Just a little bit of what's to come. I'm currently gathering info to do a comparison of surface friction. I plan on analyzing the surface friction of the competition vs the Radical balls.
It seems that some of the new balls on the market are hyping hook, some even claim the ball hooks 3 times (physically impossible by the way). Apparently they are achieving all this reported hook by using mechanical friction. That's friction achieved by sanding the ball to make it the surface more abrasive. Heed these words, "mechanical friction is a short lived performance enhancer". Let me remind you of the 30 game ball death one of our competition experienced not too long ago. Heavily sanded balls are good for about 30 games but after about 5 games they gradually begin to lose their original performance. The market is flooded with mechanical friction especially since we moved the hook rating bar with our 62.5 on the Guru Master and exposed some of the hook imitators with the original comparison video. They are using extreme measures so as not to be embarrassed by their claims of heavy oil balls.
We pride ourselves on having the best resins in the industry, the reason is Chemical friction. Our balls have the friction engrained in the covers from the chemical reaction of the resins and the additives. What I am doing is gathering info and measuring the surface friction of all the competitors balls and will be putting together a comparison presentation to show the difference.
Chemical friction allows you to easily replicate any factory finish and refresh the covers with out any guess work. It's like shark teeth that keep rotating in when one falls out. Our covers have the same friction throughout the shell. It's built in, not created mechanically by sanding.
Performance and durability and at a lower price. Wow that's Radical.
