Dudley ASA Hycons WHAT HAPPENED?

[jslick324]

When ASA 1st went to 52/300 Dudley was making the Dudley Thunder Hycon and have now switched to Thunder ZN. The ZN is a decent ball, but for ASA the plain Thunder Hycon was tops!!! Any insight why they discontinued? And anyone got the old Hycons to sell?

Best:

Still OK and better then the rest:

 

[brandonmincy69]

I agree 100%. The Hycons had far better performance than any new Dudley ball to date as far as 52/300 goes. I questioned the same thing.

 

[justwhippin]

same ball imo

 

[Bobby Buggs]

Couple things here,
I have access to the factory that produces those balls and they tell me the ball is Not discontinued. In 52 CoR there is no Core difference between ZN and Non ZN ball. Its not like years ago when the ASA Zn was a different core. Synthetic covers are the lowest performing cover material and will always be 3rd, they are the most temp sensitive too.

 

[bimmerpilot]

Good info buggs...

Synthetic .52/275 Hycons are junky after the 4th inning.
Comp cover balls feel to be more consistent throughout the full game.

 

[single wally]

^^^^agree on this. SMH at guys on here who say they don't notice a difference between synthetic and composite covered 52s. They are worlds apart.

 

[GrinningBear]

^^^^agree on this. SMH at guys on here who say they don't notice a difference between synthetic and composite covered 52s. They are worlds apart.

The .44 SY's, Stotes, etc, were all good balls. People either correlate that to the .52's or are misunderstood when they reference the older ones. I've heard nothing but complaints about synthetic .52's, but I will say that the Baden synthetic I have are on par with any other ball no matter the cover material. Since they're Badens chances are they're not really to spec, either.

 

[Bobby Buggs]

What exactly do you mean chances are

 

[Bobby Buggs]

Thought so......

 

[phxraida15]

I have one of each on the dudleys... And there is about a 30' difference on them.. But the Baden Classic+ out hits both them... And hits almost the exact same in the winter and summer...

 

[erdy147]

The SY .52 300s are flat out pathetic compared to the old Hycors.

They have a heavy, waterlogged feel.

Not vs.s the Hycors but we switched this year to a different company and the new balls are way better that the SY's. Always liked Dudley but these were not very good.

 

[Gamble]

I know the first Baden C+s introduced about 5 years ago were found to be out of spec (over 275 compression). They were really good balls, much hotter than any C+ available now.

You could feel the compression difference easily.

Ha I remember that! I got a free dozen balls in trade for some of those to be tested.

IIRC they ended up being something like .52/365 or something. They were FAR superior to anything at the time or since that was supposed to be a 275/300 comp ball. Kind of expected since they were almost 100 pounds over spec.

 

[GrinningBear]

Composite Hycor C+s are the best performing .52 ball I've hit. They also last (by far) the longest. Composite Hot Dots are also better than synthetics. Noticeably so. I will say the cover material makes a big difference in .52 balls.

Baden C+s are actually very good performers. The durability just isn't as good as composite Hycors. I have no clue if the Badens are to spec or not, but they're damn good performers.

Confused if you are arguing with me with that top paragraph or not. It looks like we agree.

Thought so......

???

Enlighten me. I forgot about this thread. What are you asking? Badens have always been rumored to be out of spec, like Deckers. Deckers are inconsistent so there are some very good ones.

I have Baden Classic+ and they confirm the rumor. They not only fly farther they make a much more distinct, sharper crack. They don't sound like other .52's. If I've heard they are out of spec, mine hit like they're out of spec, chances are they're out of spec.

Badens also have the most durable ink I've seen. If I could pick one and only one .52 it wouldn't be Badens though.

Also there are only three periods in an ellipses. Between you and oilslick... like visual nails on a chalkboard.

 

[phxraida15]

The baden classic+ is listed at 52/375 and not 52/275

Really? I thought you couldn't list them as classic+ unless it was 52/275???

 

[phxraida15]

It does say 375 on the ball lol.... We use them and the classicm worth balls in tourneys here.. Both are good balls... Can't complain... But the Baden ClassicM's are rocks....

 

[GrinningBear]

So did we answer your question?

Thought so...

 

[chrometip78]

I'm wondering if the first Dudley 52's had a better synthetic cover? I still have 2 of my my originals from several years ago and they still fly like crazy while the new SY 52's suck horrid ass.

 

[bimmerpilot]

Yes, Hycon composites retain their playability exponentially better than the SY.
Hycon SY's seem to die mid game...

 

[Qoheleth52]

[ame="http://ftlstaticwebcdn.fruit.com/dudleysports-website/resources/pdf/2015-dudley-softball-equipment-catalog.pdf"]http://ftlstaticwebcdn.fruit.com/dudleysports-website/resources/pdf/2015-dudley-softball-equipment-catalog.pdf[/ame]

See page 12-14 of the .pdf document. Classic + Hycons and Classic M ZNs and SYs have different core material, but their new 52/300 is called Thunder ZN Hycon. I use a site where I can buy any amount of each I want rather than being forced to get a dozen, easier to try them all.

 

[phxraida15]

Played in a tourney yesterday and they gave us the new Baden Classic+ fires... They definitely were out of spec the first time... But the balls weren't too bad... I could roll with them all day over the Dudley 52/300 Sy balls... Smh.!. Them balls suck ass...

 

[Sully]

So after all of this discussion, what is the best ASA 52/300 ball as far as durability? Just looking for opinions. I've hit at least four or five different brands/types of 52s and haven't noticed much difference.

 

[Qoheleth52]

I get the best results with composite cover Tattoos, they just "fit my swing," but I also use the ZN Hycons and guys seem to like them.

 

[phxraida15]

Classic + Fires are very legit. We use them for USSSA tournies here and they fly great. Not the best durability I've ever seen, but they fly great and don't feel completely spongy.

These are different from the older ones. The writing is in Red...

 

[jbo911]

The .44 SY's, Stotes, etc, were all good balls. People either correlate that to the .52's or are misunderstood when they reference the older ones. I've heard nothing but complaints about synthetic .52's, but I will say that the Baden synthetic I have are on par with any other ball no matter the cover material. Since they're Badens chances are they're not really to spec, either.

Every synthetic I've had going back 10+ years wasn't as good as it's leather or composite counterpart. I had some old 44/375s that I wouldn't have minded using, but they were still noticeably behind the others.

 

[chrometip78]

We get nothing but synthetic everything out here in every league & tourney cause it's a *****'s market. We have to hope for the best of the worst and Dudley SY 52's ate the worst of the worst

 

[Tictac020]

We get nothing but synthetic everything out here in every league & tourney cause it's a *****'s market. We have to hope for the best of the worst and Dudley SY 52's ate the worst of the worst

Dude, I feel and say the same thing u saying.....we hit dudley thunder sy's 52's and it's like the LD loves to take our money, and hates to give softball players what they want because he's a narcissistic dude....he's always like "well, teams will always form and play and we don't need a $5 or $6 dollar ball to get teams......" Frickin' pìsses me off! So many 52's out there and it matters what wee hit with!!!! Difference in 52's is just that, a big difference!! My worths, evils, and xrocks all fly and hit great and the sy's are one of the lowest balls out there! It's just a slap in the face to the players who play at the park's from the LD