PDA

View Full Version : Stringing crosses from bottom? Danger?


tennisphotog
10-19-2009, 09:39 AM
I had to string a wilson kblade 98, did it one piece, and found that I had to string the crosses from the bottom (throat) up to the top (head). I thought this was not a great practice due to stress on the frame, but Stringfourm site had listed it this way. Is this really a method that puts the frame at risk? Or is it fine.


Thanks

Lindsay
10-19-2009, 10:29 AM
I would suggest using an Around The World pattern to string these types of racquets. If you're not familiar with that pattern, you could always string in 2 pieces. However, Wilson still accepts the bottom up method as a reliable way to string their frames. It is still under warranty the way you strung it. I would say that yes, you are putting the frame under more pressure, but that is my opinion. As long as it is acceptable by the manufacturer, you shouldn't worry too much.

Lakers4Life
10-19-2009, 11:06 AM
This is from the Wilson Site:

K Blade 98
String Tension : 50 - 60 lbs
String Length : 35' (ss: 9'6") or (16' Ms and 19' Xs)
String Pattern : 18 x 20
Start Main : At head. Mains skip 8H, 10H, 8T and 10T.
One Piece : Start Xs at bottom at 8T. Tie off Xs at 5H.
Two Piece : Start Xs at top at 8H. Tie off Xs at 5H and 7T.

You can start from the bottom (T) or the top (H). For a 1 Piece job, this is a good candidate for an ATW pattern. A few maufacturers strongly recomend you string from the top down, as not to void the warranty.

Irvin
10-19-2009, 11:46 AM
I look at it this way. Most frames today are oval shapped and have a symetrical beam. The throat of the racket does not offer any support to the throat of the racket while it is being strung. Therefore I do not see how stringing top to bottom or bottom to top makes any difference.

But I am open minded and if someone has a different opinion backed up by fact I would love to hear it.

BTW Wilson does allow stringing bottom to top.

Irvin

tennisphotog
10-19-2009, 12:53 PM
thanks all, very helpful.

rich s
10-19-2009, 04:14 PM
I look at it this way. Most frames today are oval shapped and have a symetrical beam. The throat of the racket does not offer any support to the throat of the racket while it is being strung. Therefore I do not see how string top to bottom or bottom to top makes any difference.

But I am open minded and if someone has a different opinion backed up by fact I would love to hear it.

BTW Wilson does allow stringing bottom to top.

Irvin

When you string from the head to the throat you "walk" the stress toward the throat.

When you string from the throat to the head you "walk" the stress toward the head.

The throat is stronger than the head because you have the yoke and the bridge to provide strength, whereas the head only has the strength of the hoop....this is typically why manufacturers recommend stringing from the head to the throat.

Wilson is one of the companies that designs their frames to allow for throat to head stringing. I read an article where Wilson's "engineer" said something to the affect of: "you know people are going to string throat to head, so we design for it". Other companies do not.....

some6uy008
10-21-2009, 05:08 AM
When you string from the head to the throat you "walk" the stress toward the throat.

When you string from the throat to the head you "walk" the stress toward the head.

The throat is stronger than the head because you have the yoke and the bridge to provide strength, whereas the head only has the strength of the hoop....this is typically why manufacturers recommend stringing from the head to the throat.

Wilson is one of the companies that designs their frames to allow for throat to head stringing. I read an article where Wilson's "engineer" said something to the affect of: "you know people are going to string throat to head, so we design for it". Other companies do not.....

At least now I know why from top to bottom is preferred. Thanks!