Author Topic: CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular (Read 985 times)

charlest · « **on:** September 16, 2005, 08:25:23 PM »

While I was answering a post just now,the thought occurred to me about these two balls.

I have not thrown or even seen an Arsenal Angular, but its specs makes the idea very attractive, for a number of reasons. I have far too many balls to test right now. SO I ask this question of anyone who has used both or has one and seen the other in use:

How do they compare in length on medium oil, overall hook amount, hook shape, sensitivity to carrydown, etc? (please be specific.)

Thanks.
--------------------
Bowling: Just like hand grenades and horse shoes, you only have to get close.
Life: Deal with what is.

clintdaley · « **Reply #1 on:** September 17, 2005, 10:29:35 AM »

Charlest, I would first like to say I have never thrown these balls side by side as I no longer have a CT, so I probably will never get an exact comparison.

From what I remember of the CT and compared to my Angular, the CT pushes further and is more playable as the lanes start to dry out where the Angular with the particle base will start to pick up a little early. The Angular has a very defined breakpoint, and while the CT did as well, it is not quite as sharp from what I remember. The CT would skate in carrydown while the Angular with the Peak particle tends to fight it off better. I also believe the Angular will cover more boards as well.

Clint

--------------------
Clint Daley-Owner
Lets Go Bowling Daley
Inside Hunt Club Lanes
Salem, Ohio 44460
TRACK ADVISORY PRO SHOP STAFF

http://www.trackbowling.com/

http://www.startabowlingrevolution.com/

tenpinspro · « **Reply #2 on:** September 18, 2005, 02:22:02 PM »

Hey Charlest,

In comparison for me, the Angular is at least 4-5 boards stronger. It can also handle a heavier volume of oil or density. I saw that if the oil was a little thin, it would check up pretty quick. The CT goes much longer and is smoother on the backend also compared to the Angular. The CT definitely is more susceptible to carrydown vs the Angular. My only weakness with my Angular was controlling the breakpoint due to my higher tilt and slow speed.

I had one of students try mine (has an inverted track) and his roll turned it into a very nice strong arc. He ended up whacking one of the tournaments I host for about $800 in pots (Ramtart and Jonathan Ng were there). Hope this helps some...
--------------------
Rick Leong - Ten Pins Pro Shop
Track Intl. - Amateur/Pro Shop Staff
Vise Inserts Staff
www.Trackbowling.com

*El Presidente of the Track Revolution

chitown · « **Reply #3 on:** September 18, 2005, 06:24:06 PM »

I have the angular now and used to have a CT. The angular is definitly stronger. The angular as Clint said will handle carrydown better than the CT. In fact the angular for me eats thru carrydown with ease. I would consider the Ct a step down from the angular. Not to mention the angular is also a great ball for high rev players.
--------------------
TAKE A RIDE ON THE TRACK EXPRESS!
THE REVOLUTION!
RIDE THE LIGHTNING!

charlest · « **Reply #4 on:** September 18, 2005, 06:49:33 PM »

Thanks, guys. That gives me a good idea.

Any else feel like chiming in, be my guest.
--------------------
Bowling: Just like hand grenades and horse shoes, you only have to get close.
Life: Deal with what is.

Edited on 9/18/2005 6:43 PM

Author Topic: CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular (Read 985 times)

charlest

CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular

clintdaley

Re: CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular

tenpinspro

Re: CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular

chitown

Re: CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular

charlest

Re: CrunchTime vs Arsenal Angular