I asked someone in a personal message this question. I'm looking for feedback. I purchased a Reax Pearl (original) and Reax Version 2 (solid) at the same time earlier this summer. The intent was to add pieces that should be suited for heavy oil/long patterns.

Of the two, I've had better results on heavy/long patterns with the Reax Pearl (original) than the Reax Version 2 (solid). I also feel the Reax Pearl's cover is more versatile than the Reax Version 2 in terms of adding surface (i.e., 500, 1000, or 2000) as needed. That said, is the Reax Version 2 a ball that's better suited using a polished finish of some kind, even if it's rough buff that's applied?

Without seeing you bowl or the layouts on the ball, if you are bowling on true heavy patterns, then V2 should outshine the pearl. However, a lot of people confuse long patterns with heavy patterns. They see or hear about the length of the pattern and assume that a heavy oil friction factory is necessary to compete. This is not the case in most cases.

A lot of long patterns supply the same or less units of oil than shorter patterns, making the concept to preserve the oil for as long as possible. Once the head oil goes due to usage or the oil carries down to the back part of the lane, it makes the pattern very difficult to score on, ie US Open, Bear, and especially Badger pattern.

In that case a pearl is needed to get the ball through the heads and not chew through them so fast, which is probably why you like the look of the pearl compared to the solid. Again, all this upon speculation.

The V2s that I've seen seem to come alive with a 2000 pad. A lot of companies tend to over polish the OOB finish and the balls get squirty on oil which is why I rarely keep OOB finishes. In some cases I surface the ball before I even drill it.

My Reax Pearl (original) is drilled pin-down (under ring finger); the Reax Version 2 (solid) is drilled pin-up (over ring finger). Both have weight holes.

Perhaps out of my ignorance (which I do plead in part because I've been back bowling since January after being away from it for 18 years), I was under the impression since the Reax Version 2 had a higher hook rating than the Reax Pearl, the Reax Version 2 could be used on the fresh, first ball out of my bag, on heavy oil.

I've used these pieces (with surface) on the following patterns: 44' flat and Highway to Hell (42 feet) in tournament play. The Reax Pearl gave me a better reaction on the fresh on both patterns. The Reax Version 2, well, it seemed to give me a better reaction once the lanes began transitioning -- in other words, I should not mistake this ball for, like, a Brunswick Mastermind which could be used when there is not much backend or any defined hook spot.

I'm sure that I will find better scenarios using the Reax Version 2. I'm already thinking that it could be (and should have been) the first ball out of my bag on the WTBA Athens (40') pattern -- something that is not 1:1 flat but has some crown in the pattern.

I have to disagree kid.

The V2 has been their oiler for the most part for guys who migrate in. The Reax solid and pearl were more catered to the strokers like me, where as the Version 2's pick up where the originals leave off. I loved my Reax solid. One moment and I can double check the evidence behind my statement.

Its a great video and he throws it good. He also keeps it very slow. I see the surface of the Reax at 4000 and the layout is unlisted. I see some aggressive layouts on the R2 followed by box or other finish.

Everyone will have different experiences. I can only go off my personal experience compared to a friend in a different house having the same experience along with his proshop guy having the very similar result. They all agreed at box finish that the ball was way to long and oil sensitive. When i posted my reaction vid of the ball after release and having to adjust the surface to get a desired reaction Mo blamed it on the layout.

Later when others asked for suggestions he started giving the same surface adjustment I made and was critical of, as part of the layout for the ball.

Since the op listed a similar problem/observation that I and others have experienced I stand by my suggestion of ignoring what the chart says the ball is supposed to be and go off of what you are seeing on the lane.

I'm going to try the 360/1000 surface suggestion. I may even put up a video of it. If I don't like that reaction, I may then try 360/rough buff, which is something I've done on my Meanstreak with good results.

Kidlost, I took up on that 360/1000 suggestion and spent the plurality of my practice time working various shots with the Reax Version 2. Definitely the kind of reaction that I'd been looking for with that ball.

Bought my Reax 2 in January.  Out of the box it was very nice.  very long for a solid and a VERY strong reaction to the pocket.

I clean my Equipment immediately once I am done using it.   For 2 1/2 months it was magic.  Then I noticed a drastic decrease in reaction.  It just stopped finishing, almost like it was laboring to finish.

I do bowl on a heavy pattern each week.   So off to the rejuv it went.  sanded to 500 de oiled and then back with the compound finish.   

Still did not return that long and strong reaction I had new oob.

I tried multiple surfaces on my own and with my driller to no avail.  Kinda stumped on what happened really.   

Any thoughts anyone?

Matt C