Author Topic: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ? (Read 995 times)

charlest · « **on:** January 30, 2006, 11:29:44 PM »

I like the idea of the Goo LS cover on a symmetric core, just not on that hyper-flippy revmaster monster. From the review this ball seems to be able to make strokers into tweeners.

Aside from that, the review seems to indicate this core takes the cover a step further than the Xception and covers almost heavy oil, whereas the Xception was a medium oil ball. Very confusing. Or are they (BTM) confusing backend with true ability to handle oil?

It has the same compund finish as the Xception.

I haven't seen a lot here posted about the Artillery, some, just not a lot. just got my issue of BTM.

Ideas? Comments?
Thanx.
--------------------
"...for advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise...."
J. R. R. Tolkien

BackToBasics · « **Reply #1 on:** January 31, 2006, 08:25:59 AM »

charlest: I haven't received my BTM yet so I haven't seen the review of the Artillery. However, I'm still a believer in the cover still contributes majority of the reaction. So even though the Artillery has a lower RG, I don't see the oil handling capabilities going that much higher than the Xception. Any indication whether it's the Delta or Xception GOO LS cover?

charlest · « **Reply #2 on:** January 31, 2006, 08:57:44 AM »

quote:
charlest: I haven't received my BTM yet so I haven't seen the review of the Artillery. However, I'm still a believer in the cover still contributes majority of the reaction. So even though the Artillery has a lower RG, I don't see the oil handling capabilities going that much higher than the Xception. Any indication whether it's the Delta or Xception GOO LS cover?

they printed,
Cover brand: Goo LS
Cover type: reactive pearl
Cover finish: compound polish.

So I assume it's the Xception cover, not the Delta 1.

The review numbers AND description make it a stronger ball than the Xception.
While I hold that belief in suspension, it seems that core makes that cover stronger than the Xception's core.

That's what BUGS and confuses me.
--------------------
"...for advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise...."
J. R. R. Tolkien

Edited on 1/31/2006 3:36 PM

BackToBasics · « **Reply #3 on:** January 31, 2006, 09:21:12 AM »

That would bug and confuse me too. Assuming the numbers are correct and the cover is identical to the Xception, I don't see the core adding that much strength. Too many experiments in the past where a new core on the same cover was supposed to add gobs of hook.

OG1 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 31, 2006, 09:46:13 AM »

It will be interesting to see this ball by the numbers it looks to be SUPERCHARGED
Xception. The much lower RG core will make the ball read much earlier... combine that with the higher diff sounds like a very versatile new toy....
--------------------
Did they run the oil machine? Was there any oil in it.....

C-G ProShop-Carl · « **Reply #5 on:** January 31, 2006, 01:26:50 PM »

I think it is interesting.

The only thing I would have liked to see is an exact duplicate of the Revmaster core. If the numbers listed are correct then they altered something....and I loved the high diff the revmaster had.

carl
--------------------
C-G Pro Shop (owner/operator)
Youngstown Ohio

Track Intl.-Amateur/Pro Shop Staff
www.trackbowling.com
www.startabowlingrevolution.com

Tag Team Member #1

Author Topic: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ? (Read 995 times)

charlest

Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ?

BackToBasics

Re: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ?

charlest

Re: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ?

BackToBasics

Re: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ?

OG1

Re: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ?

C-G ProShop-Carl

Re: Arsenal Artillery review in BTM ?