PDA

View Full Version : TF 320 16x20 - first impressions


vkartikv
10-03-2006, 09:10 AM
I spent about an hour with this frame y'day and since there hasn't been much input on this frame, I thought I'd start.

Specs: About 340 grams with strings (pacific tough gut 17/poly force 18 @ mid tension) and overgrip. Balance - seemed to be about an inch HL (strung)
My current frame(s) PS 85 and occasionally the redondo mid

Groundstrokes: A very light swining frame, or may be just light in comparison to my main racquet. Lots of topspin if you have the right strokes. Good, decent depth control. Moderate stability on hard-hit shots. Very maneuvarable and didn't give the impression of being something that would cause elbow pain.

Serves: Excellent on serves. The thin beam (20mm) and light-weight made for a very easy swing. It took a while to adjust to the lightness but once I got used to it, serves were fast. Good kick on second serves (more than what I usually get).

Volleys: Nice, stiff response. Felt a little wobbly to begin with but that's probably something that gets better with a racquet-user relationship. Good depth but not great for drop/angle volleys.

Overall: Felt like a better version of the PK 5G and the tt warrior. Nice, crisp feel, very comfortable hit and not too light or too heavy. I think it's a good all-round frame which would probably suit s&v players more if they added some weight to the handle and 3/9 positions to stabilise the hit. I only spent about 1.5 hours late last night with it, hope to spend more time with it this weekend

superjumbo
10-03-2006, 10:43 AM
I've been using the TF 320 16 X 20 for about a week and I'm also impressed by the frame.

On ground strokes, power is predictable while not being enormous. Stability is good on off center shots. The sweet spot is large and is located a bit high on the stringbed. In particular, slice backhands are very sharp.

The racquet has a muted feel and control is very good. The racquet also feels pretty comfortable despite its stiffness rating.

I find that I can hit either flat or with topspin and have good depth and power on my shots. I find this to be unique for a frame that's light and maneuverable.

Although its been a while since I used it and I didn't play very well with it when I did use it, this frame reminds me a of a lighter version of the i.prestige. Both sticks have excellent accuracy, a muted feel, and comfortable but stiff response. Overall, the TF 320 16 X 20 is a very good all court frame.

dewey2110
10-03-2006, 11:50 AM
how's the quality of the frame? I played with a Tfeel 305 before and felt like the racquet was poorly made, the plastic pj looks cheap. The beam of the Tfight 320 was 24mm on Tecnifibre website. This sounds like an ideal racquet, with specs close to my RDS 001 MP, and the Dunlop Mfil 200 plus 2006. I felt like the Tfeel 305 was like a plastic toy, how about this one?

vkartikv
10-03-2006, 11:57 AM
how's the quality of the frame? I played with a Tfeel 305 before and felt like the racquet was poorly made, the plastic pj looks cheap. The beam of the Tfight 320 was 24mm on Tecnifibre website. This sounds like an ideal racquet, with specs close to my RDS 001 MP, and the Dunlop Mfil 200 plus 2006. I felt like the Tfeel 305 was like a plastic toy, how about this one?

The 24 mm beam width is an anomaly. It is 20 mm and it says so on the throat of the frame. I don't know what you mean by plastic toy but it definitely does not feel like a graphite racquet. It's quite shiny and has a weird paint finish.

dewey2110
10-03-2006, 12:12 PM
hows the comfort level? What kind of feel do you get when you hit the ball? any buttery feel? does it feel like the classics? Tecnifbre doesnt have that many technology yet.

superjumbo
10-03-2006, 12:59 PM
I like and currently own both the 320 and the Dunlop 2006.

The 2006 is better than the 320 for spin but its harder to hit flat putaway shots with. The 320 allows me to both hit topspin and flat winners. I feel that the 320 drives the ball better. I also find the 320 to flutter less than the 2006 on mishits. It also seems easier to hit big serves with the 320 but the 2006 is a little better on spin serves. The 2006 can feel insubstantial at times while the 320 feels pretty solid. Overall I think that the 320 does more things better than the 2006. However, the 2006 is great for modding and is fun to whip around. I suggest you try both sticks.

As for the paint jobs, I'd say that both frames are of average quality. They both seem susceptible to chipping and scratching. Yet, most frames seem that way. The only sticks I've seen that had finishes that prevent scratching and dinging are Volkls. I demoed a DNX 9 and it had a glossy coat on top of the paint.

By the way, the 320 is definitely 20 mm.

vkartikv
10-03-2006, 02:34 PM
Paintjobs on todays racquets do make them look like toys. There are no more prostaff 6.0 or max 200G cosmetics. I think this is a great upper level tweener frame. And to confirm, the beam width is 20 mm and stiffness is 68 as advertised.

blubber
10-04-2006, 08:30 AM
I tried the 320 and thought it was a nice racquet. I'm not sure what category to stick it in, player or tweener. Less power than a traditional tweener, better control too. Probably too stiff and light to be called a players stick. Stability is good and stands up ok to hard hitting. I definitely wouldn't say it has a buttery feel. Its firm without being uncomfortable. It doesn't feel quite as stiff or boardy as something like a Wilson nPro Open.

It's definitely more stable than the Dunlop 200 2006. The TF is a better frame in my opinion.

superjumbo
10-04-2006, 12:41 PM
I also wouldn't say it has a buttery feel. Perhaps I gave people the wrong impression when I mentioned the i.prestige. When I think of buttery racquets I think of something softer, with more flex. This is definitely a stiffer frame, but it's not boardy and uncomfortable.

harryz
10-06-2006, 10:43 AM
Strung up custom with nice TF strings at 62lbs or so. Solid and stable, but no better than my nCode 90s (not as good, for me). Has nice feel and is flexy. I simply prefer Wilson grip shape and the PS head shape, so I seem to always come back to the PS frames. The TF 325 is a nice stick, though, with excellent spin potential for a dense pattern frame, nice response (not too muted) and great control. A really fine player's stick. No 320 for comparison, but I'd bet it's nice (though the stiffness is too high for me, if 68 is accurate).

Harry

BreakPoint
10-06-2006, 11:56 AM
No 320 for comparison, but I'd bet it's nice (though the stiffness is too high for me, if 68 is accurate).


I demoed the TF 320 18x20 and it definitely didn't feel as stiff as 68 to me. More like 63, if I had to guess.

blubber
10-06-2006, 07:56 PM
Comparing it to other racquets I've tried, the 320 feels flexier than the Wilson Npro Open and a little stiffer than the Dunlop 200 2006. So I'd say TW's specs are pretty close to being on the mark. To me the stiffness feels similar to the DNX 9.

I recently tried out the TF 335 for an hour and so far I think it's a beast. If you can handle the extra weight (I'm not sure if I can) give the 335 a shot. The 335, as it's designed to do, is great for basilene play. Likewise, per its design, the 320 is great for all court play.

Duzza
10-07-2006, 03:08 AM
I spent about an hour with this frame y'day and since there hasn't been much input on this frame, I thought I'd start.

Specs: About 340 grams with strings (pacific tough gut 17/poly force 18 @ mid tension) and overgrip. Balance - seemed to be about an inch HL (strung)
My current frame(s) PS 85 and occasionally the redondo mid

Groundstrokes: A very light swining frame, or may be just light in comparison to my main racquet. Lots of topspin if you have the right strokes. Good, decent depth control. Moderate stability on hard-hit shots. Very maneuvarable and didn't give the impression of being something that would cause elbow pain.

Serves: Excellent on serves. The thin beam (20mm) and light-weight made for a very easy swing. It took a while to adjust to the lightness but once I got used to it, serves were fast. Good kick on second serves (more than what I usually get).

Volleys: Nice, stiff response. Felt a little wobbly to begin with but that's probably something that gets better with a racquet-user relationship. Good depth but not great for drop/angle volleys.

Overall: Felt like a better version of the PK 5G and the tt warrior. Nice, crisp feel, very comfortable hit and not too light or too heavy. I think it's a good all-round frame which would probably suit s&v players more if they added some weight to the handle and 3/9 positions to stabilise the hit. I only spent about 1.5 hours late last night with it, hope to spend more time with it this weekend
Woah..if the 320 is 340 strung, does that mean the 335 would be 355?

BreakPoint
10-07-2006, 09:07 AM
Woah..if the 320 is 340 strung, does that mean the 335 would be 355?

Yes, that's about right.

Just look at the TW strung specs: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCTFUSA-T33516.html

milo
10-07-2006, 09:31 AM
quite right, it also depends on what kind of strings you use.

vkartikv
10-07-2006, 10:19 AM
Woah..if the 320 is 340 strung, does that mean the 335 would be 355?

Yes, but believe me, the 320 is very light to swing - almost too light. That's why I mentioned that it might need some lead..

BlackJesus
10-08-2006, 10:44 AM
Yes, that's about right.

Just look at the TW strung specs: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCTFUSA-T33516.html

I thinks that the strings weights 15 grams not 20 grams. Am I wrong?

midsouth
10-08-2006, 03:49 PM
The new TF 320 series (16x19, 18x20) specification is 320 grams unstrung. Add 15 grams for strings, 2 grams for a vibration dampner, and 6 grams for an over grip, and you have 343 grams or just slightly over 12 ounces. But, in the real world racquets rarely meet specs exactly. My 320 (16x19) came in at 312 grams unstrung. So strung, with a dampner and over grip its still shy of the 12 ounce mark.

sureshs
10-08-2006, 04:13 PM
The new TF 320 series (16x19, 18x20) specification is 320 grams unstrung. Add 15 grams for strings, 2 grams for a vibration dampner, and 6 grams for an over grip, and you have 343 grams or just slightly over 12 ounces. But, in the real world racquets rarely meet specs exactly. My 320 (16x19) came in at 312 grams unstrung. So strung, with a dampner and over grip its still shy of the 12 ounce mark.

That is why I asked TW to make sure both my T315s were 315 grams unstrung. They did that, and even included a note with the weight (was very very close). A manufacturer which bases its model name on unstrung weight should have much better quality control than 312 for 320. That means the 320 you got is lighter than the 315. I am very sensitive to the static weight and would not accept this frame.

BreakPoint
10-08-2006, 04:44 PM
I thinks that the strings weights 15 grams not 20 grams. Am I wrong?

I've found the strings in my racquets (16g mono syn gut) tend to add closer to 20 grams to my racquets.

Richie Rich
10-08-2006, 05:56 PM
Yes, but believe me, the 320 is very light to swing - almost too light. That's why I mentioned that it might need some lead..
add the 335 as well. i'm used to the TF 325 and the 335 felt waaaaay lighter due to the more headlight balance. almost to the point of being too easy to swing and not having enough mass (even though static weight is approx 12 oz strung). i added some lead at 3/9 and it feels much better. weight of shot is better from the baseline and still very easy to swing. i'm liking the frame a lot

BreakPoint
10-08-2006, 07:15 PM
add the 335 as well. i'm used to the TF 325 and the 335 felt waaaaay lighter due to the more headlight balance. almost to the point of being too easy to swing and not having enough mass (even though static weight is approx 12 oz strung). i added some lead at 3/9 and it feels much better. weight of shot is better from the baseline and still very easy to swing. i'm liking the frame a lot

RR,
Are you sure your TF 335 is only 12.0 oz. strung? Have you weighed it yourself? According to TW's specs, it's 12.4 oz. strung, and I've always noticed that TW seems to underestimate strung weights.

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCTFUSA-T33516.html

Richie Rich
10-09-2006, 03:24 AM
RR,
Are you sure your TF 335 is only 12.0 oz. strung? Have you weighed it yourself? According to TW's specs, it's 12.4 oz. strung, and I've always noticed that TW seems to underestimate strung weights.

http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/descpageRCTFUSA-T33516.html
to be honest, i haven't weighed it and my 12 oz was just an approximate guess. it is most likely over 12 oz strung but it is so headlight it felt lighter than that. you mentioned the SW on these racquets is quite low (compared to the static weight) and i really noticed this when playing with the frame.

Duzza
10-09-2006, 03:47 AM
They look very nice racquets....But guess what. I emailed Tennis Warehouse Australia and due to a lack of success with the predecessor they aren't going to stock the new TF's! I'm so disappointed.

blubber
10-09-2006, 10:21 AM
I think this has been brought up before with regard to other TF frames but I can't find it by searching so I'll ask here. What is the correct string tension range for the TF 320 and 335? On both frames the reccommended range is listed as 49-57. Yet TW lists it as 55-65. Why the discrepancy?

superjumbo
10-09-2006, 10:34 AM
I've tried both the 320 and 335. The 335 hits a nice heavy ball on serves and ground strokes. Unfortunately I can't swing the 335 fast enough. I've got both a 320 and 335 in a 4 1/2 grip. I'll probably sell both frames and than stock up on a few 320s in 4 3/8, my correct grip size.

Before I load up on 320s, are there any other frames I should try? I seem to play best with racquets below 12 oz that have a swingweight under 320. I tried the Dunlop 300 and 200-2006 as well as the DNX 9 and RDS 001. So far I like the 320 the best because of its accuracy and adequate power.

I'm considering trying the Pro Kenex 5g. I notice that vkartikv thought the 320 was a better 5g. Why?

Thanks

vkartikv
10-09-2006, 10:37 AM
I've tried both the 320 and 335. The 335 hits a nice heavy ball on serves and ground strokes. Unfortunately I can't swing the 335 fast enough. I've got both a 320 and 335 in a 4 1/2 grip. I'll probably sell both frames and than stock up on a few 320s in 4 3/8, my correct grip size.

Before I load up on 320s, are there any other frames I should try? I seem to play best with racquets below 12 oz that have a swingweight under 320. I tried the Dunlop 300 and 200-2006 as well as the DNX 9 and RDS 001. So far I like the 320 the best because of its accuracy and adequate power.

I'm considering trying the Pro Kenex 5g. I notice that vkartikv thought the 320 was a better 5g. Why?

Thanks

Glad you asked. The 5G seemed to have some weird movement/shaking at the throat. This is was not regular, it happened on and off and it did not happen with all the 5Gs I once owned. Secondly, service speed was greatly reduced - I think someone gave an explanation for it relating it to the movement of particles within the racquet. Thirdly, the beam width was not aerodynamic. All these point in favour of the TF 320.

superjumbo
10-09-2006, 12:19 PM
vkartikv, thanks for your response. There's another racquet I'm curious about the Yonex RDX500 MP. Have you tried it? How does it compare to the 320? I know its flexier and probably more spinny. I'm interested in its power level on groundstrokes and especially on serves.