PDA

View Full Version : Any difference in performance between the Wilson sting with and without PWS?


AndrewD
03-09-2009, 05:51 PM
The Wilson sting has always been one of my favourite racquets but I've never had the opportunity to hit with both the PWS and non-PWS versions. Just wondering if anyone has hit with both and can offer up a comparison, assuming there's some difference.

Also, I do recall there being a Wilson Sting (midsize) that had red piping instead of the typical blue stripe. Any difference there or just a cosmetic variation?

Oh, just wondering if anyone can provide the specs for the Sting Oversize.

TW had the specs listed, for the mid, as being:
Head Size: 90 sq. in
Length: 27 inches
Strung Weight: 12.6oz / 357g
Balance: 7pts Head Light
Swingweight: 326
Stiffness: 61
String Pattern: 16 Mains / 18 Crosses

Does anyone know what they'd be for the OS ?

plasma
03-09-2009, 10:55 PM
http://i44.tinypic.com/2nu6n3t.jpg
sting is an 85, string pattern and headsize identical to st.vincent...
http://i44.tinypic.com/2i03xuc.jpg

AndrewD
03-10-2009, 04:02 AM
http://i44.tinypic.com/2nu6n3t.jpg
sting is an 85, string pattern and headsize identical to st.vincent...
http://i44.tinypic.com/2i03xuc.jpg

As I said, I'm quoting TW verbatim.

jorel
03-10-2009, 06:44 AM
they are very similar.. just put some lead at 3 and 9 on the nonpws version and wa la

gsquicksilver
03-10-2009, 08:50 AM
i believe the PWS version is a bit softer than the non PWS. i've only played with the non PWS version.

as for the red sting, that is known is the STING 2. it's almost identical to the sting without PWS, but with an indented groove area for the bumperguard. the bumperguard sits flushed instead of protruding out like typical bumperguards. the sting 2 is more flexible than the blue sting, and yes, i own both version so this statement is true on my part.

tandayu
03-10-2009, 09:36 AM
i believe the PWS version is a bit softer than the non PWS. i've only played with the non PWS version.

as for the red sting, that is known is the STING 2. it's almost identical to the sting without PWS, but with an indented groove area for the bumperguard. the bumperguard sits flushed instead of protruding out like typical bumperguards. the sting 2 is more flexible than the blue sting, and yes, i own both version so this statement is true on my part.

just curious, what the 3 letter code on the buttcap of your Sting with PWS and non-pws?

I might have one with "Q" on the third letter, need to check it tonight ...

gsquicksilver
03-10-2009, 10:12 AM
just curious, what the 3 letter code on the buttcap of your Sting with PWS and non-pws?

I might have one with "Q" on the third letter, need to check it tonight ...

let me check when i get a chance. i only have the non pws versions. they came with a black buttcap and white W logo.

gsquicksilver
03-10-2009, 10:13 AM
damn, you guys make me want to dig my old sting's out of the closet and string them up to play, haha. i haven't used them since 95 when i switched over to the ps85.

tandayu
03-10-2009, 10:45 AM
damn, you guys make me want to dig my old sting's out of the closet and string them up to play, haha. i haven't used them since 95 when i switched over to the ps85.


The non-pws is rare, I got one because VSBabolat told me about its existence.

The sting was used by several pros including John Loyd, Scott Davis, and several more I can't remember right now.

gsquicksilver
03-10-2009, 10:50 AM
the sting felt similar to the ps85, but it was a tad stiffer and slightly heavier. but shots dead on the sweet spot were potent. mishits sucked.

gsquicksilver
03-10-2009, 10:53 AM
here, check out a post i made a while back about the different versions of the sting:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=194786&highlight=wilson+sting+back

jorel
03-10-2009, 11:45 AM
the sting felt similar to the ps85, but it was a tad stiffer and slightly heavier. but shots dead on the sweet spot were potent. mishits sucked.
u thought the sting was stiffer???

jorel
03-10-2009, 11:46 AM
The non-pws is rare, I got one because VSBabolat told me about its existence.

The sting was used by several pros including John Loyd, Scott Davis, and several more I can't remember right now.
yep i bought a few from the Bosworth collection

jorel
03-10-2009, 11:47 AM
just curious, what the 3 letter code on the buttcap of your Sting with PWS and non-pws?

I might have one with "Q" on the third letter, need to check it tonight ...
with PWS is in Taiwan

gsquicksilver
03-10-2009, 11:51 AM
u thought the sting was stiffer???

yes it was stiffer.

AndrewD
03-10-2009, 03:58 PM
The non-pws is rare, I got one because VSBabolat told me about its existence.

The sting was used by several pros including John Loyd, Scott Davis, and several more I can't remember right now.

Marty Davis, one of the nicest blokes you'll ever meet and possibly my favourite tennis player of all time. Got to meet him back in 1985 when I was in primary school and my school took a few of us to see the old Melbourne Indoor (he won it that year). He was one of the players who took the time to chat with us (mainly about surfing LOL).

Hence my reason for asking about the Sting and wanting to grab a couple to play with.

RyanC
03-10-2009, 04:40 PM
So what's the Sting like compared to the ProStaff 6.0 85 ? Is the Sting stiffer or more flexible, less power or more, spinnier or less spin, etc ?


Plus, I just saw a Sting 95sq on the big auction site. Is that one of those semi-wide body racquets or is it a slim beam like the original Sting racqeuts?

tandayu
03-10-2009, 06:56 PM
So what's the Sting like compared to the ProStaff 6.0 85 ? Is the Sting stiffer or more flexible, less power or more, spinnier or less spin, etc ?


Plus, I just saw a Sting 95sq on the big auction site. Is that one of those semi-wide body racquets or is it a slim beam like the original Sting racqeuts?

The sting 95 is not like the PS6.0 95 to the midsize version, just using the Sting name.

DIfferent people might feel different sensation, but my sting felt more swingweight, crisper and harsher compared the St. Vincent, which more absorbing feel in comparison.

My college coach and most sponsored WIlson team in the late 80s were all using Sting back then until the arrival of the Ps6.0, which everybody has to help use and promote.

schu47
03-10-2009, 07:30 PM
RyanC,
The Sting 95, if it's the one I think it is, isn't like the original at all. The Sting was a classic 80s graphite 85-sq-in mid. The 95 is a wide-body -- kind of lightweight, head-heavy, cumbersome, and puny -- part of Wilson's "High-Beam" series. IMO, they feel tinny and play the same way.
The only good thing about them is that they have the beautiful black finish with the blue and silver graphics. Other than that, very little to recommend them, if you like the real 80s mid graphites. I used the Sting mid for many years, and loved it. Just a solid, no-nonsense racquet. The PWS and non-PWS versions weren't really much different -- just a little more head weight in the PWS versions, natch, and a little more plow-through. Now I have the whole family, even the Largeheads and Sting 2. I'll post a family portrait tomorrow.

RyanC
03-10-2009, 09:42 PM
Hey guys,

Sorry if I caused any confusion but what I meant was how does the Sting Midsize (not the 95sq) compare to the PS85. For that matter, does anyone know how the Sting Midsize (with pws or without) compares to the POG Mid?

tandayu
03-11-2009, 07:24 AM
Why Sting has that bridge, while Ps6.0 85 no bridge?

gsquicksilver
03-11-2009, 08:52 AM
Why Sting has that bridge, while Ps6.0 85 no bridge?

i believe it was in response to the prince graphite.

schu47
03-11-2009, 08:54 AM
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_R75QH658YRs/Sbfj3_XkrxI/AAAAAAAARkc/aZ_fzsmOVHs/s800/P3110336.JPG

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_R75QH658YRs/Sbfj4g7_zcI/AAAAAAAARkk/PjFZf_uG5Pk/s800/P3110339.JPG

These are the "true" Stings, IMO. From the left, they are the SC2000 (the graphite/ceramic version) mid and largehead; the Sting 2 mid; and the Sting largehead and mid. The bottom photo is just the mids, which are all are from the same mold, as far as I can tell. Some models had PWS, some didn't. I always assumed the earlier models didn't, but don't know that for sure. The Sting and Sting 2 play very much alike, the ceramic feels a little lighter, not as substantial.

I'm sorry I can't provide much in the way of a comparison between the Sting and the PS 6.0. I haven't used the 6.0 very much. The one thing I noticed, though, was that the Pro Staff definitely has a smoother, more balanced feel to it. I am a big fan of the Sting -- I think it's a solid, responsive classic -- and costs about one-tenth as much as a PS 6.0.

schu47
03-11-2009, 09:12 AM
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_R75QH658YRs/Sbfj51pF83I/AAAAAAAARk4/yZnVWxjLFqY/s800/P3110345.JPG

Here's the original Sting next to the Sting 95. No comparison, really. The Sting 95 mimicked the Sting graphically. It's pretty, but no substance, part of the cheap "High Beam" series Wilson produced in what, the early 90s?

schu47
03-11-2009, 09:19 AM
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_R75QH658YRs/Sbfj6dJ8VoI/AAAAAAAARlA/zCYoH4HgM04/s800/P3110346.JPG

And here's the weird cousin. The crossed bridges are plastic, and the strings go through them and then off at an angle to the head. Sort of a metal version of the Wilson Legacy.

GPB
03-11-2009, 09:46 AM
And here's the weird cousin. The crossed bridges are plastic, and the strings go through them and then off at an angle to the head. Sort of a metal version of the Wilson Legacy.

Woah, it's like a snowshoe!

tandayu
03-11-2009, 03:05 PM
Sting with PWS and without PWS, old pic from old post using cell phone camera

http://i5.tinypic.com/21o9fyf.jpg

Sorry for the toe nail, those are my rackets and my toe

AndrewD
03-11-2009, 06:25 PM
Sting with PWS and without PWS, old pic from old post using cell phone camera

http://i5.tinypic.com/21o9fyf.jpg

Sorry for the toe nail, those are my rackets and my toe

Thanks for the pictures and to everyone else who has been able to contribute.

As I said in another thread, this always makes me incredibly envious of you folk in the States who can pick up one of those great racquets for about $40 or $50 (if not less).

When I came back to tennis 5 years ago (after a 12-13 year break) if I could have just picked up a few Prince Graphite Comp 110, POG OS (the early models, when they were 8-10 pts HL) and Wilson Sting Midsize, I would have never felt the need to constantly jump, jump, jump from one modern racquet to the next in the hopes that I'd find something comparable (there is nothing).

jimbo333
03-11-2009, 06:29 PM
Absolutely!!!

I've made my main racquet now the Dunlop 300i, I can't find a racquet as good as this anywhere, they just don't make 'em like this anymore, and in the 300i's case since 1988:):)

AndrewD
03-12-2009, 04:14 AM
Absolutely!!!

I've made my main racquet now the Dunlop 300i, I can't find a racquet as good as this anywhere, they just don't make 'em like this anymore, and in the 300i's case since 1988:):)

Never really got a good feel from the 300i (I played the 200G) but had a couple of team-mates who swore by them.

Just dawning on me that what I really need to do is bite the bullet and purchase a few of the old frames I know I love from the States. I've been hesitant to do so because of one bad experience but think it might be worth my while giving it one last try.

Chalk Flew Up!
03-12-2009, 09:08 AM
I've been using a Sting w/o PWS for a couple of weeks now and I am impressed with this stick. This is the most special racquet I have ever swung. I am more used to midplus sizes but my concentration has never been better and I'm able to hit a lot more crisply and cleanly, not to mention accurately, with this racquet than I was with any modern stick. Even though this racquet was way before my time I feel a special bond with it. The Sting has made tennis even more fun than before.

Best 3 dollars I've ever spent!:) Found it at a thrift store along with an immaculate Wilson Pro Select midsize...paid 5 dollars for the two. I haven't swung my modern sticks since.

Virginia
03-12-2009, 12:12 PM
Just dawning on me that what I really need to do is bite the bullet and purchase a few of the old frames I know I love from the States. I've been hesitant to do so because of one bad experience but think it might be worth my while giving it one last try.
That's what I've been doing for the last year, Deuce and I've picked up some beauties. The only problem now is the exchange rate with the US dollar, which has moved up (or down, whichever way you look at it) from .79/.80 to a horrendous .5. I expect it's the same for you in Australia.

You might want to check out rodracquet (who's in Melbourne - where are you BTW?) as he trades on the big site and has listed some fantastic frames in the past. I can put you in contact with him privately if you like - he's the guy that's recently started the Australian tennis history (http://www.tennishistory.com.au/)website.

plasma
03-12-2009, 02:17 PM
Thanks Virginia, I try to tell people about his beautiful site. It is the only one in the calibre of wood tennis or 80's tennis. These three sites provide phenomenal history on "racquetology": the history and science behind racquet technology

AndrewD
03-12-2009, 06:32 PM
That's what I've been doing for the last year, Deuce and I've picked up some beauties. The only problem now is the exchange rate with the US dollar, which has moved up (or down, whichever way you look at it) from .79/.80 to a horrendous .5. I expect it's the same for you in Australia.

You might want to check out rodracquet (who's in Melbourne - where are you BTW?) as he trades on the big site and has listed some fantastic frames in the past. I can put you in contact with him privately if you like - he's the guy that's recently started the Australian tennis history (http://www.tennishistory.com.au/)website.

Virginia,

Thanks very much for that. I have seen the site you mentioned but most of the racquets seem to be of the 'very collectable' type and my interest is far more utilitarian. While I do love the craftsmanship involved in the older frames my main interest is in playing with them. That being the case, there's really only a select few which interest me (exceptions being the odd wooden frame) - the Graph Comp 110, POG OS (early versions) and the Sting Midsize.

Yes, our dollar has been dragged down against the US and it's probably only worth about 65-70 cents against the US$. Where I find that hurts most is in shipping. I can buy a racquet $20US and it's still inexpensive (about $30Aus) but then you've got add on shipping and that's a fixed rate. Might add another $40Aus to the price of each sale. So, unless I can get a number of racquets from the same source at the same time I end up getting hurt quite badly with shipping.

I have sent Joe at woodtennis.com an email asking for a price on the Sting Mid and Sting OS but, to date, haven't received a reply. When I do I might also ask if he can give me a price on the Graphite Comp 110 and the POG OS (earlier models). As I want them for playing, not collecting, I can be a bit more flexible with their condition. So long as they're playable, no cracks and can handle a few more re-strings I'll be happy. If I can source them all from him it might save quite a bit with postage.

Can I ask, what are your areas of interest when it comes to collecting? Is it just wooden frames or do you go beyond that?

Virginia
03-12-2009, 08:19 PM
I specialise in 80's frames (I just love those) but go back to around 1950 with some of my woods and I have a few of the better 1990's frames, such as the Fischer M Speed, Prince Mono and Mach 1000, and several modern Snauwaerts (because I love Snauwaerts). My goal was/is to collect as many different manufacturers as possible and to just buy frames that are either very collectable, or very beautiful (often they are the same ones of course). To date I have around 330, with 68 different manufacturers represented.

You're not in Sydney by any chance, are you?

tailofdog
03-12-2009, 09:29 PM
Living in Australia presents a problem on postage. I have 6 racquets comming in i bought 2 as one only buy,s (THAT HURT) the other 4 were 2 at a time which i will do in the future as it,s the only way to make it work.
Rod does sell some playable racquets from time to time and he is a good guy to deal with.

Virginia
03-12-2009, 09:51 PM
Recently I was very lucky with buys from the big site. Six racquets from two separate buyers! That was certainly a good deal, shipping wise. It definitely pays to buy two or more from the same seller. I always check to see what else they have listed, for that reason.

AndrewD
03-12-2009, 11:10 PM
Virginia,

No, I'm in Brisbane (originally from Melbourne - moved in 03).

Djumex
07-21-2009, 07:00 AM
http://g.imagehost.org/t/0020/IMG_1851.jpg (http://g.imagehost.org/view/0020/IMG_1851)
http://g.imagehost.org/t/0215/IMG_1854.jpg (http://g.imagehost.org/view/0215/IMG_1854)
http://g.imagehost.org/t/0313/IMG_1856.jpg (http://g.imagehost.org/view/0313/IMG_1856)

wich sting is this?

projoe
07-21-2009, 10:31 AM
here, check out a post i made a while back about the different versions of the sting:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=194786&highlight=wilson+sting+back

great thread by the way. my first wilson stick was a sting high beam series in the 90's. think it was a 110sq in head. there was also a sting hammer after that i think. may be wrong though. i used to love that sting and it was a good back up racket after i bought the pro staff classic. but it broke after i smashed it off the net post. i wish i hadnt done that now.

PBODY99
07-21-2009, 02:04 PM
When Vic Braden made the commercial" You've got to go with the Graphite !! " it was a dig at the Prince Pro. The Sting 110 was 99.00 $ back then, the same price as the Al Prince Pro. I played with one while nursing a damages shoulder. Great frame, half the price of the POG,

schenkelini
08-06-2009, 08:51 PM
I worked in a shop in the 80's and we sold the Sting. We hated it though and we referred to it as the Stink.

pshulam
08-07-2009, 03:37 AM
I have not noticed any difference in playability between the two versions.

tennis005
12-19-2009, 05:08 PM
I found a new Wilson Sting 110 high beam series the other day. What would it be worth. Still had plastic on handle.