PDA

View Full Version : Dunlop Aerogel 200 or 300. What to choose?


VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 03:41 PM
Hi guys.. in recent times, I have heard some great things about the new Dunlop Aerogel frames..

Those who know me, know that I was always a lover of heavy players frames, and have used mostly Wilsons and even the Puma sticks at some stage, but in the last year, changed over to the Prince o3 95 MS.. It is at this time, that for me the honeymoon is over for these frames and I really feel kind of so so when hitting with them..

Here is my delema.. Like most people, I am not able to demo racquets, and so I will usually buy frames, and if I dont like them, trade them or sell them off later.. In saying that, I have been doing alot of reading on the Aerogel frames, and like what I have seen..

I personally like the looks of the specs of the Aerogel 200, but I am again thinking as a person that is still 16 and hitting the ball like I used to, and playing 8 hours a day.. The reality is, that I am now 33, a little older, a little chunkier, a little slower, and only play on occassion. So this is why I am leaning more toward the Aerogel 300.. The problem is, that even at 95", the Prince o3 was a big step for me as far as head sizes go. But I am kinda dreading the idea of going up to 98".. (Its a boy thing!)

Any thought on guys around my age that use these sticks would be great.. Or even if you are of any age, and love them.. I guess all thoughts are appreciated..

Jonny S&V
08-13-2007, 03:55 PM
Hi guys.. in recent times, I have heard some great things about the new Dunlop Aerogel frames..

Those who know me, know that I was always a lover of heavy players frames, and have used mostly Wilsons and even the Puma sticks at some stage, but in the last year, changed over to the Prince o3 95 MS.. It is at this time, that for me the honeymoon is over for these frames and I really feel kind of so so when hitting with them..

Here is my delema.. Like most people, I am not able to demo racquets, and so I will usually buy frames, and if I dont like them, trade them or sell them off later.. In saying that, I have been doing alot of reading on the Aerogel frames, and like what I have seen..

I personally like the looks of the specs of the Aerogel 200, but I am again thinking as a person that is still 16 and hitting the ball like I used to, and playing 8 hours a day.. The reality is, that I am now 33, a little older, a little chunkier, a little slower, and only play on occassion. So this is why I am leaning more toward the Aerogel 300.. The problem is, that even at 95", the Prince o3 was a big step for me as far as head sizes go. But I am kinda dreading the idea of going up to 98".. (Its a boy thing!)

Any thought on guys around my age that use these sticks would be great.. Or even if you are of any age, and love them.. I guess all thoughts are appreciated..

Honestly, if you do want to suck up your pride and go to the 300 (lol), go to the M-fil 300 or 200. Both are cheaper (in price only) but their playability far exceeds that of the Aerogels, IMO. The Aerogels felt too Babolat like, IMO, and I am not a Babolat liker to put it lightly (the Pure Drive screwed up my shoulder, now it's fine with my trusty Dunlop M-fil 200). If you get the 200, I would suggest putting some weight at 3 & 9, as the 200 really doesn't do too well with topspin, but it becomes the most solid spin doctor out there with it. Hope this helps!

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 05:28 PM
Thanks Jonny.. I have looked at the M-fil sticks, and after reading a few reviews, just get the feeling that the feel of the Aerogel frame would be more to my liking?.. In saying that, I have heard great things about the M-fils, and at the price they are, are hard to go past. But something is saying to me that I would be more suited to the AG frame instead.. Also, I like the asthetics of the new AG frames..

ps: Is the AG200 a heavy feeling frame at 11.9oz?, and how does it compare to the 300?

The reason I ask is that I think I am looking at the 300 because of the less weight difference, and am looking for a racquet that is easier to swing, and will take up the slack of my power and generate it without too much trouble for me.. I am a hard flat hitter, but as I said earlier, not 16 anymore, so I am looking for a frame with a little more power and manuverability that allowes me to just swing through and not belt the ball like I used to.. The o3's gave me this at first, but they all but have no feel to them...

AndrewD
08-13-2007, 05:52 PM
Chris,
If you're talking about the 18x20 Aerogel 200, I found it to swing like a log and actually felt the Mfi-200 (95sq) was easier to manage. The Aerogel does give you a lot of power (via weight) and has a nice feel (much more comfortable than the Mfil) but it is an exceptionally hefty racquet and at only 6pts HL, it is far less capable the closer you get to net (unlike the similarly hefty Wilson 6.1 series - 10pts HL makes 330+ swingweight easier to manage). As for adding weight at 3 & 9 (making it less head light and harder to swing fast), I'm sure that'd really help to increase spin LOL.

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 06:41 PM
Andrew thanks mate.. I think in a long winded kind of way, I am trying to say that I am looking to get away from the heavier frames, and so that is why I have been looking at the AG300.. I understand that the 200 compared to the old player frames is light in comparison, but still a hefty stick. But the 300 seems to be around what I am looking at.. The 200 does come across as a hefty type of frame (even though normally , I wouldnt think so) and so the 300 is just calling to me..I also like the flexability at 61 also.. I guess I am looking for something light, but have the playability of a player frame.. Although the swing is free on my o3's, I am starting to want something around the 11oz mark.. I know it sounds stupid, but the painjob is kinda turning me off the M-fils at the moment, and the AG300 is quite pleasing to the eye.. Some people might think that is silly, but certain paintjobs put me off..

dunloplayah
08-13-2007, 07:08 PM
Yeah, i play M-fil 300s. got them for a great deal at sports authority on closeout. I was going to get one aerogel. i got 3 m-fil 300s for the same price! Plus , i can't tell you how much I love playing with it! I demoed the AG300 but really like the stiffness and weight/feel of the m-fils. I'm sticking with them!

AndrewD
08-13-2007, 07:13 PM
Chris,

I wouldn't count on the Aerogel 300 actually deserving a 61 for stiffness: expect something closer to a 63-64 (hola-bird rates it at 63, as does the USRSA). I find TW to be very poor these days when it comes to flex and swingweight so, if those two ingredients are important to you, I suggest checking the USRSA site or cross-checking with other retailers.

Personally, I'm in the market for something to replace my Volkl t10mp Gen2 and will be giving the Aerogel 300 a try at some stage. I want to retain the flex of the Volkl (about a 61/62 rating) for groundstrokes but get a little (very little) more pop on serve. So, on my 'to try' list I also have the Head Flexpoint Radical Tour MP, Head Microgel Radical Pro MP (and OS) and Prince Diablo MP. All offer good flex of 63 or less, lower swingweight and are under 12oz (not such a big deal to me). Have you tried them?

bertrevert
08-13-2007, 07:19 PM
Gee you know as a long term Dunloper I really reckon 200s and 300s are different beasts. Am unusre what to put it down to. I think a major difference is stringbed density - the 18x20 versus the 16x19.

I know you want lower swingweight, and a lighter match weight, so did I as i got older and didn't go to gym as much.

I just don't think you can think of these models as somehow interchangeable. They have very different play characteristics. What about an AG200 with the 16x19 stringbed and lighter overall weight (if u can get hold of one!).

If you like control racquets then you have to stiock with 18x20...

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 08:15 PM
Andrew, I actually have 2 diablo ms 93".. I like them, but just looking for something else.. Anyone want the diablo's?

Anyways, I appreciate your help, it has been great to hear other thoughts regarding this subject.. I am still leaning toward that AG300..

bertrevert: What frame are you talking about as a lighter AG200?.. Is there a lighter version?.. Interested in knowing more.. Back to your other coment.. No one is looking to interchange the 200 and 300. I am just trying to work out which of the two will suit me more..

ps: I am also restricted to buying from TW, for various reasons.. One, my wife has told me that before I buy any new frames, I must first clean out what I already have.. 2, I find prices in the US to be the cheapest, and 3, I would prefer doing a trade, or even buy privately or through TW using paypal..

redsoxrock930
08-13-2007, 08:19 PM
i don't like dunlops

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 08:26 PM
i don't like dunlops

I dont like troll's.....;)

pow
08-13-2007, 08:37 PM
Out of the two, I'd go with the 200. I've hit with the AG300 briefly and it felt very hollow. After every hit there as a certain vibration to it that just didn't feel like a nice solid stick. I hope the mass in the 200 would address this feel.

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 08:47 PM
Out of the two, I'd go with the 200. I've hit with the AG300 briefly and it felt very hollow. After every hit there as a certain vibration to it that just didn't feel like a nice solid stick. I hope the mass in the 200 would address this feel.

Interesting, and well noted..

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 09:50 PM
I just read RedFlea's thread about the AG300 he got earlier in the year, and it has swayed me toward the AG300..

cukoo
08-13-2007, 10:12 PM
Chris, why not demo them. This might not be much help but I played with an mfil 200 18x20 and its solid as a rock. Great for baseline bashing and handles just as well at the net. The sweet spot howver is small and is geared more towards flat ballers. With some lead at the 3 and 9 o clock position and some counter weight in the butt..there is nothing like it. I would think that the AG200 is not that much different. I have one (AG200) in brand new condition if you want. But honestly, from your description :
"The reality is, that I am now 33, a little older, a little chunkier, a little slower, and only play on occassion. So this is why I am leaning more toward the Aerogel 300" ...It seems like the 300 series (weather it be the AG or MFIL , I havent played with them) will be more apprioate for you. But, IMO, if you can handle it, the Dunlop 200 series is the way to go. Hope this helps.
What is your playing style?

VikingSamurai
08-13-2007, 10:46 PM
Thanks cukoo. I was a junior tournament player back in the day, and used Puma frames, and then finally settling on a Wilson Pro Select (grey cousin to the ProStaff) with a brief stint with the Prince Graphite Pro series 90... So I have basically used heavy player frames my whole life.. I am an old S&V with all court game that hits flat and hard.. The fact that I am not 16 anymore, and I dont play 8 hours a day anymore, I know that its silly to continue with heavy player frames..Thats why I am looking at something that is a little lighter, and can be added to later if need be, that will take up the slack with power, and I don't have to do as much work.. As for demo'ing, I dont have that luxury here in Japan.. Thanks for suggesting it though.. I wished I could..

0d1n
08-13-2007, 11:47 PM
Andrew, I actually have 2 diablo ms 93".. I like them, but just looking for something else.. Anyone want the diablo's?

Anyways, I appreciate your help, it has been great to hear other thoughts regarding this subject.. I am still leaning toward that AG300..

bertrevert: What frame are you talking about as a lighter AG200?.. Is there a lighter version?.. Interested in knowing more.. Back to your other coment.. No one is looking to interchange the 200 and 300. I am just trying to work out which of the two will suit me more..

ps: I am also restricted to buying from TW, for various reasons.. One, my wife has told me that before I buy any new frames, I must first clean out what I already have.. 2, I find prices in the US to be the cheapest, and 3, I would prefer doing a trade, or even buy privately or through TW using paypal..

Yes there is, there's a 16x19 version of the AG 200 and it's 10 grams lighter and lighter in sw. Great stick.

See :

http://i16.tinypic.com/4ue09rk.jpg

+

http://i10.tinypic.com/63r2tes.jpg
+
http://i15.tinypic.com/4z4mi9x.jpg

For more pictures check this thread out
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=93575&page=32

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 12:06 AM
Thanks for the pics.. But I am thinking the 300 is the way to go, and if weight is needed later, then I have the option to ad on...

VS_Power
08-14-2007, 12:12 AM
here i was thinking you were 50 but you're only 33!!

live life a little, enjoy yourself and get both!
that is the only way you'll truly know

buy em both used, keep the headguard clean, resell em and you practically demo'd em for free!

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 12:29 AM
Ha ha ha, I normally just do that. And if the truth be known, I am not restricted by finances. But you must understand that I have a house full of frames both new and used, and my wife doesn't see the love of a sport, and a collection. Rather she see's wasted money..

And so on this occasion, she has made it clear that I get rid of a few before I get anymore, and so I am in the process of that at the moment as you will note with the amount of stuff I am hording on the For Sale Forum.. And so instead of getting both, I have decided to really have a good think about it, and just go with what I feel would suit me better, and at the moment, it is the 300..

Duzza
08-14-2007, 12:42 AM
IMO the Dunlop AG 200 was one of the lighter feeling frames I demoed out. The K6.1 clearly had more heft, and even the similar weighted Microgel Extreme Pro felt heavier.

I would confidently say you can handle it. Anyway, it's a super frame. If I was playing on hardcourt more I would have definitely got them.

AndrewD
08-14-2007, 12:47 AM
Chris,

I meant the Diablo MP (lower swingweight, lighter and more flex than the Mid).

Have you looked into prices here in Australia? I see the Aerogel going for $220-$240 and it might prove cheaper if you could get a family member to send it to Japan.

IMO the Dunlop AG 200 was one of the lighter feeling frames I demoed out. The K6.1 clearly had more heft, and even the similar weighted Microgel Extreme Pro felt heavier.

Duzza,

LOL, sounds like you've got a bad case of plumber's (cement) hands because, even in relation to the Wilson and Head the AG200 is an obviously sluggish and hefty frame.

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 12:59 AM
Thanks Duzza.. I have no problem with thinking that I could handle it.. In fact that is more of a turn on for me, as I am the old stick kind of guy.. But times change, and well, I just need a frame that is a little less effortless, or should I say, a little bit more performance enhancing and allowes me to not rely on my own effort in order to get a good result.. So thats why I am looking for something a little lighter and a little more powerfull!

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 01:00 AM
Chris,

I meant the Diablo MP (lower swingweight, lighter and more flex than the Mid).

Have you looked into prices here in Australia? I see the Aerogel going for $220-$240 and it might prove cheaper if you could get a family member to send it to Japan.

I did Andrew, but as I will probably pay by paypal, I will stick with TW.. I will say I saw that price at TW Australia, and it is a good price.. Usually frames in Australia have a high mark up on them..

VS_Power
08-14-2007, 01:11 AM
Ha ha ha, I normally just do that. And if the truth be known, I am not restricted by finances. But you must understand that I have a house full of frames both new and used, and my wife doesn't see the love of a sport, and a collection. Rather she see's wasted money..

And so on this occasion, she has made it clear that I get rid of a few before I get anymore, and so I am in the process of that at the moment as you will note with the amount of stuff I am hording on the For Sale Forum.. And so instead of getting both, I have decided to really have a good think about it, and just go with what I feel would suit me better, and at the moment, it is the 300..


bummer, looks like the wifey got ya this time :sad:

but i'm not gonna sit here and let you tell yourself you're getting old and slow!
stick with the 200. yea sure maybe you're a bit older and lost a step or two, but i sure bet as hell you've still got that fire from 17 years ago. i think in your heart you truly want the 200, but you are desperately trying to rationalize the 300 for your game. you have to follow your heart! you're only 33, its only a matter of time til you get your strokes back, and with some brains, your shotmaking may become even better. buying the 300 will be giving up on the great player you once were. find your brimming pride once again! relight that dimming fire! tell your wife you bought the 200 and tell her its one of the hardest rackets to use on the market--that'll make her proud.

crosscourt
08-14-2007, 01:11 AM
Chris -- I am a little older than you and don't play as much as I would like. I have tried a lot of rackets recently -- PDR, APD, Yonex 003 etc -- thinking that a bigger head would help my serve and forehand. And they do to some extent make playing the game easier. But there is a trade-off for this playability.

Anyway, I picked up the AG200 on a whim and haven't looked back. I am sure it's not for everyone and I know that Andrew D recently tried it and didn't like it. But for me it has comfort, power and precision. I don't have a problem hitting spin from the string pattern, it is as playable at the net and in the frontcourt as at the baseline, and it can hit monstrous groundstrokes. (I have alu power crosses and gut mains and the performance with this set up by comparison with the all NRG2 set up that I have tried is amazing. Outstanding bite/spin, power and control.) Volleying and serving are easy.

So obviously the racket suits me and my game, and I am reasonably fit at the moment, so the heft isn't a problem. But there is a lot less heft here than in the Wilson PS/N/K 95, and a lot more feel. I think that the AG200 is one of the new style of player's rackets that has been adapted to the modern game.

cc

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 01:28 AM
bummer, looks like the wifey got ya this time :sad:

but i'm not gonna sit here and let you tell yourself you're getting old and slow!
stick with the 200. yea sure maybe you're a bit older and lost a step or two, but i sure bet as hell you've still got that fire from 17 years ago. i think in your heart you truly want the 200, but you are desperately trying to rationalize the 300 for your game. you have to follow your heart! you're only 33, its only a matter of time til you get your strokes back, and with some brains, your shotmaking may become even better. buying the 300 will be giving up on the great player you once were. find your brimming pride once again! relight that dimming fire! tell your wife you bought the 200 and tell her its one of the hardest rackets to use on the market--that'll make her proud.

Thanks mate, I really enjoyed that post.. I got a good laugh out of it!.. As for my wife.. You just don't know her very well.. But don't worry, it wouldn't be the first time I have used that excuse, believe me!

Crosscourt: Also thank you.. I started this thread not really expecting to get much feedback, as there really hasn't been a lot of talk about the Dunlop's compared to other brands.. I appreciate your candor, and all you and VS have done is made me more confused as I am trying to give myself reasons not to go with the 200 even though I would normally levitate toward it.. I think after my o3 experiment, I don't want to just be beating the dead horse, and feel I should look at other options..

Duzza
08-14-2007, 01:52 AM
Well Chris, I would also say that the AG200 is the most effortless frame I have tried in a while (Pure Control, Microgel Extreme Pro, k6.1, Pure Drive, RDX 500, POG, PS 85).

nickb
08-14-2007, 01:54 AM
Im not sure if you can get them in the US but there is a Aerogel 300 16*18 which is 320 grams strung...I have one....its more stable than the regular 300 and is better at net. Here are the specs:

Head Size: 98 sq in
Unstrung Weight: 305g
Strung Weight: 320g
Balance: 320mm
Beam Width: 21mm
String Pattern: 16 x 18


Nick

protourOS
08-14-2007, 02:00 AM
Hi Chris,

I'm about your age and recently tried my friend's AG300 for a few rallies - I found it very light and overpowered - I think for someone who has played good level tennis, you might find it too much of a "tweener" racket even if you are (a bit) older and not playing as often - I would go for the 200 - I imagine a little less power with better weight, feel and control

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 02:02 AM
Ok, I put this to you guys.. How about I get the AG 300 and ad some weight to it.. What would you suggest.. I am even becoming comfortable with the idea of a 98 inch head size also, and in all honesty it is starting to appeal to me..

I know you mean well with the AG 200 suggestions, but after the o3 Tour ms, I just don't want to go there again, and feel that something around 11oz is the way to go, and to then build on it...But that doesnt mean I have written off the 200 yet though!... aaaahhhhh why oh why is it so hard!

Duzza
08-14-2007, 02:04 AM
Get one of each? :D

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 02:06 AM
Hi Chris,

I'm about your age and recently tried my friend's AG300 for a few rallies - I found it very light and overpowered - I think for someone who has played good level tennis, you might find it too much of a "tweener" racket even if you are (a bit) older and not playing as often - I would go for the 200 - I imagine a little less power with better weight, feel and control

I appreciate that mate.. But I am just the every day player now days, and don't get into the serious stuff anymore.. I really would like to go with the 200 as it is as I have stated the kind of frame I would levitate to in a line.. (Actually the Aerogel 100) would be what I would have normally gone for, but fact are facts, and so I think its time to move on, and go with the easier option.. Geez I sound like an old whiner , but I am tired of the hell that is modern tennis racquets..

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 02:07 AM
It surely is tempting Duzza!......

0d1n
08-14-2007, 02:12 AM
Im not sure if you can get them in the US but there is a Aerogel 300 16*18 which is 320 grams strung...I have one....its more stable than the regular 300 and is better at net. Here are the specs:

Head Size: 98 sq in
Unstrung Weight: 305g
Strung Weight: 320g
Balance: 320mm
Beam Width: 21mm
String Pattern: 16 x 18


Nick

Tried that one and much preferred the 16x19 AG 200. At around 8-10 grams heavier (327-330 g strung) it is just as easy to swing but in my experience much more stable and with more of a "thuddy", solid feel to it instead of the more "hollow" feel of the 300.

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 02:22 AM
I have read a good review of the Aerogel 500 Tour! ha ha ha.. And even TW is placing it as a frame for 4.5 + players!... But a little stiff for my liking..

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 03:01 AM
Here is another curly one.. I love the feel of the Grip 3 on the Prince o3 Tour ms.. So who can compare Grip 3 on the Dunlop AG frames?.. Is there much difference?..

Duzza
08-14-2007, 03:48 AM
I personally thought that 4 3/8's was pretty big on Dunlops. But you wouldn't want to go down to a 4 1/4 just to compare to the 4 3/8 Prince. Stick with a Grip 3 I say.

ksm
08-14-2007, 06:46 AM
Im not sure if you can get them in the US but there is a Aerogel 300 16*18 which is 320 grams strung...I have one....its more stable than the regular 300 and is better at net. Here are the specs:

Head Size: 98 sq in
Unstrung Weight: 305g
Strung Weight: 320g
Balance: 320mm
Beam Width: 21mm
String Pattern: 16 x 18


Nick

Nick- I will be grateful if you could give some inputs as to how the Aerogel 300 16*18 plays in terms of control, maneuverability, serves, groundies, topspin, etc.. I am keen on buying this racquet but don't have a demo. It is quite expensive to buy without having any feedback about this racquet.

Thanks.

ksm

crosscourt
08-14-2007, 07:24 AM
Well Chris, I would also say that the AG200 is the most effortless frame I have tried in a while (Pure Control, Microgel Extreme Pro, k6.1, Pure Drive, RDX 500, POG, PS 85).

I support Duzza

Azrael
08-14-2007, 05:09 PM
chrisinjapan,
I can relate to what you're saying, as I was considering both of these frames after I foolishly sold my LM Radical MPs (I had decided to quit tennis...but ended up coming back in around two months :p). So, I demoed them both along with others. I'm not quite as old as you (only 16), but I'm not exactly the strongest tennis player ever either. Of course I'm heavily biased as I like denser string patterns, but I can tell you what I got from my experiences.

Regarding Dunlop stiffnesses, my AG200s both say 63 on them as opposed to TW's proposed 61, but a difference of 2 RA isn't all that much. The AG200 also feels incredibly light for 11.9 oz, most likely due to its 8 pt headlightness and so I agree with Duzza that it's pretty easy to use. On the other hand, the older players (30ish+) that have used my frames before have stated that they swing like logs. Meh.

I disagree with Duzza that Dunlop 3/8s feel bigger than Prince 3/8s though. Maybe its the shape, maybe I'm just crazy.

Anyway, not much of a comparison, but I thought that the 300 was more powerful and less stable. And 3si isn't all that noticeable...so don't let headsize sway you too much. This is all a preference of string patterns IMO.

As a final note, perhaps you could try the M-fil 200 16x19? Seems like a hybrid of the two you are considering. Lighter than the AG200, has an open string pattern, a 97si head, 7 pt hl, 64 stiffness.

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 06:46 PM
Thanks Azrael, good head on your shoulders for 16.. In fact, I gotta give a big thank you to everyone that has posted.. Its so nice to get a thread without it being taken over by trolls that want to horde their particular taste for a brand other than the one you want to talk about.. Everyone has stuck to talking about the Dunlop frames, and have given a great deal of help.. I have enjoyed this thread greatly..

VikingSamurai
08-14-2007, 07:10 PM
Ok, here is where I am at.. I still havn't written off the AG 200.. But I need to know from anyone that has demo'd both.. Is the 1oz difference a big difference?..

What I am trying to say is, that although my heart is saying go with the AG200, I am thinking that, as its about at the extreme max that I want to go in weight. Then I don't have much experiment room.. And if I do start adding weight, then I am entering myself back into the hefty player frame weights again, and that is what I am trying to avoid..

Where as with the AG300 I can add on as I like and go from there, and can still keep myself under or just on to the 12oz mark.... I also don't see too much difference in head size going from the 95" to the 98" either, so that is now not really an issue for me anymore also....

JediMindTrick
08-15-2007, 07:15 AM
Look, if you're worried that the AG 200 is too heavy and AG 300 is too light, why don't you just get the AG 200 16x19 which is smack in the middle, plus it has the 95" head that you want.

VikingSamurai
08-15-2007, 08:01 AM
Actually, I have decided that I will get both and then decide which of the two I like. The one I don't want, I will trade it or sell it someone that likes that frame..:-)

crosscourt
08-15-2007, 08:49 AM
Actually, I have decided that I will get both and then decide which of the two I like. The one I don't want, I will trade it or sell it someone that likes that frame..:-)

That would be my approach.

Redflea
08-15-2007, 12:09 PM
<snip>

On the other hand, the older players (30ish+) that have used my frames before have stated that they swing like logs. Meh.

Oh man that hurts...

30ish+ = older!?! You are going to SO take back those words in a decade or so... ;)

frekcles
08-15-2007, 12:46 PM
Chris,

I've tried both. The AG200 is very solid. If you're used to playing with heavy racquets then you'll have no problems using this. The AG300 on the other hand is a bit lighter but also very solid. Not as solid feeling as the AG200. You'll miss that "thump" that the AG200 has when hitting balls. Again if you're used to heavy(ier) racquets this might throw you off for a while until you get used to the weight. Either way both are excellent racquets and you can't go wrong with either one.

VS_Power
08-15-2007, 01:01 PM
Actually, I have decided that I will get both and then decide which of the two I like. The one I don't want, I will trade it or sell it someone that likes that frame..:-)

good decision Chris :p

VikingSamurai
08-15-2007, 04:25 PM
Thanks guys, I want to say thank you to all of you. You have been great in helping me with this dilema.. In saying that, I have enjoyed everyones opinion regarding these frames, and would hate to see this thread die, as I have enjoyed the good read..

I dont usually get excited about racquets, as for me, it is an instrument to play a sport. but these Aerogels have had me a little ga-ga and must say that I have been excited about getting my hands on a few of them. I also think that they are the nicest stick I have seen to the eye in a long time also!

AndrewD
08-16-2007, 06:44 AM
Chris,

I'm just back from tennis and managed to fit in a set with the Aerogel 300. I know you've made up your midn but thought I'd throw in my ten cents worth.

The racquet is very light. As is the case with all light racquets, regardless of how stiff they are, the deeper in the court you are, the less capable they are. Topspin is easy but the shot lacks weight. Slice, in my opinion, suffers most because you don't have enough weight to drive through the ball. Approach shots, for that reason, weren't as penetrating as I would like and it was very hard to chip-charge as you're not really punching/blocking the ball back with any weight. Serves were quite good although, due to the weight, it was easier to swing the serve, rather than hitting the big, flat one. That said, I had good direction and just enough power to put the ball away. The sweetspot I found to be very low - situtated below centre on the string bed - and shots hit in the upper third (typically where you would contact serves and volleys) were very dead. Again, that comes down to a lack of weight. If I were going to use it, I would really need to raise the sweetspot and add a fair bit of weight to 10 & 2 o'clock positions. The overall feel was, to me, far superior to the Mfil-300: softer, more comfortable and considerably less jarring on anything outside the sweetspot. It didn't seem to have as much spin as the Mfil-300 but there was enough.

All up, it really does need an injection of weight - especially in the upper hoop. You said that was your intention, so it might be workable.

ksm
08-16-2007, 06:56 AM
Nick- I will be grateful if you could give some inputs as to how the Aerogel 300 16*18 plays in terms of control, maneuverability, serves, groundies, topspin, etc.. I am keen on buying this racquet but don't have a demo. It is quite expensive to buy without having any feedback about this racquet.

Thanks.

ksm

Nick - Still awaiting your feedback on the Aerogel 300 16*18. Will appreciate your inputs on this racquet.

Thanks.

ksm

VikingSamurai
08-16-2007, 07:11 AM
Chris,

I'm just back from tennis and managed to fit in a set with the Aerogel 300. I know you've made up your midn but thought I'd throw in my ten cents worth.

The racquet is very light. As is the case with all light racquets, regardless of how stiff they are, the deeper in the court you are, the less capable they are. Topspin is easy but the shot lacks weight. Slice, in my opinion, suffers most because you don't have enough weight to drive through the ball. Approach shots, for that reason, weren't as penetrating as I would like and it was very hard to chip-charge as you're not really punching/blocking the ball back with any weight. Serves were quite good although, due to the weight, it was easier to swing the serve, rather than hitting the big, flat one. That said, I had good direction and just enough power to put the ball away. The sweetspot I found to be very low - situtated below centre on the string bed - and shots hit in the upper third (typically where you would contact serves and volleys) were very dead. Again, that comes down to a lack of weight. If I were going to use it, I would really need to raise the sweetspot and add a fair bit of weight to 10 & 2 o'clock positions. The overall feel was, to me, far superior to the Mfil-300: softer, more comfortable and considerably less jarring on anything outside the sweetspot. It didn't seem to have as much spin as the Mfil-300 but there was enough.

All up, it really does need an injection of weight - especially in the upper hoop. You said that was your intention, so it might be workable.

Andrew thank you for that.. Infact that is excellent that you were able to share your thoughts regarding the frame.. I hope you enjoyed your tennis tonight, and didn't spend the whole time working the racquet out.. But still, great feedback..

I actually got myself an AG300 today from a guy here in Fu kuoka (should have it in a few days). And I intend on getting myself an AG200 aswell.. I was wondering about where the AG300 will need the extra weight.. Your suggestion of 10 & 2 o'clock will come in very handy when I get a chance to hit with it..

Problem is, that 2 days ago, I was fooling around with a friend, and accidently put my hand through a plate glass window, and severely gashed my wrist and arm open.. So now I am very sore and sorry with a stiched up arm, and simply too much pain to even grab things. So I dare say now, it will be a few weeks until I will be able to pick a racquet up and have a hit..

In saying that, I will definately be happy with what other thoughts you would like to share about it.. Is this one a demo you got, or did you purchase it?

PED
08-16-2007, 01:18 PM
I've demoed both. I played for a week with the ag 300 back in july and have been looking forward to playing with the 200, but so far I have to say it's not the stick for me. I started demoing it today and while it's early days, I think i would go with the 300: however, my son loves the 200 and he was really serving well with it and getting a lot of stick on the ball, but I much prefer the 300. I was able to generate a lot more racq head speed with the 300 because of the lighter weight. I can see how alot of people would not like to go the other way and switch from the 200 to the 300 as the weight difference is very noticeable. I used to use a pure storm and i found that it was quite similar to the AG300 but that the 300 was better. I've not yet tried the new storm tour but it sounds (and looks) very nice. You would really have to play with both the 300 and 200 before deciding. Both great but for different reasons. Good luck in your search. Try the 300 stock before adding the weight, everyone is different but i quite liked it stock.

VikingSamurai
08-16-2007, 10:45 PM
Thanks PED.. All help is welcome.. I definately will have a hit with it stock. I do worry about it being light, but some people have said that it swung heavier. So I will see how it goes and go from there.. Definately will get a 200 and see how that go's also.. Its just with my arm at the moment, I guess when the 300 I just got arrives, I will be able to just sit here and look at how perdy it is!

VikingSamurai
08-17-2007, 06:30 AM
Just curious.. As I am ok with going to a 98 head. What really is the difference from the 95.. Does anyone have both the AG300 and AG200 to compare, or even a pic.. I cant imagine it would be all that much?..

crosscourt
08-17-2007, 07:25 AM
Just curious.. As I am ok with going to a 98 head. What really is the difference from the 95.. Does anyone have both the AG300 and AG200 to compare, or even a pic.. I cant imagine it would be all that much?..


The difference between 95 and 98 needn't be much. But
1. the difference between a move from say 90 to 95 and 90 to 98 is noticeable
2. the difference between a 95 with an 18*20 and a 98 with say a 16*18 can be significant.

cc

VikingSamurai
08-17-2007, 08:10 AM
Thanks cc.. I think I need a lie down after all this..

PED
08-17-2007, 11:54 AM
Chris: one more piece of input. I played again with the 200 today, and while it's not really my style, I can see how some people love it. I was playing my son who is a hard hitting junior and he was using the 200 and just getting back everything that I was giving him: i was hitting it hard and deep but it was no problem while he had the ag 200. I used it after him and could see why. It is a great stick to use against a hard heavy hitter and is a true weapon on serve.

Azrael
08-17-2007, 04:36 PM
Oh man that hurts...

30ish+ = older!?! You are going to SO take back those words in a decade or so... ;)

I just meant older than me now lol :p

It is a great stick to use against a hard heavy hitter and is a true weapon on serve.

Very true, but kick serves weren't the best with this stick, I'm afraid.

VikingSamurai
08-17-2007, 05:40 PM
Well PED, I should have my AG300 in a day or so, and will definately be getting the AG200 as well.. I wouldnormally do a review once I have them, but at the moment I am restricted to the hitting centre, and really wont be able to play any decent tennis until we return back to Australia for good at X-Mas time.. Once back, I am going to try and find as many social comps as I can and enjoy what I have missed for the last 6 years..

saqdeez
08-17-2007, 05:41 PM
The rackets are opposites...flat or topspin.

VikingSamurai
08-17-2007, 05:56 PM
The rackets are opposites...flat or topspin.

Fair enough.. The way i see it. I am going to prefer one or the other. So by trying them, I will be able to see if I am still able to hit like I always have by using the AG200. Or if I indeed feel that I am ready, or need a racquet to give me a little help..It will be fun to experiment with both, and in the end, I am sure that someone will take either frame off my hands when I decide I like one or the other.. They seem to be popular frames at the moment..

saqdeez
08-17-2007, 05:58 PM
With my babolats, i could drop the control and use the storm right away, same with those and PDR, but with the ag200, a completely different stroke is required, doesnt respond to topspin at all...BUT, the directional contorl is amazing and you can really kill the ball. Good luck with the rackets

VikingSamurai
08-17-2007, 06:11 PM
Like I say. Its going to be fun to play with them.. The AG200 is a frame that I would normally go with, but I have heard great things about the AG300, and I am looking forward to experimenting with it, and see what its potential is..

VikingSamurai
08-17-2007, 11:14 PM
I havn't received my AG300 yet, but I went to my local store here in Japan and had a look at one.. It did feel a little light at first, but I know exactly where I will put the weight when I get mine and give it some heft and stability..

I compared it to the Mfil300 and the frame is completely different.. The AG300 head shape does have a squarer sense to it compared to the Mfil (and also the Dunlop RIM) that is sold here in Japan.The bridge is also shaped differently to the older models.

In all honesty, I didn't mind that the head shape was a little bit squarer, because it makes the 98" head size seem more like 95, and so I just felt when holding all 3, that the 98" on the AG300 appeared smaller. (which I liked)

I really liked the feel of this racquet, ad its the first time that I have liked a thickish beam on a frame. Asthetically, it is also a very sexy racquet, and I found that when comparing all three, my eyes kept going back to the AG300..Something about the big Dunlop written in the racing font on the flat black that did it for me...

Now I cant wait for mine to arrive, and hope my arm can heal quickly as well..

Redflea
08-18-2007, 08:52 AM
Chris...

The AG300 has some slight differences from the M-Fil 300, but it's not "a completely different" from the M-Fil.

The AG300 head is just slightly narrower than the M-Fil (about 1/4" or so total difference across the 3 & 9 axis) and the "punts" (indents) at the top of the throat where it connects w/the head are gone on the AG300. Other than that, if you lay one on top of the other they are virtually indistinguishable.

There are definitely differences in feel, power, swing, etc., but in terms of actual physical shape/dimensions, they are extremely close.

VikingSamurai
08-18-2007, 03:35 PM
Agreed......