Author Topic: paradigm secret inside !!! (Read 3543 times)

mrbowlingnut · « **on:** May 04, 2006, 03:48:53 PM »

I was talking with a very reliable source who informed me that a R&D department of a another major ball company disected and tested the chemical makeup of a paradigm. They found the same exact particle being used in the so called pearl reactive paradigm that they use in the trifecta and other high particle balls that storm makes. I am not here to argue with you or anyone about it i own the ball myself and like it very much, i am just informing everyone of what these different ball companies do tell you and dont tell you

So we are all being mislead in marketing by ball companies and i think it should stop and they should come clean with telling us what covers have any particle in them or really dont. I know of AMF balls from 2 years that were superflex covers and advertised as being a new particle cover, so they were 180 from what storm and some newer rumors going around like m80 having particle added on some balls and other releases not having any added.

Edited on 5/4/2006 11:55 PM

DanR · « **Reply #1 on:** May 04, 2006, 11:55:30 PM »

I heard it also, why does Storm try to fool their loyal customers?

ebwkidvicious · « **Reply #2 on:** May 05, 2006, 12:02:17 AM »

You know I was just thinking about posting this earlier also. I told my pro shop owner that I was gonna wait for the Pearl Particle version of the Paradigm and he told me "don't bother waiting, there are definitely particles in the paradigm, they just didn't say it". Looks like its valid if we're all hearing it.
--------------------
F-M-3

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #3 on:** May 05, 2006, 12:12:34 AM »

Early in the morning one day I called another ball company and got someone in the know.

He informed me that two or three balls in their lineup had very light particle loading that were listed as reactive. Fact of the matter is that particles got a bad name when they were particle loaded balls in the 17 percent range of loading.
All sorts of people don't like the word particle. So lots of balls are marketed as reactive have very light loads in the 1 to 2 percent range. It is the only way they can get balls to turn on todays' slicker oils.

On the other hand many are saying that Storm's new reactor covers are cousins of the Brunswick activator coverstock. I could see it as the one that I own cannot be stopped from hooking in a controlled but powerful way on both fresh and carrydown.

Great covers today...for today's slicker...longer.. yet thinner applications of oil!

REgards,

Luckylefty
PS if they put down 5 years agos thicker,,,,shorter and more blended oils the old particles could just kill em....day after day!
--------------------
Open the door...see what's possible...and just walk right on through...that's how easy success feels..

mrbowlingnut · « **Reply #4 on:** May 05, 2006, 12:31:33 AM »

I agree Lucky with the reactor cover being close to the activator in motion, i have the new agent and it acts likes a polished absolute inferno i have. I believe they vary the loads and the agent has more of a load than say the fired up does. At least in the pyro they admit to it being particle pearl, being i have all of the series i can see the differences in loads or maybe none at all.

It seems funn to me that Storm would go all reactor cover unless it is something like activator and they know they can greatly increase or decrease the strength with blends.

I will tell you the rumor has it the new one series ball coming next month will redefine the word sideways when it comes to ball motions on the backend. If you think the one goes big you have not seen anything yet, i know the name and have not seen the ball personally but i have heard what the test balls did that they went to production with.

Slopsurprise · « **Reply #5 on:** May 05, 2006, 01:17:01 AM »

Not to hyjack but its on the same kind of subject. Storm particle balls reactlike nobodys particles. To me they seem to react like a Reactive ball. I have owned the Trifecta, the Ace, and the Pyro and they all can get down right sideways. Well, maybe not the Trifecta due to its surface but, the Pyro is the most angular ball I have ever thrown. Makes the One look like Crap IMO. Actually, due to the pyros angularity, I had ALOT of trouble controling it until I knocked the shine off of it.

Edited on 5/5/2006 1:15 AM

stanski · « **Reply #6 on:** May 05, 2006, 01:40:34 AM »

Yep, this is old news. This came out soon after the paradigm was realeased, someone leaked that it was particle but was called reactive for advertising purposes.

Who really cares what they are as long as they react the way we want?
--------------------
stanski

dizzyfugu · « **Reply #7 on:** May 05, 2006, 01:57:25 AM »

"Hidden" particle has been around for some time, and I do not see a drawback in adding them to "normal" reactive coverstocks to enhance friction or smooth out the reaction. With today's aggressive stuff, this might even be technically necessary to get a consistent ball reaction at all.
But IMHO it is bad policy to put this practice under the blanket of marketing and "misleading" customers.

I think it is a communication problem, making the function and degree of reaction effect understandable for the common customer. When people hear "particle", they think "hook at your feet" and heavy oil. But that's wrong, as great balls like MoRich's Onslaught or Storm's light load particles prove. But it is a marketing challenge, after all.

By the way (@Slopsurprise): Storm uses, as far as I know, soft particles in their coverstock, which flatten out upon contact and increase contact area with the lane - but need dry boards to work well. Much different from carbide particle (e. g. Brunswick) which acts like spikes and create that dreaded early friction.
--------------------

DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
Team "X" website (now available in English!): http://homepage.mac.com/timlinked/
"All that we see or seem, is but a dream within a dream..." - Edgar Allen Poe

Djarum · « **Reply #8 on:** May 05, 2006, 08:37:43 AM »

quote:
Not to hyjack but its on the same kind of subject. Storm particle balls reactlike nobodys particles. To me they seem to react like a Reactive ball. I have owned the Trifecta, the Ace, and the Pyro and they all can get down right sideways. Well, maybe not the Trifecta due to its surface but, the Pyro is the most angular ball I have ever thrown. Makes the One look like Crap IMO. Actually, due to the pyros angularity, I had ALOT of trouble controling it until I knocked the shine off of it.

Edited on 5/5/2006 1:15 AM

I believe the pyro has a significantly earlier breakpoint however than the fired up. Say by 3 or 4 feet on the same lanes. If the Fired up has particles, it must be minimal. I would say that one could control the pyro better than the fired up on most lane conditions.

The other difference is that particles of the past were added into the mix. Are particles now actually created when the resins are created? What I am asking is do some reactive formulas create particles as they cure?

Dj
--------------------
The views and opinions of Djarum expressed on BallReviews.com do not necessarily state or reflect those of the BallReviews.com.

Slopsurprise · « **Reply #9 on:** May 05, 2006, 11:44:29 AM »

quote:
quote:
Not to hyjack but its on the same kind of subject. Storm particle balls reactlike nobodys particles. To me they seem to react like a Reactive ball. I have owned the Trifecta, the Ace, and the Pyro and they all can get down right sideways. Well, maybe not the Trifecta due to its surface but, the Pyro is the most angular ball I have ever thrown. Makes the One look like Crap IMO. Actually, due to the pyros angularity, I had ALOT of trouble controling it until I knocked the shine off of it.

Edited on 5/5/2006 1:15 AM

I believe the pyro has a significantly earlier breakpoint however than the fired up. Say by 3 or 4 feet on the same lanes. If the Fired up has particles, it must be minimal. I would say that one could control the pyro better than the fired up on most lane conditions.

The other difference is that particles of the past were added into the mix. Are particles now actually created when the resins are created? What I am asking is do some reactive formulas create particles as they cure?

Dj
--------------------
The views and opinions of Djarum expressed on BallReviews.com do not necessarily state or reflect those of the BallReviews.com.

I have thrown both with the same drilling and I thought the OOB Fired up was a bit easier to control than the OOB pyro. Both GREAT balls though indeed!

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #10 on:** May 05, 2006, 12:05:18 PM »

DJ...please don't think I was implying any of the reactor balls are particle...unless they say so!

I believe the Reactor coverstock is sort of like an activator from brunswick or should I say activator plus.

I'm not sure but I have never seen anything move smoothly on fresh synthetics and also move smoothly on synthetic carrydown as though there is virtually no difference! Very powerful stuff at the break but smooth! I base this on one reactor ball my HR SS pearl(not very pearly!

I respect this guys opinion and see what he says about the Fired UP (which I don't own). Oh yeah...Chris...from Buddies Pro shop...his review of Fired UP!

Ball specs: pin 3 1/4, top 2.45

My PAP: 4 3/4, up zero

Layout: pin 4 1/4 inches from PAP, cg 4 1/2 from PAP

The new Reactor coverstock by Storm is just great. This ball allows the ball to clears the heads real well like all other Storm pearls but unlike previous pearls this ball reads the dry very smooth instead of the big jerk that was common in other Storm balls. The other thing I really liked is that of you do happen to get this ball in the oil it didn't skid 55 ft and then try and make a move. It actually tried to read the lane. This new cover finally gives Storm the ball motion of the ever popular Brunswick Absolute Inferno but at a lower price point. Even better yet a bowler can have the Screamin' Banshee and the Fired Up and the two balls really compliment each other. When the Screamin' begins to burn up to fast in the fronts the Fired Up with a similar layout allows you to play the same part of the lane and get your backend reaction that was lost back.

I believe the light loads of particles are being put in some other companies more traditional skid snap reactive covers. Reactor is different I believe without particles.

REgards,

Luckylefty
--------------------
Open the door...see what's possible...and just walk right on through...that's how easy success feels..

Edited on 5/5/2006 12:58 PM

ebwkidvicious · « **Reply #11 on:** May 06, 2006, 12:08:36 PM »

So quick summary here, are we saying that the only coverstock from storm that has particles is the EOX, in other words, the reactor listed for the other equipment is not including particles except where advertised (the pyro).
--------------------
F-M-3

mrbowlingnut · « **Reply #12 on:** May 06, 2006, 02:28:07 PM »

I am not saying this maybe lucky lefty is??? You can actually see the rubber like particles if you look at the ball very closely on the paradigm. I prefer reactive balls also so i think ball companies realize they must keep it on the down low about the word particle. I will probably even buy the next particle pearl release in the series because strom will make it handle different lane conditions and i am just a ball whore anyway.

tekneek · « **Reply #13 on:** May 15, 2006, 12:17:49 PM »

that you are Barry, LOL at least you admit it. I however have been going to therapy, I only have 4 now, whew what a relief.
--------------------
Steve
Leading Edge Pro Shop
512-755-2947
e-mail tekneek@281.com

www.dynothane.com

Capt Ramius "Vasili, give me one ping, and one ping only"

chitown · « **Reply #14 on:** May 17, 2006, 01:32:03 PM »

quote:
Yep, this is old news. This came out soon after the paradigm was realeased, someone leaked that it was particle but was called reactive for advertising purposes.

Who really cares what they are as long as they react the way we want?
--------------------
stanski

I would care. What about if you bought a paradigm thinking it was a reactive cover and didn't like the ball reaction? Then come to find out it's a particle pearl ball. I would be pissed.

Author Topic: paradigm secret inside !!! (Read 3543 times)

mrbowlingnut

paradigm secret inside !!!

DanR

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

ebwkidvicious

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

LuckyLefty

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

mrbowlingnut

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

Slopsurprise

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

stanski

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

dizzyfugu

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

Djarum

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

Slopsurprise

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

LuckyLefty

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

ebwkidvicious

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

mrbowlingnut

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

tekneek

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!

chitown

Re: paradigm secret inside !!!