View Full Version : dunlop mw200g: was is that good? how compared to PC600?

05-02-2007, 11:00 PM
I have read many posts here of people saying how much they liked the Dunlop MW200G.
I've never had the chance of hitting with it, while I played once with the Hotmelt 200G, which I liked but found a bit too stiff.

currently I play with the PC600, is there anyone who played with both PC600 and MW200G and could make a comparison between the two?

I play flat groundstrokes and go to the net very often, I guess I could be rated as a 4.0, so I am pretty curious to know if the MW200G could suit my game.

05-04-2007, 03:07 AM
yes, the mw200g could suit your game, and is certainly worth a demo if you're interested in it.

terrific frame, softer feel than the PC600, and definitely more than the hm200g. 95" head with large sweetspot.

05-07-2007, 09:58 PM
I asked this exact same question a month ago. (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=125863)

the mw plays very mcuh like a pc600. it would suit your game just fine. But on the up and up, I would say there is no real need to try and switch from the pc600. I think the pc600 is much more accessible, that is its easier to find, than the mw200g. They do feel very similar, and to some they can feel a difference and to others not really.

The pc600 has a bit of a smaller sweetspot, becasue of the smaller head. I have used both and say i could use either really. They are both very good racquets. If you like the pc600 you will like the mw200g. Many find the Mw200g to be quite under powered and find that that is one of its major drawbacks. also I'd say perhaps the amount of spin you can generate on the fly for the mw might be an issue. You really have to put forth the effort and concentrate to keep the ball in for the mw. It's due to it's swing weight. I found this to be the main issue with the muscle weave, and found a lot more ease in keeping the ball in with the pc600.

Note that the HM 200g is nothing like the MW200g. And if you want to stick with head try the pro tour 280 or the re-issued pt630 cause it does almost identical to the mw200g.

But essentially, if you like your racquet and do well with it, here's no need to change/switch. It's better to focus on internal faults/errors rather than external ones. Alot of people try to switch racquets and blame their racquets for a poor game and sadly never settle down long enough to hone and refine their skills.

just my 2 cents.

05-07-2007, 10:17 PM
I used the MW 200G 90 for a year or so. Good racquet. One of the few racquets I strung over 60 pounds (I'm usually at 53 pounds or below).
The MW 200G 90 is more similar to the iPrestige Mid than to the Prestige Classic Mid.

I never used the MW 200G MidPlus - but many people have said that it's similar to the Pro Tour 280.

05-07-2007, 11:19 PM
PC600 is way more solid. I had a MW200G and didn't like it that much because the throat would twist and turn on hard shots and it wasn't very stable. It had very nice touch however, and a dream to volley with. But in every other category, especially serves and groundstrokes.. the PC600 is superior.

05-07-2007, 11:47 PM
actually I really like the PC600, but as I'm getting a bit older (nearly 36 now) I was thinking about switching to a less demanding frame.
I thought that maybe the bigger head size and larger sweetspot of the MW200 could help.
I know it's really hard to find it, so I was also thinking about giving the new Aerogel 200 a try, as I've read many posts saying that is a bit similar to the MW200G.

05-10-2007, 06:59 PM
I don't think they are that similar. Perhaps in the way they perform, but not in the manner of feel. I don't really think the mw200g would be that much of a step into ease. I find myself working as hard as, or even harder (due to the swingweight) with the mw200g sometimes.