win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Fire Quantum review  (Read 4247 times)

JoelTRay

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
Fire Quantum review
« on: December 09, 2016, 10:12:09 AM »
Technical Stuff:

COEFFICIENT OF RESTITUTION
The new Quantum Fire Pearl has been designed with 3.5 times more coverstock increasing durability and performance longevity with an amazing pin impact you not only see but hear! Why does more coverstock improve the pin action so much? More coverstock enhances the Coefficient of Restitution which is the ratio of the differences in velocity between two objects before and after a collision. The higher the restitution, the faster the pins will move after being struck by the ball, transferring that increased kinetic energy to the surrounding pins producing greater pin action!

“quantum-cores”

COVERSTOCK
The combination of our highly popular PK 2016 pearl reactive coverstock with our high-density, redesigned Quantum Mushroom core, gives the Quantum Fire Pearl effortless skid through the front, maintaining axis rotation for a superior backend reaction on medium oil lane conditions.

DRILLING
The Quantum Fire Pearl can be drilled using the standard drilling techniques developed for symmetric core bowling balls.

LIGHTWEIGHT ENGINEERING
Quantum’s patented core design, for controlled dynamic integrity in all weights.

My Input: This ball gives me that old school Quantum feel for today's lane conditions and brings back that Quantum punishment on the pins. I have both my Fire Pearl and Forest Green Solid drilled identical. Nothing special pin up with cg kicked out a tad. As a high rev moderate speed lefty my side doesn't typically get broken down a whole lot. I usually start with my Solid Forest Green Quantum and when that starts coming off my break point to strong i switch to the Pearl and stay in the same place. Its a perfect 1 2 punch. These 2 balls are a must have and perfect addition to any bowlers arsenal. I have already had quite a few bowlers switch over and give these a try and they are now believers!!
Joel Ray
Brian Himmlers Pro Shop
Cincinnati, Ohio
Motiv Staff

 

Bowler19525

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 882
Re: Fire Quantum review
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2016, 03:52:38 PM »
USBC limits the coefficient of restitution on all balls to a range of 0.65 to 0.75.  COE's effect on pin carry is kind of a moot point in this day and age of equipment.  Put the ball in the pocket correctly, and a "new" Fire Quantum will have the same carry/pin action as the current Brunswick Vintage Danger Zone.   

It is kind of surprising that Brunswick would use such old school marketing on these rereleases.   

Gene J Kanak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Re: Fire Quantum review
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2016, 04:02:10 PM »
You're right, but that only applies to the savvy consumer. People, on the whole, are very easily manipulated. If you tell people that these balls have enhanced COR and that that will lead to better carry, many of them will believe it. It's the same with negative associations. There are still particle additives in balls these days, but nobody advertises that anymore because particle got such a bad name back in the day. It's all about perception since so few people truly know what any of the science means anyhow.

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24524
Re: Fire Quantum review
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2016, 08:14:26 PM »
You're right, but that only applies to the savvy consumer. People, on the whole, are very easily manipulated. If you tell people that these balls have enhanced COR and that that will lead to better carry, many of them will believe it. It's the same with negative associations. There are still particle additives in balls these days, but nobody advertises that anymore because particle got such a bad name back in the day. It's all about perception since so few people truly know what any of the science means anyhow.

I'm wondering if Brunswick isn't quite right in phrasing this effect of no-filler as having an effect on the COR. It has been noted by many people using older Lane Masters and Storm/Rot-Grip no-filler balls that they seem to move pins more effectively than many 3 piece (core, filler, coverstock) balls.(Many of today's strongest balls have incredible pin moving power.) Many Lane Masters users have noted an especially loud "crack" when those old LM balls hit also. Their new no-filler balls don't seem the same as the old ones at all.

I don't know if this is reality or some people's belief, but some have noted this increase in ... pin action, if you will, who never expected it or knew that others had said the same thing.
(Personally, I believe some of that effect seen and heard by LM balls had something to so with the fact that their cores were made of urethane. I have no idea what cores are made of these days.)
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

BigWillyStyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 897
Re: Fire Quantum review
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2017, 12:49:03 AM »
You're right, but that only applies to the savvy consumer. People, on the whole, are very easily manipulated. If you tell people that these balls have enhanced COR and that that will lead to better carry, many of them will believe it. It's the same with negative associations. There are still particle additives in balls these days, but nobody advertises that anymore because particle got such a bad name back in the day. It's all about perception since so few people truly know what any of the science means anyhow.

I'm wondering if Brunswick isn't quite right in phrasing this effect of no-filler as having an effect on the COR. It has been noted by many people using older Lane Masters and Storm/Rot-Grip no-filler balls that they seem to move pins more effectively than many 3 piece (core, filler, coverstock) balls.(Many of today's strongest balls have incredible pin moving power.) Many Lane Masters users have noted an especially loud "crack" when those old LM balls hit also. Their new no-filler balls don't seem the same as the old ones at all.

I don't know if this is reality or some people's belief, but some have noted this increase in ... pin action, if you will, who never expected it or knew that others had said the same thing.
(Personally, I believe some of that effect seen and heard by LM balls had something to so with the fact that their cores were made of urethane. I have no idea what cores are made of these days.)
4

This is also true with some of the older Visionary equipment I threw...just seemed to hit and carry so much better.

Juggernaut

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6498
  • Former good bowler, now 3 games a week house hack.
Re: Fire Quantum review
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2017, 05:10:50 AM »
 Sometimes, things just don't "add up", and to me, this is one of those times. The raw numbers can say all they want to, but sometimes things end up being more than just the sum of all the parts.

 As an example, I always go back to a ball, the Ebonite Vortex 2. It wasn't even a "top line", high performance ball at first. When introduced, it was simply a mid level ball, with a simple low rg core in it. Yet, it became quite dominant, and was the preferred piece of many professionals on tour, and because of that single ball, we still have iterations of it roaming around today, years later in the Gamebreaker series.

 Solid shell construction, to me at least, is one of those things. The numbers may not reflect it, and there may be no quantifiable way to measure or show it, but the "eye test" still tells me there is a difference in the way solid shelled balls tend to move the pins around.

 My highest set was with an Inferno, which is NOT a solid shelled ball, so I agree that throwing it good is the most important factor in scoring. And I also believe that virtually EVERY decent ball today is capable of producing FAR more power and angle than necessary, probably making the difference between the two types of construction a moot point, but I do still believe that difference exists.

 How to show it, explain it, or quantify it still remains a mystery.

 Perhaps the name Quantum is somewhat of an unintended serendipity of a name, because, perhaps, that "difference" happens at the quantum level, and can't quite be explained.
Learn to laugh, and love, and smile, cause we’re only here for a little while.