Each line, is used for different core characteristics.....

The Premier is Asymmetrical, with the RAD, and now the Shape Locks.

The Master is Similarly numbered (RG and Diff) but used symmetrical cores. These provide (typically) earlier roll then the Asyms, and are moderately priced less. Usually because you pay more for more R&D wich is required when designing an Asym.

Think of these as a 1a and 1b for high end lines.

The Fire Line, Used the Twin V cores, provide more length (higher RG) and some less flare (diff) GENERALLY providing  more length out of the ball, assuming things like Cover make up / prep , layout, release, oil yadda yadda are all the same.

Thunder, is VERY similar to the Fire, core number wise, just providing a little more POP on the back end,

Hot, is the next step down, core wise, even smoother then the Fire line, this one will typically use a slightly weaker cover stock just to create more of a gap between the two lines above it.

I think you can see where the Tropical is going.... less flare more built in length, and again using a weak-ish cover



This is just a generalization however, as the core numbers really only determine the SHAPE of the reaction and not HOW MUCH reaction, thatch done cover wise.


Storm only ever has 2 / 3 covers in use, usually cross all or most lines.

and as they develop stronger coverstocks, the older ones get moved down the line.

As you see R2S in the Hot line, when it was previously only Reactor,

R2S is being replaced by R2X in the mid lines, (likely as new info the the reigns has not yet been released)

and probably a new Premier debuting mid season with a new stronger cover...


My own opinion here:  there is a flaw in this system as the old covers are by no means WEAK, and therefor low end pieces become typically too strong for truly burnt lanes. You will hear alot of war stories of people Tropicals Being "HOOK MONSTERS" because the the covers are just plain too strong...


But I could be way off with this and I am sure I will be corrected, I have owned @least one ball from each line, and have sold many others. and heard the same things. Just what I see...





--------------------
In The Bag: http://www.putfile.com/rabbit69ca
Storm:
     Dimension,Paradigm, T-Road Pearl,  Ice Storm
Lane 1
    Liberator
Columbia 300:
     Arch Rival, Scout/R Hi-flare
Ebonite:
     Playmaker

My brother went to the release seminar for the Gravity Shift and he was saying that Jeff Carter mentioned that the guys on tour typically do not use the Tropicals (even though they are entry level) due to the fact that the cover is too strong on late shift patterns. I beleive he said that they usually opt for the Jolt because it is an older and weaker cover.

I have run into this problem quite a bit in the last few years. The companies do not put out much in the way of a ball with a very strong core and a weaker cover. Lane 1 kinda has the market cornered on this. Do not understand why others don't attempt this.


--------------------
"The rule is perfect. In all matters of opinion our advesaries are insane".   Mark Twain

http://members.bowl.com/SearchUSBC/ViewMember.aspx?prefix=1034&suffix=1647

dizzyfugu:

Curious to hear your opinion on where you see overlap in their product line for comparable products?  For example, Premier to Master is not a direct comparison where Thunder to Fire may be.

Let me know your thoughts...
--------------------
Steve Richter
USBC Silver Level Coach
IBPSIA Certified Technician

Steve, I hope I can give you an answer. Both upper lines are "divided" by their use of asymmetrical/strong MB and low MB cores. Both contain strong pieces which would, IMHO, make up a high preformance line with different reaction and drilling options. I come from marketing and always bear in mind "what's in it for the customer". With so many (7!) ball lines, some if them only bearing 2 pieces, I think that customer confusion is potentially huge - Strom246 mentions something alike in his original post, and I can understand it.

Sure, you can divide the offerings that way, there's nothin wrong with separate lines, but it makes IMHO it very hard for customers, or potential customers who do not know the equipment well (regardless of the manufacturer), to judge their potential strength. The latter is IMHO quite close, or better said, the gaps that would clearly separate performance lines, are very small.

It is just a personal optinion - one can argue a lot, also about other manufacturers' rating systems and the like.
--------------------
DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany

Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section

Dizzy:

Good points...Although there are solutions.

I think the marketing confusion is in lack of understanding by the consumer.  Hype is hype and usually companies get “busted” when a product doesn’t perform up to what it’s billed to be.  Since the Internet is the new word of mouth, bad PR happens in seconds, not in months and there isn’t time to react to it…If you lie, you lose your credibility.

As far as in bowling, most of us could agree consulting with a qualified pro shop operator can solve many of those bad "guesses" we see all the time.  I'll admit what makes a  "qualified pro shop" is open for debate, but that's another thread altogether.

How many guys/gals do you know that made an uninformed decision on a sort of impulse buy based on limited or incomplete knowledge?  For me it happens a lot - here's an example.

I was working with a guy who had a Widow, wanted a Virtual.  I let him throw mine and it just didn't match up.  I had him throw the Dimension and it looked great, but he still wanted the Virtual (why I don't know, it clearly didn’t roll well for him and a blind man could see that).  He says he has to think about the Dimension and promptly goes somewhere else to get the Virtual done.  Now I see him throwing it and it spins out in the front of the lane or when he opens up his angles it doesn’t make it back.  Now he wants our help fixing it.  How do I not tell him “I told you so?”

So often I see people wanting to get the latest and greatest to be the first on the block when they really know little about what it does, what purpose it fills or how it matches up in their entire arsenal.  They will say "what do you think ball X would do for me?"  My response is always "Buy a ball reaction, not a ball.  What ball reaction are you looking for?"

Our shop encourages people to wait, and while I KNOW that has caused us to lose countless sales we have also saved many more people from the frustration we have all felt at one time or another guessing on the wrong piece.  Right or wrong, that is our philosophy.

At lunch last summer Jeff McCorvey told me he admired our position and called me crazy because sometimes the customer just HAS to be right.  But we have our integrity on the line too and nothing is more important than that in not only our shop but in our bowling centers – it’s a guiding principal and we never compromise our ethics.

I often hear in my shop and around town how consumers look at the comparisons each manufacturer makes of their own equipment and someone is fooled.  For example, Storm has in their literature lane graphs to show a RELATIVE ball motion when comparing different balls.  People just don't pay enough attention to what it's really saying about the lane conditions - they just see the shape the drawing shows and assume they can have it too.

One suggestion is I think we as consumers should band together and immediately call for the hook rating system to be abolished...that is the most confusing thing in the world.  People unlike us on this forum see they have a ball that is a 45, now a 50 comes out and they have to have it.  When it performs just like the other 45 ball, who takes the blame?  It's the shop who sold it and the manufacturer who made it.  They'll hardly ever admit their role in it.

While I'm not banging on Storm in the example above, I think the confusion you reference comes from a bigger societal problem...instant gratification.

If we collectively took more time to research, analyze, seek resources, we'd all be much better off.  Throw on top of that when we use balls that are designed to be different and use them on league patterns that make them look the same, this compounds the problem.  I’d challenge anyone to speak to the touring professionals that see the hardest lane transitions anywhere and I guarantee you they will tell you the lines make sense for them.  For us league hacks, maybe not so much.

I don't know that there is one answer, but no doubt every brand out there except maybe Roto Grip with their limited releases, can be accused on too much stuff muddling up the pool.

Your thoughts?

--------------------
Steve Richter
USBC Silver Level Coach
IBPSIA Certified Technician

Steve, nice post, and very comprehensive. What makes bowling so "complicated" is (at least, that's my impression) that many players need to rely on pro shop help, and that it is quite difficult for them to judge manufacturers' offerings. Weirdest thing I ever witnessed was someone at a local proshop desperately wanting a Brunswick BVP Goliath at that time "because it has the highest hook potential", according to Brunswick's list. Anything else - the balls purpose, player style, lane conditions etc. were not relevant to him.

That made me a bit conscious about marketing approaches, and this also boils down to pro shops' integrity - making a good counseling job and "listening" to customers and what they actually "need" instead of "want", induced by dubious marketing info.

Ball lines are another piece of this scheme - while it makes sense to put some kind of order into offerings, I think it is hard to divide between facts, fiction and simple subjective perception. And I think this is well-intended - many players think: high performance = big hook = big scores. Good for sales, and sale-happy pro shops surely join this ride because it allows big margins. But I doubt that it is truly in favor of the customers - again, there is the discrepancy between "want" and "need", and I see the pro shop's important role at the interface between manufacturers and users which keep them rather torn between integrity and profit.

Another thing (and very German one ) to consider, while defining ball lines, is: whose perspective is taken when putting balls into an order? Is it an order from the customers' perspective? What are their actual desires and needs that define a ball class? I often have the impression that it is just a very technical perspective, which probably causes aforementioned confusion. Honestly, I have NEVER seen an arsenal that was e. g. defined by "mild hook", "allround pieces" and "heavy oil options". Instead you generally have multiple ball lines with various offerings for the same purpose, just in different ball lines. I do not claim to know an(y) answer to this, but the initial post made me think about this marketing problem, and I'd like to know if ANY manufacturer ever has done some market research about their offering structure. I think it just runs on the way it has ever been, high end means big hook, and everyone seems to be happy.
--------------------
DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany

Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section

Moon:

The trouble is people have to pay close attention to them and see it for what they really are, and we're just wired now-a-days to not do that.  Text Messaging, internet news, email headlines, microwaves, Starbucks :-) all have done that to us.

Far too many people rely on the pictures to tell a story of what the ball should do.  And because the manufacturers are trying to sell their own stuff, they do as best the can to show you what it's like in their line.  Where we get confused is different rating systems being compared to each other.  Apples and oranges.

Since not everyone throws the ball the same, the charts even when explained well, are meaningless.  Because it's up to the interpretation of the USER that defines who he/she is.  The wrong interpretation, the wrong fit and a frustrated bowler he/she is.

For example, I know none of you (humor intended) has every heard "that guy" who comes up to you looking for help saying they throw it "just like you".  When you watch them, it's not even close, and many times it's laughable at how far off their assesment is.

Perception and reality are so different, we get in our own way's.  Just take a video lesson sometime and you'll see what I mean.

I don't have the answer, but wonder what alternative could be worked out where it was sort of a mathematical equation?  I'd include 1) bowler inputs (speed, rev rate, etc), 2) lane inputs (volume of oil, length of pattern, etc) and 3) ball inputs (coverstock strength, RG, diff, etc) that could be developed to ACTUALLY show what the thing would do on a certain pattern.

Any math geeks want to try and work on something like that in an easy to use and readily available program like Excel?
--------------------
Steve Richter
USBC Silver Level Coach
IBPSIA Certified Technician