Well as far as the new stuff have a new blue hammer coming so will give review of that later but also have the new Burgundy hammer and though its not true urethane and considered somewhat entry it is my first out of bag benchmark ball and sees significantly more use than my twice the price Scandal Pearl.  One of the most versatile early and smooth rolling reactives (think urethane motion but on steroids) ever made.  Can't say enough good about it.  It is in a whole other league strength wise compared to any of the true urethanes though.  It actually hooks almost as much as the Scandal Pearl but it just does it much smoother and earlier.

Chances are you like the old stuff because it doesn't flare and you are able to play "on top of it".  You'd probably be better off trying to find some mid 90 reactive balls instead of new urethane.  Newer urethane balls are probably going to force you out of the zone you want to play.

Good luck on the 15lb Turbo.  That's a rare bird considering how few 15's we sold in those days.

 Thanks for the replies guys, you've kind of confirmed what I had been thinking, but you know how that "new ball" bug can be.

 I have several of the old timers, but got rid of my Turbo years ago.  🙄😔

 Thanks also for the advice. I know a couple of "old" bowling alleys that still have old used stuff for house balls. I think I'll be visiting them and see what I can come up with, maybe I can talk them out of something if I can't find it anywhere else.

I have essentially an old school urethane arsenal of the original Faball blue (1994), burgundy (1994), and black Hammer (1991). I also have a Columbia black U-dot (1987) and pearl gold dot (1989). Of these pieces, the blue Hammer is most useful, followed by the burgundy Hammer, and black U-dot.

The challenge with old school urethane on 21st century lane conditions (particularly on tournament shots) is that these pieces don't carry as effectively when it calls for playing inside the 10-board. It can be done but you have to be perfect in accuracy -- the ball has to hit high, high flush -- and you can't miss hitting it at the point of release.

I also have a Track Sensor II (1995, reactive, .023 differential). Back in the day, that ball could very well be the first one out of the bag (especially on wood lanes). There was a distinct difference in the sound of the pins falling using that reactive piece versus an original urethane piece.

I find now my Sensor II is more effective late in a block on tournament shots shorter than 39 feet.

Lots of opportunity for urethane on house shots.  However as the previous poster said, you are giving up way too much carry to effectively compete on tournament patterns of any length padtvabout 38 feet. 

 I quit most of my "serious" bowling several years ago.
 My job changed three years ago to a graveyard shift Sun-Thurs schedule also, so I only bowl a recreational league once a week anymore. In essence, I have become the quintessential "house hack, lol.

 Urethane works much/most of the time where I bowl IF you play it correctly, which many modern players do not do. I grew up with that type motion and laneplay, so it makes sense to me. As long as they don't flood them, or the machine doesn't malfunction, I usually have a good shot out around the eighth board to the first arrow, even though the shot is supposed to be a 40ft long pattern. Depends on the backends.

 There is one drawback though, the people who try to accuse me of messing up the shot by using urethane. I'm averaging well over 200, they're averaging 175-180, yet they tell me I'm only doing it to mess them up?

 Not saying that it might not be altering the shot a bit, but I'm way outside of their line and beating them much of the time, so I am not just throwing it to "mess them up". I actually prefer the more stable reaction I get.

 The challenge for me is to get it off my hand well enough to get it to read the pattern, "hit",  and carry.
 I like that challenge most of the time.

Accuse them of not having enough CRANK, then flex.