View Full Version : Dunlop Muscle Weave 200G 90

09-21-2007, 12:13 PM
So after a lot of waiting I've finally received my brand new Dunlop MW 200G 90...

First thing that I immediately noticed was the very thin throat beam… although the beam at the head was very similar to the beam of my M-Fil 200s the throat was dramatically thinner… what made me laugh was the dust on the racquet between the grommets, it had to lay very very long in the store… what can I say about the racquet? It has a very old school stylish look which I really prefer to those new screaming busy paintjobs… I think I’ll put a leather grip on for more weight…

Due to circumstances beyond my control I won’t be able to play with this piece of art for quite a while unfortunately… but I’ll post pictures of the stick tomorrow…

09-21-2007, 12:20 PM
I had a couple of these. Nice racquet that reminded me alot of the Prestige Classic.

09-22-2007, 01:59 AM
So here are some photo's...



09-22-2007, 02:05 AM
And as I said the throat bridge is very thin so here is a comparison to my M-Fil 200...:



09-22-2007, 04:23 AM
Damn, that is indeed very thin, how it plays compared to the m fil?

09-22-2007, 05:13 AM
Nice racquet. I always liked Dunlop 90s. Just have a nice feel to them.

09-22-2007, 06:44 AM
I won't be able to test the MW 200G 90 for quite a while... health issues I'm afraid...

09-24-2007, 10:43 AM
Okay although I shouldn't play for another week or two I decided to give the MW 200G 90 a go, and all I can say... WOOOOW! The ball pocketing is just magnificent I think it's due to low flex, you can feel the flex from the throat area (I didn't find the specs of this model so I measured it and it had 19mm beam at the head and at the throat between the 2 main strings it's like 11mm), pinpoint laser precision, extreme head speed, a killer 1hbh when you hit the sweetspot... with proper technique changing the balls direction is a snap... I played a 3 set match and... lost :D 3:6 3:6 6:7 (5-7) but this was my first time with this racquet and I played my good friend (M-Fil 400) who I beat on a regular basis but not without a fight I think it can only get better... now about the power issue all I can say that after two sets with the 200G 90 I switched for 3 games to my M-Fil 200 and it was like I changed from a slingshot to a bazooka (I lost 0-3)... the power level of the Muscle Weave is definitely one of the lowest that I've ever experienced, the trick with this stick is perfect foot work, if you can properly prepare for the shot it's no problem, but if you're late or your legs are tired you can forget about decent shot making, the lack of power is very noticeable on the serve... for the first 2 sets I reallyyyy struggled to even get the ball into play, my first serve always hit the white part of the net and the second serve was like a request to hit a winner return, however after switching back in the 3rd set to the MW 200G 90 I was more confident and familiar with this stick and the first serve started to work out, my usual first flat serve really benefited from the humongous head speed and precision of a 90 sq. inch head... everything else was clicking quite well almost from the start, my 1hbh with good footwork was penetrating with very good speed, my forehand was a killer I really loved my down the line winning forehand with this stick... overall I'm going to play the MW 200G 90 ONLY! Forget the M-Fils! This is what I always wanted...

09-24-2007, 11:03 AM
Welcome to the world of the 90's. ;)

Congrats! :D

09-24-2007, 01:39 PM
There was a guy who used to post at TW here a few years back, played with one of those. Also very positive about it; I'd love to give that stick a try.

09-25-2007, 08:59 AM

I'm glad you're enjoying the MW 90. I just posted a reply about the 90 on another thread about the MW 95. It plays beautifully, and looks great too.

09-25-2007, 09:09 AM
Yeaaah tell me about it... I love the low power on everything except the serve but that's a great reason to focus on improving my serve technique! I've now ordered the RDX 500 Mid for comparison...

09-29-2007, 01:18 PM
man.... anyone wants to sell one for me to try. I've tried to get one and none of the sellers want to ship to the US.. :((.. jetlee2k@yahoo.com

09-29-2007, 01:18 PM
Where did you get that racquet?

09-30-2007, 01:34 AM
specs~~~~~ weight? strung balance? ra? Performance compared to the ag100?

09-30-2007, 04:13 AM
Where did you get that racquet?

Poland... as I wrote from where I got it they don't ship to other countries...

specs~~~~~ weight? strung balance? ra? Performance compared to the ag100?

Head size: 90 sq. inch / 581 sq. cm
Length: 27 cali/ 68,58 cm
Weight (strung): ~332,5g
Balance: 6-8 Head Light
Swingweight: 310-320
Flex: 59
Frame width: 11mm-19mm (Throat bridge - Head)
Material: 3-D Graphite/Muscle Weave
Pattern: 18x20

In comparison to the AG100 it's definetly more flexible, buttery feel, flex at the throat bridge area, noticeably lower powered, more percise, less spin friendly, and more stable... the AG 100 offers more crisp feel however if I had to choose I would go with the MW 200G 90...

09-30-2007, 04:34 AM
I had enough butter with Rdx 500s ;-) So the perspective to have more of it, doesn't sound so appealing.
(It's a little joke, sorry. These words "buttery" etc reminds me of a past time of my tennis life. I'm happy you find a rewarding racquet!)

09-30-2007, 04:37 AM
Well I actually bought the RDX 500 Mid for comparison... so as soon as I string it and get to play with both I'm sure of writing a short comparison...

09-30-2007, 04:47 AM
It will be interesting. Thanks

10-07-2007, 12:38 AM
So I've got the chance to hit with the RDX 500 Mid although 2,5h is surely not enough for comparing with the MW 200G 90 I can say this:

1) Although the RDX 500 has slightly higher flex than the MW 200G 90 I can definetly say that it's more mushy, buttery, you name it! I think it could be due to the string pattern (16x18 to 18x20 on the MW)... I think if I strung the MW 200G 90 at lower tension I'd have similar feel to the RDX 500 but both are have buttery, soft feel...

2) The RDX 500 is a spin monster! Compared to the MW 200G 90 it is about 10 times more spin friendly... I could say that the MW 200G 90 is definetly for the flat hitter but if you mix it up the RDX 500 Mid makes it a lot easier...

3) The RDX 500 Mid power level is definetly higher than the MW 200G 90, I'd say string pattern is the key here... really noticeable...

4) When it comes to control I'd say that the MW 200G 90 has the advantage here, a little less mushy, tight string pattern and you have absolute control...

5) The sweetspot... well I can only confirm that the Isometric head shape works! The RDX 500 Mid has a sweetspot that seems to run bigger than the head size! It's like the sweetspot literraly extends to cover the entire stringbed... this is the advantage of the Yonex... if I compared the sweetspot of the RDX to the MW 200G I would have to say that the sweetspot on the Dunlop is the size of a dime...

10-02-2008, 12:37 PM
so which one is better for you mate? it seems like you like the yonex a lot more!

10-03-2008, 05:16 AM
Well that's a tough one!

Both are great frames which will be used for reference when mentioning buttery feel!

I think the RDX 500 Mid is more versatile, more rotation options (by that I mean you can whip up any rotation without hard work while with the MW 200G 90 it's better to stick with hitting flat) so it's better for an all-round versatile game and can still be a competitive frame on clay.

But I have to be honest... I have more fun playing with the MW 200G 90. Yeah it has a small sweetspot, to achieve decent rotation you have to focus and work harder but boy when you hit that flat backhand right it's a killer.

I play generally flat and I'm most effective on fast surfaces so I give the MW 200G 90 an edge when it comes to my game.

Since this topic has been bumped up just a quick update...

I've changed the Voelkl Leather Grip for Pacific Leather and know I'm experimenting with Isospeed Control in this frame.