Author Topic: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell (Read 2624 times)

Ric Clint · « **on:** October 13, 2009, 06:53:01 AM »

On their website, you can purchase it for like $5.00 so I did.

It wasn''t a bad review and the numbers weren''t weak by no means... but I just expected alot higher on certain categories I guess.

They basically describe the Mutant as being just "slightly" stronger than the original Cell? They also say that it is just merely a Replacement for the original Cell (but I didn''''t think that was the design intent of the Mutant, but that''s what BTM says).

With all the hype surrounding this ball, I was thinking (and PRAYING) that it would be ALOT more ball than the original Cell was!

But the numbers/ratings for the Mutant Cell on the Torque (6.5), Backend (16) and Total Hook (52) just seem slightly above average to me.

With people making asumptions that the Mutant Cell makes the Virtual Gravity look like a Plastic Ball... I was thinking that maybe the BTM Review would have the numbers/ratings for Torque to be like 7.5, Backend to be like 17.5 and the Total Hook to be like 54.

Now I understand these Reviews are not set in stone and are not the meant to be everybody''s opinion... but I still just expected a little bit more?

Thoughts?

Edited on 10/13/2009 3:00 PM

charlest · « **Reply #1 on:** October 13, 2009, 04:12:38 PM »

A "lot" is relative. It's only been 18 months since the Cell put Roto-Grip, not on the map, because it had always been there, but on everyone's lips. And it didn't do it with "appearances", that is, a big backend ANd lots of hook. It did it with control and a relatively small hook for an oil ball. So why would the Mutant do it with MUCH larger numbers, when, from everyone's apraisal so far, it does it with a proper increase in those numbers, as it seems you're saying.

I'd rather my ball not look great in its ballpath but in its carry power. It seems the Mutant is progress from that aspect, as no one seems to respect the Cell itself anymore.

The "OOO, Look!" should be saved for the ball used by the bowler shooting 280 with a small hook and backend, rather than the 85 boards covered and the 30 board backend when the bowler, using that impressive looking hook, shoots 220.

--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Bigmike · « **Reply #2 on:** October 13, 2009, 04:21:10 PM »

Also remember this is the "sister" company to Storm. If you have a huge seller like the Virtual, why copy it to your sister company (rerelease it). Plus this will be the biggest hooker in the Roto line which is a control driven product.

Some of us who are lower rev players can not use the biggest hookers because they take us out of our natural game. The Virtual was good for me, but made me really separate my feet and target which I could not do with any other ball in my bag. Shining this would defeat the purpose as I have a Cell which I can stay in my comfort area with on longer/slicker patterns.

I personally like that Roto and Hank in general take a "quality" first type of mentality to the table when they plan the new releases instead of flooding the market with the same ball over and over and over again. It is one thing to use some proven coverstocks or cores because they still roll well and give your line depth, but to make the smallest tweaks and then rush a ball out.......well?
--------------------
"Why don''t you call me sometime.....when you have no class" ~~Rodney Dangerfield to Sally Kellerman, his college professor in Back to School ~~1986

Mike Craig - Storm Products Pro Shop staff -Columbus, OH

Edited on 10/13/2009 4:23 PM

joblo1978 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 13, 2009, 05:33:41 PM »

The do have it as "slightly" less than the VG and VE, but a good bit more than the original cell.

I don't think the ball was ever designed as a replacement for the cell. It has a new core, cover, and is for heavy oil. The ball could be called something completely different than a cell actually.

I don't see how anything could make a VG look like a plastic ball, that ball hooks a ton, but I can see how a stronger cover and the changes to the core would make the ball more angular and hook earlier. The change to the mutant cell core was designed for the ball to turn harder, not necessarily more than a VG.

How much hook does someone really need anyway?

All the hype has probably let some people down. It's still just another ball really. I'll be getting one. I need an oil eater still. I was looking at a VG, but am holding out for this.

Laniarty · « **Reply #4 on:** October 13, 2009, 09:15:42 PM »

From what I've experienced so far, the Mutant is earlier and more arcy, but the VG is longer and stronger at the breakpoint. For me, they hook almost exactly the same amount, they just provide a different look.

I think that's great, personally.

Steve Richter · « **Reply #5 on:** October 13, 2009, 09:18:48 PM »

Well said Charlest, I couldn't agree more.

I'm one of the lucky fortunates that has this ball already in my bag. The "look" is very CELL-ish and as you already know is not as sexy as a VG - but it rolls through the pins better than anything I own - and considering how much I'm able to test and decide what to keep in my bag, I realize the gravity of the endorsement I give this ball.

For those of you looking for that classic CELL look with better traction and less "lane shine" than the original, go out and get your pre-orders in - you won't be disappointed. For those of you who are going to listen to the thoes that say "this makes a Virtual look like a plastic ball" - save your money or go waste it somewhere else. You will be disappointed, I assure you. It's not even the same hook shape (as defined by the core design).

As I always tell my clients "buy a ball reaction, not a bowling ball". Make sure the Mutant fits the designed shape and look that you want to see out of your reaction, rather than "overdo" what it's intent is where you will surely be disappointed. Remember, a 4" x 4" layout just makes it spin faster and lay more down lane - giving the illusion that it doesn't "backend".

Please hold the comments that we didn't warn all of you that the Mutant isn't a super hooker, it's not. To be sure, it's a super upgrade. It's a CELL designed to spin up faster and have better traction (Cytoplasmic II) - the numbers and the design intent tell us so. To assume or assert any other opinion goes against the data that Roto Grip has already provided.

Please do yourself a favor and attend an upcoming MatchMaker LIVE event in your ares and test it for yourself. Then decide if it fits your needs as compared to your current equipment. Don't take everyone else's word for it - go see for yourself.
--------------------
Steve Richter
USBC Silver Level Coach
IBPSIA Certified Technician

VideoBallReviews · « **Reply #6 on:** October 14, 2009, 05:05:07 AM »

quote:
Well said Charlest, I couldn't agree more.

I'm one of the lucky fortunates that has this ball already in my bag. The "look" is very CELL-ish and as you already know is not as sexy as a VG - but it rolls through the pins better than anything I own - and considering how much I'm able to test and decide what to keep in my bag, I realize the gravity of the endorsement I give this ball.

For those of you looking for that classic CELL look with better traction and less "lane shine" than the original, go out and get your pre-orders in - you won't be disappointed. For those of you who are going to listen to the thoes that say "this makes a Virtual look like a plastic ball" - save your money or go waste it somewhere else. You will be disappointed, I assure you. It's not even the same hook shape (as defined by the core design).

As I always tell my clients "buy a ball reaction, not a bowling ball". Make sure the Mutant fits the designed shape and look that you want to see out of your reaction, rather than "overdo" what it's intent is where you will surely be disappointed. Remember, a 4" x 4" layout just makes it spin faster and lay more down lane - giving the illusion that it doesn't "backend".

Please hold the comments that we didn't warn all of you that the Mutant isn't a super hooker, it's not. To be sure, it's a super upgrade. It's a CELL designed to spin up faster and have better traction (Cytoplasmic II) - the numbers and the design intent tell us so. To assume or assert any other opinion goes against the data that Roto Grip has already provided.

Please do yourself a favor and attend an upcoming MatchMaker LIVE event in your ares and test it for yourself. Then decide if it fits your needs as compared to your current equipment. Don't take everyone else's word for it - go see for yourself.
--------------------
Steve Richter
USBC Silver Level Coach
IBPSIA Certified Technician

Great post Steve, truer words could not be spoken...
--------------------
Britton
Owner/Operator of Videoballreviews.com
Multi Media Consultant
Storm Products, Inc.
www.stormbowling.com
www.rotogrip.com

EboHammer4ever · « **Reply #7 on:** October 14, 2009, 02:19:59 PM »

Having watch Chris Forry (owner of BuddiesProshop for those who don't know) throw this ball in NH last sunday I can attest that it does appear to be stronger than the original Cell and looks like it can handle more oil than the original. Where the original would skid a little further in the puddle, this ball seems to be able to dig through the oil. You have to realize that you are never going to get a skid/flip reaction out of any of the Cells, not even the Cell Pearl...the block is way to big to be able to rev up for that. The entire line is a control ball in the finest sense. People are looking for control downlane, not how many boards you can cross as others have said before. Even though I have moved on from Roto and Storm, I did love the reaction the Cell line gave me, the control, hit and carry was great. If you are looking for a ball for oil, the new Mutant Cell should be what you are looking for.

Just my two cents.

Jarrett Roseboom
Concord, NH
--------------------
Jarrett Roseboom
Ebonite fan
pics of my equipment
http://s638.photobucket.com/albums/uu109/jarrettcr/My%20Bowling%20Equipment/

ImBackInTheGame · « **Reply #8 on:** October 14, 2009, 02:44:10 PM »

MatchMaker Live, eh? I see there's an open house here in MN on my birthday and I'm off that day. Hmmm...
--------------------
Arsenal:
Roto-Grip Cell Pearl (4000 abralon)
Lane #1 Chainsaw (2000 + Secret Sauce)
Lane #1 XXXL Starburst

F.O.S. Member

Ric Clint · « **Reply #9 on:** October 15, 2009, 02:02:43 AM »

Wow! The Mutant Cell's that are thrown by the first 2 bowlers in the following Video shows a ball reaction that looks strong (and along the lines of what I was expected after hearing all the hype surounding the ball).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIQdlvZQeL0

Adrenaline · « **Reply #10 on:** October 15, 2009, 04:39:23 AM »

In the first video by BowlersSupplyProShop he compares the Rogue to the Mutant and the Mutant is a solid 5 boards stronger than the Rogue. My Rogue and VG drilled almost identical roll the exact same. (Although my Rogue seems to be more versatile and lasts longer as the oil breaks down)
This would mean (to me anyways) that the Mutant is 4-5 boards stronger than the VG. Now I haven't gotten an answer as to what Layout was on that guys Rogue, but I assume they should be similar layouts, or he would have made a point to mention it in the video, but unless I get a response I won't know for sure.
Just my guess based on the video provided and my experience with the Rogue and VG.

Author Topic: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell (Read 2624 times)

Ric Clint

The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

charlest

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

Bigmike

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

joblo1978

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

Laniarty

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

Steve Richter

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

VideoBallReviews

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

EboHammer4ever

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

ImBackInTheGame

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

Ric Clint

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell

Adrenaline

Re: The BTM Review of the Mutant Cell