as someone who has thrown nothing but brunswick since 1995 i've got a few comments to make. i thought some of the zone line-up of bowling balls was very good---especially the sapphire blue zone, danger zone, and the danger zone red alert. the zone defense and the deep danger zone were too condition specific and didn't match up really well with the lane conditions i bowled on at that time. of course i wasn't as good in those days so maybe i just didn't throw the ball well enough.

a side note---the original danger zone and the zone classic share nothing in common except that they are both reactive balls. the original danger zone used brunswicks powrkoil 18 solid reactive coverstock and had the now familiar light bulbish-shaped symmetrical core. the zone classic features brunswicks pearlized activator reactive coverstock( new from the ground up )and a asymmetrical shaped core---although this core was very similar to the one in the danger zone and was stretched out laterally to create a mass bias.

my first ball in the inferno line was the original inferno. i was very impressed with this ball and grew to like it more and more as time passed on. the activator reactive coverstock seemed to soak up less oil and was more durable. the raging inferno worked great for me when i needed the extra bite from a particle ball. the ultimate inferno is a great reactive ball for medium to heavy oil conditions and the coverstock is easily adaptable from coarse sanding to highly polished.

part of the popularity of the zone series was marketing----brunswick balls were on tv seemingly every week as brunswick had the most( and best ) staff members at the time( walter ray williams, jr., mike aulby, parker bohn III, etc. ). poor management at brunswick caused a huge downhill slide that now seems to be over. but they lost some customers and there are still many who haven't( or won't) try a brunswick ball.

i'm ready to bestow the title of the best reactive ball brunswick ever made to the original inferno. only time will tell if the entire inferno line can make that claim. they're off to a very good start though.

Edited on 5/27/2005 5:51 AM

I only have one comment to respond to. Dizzyfugu stated that our current Zones are "not-so-state-of-the-art, but nevertheless strong". We get the differential we intend with the block design we use. It is not necessary to have multiple pieces inside to create useful RG numbers. Those designs may look "cool", but if you look at the spec #'s you will see that we get plenty out of our design.

Anyway, I vote for the Inferno Line. Not only are they showing great success against several competitors with quality stuff, but it is THE most durable coverstock on the market. How many of you have seen a ball with Activator coverstock get those spiral cracks around the holes or split on the bridge. I have yet to see one and our extensive testing was not able to get one to crack, even after thousands of shots. I actually used my Original for about 8 months before I even cleaned and repolished it. It held up wonderfully and has probably 200 games on it now and is still top notch.

No doubt though, we'll keep trying to advance our technology even further. It amazes me, our R & D guys keep finding ways to move forward when it feels like it couldn't get any better.

RoB LAW  


--------------------
If ya ain't throwin' Brunswick.....Ya ain't maximizin' your abilities.  Get ur done with Brunswick !!!

Think of how the Original Inferno looked in Chris barnes' hands in 2003 -2004.

Grabby in the midlane.

Then contrast how they looked in 2004 2005 on tour.  Beautiful wait and then move
(More oil in midlanes or brunswick oil is more viscous than kegel).

It all makes sense.

Activator in their early discussions talked about was said to "Hook more in oil and react more smoothly to dry"  An attempt at paraphrase.

They are what they are.  Non particle balls designed to act like particles.

They do this job perfectly.

An awesome tool when one has midlane oil and wants a smoother backend.

The AI looks like it is closer to a reactive with Activator +.

I don't believe it is better or worse, it is exactly what one would expect when the descriptions first came out!

Pure reactives will dominate on a different condition and these new non particle particles will do real well on a condition like the 2004 2005 tour condition.

Sweet.

REgards,

Luckylefty
PS I don't bowl on the 2004 2005 tour condition.
PPS their performance on teh 2004 2005 tour was outstanding... Do you bowl on the tour?