No. Only urethane being made is with 900 Global, Hammer, Motiv, and Storm.

Radical has the Rack Attack series meant for drier conditions

Motiv Rebel tank is a great urethane ball. My favorite

Would a Rack Attack with the pin near pap and a surface around 500 work getter than urethane on a short pattern?

Newguy:  What has changed in the manufacturing process that prevents manufacturers from making old school urethane?  I'm assuming it is still technically possible but costs are prohibitive.

Quote from: newguy on August 05, 2015, 12:37:30 PM

Quote from: 2handedrook12 on August 05, 2015, 12:21:22 PM

Would a Rack Attack with the pin near pap and a surface around 500 work getter than urethane on a short pattern?

Absolutely,  that would be smooth and roll early like original urethane.

I'm going to disagree and say not even close. Urethane can be drilled with some dynamics and to take advantage of the core.   It can be used much longer, even once oil has carried down.  A pin near the PAP will be very limited in its use and doesn't hit as well even being resin. 

There's a reason why so many players go to urethane on the short patterns and why there's a resurgence in urethane. I know plenty of players that scoured eBay for old Stingrays, Turbos, Nitros, etc vs trying to "kill" resin. 

Umm BacktoBasics....You do know that NewGuy is Phil C from Radical.  I would tend to think the ball designer's opinion carries more weight.  He designed the freaking ball among dozens of others for Radical and other ball companies.

Quote from: txbowler on August 06, 2015, 02:10:36 PM

Quote from: BackToBasics on August 06, 2015, 01:01:47 PM

Quote from: newguy on August 05, 2015, 12:37:30 PM

Quote from: 2handedrook12 on August 05, 2015, 12:21:22 PM

Would a Rack Attack with the pin near pap and a surface around 500 work getter than urethane on a short pattern?

Absolutely,  that would be smooth and roll early like original urethane.

I'm going to disagree and say not even close. Urethane can be drilled with some dynamics and to take advantage of the core.   It can be used much longer, even once oil has carried down.  A pin near the PAP will be very limited in its use and doesn't hit as well even being resin. 

There's a reason why so many players go to urethane on the short patterns and why there's a resurgence in urethane. I know plenty of players that scoured eBay for old Stingrays, Turbos, Nitros, etc vs trying to "kill" resin. 

Umm BacktoBasics....You do know that NewGuy is Phil C from Radical.  I would tend to think the ball designer's opinion carries more weight.  He designed the freaking ball among dozens of others for Radical and other ball companies.

I know exactly who he is.  There is also a conflict of interest because Radical/Big B/DV8 do not have a urethane.  I'm going off of over 25 years of experience including international in addition to the countless International players that have urethane at FIQ events.   There is a distinct performane difference between an original urethane or even something like the Blue Hammer remake drilled with a stronger layout than a weaker resin ball with the pin near  the axis with surface.

He did ask my opinion on this. he asked if a pin near the axis would work better. I said yes because it still will absorb oil where as original urethane will not.  Secondly I do not have conflict or bias opinion since no one make original urethane balls any longer they make weak formula resin balls. Which I could do in a heartbeat if I felt there was a strong enough market for it. Unless you are a super high rev player bowling on a short sport pattern using old school urethane would be a disadvantage.
The oil absorption factor is a huge deal since the urethane shell would cause performance to get weaker and weaker and also quicken any carry down, the urethane ball would not be able to combat carry down.
So in my humble opinion a weaker resin ball with the pin near the axis would be rolly like urethane and still allow you to play on some carry down.