Currently using a Columbia 300 blue Beast Urethane for my urethane option when bowling on short conditions etc.

It is much weaker compared to the Hammer Purple Pearl urethane, Hammer fuchsia urethane (overseas version of the Hammer Black) and the Brunswick True Motion. They are all noticeably stronger by far coverstock wise then the original Columbia blue Beast.

They all have a similar shape as the original Beast with the exception of the Purple. Once the purple gets lane shine it looks more mild reactive in how it finishes compared to anything urethane. With surface the Purple can be as early was anything.

They are very similar.  The thing you have now is bigger cores.  I compared my Pitch Black to my OG Burgundy Hammer and black U-Dot.  The Pitch Black has a little more due to the flare tracking.  The covers are about the same ... remember back then you judged a ball by its hardness number.  There was no talk about RG or Diff.  An OG Hammer came out of the box at 360 grit ... a Pitch Black is 1000.  Less surface with a little flare track gives the illusion of more motion ..... that's how I see it anyway.

Also .. remember most these balls were being used on short oil.  We used to axis drill them sometimes to get them to STOP.  Hook/Stop was what people in my area looked for.  It depends on lane surface, but in my area (SW Ohio/SE Indiana) most houses were wood lanes back then.

I have an OG Black Hammer. An OG Blue Hammer. An OG Burgundy Hammer. An OG Phantom.

The urethane cover compilations of today are mostly stronger than the ones from the 90's! For example there is no comparison between my OG Phantom and the latest Phantom that hit the market.

My Burgundy Hammer still has some giddy up to it, but I've thrown a Pitch Black that is quite a bit stronger and earlier! My Blue Hammer which back in the day was da sh*t, is mostly just a mellow medium rolling piece compared to todays urethanes!

If you are talking about the latest Phantom, I am pretty sure it is a Reactive Resin.