Post by: ImBackInTheGame on March 05, 2010, 01:35:57 AM
--------------------
Arsenal:
Roto-Grip Cell Pearl (500/4000 abralon)
Lane #1 Chainsaw (2000 + Secret Sauce)
Roto-Grip Cell (2000 abralon)
Brunswick C-System 3.5 (NIB)
Post by: Sir Bowl-A-Lot on March 05, 2010, 09:39:13 AM
Again congrats on your win. I think I may be able to help. The 3.5 is definitely a pearl and should outhook those other three balls that you have listed in your signature. The 3.5 should also be able to handle more oil than those other balls as well. I would treat it as your heavy oil piece in your arsenal and drill it accordingly.
Bowl well with it.
Edited on 3/5/2010 10:39 AM
Post by: Abe on March 05, 2010, 09:39:41 AM
Post by: Brunswick_fan_BrandonH on March 05, 2010, 09:44:22 AM
--------------------
Brunswick user and supporter. Go Big B!
PBA Eastern Region Member
Post by: ImBackInTheGame on March 05, 2010, 10:59:02 AM
Thanks!
Post by: dougb on March 05, 2010, 11:28:09 AM
quote:
Unfortunately I don't encounter high volumes of oil, but I'll probably still have it drilled for it and then tweak the surface as needed. As I improve, perhaps I'll enter some tournaments, but I'm a ways away from that point.
Thanks!
My 2.5 takes very well to surface changes. Smooth out the surface and throw some polish on it and you should be able to use it on lighter oil conditions. Mine's at 4000 abralon and it is still very strong off the friction, but works well on mediums.
Post by: on March 05, 2010, 11:36:17 AM
If you've been around for awhile, at first came HEAVY LOAD particle covers that enhanced friction on slicker patterns. The problem, to me, is that everyone jumped to buy these for their house shots that really didn't have the amounts of oil to allow them to perform... These were much higher maintenance due to the accelerated oil absorption and other factors. "Particle" became a four-letter-word that pretty much guaranteed that the ball wouldn't sell.
Then companies started producing the next generation with LOW-LOAD particle covers, which was a step in the right direction for Joe Bowler because they reacted similar to their reactive balls, yet handled carry-down or heavier oil volumes better. The maintenance was still there, but not to the extent of the first generation.
Now, technology has been developed (thanks Carmen Salvino and others) that seems to be yet another improvement.
BackInTheGame, for house shots I'd recommend going with weaker layouts on the 3.5, as well as being open minded to surface adjustments as needed. Good luck with the new BEAST.
--------------------
Lane Carter, Strike Zone Pro Shops - Salt Lake City, Utah
Brunswick Pro Shop Staff
www.brunswickbowling.com
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.
Post by: ImBackInTheGame on March 05, 2010, 11:51:29 AM
Post by: Spider Ball Bowler on March 05, 2010, 11:59:22 AM
--------------------
Ahhh Disco Biscuits!
Post by: ekster on March 05, 2010, 02:49:42 PM
Marketing
--------------------
In SE Michigan, it's AMBT
http://www.americanmastersbowling.com
Post by: Doug Sterner on March 05, 2010, 03:02:34 PM
Regardless of what CFT actually is, the 2.5 and 3.5 have a ball motion that I have never seen out of a ball with the Big B engraved on it.
The balls are strong and have a good backend reaction. They don't roll at your feet, they don't die by the backend. The backend is strong but not overly snappy.
As I said....solid, strong performing balls that give a different look on the lanes....a lot like the Ebonite Mission does, just differently.
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Post by: EboHammer on March 05, 2010, 11:08:50 PM
Post by: charlest on March 06, 2010, 03:04:04 AM
quote:
I wonder how much different the chemical friction technology is from the Hammer white sharp-edge coverstock material. Don't both just have to do with changing the make-up of the reactive coverstock?
Ask Carmen Salvino. Don't assume.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Post by: Doug Sterner on March 06, 2010, 11:34:32 AM
I don't know if you could get him to tell you exactly how this cover is different but as I said who cares? It works...that's all we should be concerned with...yes?
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Post by: charlest on March 06, 2010, 05:55:12 PM
quote:
charlest...I went to the seminar where the 2.5 was introduced, I saw the video interview with Mr Salvino and he was very evasive with his responses whenasked about the nature of CFT.
I don't know if you could get him to tell you exactly how this cover is different but as I said who cares? It works...that's all we should be concerned with...yes?
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Yes.
But the OP wanted an answer that only the developer could give. Asking everybody else is counterproductive. So I sent him to the source. If the source does not choose to reveal his secrets, what can I do?
I choose to use my 2.5, drilled as I chose, because I cannot find enough oil to use a 3.5.
I believe no other answer is possible.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Post by: charlest on March 06, 2010, 05:56:22 PM
quote:
It always sounded like the definition of resin enhanced urethane to me. The original resin balls got more friction from the resin ( a chemical ) than from the abrasive nature of the urethane.
Also, I guess the 3.5 may be okay, but I have never seen anyone, including several B staffers look good with the 2.5 in their hands.
Bob,
I am suprised at your response. I believe you have just not looked hard enough.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Post by: Doug Sterner on March 06, 2010, 08:21:10 PM
My guess would be pro shops over drilling the ball to do more than is necessary.
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Post by: EboHammer on March 06, 2010, 09:51:39 PM
quote:quote:
I wonder how much different the chemical friction technology is from the Hammer white sharp-edge coverstock material. Don't both just have to do with changing the make-up of the reactive coverstock?
Ask Carmen Salvino. Don't assume.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Why the attitude? I never said anything bad about either ball.
Post by: ImBackInTheGame on March 11, 2010, 09:38:25 PM
692 first night out of the box tonight! This is a personal best series for me.
Thank you Brunswick, and Sir Bowl-a-lot since he ran the raffle I won this ball in!
--------------------
Arsenal:
Roto-Grip Cell Pearl (500/4000 abralon)
Lane #1 Chainsaw (2000 + Secret Sauce)
Roto-Grip Cell (2000 abralon)
Brunswick C-System 3.5 (500/4000 siaair)
Post by: charlest on March 11, 2010, 10:37:16 PM
quote:quote:quote:
I wonder how much different the chemical friction technology is from the Hammer white sharp-edge coverstock material. Don't both just have to do with changing the make-up of the reactive coverstock?
Ask Carmen Salvino. Don't assume.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Why the attitude? I never said anything bad about either ball.
Sorry if you saw attitude in that reply. I like my 2.5. I just can't find enough oil locally to use it properly. I don't what "chemical" means in this case. I doubt that anyone else outside of Mr. Salvino or the Brunswick chemistsdo either. I was simply referring you to the source. That's where the answer MUST come from.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Post by: charlest on March 11, 2010, 10:40:50 PM
quote:
I see where you are coming from charlest....and I agree that something has to be wrong since Bob has never seen a good looking 2.5.
My guess would be pro shops over drilling the ball to do more than is necessary.
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Doug,
when I saw the first posts about this ball (the 2.5), I noted that eveyr success had drilled it with the pin at or below the bridge area. So that's where I put mine. Given the VERY STRONG backend on it and its oil-loving cousin, the 3.5, I decided to even kick the MB out a littl emore than I normally do. I was right, for me and my delivery. When I see enough oil, I get plenty of backend, almost more than I can handle, even with a drilling that normally provides a lot of roll, for me.
For me, this ball, the 2.5, needs true medium oil, at a minimum, to perform.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Post by: J_w73 on March 12, 2010, 02:58:35 PM
anyway.. does anyone have any reports how these balls are with cover death or diminished hook-ability after use?? How are the C-systems holding up.
--------------------
18 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, 15 deg axis tilt, varied rotational axis deg.. usually 45+
HighGame 300 x 4, High Series 808
Book Average 205,PBA Xperience 185
Post by: charlest on March 12, 2010, 03:16:21 PM
quote:
"For me, this ball, the 2.5, needs true medium oil, at a minimum, to perform."
What a revelation. Is there anywhere in the lit on the 2.5 that said it''s for light oil? What next, the sun is made of helium and is really hot?
Did your mother and father just not pay enough attention to you as baby?
Do you really have to make so many useless comments, just to draw attention to yourself?
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Edited on 3/12/2010 4:16 PM
Post by: on March 12, 2010, 03:21:50 PM
There is no marketing ploy. The 3.5 has more of the "chemical friction additive", for lack of better explanation. Exact percentage is Brunswick's formula to reveal (or not).
My 2.5 has tons of games on it without any loss of reaction that I can see. Mine is great with a little polish because I can use it more often.
The 3.5 doesn't have nearly the use, but I suspect it will remain true to Brunswick's reputation of durability.
The 2 C-System balls are quite different. Anyone who owns them both should be able to confirm that. They are VERY responsive to surface changes, too.
--------------------
Lane Carter, Strike Zone Pro Shops - Salt Lake City, Utah
Brunswick Pro Shop Staff
www.brunswickbowling.com
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.
Post by: Bluff on March 12, 2010, 06:11:06 PM
quote:
As the title states, what is it? A pearl, a hybrid, solid? I'm not only still relatively new to bowling, but I have no clue about the Big B product. I won a C-(System) 3.5 in a raffle and I tried to do some reasearch about it, but couldn't find anything on this. The cover "looks" like it might be a pearl. Also where should it "fit" in my arsenal (see sig)?
--------------------
Arsenal:
Roto-Grip Cell Pearl (500/4000 abralon)
Lane #1 Chainsaw (2000 + Secret Sauce)
Roto-Grip Cell (2000 abralon)
Brunswick C-System 3.5 (NIB)
Just a Fancy name for sale pitch
--------------------
"A man with no skills can be taught. A man with no honor, has nothing."
Post by: Doug Sterner on March 12, 2010, 09:44:49 PM
This would make sense since the 3.5 is significantly stronger than the 2.5.
Anyone else who attended the seminar hear that? Or am I dreaming??
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Post by: J_w73 on March 12, 2010, 11:20:13 PM
quote:
I seem to remember the Brunswick guys saying at the C-System 2.5 seminar that the 2.5 stands for the percentage of the additive in the coverstock.
This would make sense since the 3.5 is significantly stronger than the 2.5.
Anyone else who attended the seminar hear that? Or am I dreaming??
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
So how does this additive effect the coverstock..?? is it like plasticizer that is used in the creation of porous coverstocks or is it something else..
--------------------
18 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, 15 deg axis tilt, varied rotational axis deg.. usually 45+
HighGame 300 x 4, High Series 808
Book Average 205,PBA Xperience 185
Post by: Juggernaut on March 13, 2010, 07:56:16 AM
quote:
What next, the sun is made of helium and is really hot?
Elements in the Sun
Element----------------------% of total atoms-----------------% of total mass
Hydrogen--------------------------91.2-------------------------------71.0
Helium-----------------------------8.7-------------------------------27.1
Oxygen-----------------------------0.078------------------------------0.97
Carbon-----------------------------0.043------------------------------0.40
Nitrogen---------------------------0.0088-----------------------------0.096
Silicon----------------------------0.0045-----------------------------0.099
Magnesium--------------------------0.0038-----------------------------0.076
Neon-------------------------------0.0035-----------------------------0.058
Iron-------------------------------0.030------------------------------0.014
Sulfur-----------------------------0.015------------------------------0.040
Although you are correct in your ASSUMPTION that the sun is hot, you obviously don't know the whole story. It is composed of thousands of elements, with these being the most abundant 10. Helium IS there, but it is only a secondary element as HYDROGEN is the main component of the sun.
Now, if you know as much about CFT as you do the sun, we are in trouble.
--------------------
Good transactions list in my profile
ILLEGITIMI, NON-CARBORUNDUM!
Post by: Doug Sterner on March 13, 2010, 01:22:44 PM
So....just what is the additive? I do recall them saying that the additive is a liquid and the annotation of the ball (2.5 and 3.5) results from the amount of the additive added to the base resin. It would seem to me that it could be a chemical that changes the orientation of the molecules within the coverstock material. This would make sense, but then again as has been said, only Carmen Salvino knows for sure.
--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY
http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
For Real Time Interactive Bowling Conversation:
BowlingChat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")