PDA

View Full Version : Hit the nBlade98


NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 08:27 AM
Found this to be a nice frame. Nice penetrating shots from the back, really nice for serving and a surprising amount of kick. Good at everything.
Might be a frame for fans of the Slaz X1 as it had a similar ball feel (firm but thuddy), preciseness, spin, but in a heavier package

w00gy
05-02-2007, 08:28 AM
I want you to tell me more about it!??

nunchuku
05-02-2007, 08:38 AM
Cool, I look forward to hearing more. I'm especially interested in the nBlade as it's one of my short listed candidate for my next racquet.

It's a beautifully engineered and designed racquet and holding it is in itself addictive. I didn't manage to play test for long, just 30mins but found that it was very solid on ground strokes, both wings. Very nice feel as well, reminiscent of an old school racquet. It was a very comfortable stick to whack with, which I belief is attributed to it's relatively low flex.

Swingweight suited me very well, but if I commit to this stick long term, I might add some heft to push it nearer a KSix-One Tour.

Sadly I didn't have time to try the serves and net-play with this stick.

travlerajm
05-02-2007, 08:53 AM
Found this to be a nice frame. Nice penetrating shots from the back, really nice for serving and a surprising amount of kick. Good at everything.
Might be a frame for fans of the Slaz X1 as it had a similar ball feel (firm but thuddy), preciseness, spin, but in a heavier package

Are you finally realizing the benefits of a high swingweight, low static weight frame? Less HL balance = higher SGPR (Serve to Groundstroke Power Ratio).

Almost every player's frame on the market has a little too much mass in the handle, and not enough mass in the hoop for optimum performance. The nBlade is better than most in this regard.

NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 08:59 AM
Are you finally realizing the benefits of a high swingweight, low static weight frame? Less HL balance = higher SGPR (Serve to Groundstroke Power Ratio).

Almost every player's frame on the market has a little too much mass in the handle, and not enough mass in the hoop for optimum performance. The nBlade is better than most in this regard.

i have no idea what you are talking about. i liked this frame...i think it's probably close to evenly balanced. i also like many headlight frames..i almost never like significantly head heavy frames. finally realizing? lol.funnny stuff

tarkowski
05-02-2007, 09:12 AM
Found this to be a nice frame. Nice penetrating shots from the back, really nice for serving and a surprising amount of kick. Good at everything.
Might be a frame for fans of the Slaz X1 as it had a similar ball feel (firm but thuddy), preciseness, spin, but in a heavier package

Hi NBMJ,

Thanks much for the quick review. Can you comment on how it played relative to the K61 Team?

Also - a little off topic - you had started a thread a while back - an article that showed the benefits of larger head sizes with respect to spin generation. I'd much appreciate it if you could post that again - or point me to the thread . I have searched for it but have been unsuccessful at finding it. The article seemed pretty comprehensive - addressing also at what point larger head-sizes don't add anything (Point of DMR) - which I think was 100?

Thanks much!

travlerajm
05-02-2007, 09:14 AM
i have no idea what you are talking about. i liked this frame...i think it's probably close to evenly balanced. i also like many headlight frames..i almost never like significantly head heavy frames. finally realizing? lol.funnny stuff

When I say less HL, I mean less HL for a given static weight. The reason you don't like HH frames is because they are too light overall, not because they are HH.

NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 09:21 AM
When I say less HL, I mean less HL for a given static weight. The reason you don't like HH frames is because they are too light overall, not because they are HH.

dear self proclaimed Christopher Columbus of racquets...please dont tell me why I dont like racquets as you have no clue..that's very not appropriate and beyond uncool..truth of the matter is I generally dont like significantly HH racquets of any weight..sorry you cant understand that.

the Town Sherif
05-02-2007, 09:32 AM
saucer of milk....table two!

knasty131
05-02-2007, 09:34 AM
so travlerajm...how much lead would you put on the nBlade

travlerajm
05-02-2007, 09:45 AM
so travlerajm...how much lead would you put on the nBlade

The nBlade is flexible enough that you can get to SW2 at a low swingweight (in the low 360s), and still get plenty of spin. The amount of lead depends on your tension. It becomes an amazing serving stick with ~10g of lead at the top of the handle plus enough lead in the upper hoop to get to SW2.

jbr
05-02-2007, 09:49 AM
NBMojo,

Have you tried the 106?

Also, your are probably good enough where you don't do this but I found with the slightly less HL nature of the 98 I was late more often.

Also #2, did you find the power adequate? The numbers show it to be much less than most of the raquets out there. I found the 98 to be fine untill late in a match when I started having trouble keeping balls deep.

Lots of posts on this board have stated the vollying is a week spot for the 98, did you find that so?

Thanks for your thoughts!

NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 09:51 AM
Hi NBMJ,

Thanks much for the quick review. Can you comment on how it played relative to the K61 Team?

Also - a little off topic - you had started a thread a while back - an article that showed the benefits of larger head sizes with respect to spin generation. I'd much appreciate it if you could post that again - or point me to the thread . I have searched for it but have been unsuccessful at finding it. The article seemed pretty comprehensive - addressing also at what point larger head-sizes don't add anything (Point of DMR) - which I think was 100?

Thanks much!

sorry..your post got lost in the crap.

are you referring to an article by Rod Cross i posted entitled 'The inch that changed tennis' or something like that? if so, that is the best explanation i've ever seen explaining how/why the game has changed because of the gear. concise, cogent, and easy to understand. i may have kept it, and if that's the one, i'd be happy to repost for you if i still have it. let me know pls

as to the k6.1 Team vs the nBlade98, I think there are a lot of similarities. the kteam swung significantly easier, had similar spin capabilities and power levels, but i found the nBlade a much better serving frame and the ball seemed to pierce the court a bit better on most of the shots. If you can handle the higher swingweight of the nBlade, i'd prefer that one. the swingweight of the nBlade caught up to me at the end of my session, but it was hot and humid here today and breathing smoke from the wildfires to the North didnt make for decent conditions like 'breathing' ;)

movdqa
05-02-2007, 09:57 AM
I guess the FXP Radical Team would be another one in this vein. I acquired on this past Friday for the kids. I can't stand the racquet but our daughter likes it and our son hits quite well with it (he uses a full Western).

tarkowski
05-02-2007, 10:09 AM
sorry..your post got lost in the crap.

are you referring to an article by Rod Cross i posted entitled 'The inch that changed tennis' or something like that? if so, that is the best explanation i've ever seen explaining how/why the game has changed because of the gear. concise, cogent, and easy to understand. i may have kept it, and if that's the one, i'd be happy to repost for you if i still have it. let me know pls

as to the k6.1 Team vs the nBlade98, I think there are a lot of similarities. the kteam swung significantly easier, had similar spin capabilities and power levels, but i found the nBlade a much better serving frame and the ball seemed to pierce the court a bit better on most of the shots. If you can handle the higher swingweight of the nBlade, i'd prefer that one. the swingweight of the nBlade caught up to me at the end of my session, but it was hot and humid here today and breathing smoke from the wildfires to the North didnt make for decent conditions like 'breathing' ;)

Hey NBMJ,

Yes! That is definitely the article - it was a great read. Now that I have the author's name, I can try searching on that.

Thanks for the additional comments on the blade and team. I played with each for only 15 minutes or so - and about 3 months apart. I'd like to demo them again. I remember thinking, as you describe, the blade having a bit more heft and providing easier access to winners from the back court. I enjoyed the team too - VERY maneuverable but a little light for me to produce winners over the course of a match.

tarkowski
05-02-2007, 10:10 AM
Hey NBMJ,

Yes! That is definitely the article - it was a great read. Now that I have the author's name, I can try searching on that.

Thanks for the additional comments on the blade and team. I played with each for only 15 minutes or so - and about 3 months apart. I'd like to demo them again. I remember thinking, as you describe, the blade having a bit more heft and providing easier access to winners from the back court. I enjoyed the team too - VERY maneuverable but a little light for me to produce winners over the course of a match.

Found it! Thanks again. For others, here is the link:

http://www.racquetsportsindustry.com/issues/200601/200601science_inch.html

NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 10:19 AM
The nBlade is flexible enough that you can get to SW2 at a low swingweight (in the low 360s), and still get plenty of spin. The amount of lead depends on your tension. It becomes an amazing serving stick with ~10g of lead at the top of the handle plus enough lead in the upper hoop to get to SW2.

this is so very far fetched that it isnt deserving of a comment other than to say that a swingweight in the low 360's isnt LOW by anyones' standards in the universe save for yours

NBMojo,

Have you tried the 106?

Also, your are probably good enough where you don't do this but I found with the slightly less HL nature of the 98 I was late more often.

Also #2, did you find the power adequate? The numbers show it to be much less than most of the raquets out there. I found the 98 to be fine untill late in a match when I started having trouble keeping balls deep.

Lots of posts on this board have stated the vollying is a week spot for the 98, did you find that so?

Thanks for your thoughts!

i havent hit the 106. i bet it's nice too, and perhaps a good choice for someone who wants something with a bigger sweetspot, but yet some serious swingweight to it..there arent many frames like that. maybe a 106 user will jump in

i looked up the specs on this frame, and would say that normally a frame with this type of static weight which is still slightly headlight, wouldnt have a swingweight nearly so high..you could call this very inefficient racquet design, except it seems to work in this case if somene can swing a sw this high for the duration, and is why swingweight is such an important consideration

to answer your q's, if you are late on this frame that is because the swingweight is too high..

try leading it up to SW2 <whatever that is..i think it is someones wild guess at a swingweight in the 360s'.... your racquet will magically produce mad spin, will start to rattle and hum like something from U2, and will swing all on its own with no effort required by the racquet operator;)

#2 - i found it had nice controllable power, but would def put this frame in the make your own power category, and again, seems like the swingweight is too high for you..it would be for lots of players. it's also a frame for someone who has good spin control

i volleyed just right with this frame. i can volley well with pretty much anything which isnt headheavy to any degree

NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 10:31 AM
Found it! Thanks again. For others, here is the link:

http://www.racquetsportsindustry.com/issues/200601/200601science_inch.html

yw..i think it's a great article, and think TW should make it into a 'sticky'

jbr
05-02-2007, 10:41 AM
Thanks, NBMJ. Now, here is the intresting point. I do use the 106, love it, never (well, maybe not never) miss hit or am late with it, and win alittle more than I lose. I find I serve a little better with the 98 and, like you, have no problem vollying with it. I've just got this idea I should be playing with the 98 so I keep trying!

Had a string on this about a week ago and finally joined fgs in the over-40 over-size league (3.5 - 4 for me, sounds like semi-pro for him) but I keep trying to downsize.

NoBadMojo
05-02-2007, 12:08 PM
Thanks, NBMJ. Now, here is the intresting point. I do use the 106, love it, never (well, maybe not never) miss hit or am late with it, and win alittle more than I lose. I find I serve a little better with the 98 and, like you, have no problem vollying with it. I've just got this idea I should be playing with the 98 so I keep trying!

Had a string on this about a week ago and finally joined fgs in the over-40 over-size league (3.5 - 4 for me, sounds like semi-pro for him) but I keep trying to downsize.

if you serve better with the MP why arent you switching? the swingweights are similar aye? are there things the MP doesnt do for you the 106 does? fewer misshits? fewer short weak balls?

Pusher
05-02-2007, 12:10 PM
The nBlade is flexible enough that you can get to SW2 at a low swingweight (in the low 360s), and still get plenty of spin. The amount of lead depends on your tension. It becomes an amazing serving stick with ~10g of lead at the top of the handle plus enough lead in the upper hoop to get to SW2.

My son has broken two Nblades right below base of the head. It started out looking like a paint crack but later they just broke. I'm thinking the Nblade, with its flexibility, may be a little HH for its construction.

It is a nice hitting frame.

fgs
05-04-2007, 12:34 PM
the differences between the 98 and the 106 are not that big - i'd say you make them play "the same" by stringing the 106 with 2lbs higher than the 98. that would equalize the power level (stringbedsize).

nobadmojo,
i'm glad you enjoyed the "nblade-feel" too. just talking about stock version, these are really nice sticks for those that like a lighter static but still a higher swingweight.

NoBadMojo
05-04-2007, 01:03 PM
nobadmojo,
i'm glad you enjoyed the "nblade-feel" too. just talking about stock version, these are really nice sticks for those that like a lighter static but still a higher swingweight.

i have no idea how they made that swing so sluggishly with such a small static weight and also being marginally headlight, unless the one i hit was totally off spec static weightwise..the swingweight seemed to match what TW suggests as did the balance though. there must be a ton of weight in the throat area around the balance point as a guess..it defies logic. nice hit though..too much sw for this guy.

Polaris
05-04-2007, 01:07 PM
The nBlade is flexible enough that you can get to SW2 at a low swingweight (in the low 360s), and still get plenty of spin. The amount of lead depends on your tension. It becomes an amazing serving stick with ~10g of lead at the top of the handle plus enough lead in the upper hoop to get to SW2.

I'm still skeptical of SW2 for safety reasons. My guess is that a SW of 360+ would tear my shoulder apart (I don't have a very strong build), but I will reserve a judgment call until I have experimented with an old Head Graphite Edge which should have been shipped to me now. It will be the least HL racquet I have played with in a while.

BounceHitBounceHit
05-05-2007, 10:47 AM
Greetings Mojo!

I tried to e mail you about the Isospeed but didn't hear back. I figure it didn't go thru for some reason. Can you please drop me an e mail for an update?

Best,

CC

NoBadMojo
05-05-2007, 10:56 AM
Greetings Mojo!

I tried to e mail you about the Isospeed but didn't hear back. I figure it didn't go thru for some reason. Can you please drop me an e mail for an update?

Best,

CC

Hi Craig. got your email and promptly responding by simply hitting 'return'. have no idea why you didnt get it. unable to help you.

dave108
05-05-2007, 12:59 PM
I think this is a great frame, but it gets a lot of bad press with respect to volleys, although for the life of me I can't figure out why. I volley just as well with this frame as with supposedly top-of-the-line volleying frames. The only modification I did was add a little lead tape under the butt cap to make it slightly more head light (but may have raised the SW in doing so). This is a really comfortable frame that is great at groundies, and has a lot of pop/spin on serves. Never tried the 106 size, but I think it would be very similar with slightly more spin potential.

MordredSJT
05-05-2007, 06:22 PM
i have no idea how they made that swing so sluggishly with such a small static weight and also being marginally headlight, unless the one i hit was totally off spec static weightwise..the swingweight seemed to match what TW suggests as did the balance though. there must be a ton of weight in the throat area around the balance point as a guess..it defies logic. nice hit though..too much sw for this guy.

I have some nBlade MP that I have been playing with on and off and I can tell you that it isn't weight in the throat. In my opinion they have a good amount of weight in the head (contributing to the higher swingweight) and enough mass in the handle area to make the balance a few points headlight. The throat is actually where all the flex is. It seems almost hollow (the nBlade is filled with foam I believe). In fact I can make the racquet flex noticeably at the throat just by pressing on the tip with my hands.

The weight distribution and the flex is what makes the nBlade the great baseline racquet that it is. I'm one of the people that doesn't really like it in stock form for volleys. It is great for touch shots, but something is just off when I try to really stick it (without swinging). Some lead helps with that, but it think the stiffness has something to do with it.

NoBadMojo
05-05-2007, 06:47 PM
I have some nBlade MP that I have been playing with on and off and I can tell you that it isn't weight in the throat. In my opinion they have a good amount of weight in the head (contributing to the higher swingweight) and enough mass in the handle area to make the balance a few points headlight. The throat is actually where all the flex is. It seems almost hollow (the nBlade is filled with foam I believe). In fact I can make the racquet flex noticeably at the throat just by pressing on the tip with my hands.

The weight distribution and the flex is what makes the nBlade the great baseline racquet that it is. I'm one of the people that doesn't really like it in stock form for volleys. It is great for touch shots, but something is just off when I try to really stick it (without swinging). Some lead helps with that, but it think the stiffness has something to do with it.

that makes sense, and would explain why the poster above had them crack in the throat area, and would explain why it is good in the backcourt with the weight in the head countered by weight down low to still keep it marginally headlight..this would explain how the racquet has high swingweight for its low static weight and still be marginally headlight. good observation.

Wilson6-1
05-06-2007, 07:30 AM
i have no idea how they made that swing so sluggishly with such a small static weight and also being marginally headlight, unless the one i hit was totally off spec static weightwise..the swingweight seemed to match what TW suggests as did the balance though. there must be a ton of weight in the throat area around the balance point as a guess..it defies logic. nice hit though..too much sw for this guy.

Totally agree, the nBlade was one of the demos that I tried and I found it sluggish, and although I thought I would like it, I found after several attempts, I just didn't feel comfortable with it.

I found the n6.1 95 to be easier to swing, more powerful with better spin, much better serving racquet and significantly better at the net, all in a heavier albeit HL racquet.

To me, there was no comparison with the n6.1 being the better racquet. Having said that, I predominantly play doubles where it is rare that you slug it out at the baseline, therefore, singles players may prefer the nblade.

BounceHitBounceHit
05-06-2007, 08:57 AM
Hey Mojo,

Can you please shoot me an e mail about the Isospeed string?

Best,

CC

richpit10
05-06-2007, 10:05 AM
I recently got an nblade after demo-ing a ton of racquets and i have to say i absolutely love it! I find it great for pretty much everything. After 2 months of hitting with it i feel my game has improved out of sight. There's just such a gorgeous feel. As i understand it people rarely find the 'holy grail' racquet. i think i might just have mine.

chowdhurynaveen
05-06-2007, 01:01 PM
Just got done playing with this racquet, love it! Won against a 5.0 player, the scores were 6-3, 2-6, 6-1.

Just wondering what everyones setup was, overgrip, lead? I played with an overgrip but found i like it better without one ( took it off after the second set ).

Looking forward to your answer! :D

BounceHitBounceHit
05-06-2007, 02:21 PM
Hi Craig. got your email and promptly responding by simply hitting 'return'. have no idea why you didnt get it. unable to help you.

Thanks for trying. :D Best, CC

fgs
05-07-2007, 10:27 PM
chowdhurynaveen,
i play the 106 blade, have replaced the original grip with a leather grip and use no overgrips. since i like slightly headheavy balance i have put 12g of lead at 11 and 1 o'clock. i use nxt tour 16g strings at 51lbs mains and 49 lbs crosses. i am an aggressive baseliner though hitting with lots of topspin off both sides, but i also get my fair share of doubles (only in tournaments!), so i get along quite well with the blade in spite of my set-up at the net too.

chowdhurynaveen
05-07-2007, 10:41 PM
fgs- that sounds like a great comfortable setup, I gotta try that!

By the way, you should make an appearance in the nblade club thread and share your knowledge about this frame with everyone!

fgs
05-08-2007, 01:08 AM
chowdhurynaveen,
will be there (n-blade club), just "working up" after being some days off due to tournaments.