32 Comments on “USBC: STORM SPECTRE NO LONGER APPROVED! | MORE BALLS NEXT???”

  1. This makes me so angry. First the Jackal Carnage, now the Spectre. I owned BOTH, and am again perplexed as to how this can happen.
    Again I’m stuck with a useless ball. Sure, Storm will give me another ball. Eventually. But what I want (and what we should all expect) is my money back.

    1. @Shady Carry I did the same thing when this happened to Motiv. The Jackal Carnage was banned and I did not like the way Motiv responded so I have bought Storm equipment ever since.

    2. Hopefully we aren’t the only ones. If all they do is offer a replacement ball everyone should be done with them.
      If you want a good laugh go read the spectre page on their website lol

    3. When they’ve replaced balls in the past do you need to return the banned or revoked balls? Or can someone gift the ball to a newer bowler who isn’t involved in leagues or tournaments yet?

    4. @Nathan Gee This is just a guess, but we’ll probably have to send the serial number of our Spectres to Storm, using a special web page or email. Storm will then send a new replacement ball to your pro shop. The illegal ball will have to be destroyed in some way, like drilling a hole through the serial number.

  2. My Spectre is only about a month old. Probably has less than 20 games on it. I’m hoping they give us a choice of balls, and don’t limit that to just a couple of choices.

    1. Would suck if they don’t allow you to pick any ball in Storm lineup if they won’t be covering drilling fees.

  3. Bahahahaha Sean was ABSOLUTELY using a Spectre when he flipped on Russo lol and he was the one using an illegal ball the whole time lol soooo funny

    1. The people using the purple hammer knew the deal prior and the urethane issue is legitimate. BELMO uses a 7 year old pitch black for a reason, storm would give him 3 a week if he wanted them.

      Not the same as a ball failing post production and everyone finding out the same time and a recall by the manufacturer. The hammer issue is directly related to age not production.

    2. #INTEGRITY , crickets…………. smdh. All balls are cheaters after the OG urethane Age. All this crying about gear. Grab a Rubber ball and lets see some of these honor scores. Talk to Glenn Allison about it , 900 with a yellow dot, now that is scoring!

  4. The competition between manufacturers is tough. Storm pushed the limit on the specs until reasonable quality control was not enough. Ebonite knew the limits of quality control when the original black widow was introduced so the advertised core numbers were closer to the limit than actual numbers. They played it smart. Motive just barely went over the percentage limit with the Jackal.

  5. I understand USBC is trying to hold the integrity of the sport. But this was absolutely pathetic on their end. Customers and players dont want to deal with a revoked ball. Its troubling that in a short span, 2 balls getting revoked/unapproved in about a 2 month span is suspicious. And with that, people complaining like a bunch of Karens and Kens *cough Rash cough* is ruining the integrity of the sport.

  6. Read somewhere that a guy bowled a 789 *last night* with a Spectre and now he can’t use the ball anymore.

    I flipped a coin in early February to choose between a Phaze 4 and Spectre. Glad I ended up with the Phaze 4 in hindsight.

    Jokingly, you know what could be next? The Idol Helios, after that second 900 series being thrown with it… 😭

  7. I gotta suspect the USBC on this one. I was thinking the same thing as you Chris; how do bowling balls from a major manufacturer like Storm get certified only 3 months ago yet fail in their specs 3 months later? Storm has been in this business for years; I can’t see them screwing up on this.

    1. Right like suddenly they are doing inspections? The USBC needs to learn more transparency. They are shady

  8. How the hell do they “field test” balls in the same environment as their facility in TX?? 🤔🤔

    1. The test procedure document is online. You can purchase the exact same durometer and repeat the test if you wanted to. They are all tested in a controlled environment with the temp of the ball having to be in a certain range, 70 – 77 I think. The balls are tested in 10 different spots making sure to test each color on the ball. The readings are then averaged. They are allowed a 5% failure rate.
      They have an sop. It’s not just some random guy going into random proshops and testing the ball in the shop.
      The only explanation is a catastrophic manufacturing error.

  9. Kind of hard to explain away. I’d be shocked if Storm sent in the test batch with a different cover formulation than the regular production. I wonder if there is something in the formulation that makes the covers soften up faster than previously known or predicted. Could be they were good at time of certification but no longer. Be interesting to see what develops.

  10. It’s just getting ridiculous now, I remember when people would illegally put lead in the ball to make it turn and increase hitting power, At this point scores are getting so high because of cores and coverstocks, but is it because of the ball or because people are just getting better at the game, Today’s game has coaching, college opportunities, etc. that make bowling a viable choice to make some extra money and help with education, it’s just not a bunch of drinkers using an excuse to get out of the house(in my case it is, LOL), again no matter how good the ball is, it still comes down to execution and a whole lot of luck.

  11. That’s great. I’ve only used mine for one night in league. Do we get our money money back? Do we get another ball?

  12. I put this under someone’s comment, but might as well post it as a comment of its own.

    The test procedure document is online. You can purchase the exact same durometer and repeat the test if you wanted to. They are all tested in a controlled environment with the temp of the ball having to be in a certain range, 70 – 77 I think. The balls are tested in 10 different spots making sure to test each color on the ball. The readings are then averaged. They are allowed a 5% failure rate.
    They have an sop. It’s not just some random guy going into random proshops and testing the ball in the shop.
    The only explanation is a catastrophic manufacturing error.
    We can all hate on the usbc, but at the end of the day it’s storm’s error. Hopefully storm steps up and does right thing for everyone.

  13. this is kind of a strange time in bowling. first we had the ban on 2016-2017 purple hammers, then PBA tule of no urethane prior 2 years ago, and now the Spectre being revoked. feels like lots of things all of a sudden are being examined. which isn’t necessarily bad, i understand governing bodies of a sport should make sure things are on a fair playing field and no “illegal” equipment but it does make me wonder (as mentioned) how many other bowling balls are being monitored. and will USBC somehow change the hardness rule and then all of a sudden 20+ balls are “illegal”.

  14. You have a lot of queations what happened. To be honest, that’s for Storm to know and share if they’d like. Balls have been approved before and have gotten softer later and banned – such as urethane. I appreciate USBC ensuring fair play across the board. Historically, ball manufacturers with recalls/bans have offered replacement equipment. The loss to the bowler is usually the cost of drilling.

  15. Storm knew this, they had to with that amount of balls that failed. The ones Storm Supplied for certification were fine. then the manufacturing started thigns changed and Storm had to know maybe they cheapened out on some of the additives to the cover. But with 98.6% failure they knew this and tried to get away with it

  16. What happens is Storm took their time on the first balls coming off the line followed every step to the “T”. They watched the temps, times, material handling etc, etc once they were approved the went back to normal operations and produced as many balls as they could in the shortest amount of time.

  17. Is it possible that whatever additives used to conform to USBC’s new oil absorption rate change may have an effect on the softening of the cover stock?

Leave a Reply to Michael Graziani Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.