PDA

View Full Version : ag200 16x19 compared to 18x20


zoobears
11-04-2008, 03:06 PM
Hi, i just popped into lillywhites after work today and I held the 16x19 version for the 1st time. They are selling the 16x19 at 40 and the 18x20 at 60-90 (depending on grip size). Why do you think there is a price difference? The 16x19 version has aerogel 2hundred "plus" written on the side...

I asked a sales assistant and he said that the 2hundred plus was for intermediates... I don't understand. Apart from the different string pattern, the 16x19 felt a bit lighter and the racket head seemed a tiny bit larger. The cardboard on the front suggested that it had more power etc...

How do people think it plays? is it a racket for people who aren't amazing?

soggyramen
11-04-2008, 03:09 PM
it's a cheaper rec. racquet version. it doesn't play anything like the "real" aerogel 200

nCode747
11-04-2008, 05:34 PM
the aerogel 200 plus is 100sq in. and is a cheaper version that most big sports stores have

zoobears
11-05-2008, 11:22 AM
Then is the ag200 plus the same racquet as the ag200 16x19?

robertg06
11-05-2008, 11:32 AM
I tried both of them, and went with the 18x20, just felt more comfortable to me.

0d1n
11-06-2008, 12:56 AM
Then is the ag200 plus the same racquet as the ag200 16x19?

No it's not. People in the States mostly make this confusion because they don't have access to the "real" ag 200 16x19 (it's not available there).
The difference is the string pattern and weight. The 16x19 version is about 10 grams lighter than the 18x20 (312 grams unstrung as opposed to ~ 322).

Keifers
11-07-2008, 02:15 AM
I played with an AG200 16X19 last night (not an AG200 plus). With an overgrip and rubberband dampener, it measured 340 grams and about 7.5 pts HL. Strung with M-Fil Tour 16, don't know the tension.

Compared with the AG100, it has more flex in the hoop, which provides more dwell time, control and spin. The hoop isn't noodle-y, though, because (like the 100) this stick serves very nicely indeed. A very comfortable and stable hit, groundies and volleys. Generous sweet spot. I would probably add a small amount of weight at 3 and 9 to add some pop.

Compared with the 200 18X20, the swingweight is a little lower; I liked the improved maneuverability (the 18X20 felt a little too sluggish to me). As you would expect, the 16X19 stringbed grabbed the ball better.

I must get my MW 200G strung up again soon and compare with the AG100 and 200. In terms of physical dimensions, the MW 200G and AG200 seem almost identical -- not a bad thing because the MW is a classic. Compositions are different, of course.

Roms
11-07-2008, 02:50 AM
the 18 is good but i don't like the 16, because the mix of flexibility and is light mass do that 16 is really underpower.
The 18 is the same but heavier, it is very good

0d1n
11-07-2008, 06:20 AM
I played with an AG200 16X19 last night (not an AG200 plus). With an overgrip and rubberband dampener, it measured 340 grams and about 7.5 pts HL. Strung with M-Fil Tour 16, don't know the tension.

Compared with the AG100, it has more flex in the hoop, which provides more dwell time, control and spin. The hoop isn't noodle-y, though, because (like the 100) this stick serves very nicely indeed. A very comfortable and stable hit, groundies and volleys. Generous sweet spot. I would probably add a small amount of weight at 3 and 9 to add some pop.

Compared with the 200 18X20, the swingweight is a little lower; I liked the improved maneuverability (the 18X20 felt a little too sluggish to me). As you would expect, the 16X19 stringbed grabbed the ball better.

I must get my MW 200G strung up again soon and compare with the AG100 and 200. In terms of physical dimensions, the MW 200G and AG200 seem almost identical -- not a bad thing because the MW is a classic. Compositions are different, of course.

Yup, I own 2 of them, and they are good all round rackets. I used them with volkl leather + yonex overgrip and a couple of grams of lead split between 3 & 9. I didn't find it to have a "generous sweet spot" and the feel wasn't THAT flexible for me.
Thinking about it though ... my main rackets were Tour 10 Gen 1 MP's which are heavier swinging, 98 head and very big sweet zone so my comparison is obviously influenced by that.
I have also found the 16x19 vantage 95 frames to have a more forgiving sweet zone than the aforementioned aerogels (and a more flexy feel for the 63 flex option).

Tennis2001
11-08-2008, 12:39 PM
I hate to criticize the rackets but eventually they come to my rackets so i want some inputs for fun. I tried all AG100, AG200 16x19 (95 sq in), and AG200 18x20. My conclusion is that you guys from different situations try to compare the same rackets, that will go no where. Different situations mean you guys might have different ages, different physical conditions, one stronger the other, playing style.... This racket might be light to this person but heavy or enough to the others. No good or bad rackets, if it fits YOU, go for it.
. AG200 18x20 is little heavy to me, AG200 16x19 is little light to me. AG100 is a best fit for me so i go with it. That's it!!!!