PDA

View Full Version : Wilson Hyper Hammer 5.2 mp & Prince TT Warrior mp: info and opinions please


GregOz
06-01-2005, 09:12 PM
Id just like to get some feedback from people regarding these two frames. I realise they're quite different sticks but a player at our club is considering both but wanted a bit more input before deciding.

He knows the H-H is quite lightweight but would be leading it up to about 11.5 ounces which is his preferred weight. Any ideas how that would make it play would also be great.

I havent hit with either so couldnt help him but am hoping there's a few here who can provide a bit of information and some good opinions on their relative merits.

Would also like to hear if anyone has found trouble with the TT Warrior midplus cracking at the throat. I gather that is a problem.

AndrewD
06-02-2005, 01:10 AM
Greg,
the Hyper Hammer is slightly head heavy to begin with but I think its only about 1 point. Its only 10.6 ounces to begin with so if he adds on around another ounce he'll have to be careful just how head light he makes it. I know one of the guys at the club uses the Hyper Hammer in stock form and is pretty happy with the way it plays. He's one of the higher A grade players so it obviously can be used by someone quite good. Seems to generate quite a bit of power out of the thing on serves and groundstrokes so its obviously not that limiting. I know Ive had a lot of trouble handling his serve due to the slice and top he puts on it but he does have quite a high swingspeed so you'd want to take that into account. No idea what the 'touch' or 'feel' are like. Young Tomak uses one as well and he plays a pretty mean game regardless of age.
As to the Warrior, Ive no idea sorry.

tschevap
06-02-2005, 01:20 AM
I saw two cracked Warriors - both of them a little above the "Triple Thread"logo at the throat...both of them cracked during play and without prior abuse...
too sad as this frame plays like a dream - maybe a little too powerful...

GregOz
06-02-2005, 02:15 AM
tschevap,
that's not good to hear.
Have you had a hit with the Hyper Hammer 5.2mp? I think that's the one he's most interested in but I did a search here and couldn't come up with anything worthwhile. I know Henin and Davenport used it (or something that looked like it) and Ive read the old TW write-up but there doesn't seem to be much else

GregOz
06-02-2005, 07:34 AM
Andrew,
I'll ask around at the club to see if there's anyone there with one. Like I said, there doesnt seem to be many comments about it. Dont know if guys here consider it a ladies racquet but it doesnt crop up in any threads I could find. Truthfully, I dont think he's going to lead it up so much. I really think he wants a lighter weight frame but just wont admit it yet. His days of s-v are pretty much over so he's playing more of an all-court game these days and quite a bit of doubles. Flat hitter but an infrequent player so i guess he wants something that swings a bit easier. Ive always liked the Hammers that Ive tried and id expect the Hyper Hammer to be quite a nice racquet.

POGO
06-02-2005, 07:46 AM
Id just like to get some feedback from people regarding these two frames. I realise they're quite different sticks but a player at our club is considering both but wanted a bit more input before deciding.

He knows the H-H is quite lightweight but would be leading it up to about 11.5 ounces which is his preferred weight. Any ideas how that would make it play would also be great.

I havent hit with either so couldnt help him but am hoping there's a few here who can provide a bit of information and some good opinions on their relative merits.

Would also like to hear if anyone has found trouble with the TT Warrior midplus cracking at the throat. I gather that is a problem.
According the Prince, spoke to a Prince rep, the early TT warrior had fabrication defects, but the later TT warriors have been fixed with the throat crack problem.

To determine if your TT Warrior is the older model with the notorious cracking problems, look inside of the throat and look for the label that states tension and string recommendations. There would be a letter in between these brackets < > . The older Warrior would have <A> through <F> The Warriors with the crack fixes are from <G> so on.

The letters corresponds to slight changes on the racket fabrications.

There are also noticeable difference in weight between revisions. So if you find a Warrior to your liking, look at the revision and purchase one with the same revision. All rackets though same model will feel and play slightly due to manufacturing changes in fabrications.

I once weighted two different TT Hornet MP. One had a <B> and the other one was <Y> The B was much heavier and had a thicker coat of red paint. It weight 11.2 oz while the Y weight 10.6 oz. The paint on the Y had a lighter red color, with slight blend of orange on the throat. The B was a darker Red and no slight blend of orange on the throat.

The B version played much better, but the paint chipped often. The Y had a better paint job, but was not as solid as the B.

AndrewD
06-02-2005, 04:23 PM
I guess that would make things tough if he was buying from overseas - through TW for instance.

Curious to hear what others have to say about the Hyper Hammer Greg. Like you, I assumed it was very popular over in the States but it doesn't seem like anyone knows much about it. Possibly, on this board, there isn't much love for the Hammer racquets although I must say, Ive had a hit with the 6.2 (the 'skunk') and thought it was very nice and comfortable.

POGO
06-02-2005, 04:31 PM
I guess that would make things tough if he was buying from overseas - through TW for instance.

Curious to hear what others have to say about the Hyper Hammer Greg. Like you, I assumed it was very popular over in the States but it doesn't seem like anyone knows much about it. Possibly, on this board, there isn't much love for the Hammer racquets although I must say, Ive had a hit with the 6.2 (the 'skunk') and thought it was very nice and comfortable.
Prince has a similar racket to the classic Hammer 6.2. It is the Bandit.

TennisMD
06-02-2005, 05:20 PM
I have played with these a few yrs ago, purchased from TW, and no cracking problems. If POGO's theory is correct the lettter between the< > on my rkts is a Y and therefore the modification that did not crack. In any eent a good serving rkts great volleys baseline rallies average. I may try this agin since I am playing alot of doubles and the Aeroprodrive bothers my arm, the TTW never did. Obviously a great price at TW, read the review. Good luck

GregOz
06-02-2005, 07:52 PM
Okay guys, thanks for that info on the Warrior, I'll pass it along.

Now Id just like to get some opinions regarding the Hyper Hammer if I could. Has anyone here played with it, got any impressions or ideas about it?

tedmeister
06-03-2005, 02:44 AM
Okay guys, thanks for that info on the Warrior, I'll pass it along.

Now Id just like to get some opinions regarding the Hyper Hammer if I could. Has anyone here played with it, got any impressions or ideas about it?
As a stock frame without any modifications, the TT warrior beats the hyper 5.2 hands down in maneuverability, power off the strings and spin potential. Just easier to hit overall. The 5.2 has a high swingweight (335) and that turned off a lot of folks who tried it. If I remember correctly, the POG longbody has a swingweight close to it. Smaller head at 95 and the 16x20 pattern doesn't help much with the sweetspot size. It got brushed aside as just another baseliner's racquet. However, bring up the weight to anywhere from 11.5 to 12 oz (nothing in the hoop) and this racquet starts playing very differently. Good feeling lively frame. A bit harder to hit but that is offset by the extra control. Having some kevlar thrown in with the hypercarbon composite makes it play softer than the newer H and n tours. I've strung my 5.2s lots of times as I also use it for playtesting new strings not to mention "framing" another racquet or two with it during doubles :mrgreen: and the frame has held up well so durability is up there.

GregOz
06-03-2005, 03:39 AM
tedmeister,

thanks very much. Im guessing, if you use the 5.2's but have hit with the TT Warrior you managed to see some greater value in the Hyper Hammer than the Warrior. Would that be right? If so, what made you choose the 5.2?

Im thinking he'd be happiest with something in the 11.5 range as he was wanting to try a lighter weight frame (think his current stick is a 93sq 12.5 ounce one).

When you say, it's a bit harder to hit what do you mean by that? Is it because of the headsize being slightly smaller than the Warrior or a smaller sweetspot?

How do you think the two frames compare on serve, volley and groundstrokes (flat, top and slice) assuming the Hyper Hammer was brought up to the same weight as the Warrior?

Perhaps,given its very high swingweight he'd be better off looking at something (assuming he would prefer a lower initial weight than 11.5) like the Hammer 6.2, the ProStaff Tour 95 or the Prince AirLaunch mp (his price point is under $100 US). Any thoughts on how the 5.2 compares to those?

tedmeister
06-03-2005, 04:22 AM
thanks very much. Im guessing, if you use the 5.2's but have hit with the TT Warrior you managed to see some greater value in the Hyper Hammer than the Warrior. Would that be right? If so, what made you choose the 5.2?

Just had better control and feel with the 5.2. The smaller headsize does make it tougher to hit, also, it is a quarter of an inch longer than standard. That might pose issues for a one hander. Issues of maneuverability comes up because of that high swingweight. The sweetspot is more generous than what you would find in any 95 inch2 Pro staff, plus the sweetspot is up there which suits my baseline game. I hit backhand and forehand slices with it well(I learned my tennis in the dirt :mrgreen: ) Volleys great and stable post adding weight in the handle. Served better with it. Good power off the ground also. I might also add that it swings easier after all that added weight(mine specs out at 11 pts headlight). If he decides on a 5.2, buy a size smaller as there is no trap door to open and add weight(he can bring it to an MRT and have the butt pulled out but that would probably be too much hassle.)

He might find the airlaunch too light and flimsy, plus it does not hold up to frequent stringing in the high range. My vote goes to the TT warrior followed by the Pro staff tour 95. Forget about the 6.2 as he would probably need to modify it as much as a 5.2, and keep in mind that the 6.2 is 27.5 inches long. Chances are, if he hits with all 3 stock frames at the same time, it will be a toss up between the warrior and the tour 95 with the 5.2 coming in 3rd.

BTW, can you still find 5.2s in shops in your area? How much are they going for now? The last time TW had them, they were $129.

GregOz
06-03-2005, 04:54 AM
thanks again tadmeister,
I'll pass all of that information along. Might very well tempt him to rush out and grab one of each. I think he's had someone offer him some new 'old stock' they were selling off. So, in Aussie dollars the 5.2 would have been (dont quote me on this) $164 and the TT Warrior was about $135. That's about $124 and $102 US dollars so not a lot of difference from when you bought yours.

Definately sounds like a frame you either modify or ignore. But, it also sounds like a frame that when its modified plays better than either of the Warrior or the Tour95. You think that sounds about right?

AndrewD
06-03-2005, 06:07 AM
Greg,

He might want to ask himself if he's after a bit more spin or if he just hits flat. Im going right out on a limb here (and apologies to all the Wilson fans) but Ive found the Wilson frames, in general, work better when hitting flat whereas the Prince racquets are a bit easier to generate spin with. No doubt that has a lot to do with the string pattern but, even with its the same for both brands, the Prince just seems to give a bit more 'effortless' bite. The TT Warrior does have the same 16x20 string pattern as the Hyper Hammer but it does have a greater reputation for spin production. One of the guys at the club alternates between a Warrior and a Wilson Hyper Carbon (?, not sure about that). Apparently strings at the same tension with both frames, one headsize is 97sq and the other 95sq. The power difference is very noticeable with the Wilson seeming to offer significantly more power than the Prince. So, if he's after a real burst of power he might like to check out something else.

tschevap
01-11-2006, 08:24 AM
According the Prince, spoke to a Prince rep, the early TT warrior had fabrication defects, but the later TT warriors have been fixed with the throat crack problem.

To determine if your TT Warrior is the older model with the notorious cracking problems, look inside of the throat and look for the label that states tension and string recommendations. There would be a letter in between these brackets < > . The older Warrior would have <A> through <F> The Warriors with the crack fixes are from <G> so on.

The letters corresponds to slight changes on the racket fabrications.



I recently got some Warriors, which have an <Y> in the throat. Now a Warrior of a friend of mine (also a <Y>-Warrior) broke at the throat exactly at the place, where all the Warriors seem to be prone to break!

Now i have to question the above mentioned "fixing" through Prince as the <Y> Warrior seem to break, too...

Did anyone of experience breakage of Warriors "higher" than <F>?

Thank you!

nViATi
01-11-2006, 06:01 PM
The TT Warrior MP is very harsh and stiff. Not arm friendly at all.

tschevap
01-12-2006, 11:05 AM
Not exactly an answer to my question and surprisingly not the same impression most users of the Warrior have, but anyway: thanks.
I wrote an email to Prince with a question concerning the "fixed" Warriors. I will post the results here.

dcheung
01-12-2006, 06:52 PM
I used the HH5.2 for a while due to elbow problem. I modified it by leading it up at the v throat (1 g) and the butt (7 g) but still feel weight at the tip of the racquet. The head heavy (though not as HH as other models) but light weight (even after mod) gives a quick head speed that delivers powerful serve and good baseline rallies with decent control. I also tried the TTW for a few hours which have better feel and touch at net. Personally I prefer the 5.2 and the Response Ti (which I still owned) over the TTW, but using gut on 5.2would certainly enhance the feel.