanRPS · « **Reply #5 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:34:20 PM »

It's the modern cores that make the difference... if you put an original urethane cover on a modern core if will be much earlier that the original.. I know because we tried it!

txbowler wrote on 12/10/2011 11:58 AM:I wish hammer or someone would come out with the pink hammer again. I'd tried the ogre urethane and it is still too early and strong compare to my old pink hammer. I would like a really hard shell urethane coverstock.

Edited by txbowler on 10/12/2011 at 1:05 PM

Ryan Press - Seismic Staff Member

www.seismicbowling.com

txbowler · « **Reply #6 on:** October 13, 2011, 01:01:00 PM »

I guess I am curious why no one has tried to create a 90 hardness (blue dot like) urethane ball?

charlest · « **Reply #7 on:** October 13, 2011, 08:50:21 PM »

The market is too small to be worth the investment. Many here, including myself, talk about it, but that is not enough to make it worthwhile to research, create/design, manufacture and sell such balls.

The Current hardest and probably the least hooking urethane is the Ogre by Visionary,

txbowler wrote on 10/13/2011 1:01 PM:I guess I am curious why no one has tried to create a 90 hardness (blue dot like) urethane ball?

"None are so blind as those who will not see."

"A comedian says funny things. A comic says things funny."

BowlingChat.net

dougb · « **Reply #8 on:** October 13, 2011, 09:37:18 PM »

I love my Pink Hammer and don't intend to let it go now that I read this thread!

aussiedave · « **Reply #9 on:** October 15, 2011, 10:05:10 PM »

I also own a Storm Natural after previously owning a reactive and for my style of bowling (stroker), I really like the smooth predictable arc of its hook - I found the reactives can roll out on you if the conditions start to dry out a bit forcing you to put more on the ball to stop the roll out and that then affects other aspects of your game.

The urethane did not roll out even on very dry lanes.

ad.

RyanRPS · « **Reply #10 on:** October 16, 2011, 05:54:17 AM »

It really depends what you want the ball for... Different urethanes have different reaction characteristics... some will work better on shorter conditions, some will work on drier conditions..

Ryan Press - Seismic Staff Member

www.seismicbowling.com

Impending Doom · « **Reply #11 on:** October 16, 2011, 01:41:10 PM »

I only have 1 urethane ball, and my first since my Burgundy Hammer. I have a urethane AMF Hype, and its killer on the ths and shorter patterns. I haven't tested it against the natural or any other urethane ball, but it rolls so.sweet off of the wet dry that I see in some houses. I driled mine pin up (80x4.5x40, if I remember correctly) and it still exhibits a ton of flare with awesome midlane move. Tekneek has these for sale at $70 (shipping included) and I am picking up 2 more. One i am going to drill more aggressively (50x4.5x70) and save one for a rainy day.

*Inventor of the FIBJAM*

The sky is falling

The end is near

The final warning

The sun disappears.

Author Topic: Urethane comparisons (Read 3647 times)

mma1027

Urethane comparisons

mainzer

Re: Urethane comparisons

strikestriketapped

Re: Urethane comparisons

txbowler

Re: Urethane comparisons

mainzer

Re: Urethane comparisons

RyanRPS

Re: Urethane comparisons

txbowler

Re: Urethane comparisons

charlest

Re: Urethane comparisons

dougb

Re: Urethane comparisons

aussiedave

Re: Urethane comparisons

RyanRPS

Re: Urethane comparisons

Impending Doom

Re: Urethane comparisons