View Full Version : Pls compare: Slaz X1 & Fischer Pro Extreme FT
06-04-2005, 07:54 PM
Seeing the similar specs between the Slaz X1 & Fischer Pro Extreme FT, I wonder how they perform in comparison. Of course, the flex rating is quite far apart ( Slaz: 64; Fischer: 58 ).
I'm interested in the two rackets, but need to decide on one. Please provide info on various aspects of the rackets' performance. Also performance right out of the box and any mods made. I would appreciate you providing info on your string type and tension, too.
So far there's no direct comparison between the two in TW's comparisons. Only some comparisons made by BreakPoint and NBM on the Slaz X1 to other rackets, and one comparison made by Radical Tourist on the Fischer to something else.
At present I'm using the PS Tour 90 (about 340 grams strung and with lead). It would be nice if some comparison to my racket can also be provided.
06-06-2005, 05:25 AM
These are very different racquets suited for different games. I have used and own both.
The Pro Extreme FT is a soft, slightly extended length racquet best suited for a baseline-oriented game. Even though it is very headlight I find it best from the baseline. Netplay with it is a bit awkward due to the extra length. Although small it is noticeable, IMO. It is very low-powered due to its flex, and has a small sweetspot. Serves very well flat, spin is average. It is very comfortable with a dampened feeling. In fact it is probably the softest and most comfortable racquet I've played with. The Pro Extreme FT is a very love-it-or-hate it type racquet. It isn't very popular, and for good reason. It just doesn't have an all-around appeal due to it's "extreme" nature of low stiffness and low power.
The Slazenger really works best with a chip-n-charge all-court type game. This is a very spin-friendly racquet that also volleys very well. It's a stiff racquet though, which can be off-putting for some. While not exactly harsh, it does feel more raw than the Fischer. The X-series handle and shock absorbing material gives it a slightly more muted feel than say a PS 6.0 95. That dampening counteracts some of the stiffness, making it a reasonably comfortable racquet. It can get stiff and boardy with the wrong string however. You can get very good kick serves out of it--lots of spin--but as a result I found it harder to hit flat serves. Groundstrokes are not exactly its strength due to its headlight balance, and it feels that way, like there's less mass in the head. I couldn't get as much oomph on my groundies as other racquets, but heavy topspin is easy to hit. The sweetspot isn't huge, but larger than the Fischer's, and is situated lower in the stringbed. The Slazenger has a good amount of power, much more than the Fischer.
I actually enjoy the Fischer more than the Slazenger. It may not seem that way from my review, but it's mostly due to the fact that the Slazenger is a bit more accessible and would appeal to a larger audience.
Let me just say that I played about a year w/ the Fischer Pro Extreme FT. I then switched to the Slazenger for a few months, looking for a better all-court racquet with slightly more power and better spin. That was too far a jump for me. I then tried the Fischer Pro No. 1. I find it to be the perfect compromise of these two racquets. I am completely satisfied with it and IMO has all the strengths of the Extreme FT & X1.
Have owned a PEFT and currently own an X1 and agree 100% with Craig's comments. Try a crisp string in either frame as both are very well-damped. I currently have Sensation in my X1 and it is way too mushy for this frame.
06-06-2005, 09:05 PM
Thanks Craig & 007.
Sad to say I can't get the Pro No. 1 here in Thailand. However I can get the Pro No. One FT (I'll call it here: P1FT). You have any idea how it plays in comparison to the Pro No. 1.
Now that we're getting into Fischer's range of 98 sq.in., 27.4" rackets, how would you (or anyone) compare the P1FT to the Pro TOUR FT? Which one of the two rackets would be more of an all round racket? And which one would be better for returns?
I play a mix of flats, slices and tops off both wings. Don't volley much but can do as needed.
06-07-2005, 05:26 AM
First off, I've never hit with the Pro Tour FT. But knowing what I know about the P1FT, which I have hit with, I'd bet the Pro Tour FT would be much better suited for returns and all-around.
The P1FT is pretty different from the Pro No 1. It's lighter for one thing, and it has the very dampened FT feel (all the FT series racquets are very dampened). It's lower powered than the Pro No. 1, and feels rather light and somewhat less stable in comparison. The sweetspot is smaller as well. It also is 27.4" whereas the orig Pro No. 1 is 27" even. It's not necessarily a bad racquet, but it doesn't have near as many fans as the original Pro No. 1.
I don't know much about the Pro Tour FT. NoBadMojo here on the boards did a review of one, maybe he could step in and help. From what I've heard, it's a good racquet from the baseline and decent all-round easy swinging racquet. It's sure to have more pop than the Pro Extreme FT (and probably the P1FT), and the 98" head is somewhat forgiving. As an "all-around" racquet, I'd bet the Pro Tour FT would be better than the P1FT.
06-08-2005, 07:20 PM
Thanks again Craig. So I think I'll have to wait for input from NBM. :)
06-09-2005, 10:15 AM
I've tried the pro tour ft and the pro no.1 ft....I did not like the pro no.1 ft at all...it felt sluggish, didn't really have pop OR much control....the Pro Tour FT on the other hand is a sweet racquet. Even though it is 12 oz., it is fairly easy to swing , with a manageable swingweight and very headlight. THe extended length is great for enhanced spin potential and power. It plays best with a softer powerful string near or below the mid-range. I think it would play a little too stiff and unforgiving if it were strung at 60 lbs. or higher...in other words, it seems pretty sensitive to tension. Pro Tour FT has wonderful control on every shot in the book. Great slices, great volleys, good serving, excellent groundstrokes. THe only thing I didn't like about it was the Fischer "square grip" shape, and the somewhat awkward feeling, wide throat which felt strange in my off hand while taking the racquet back. Pretty small gripes I admit....oh...and although it has good spin potential , it was not as good as the racquet I was coming from. But if you are looking for something that has tons of control and decent comfort without sacrificing too much in the areas of comfort and manueverability, it's a good choice. You could probably alter the grip shape if you went down a size and modified it with electrical tape or something, I just didn't want to fool with it.
06-09-2005, 11:12 AM
i get the fischer frames all mixed up other than the pro1, but craig sez to jump in about the one i playtested (whatever it is called)...it's more demandng than the pro1...less power and smaller sweetspot. it's for very very precise ball strikers...it feels amazing within the swetspot but jarring outside of it, and if you miss the sweetspot (which isnt hard to do), you will hit a nothing ball which any good player will gobble up and either hit a winner or get you on your horse. i would say this is a 5.0 frame. i found it really nice and solid and maneuverable even given it's extra length, and it's good at everything if you have the skillset to use it..the X1 is more forgiving sweetspotwise and has a little more juice..it also plays firmer even w. the handle dampening system. hope this helps
06-10-2005, 10:04 AM
Thanks Mono & NBM. I'm actually looking for a new racket for my son (12 y-o). He's currently playing with my PS Tour 90 and is doing OK with it and he's got my style of play. But, as NBM as always commented, the game of today is more powerful. I myself do have trouble at times with the small head of the PS Tour 90. And I can see the black cloud looming over the horizon for my son, too.
So, I need a little more information from anyone who has played or tested with the Fischer Pro Tour FT AND the Slaz X-1.
The reason I need to dick deep into these rackets is because if the X-1 is really better in all aspects, I need to ask my customer to carry a couple of them from the UK for me. I can't get it here in Thailand.
Please help and thanks.
** A comparison of the Slaz X-1 to any Wilson 95 sq.in. head is also welcomed and very much appreciated. **
06-10-2005, 05:18 PM
if you try the Fischer Pro Tour FT at a tension of 54-58 lbs., it will feel a lot less demanding in terms of sweetspot...I tried one strung at 60 lbs,. and as NBMJ says, it felt like you had to hit the ball really precisely on every shot....I'd say probably a 4.5 and above racquet....but at lower tension, I felt confident using it, at my 4.0 level....its maneuverability, 98" head, and the extra pop and spin you get from the extended length makes it feel less demanding to me than something like a PS 6.0, 6.1, Pro Extreme FT, Dunlop 200g, etc. But then again, it happens to excel at most of the things that I am particularly good at, so maybe it would feel more demanding to some other 4.0's.
I think it is fairly similar to an excellent Yonex racquet, the MP Tour-5, although you have to add some lead to the Tour-5 to get it to the same weight as the Pro Tour FT...but they are of similar specs otherwise. Are you sure though that your son will want to switch to an extended length racquet after coming from the Wilson? It might be a lot to get used to...a much bigger head and also .5" of length....also does he have a 1 or 2-handed backhand? I was using extended length racquets for a while, with a 1-hander, but I am now finding that either standard 27" or 27.25" (very rare) gives me more control on my backhand....27.5" like the Pro Tour Ft would be fine for a 2-handed backhand baseliner though I think....same can be said for playing at the net.....serves...well, extended length can really give you a little more pop and spin, as well as some good angles. Just something to consider....
06-10-2005, 07:52 PM
My son plays a one handed BH. His strokes resemble mine (of course), you know, those old school strokes and grips. I teach him the old strokes for now until they are well-developed and then I'll teach him the more "modern" strokes later. He likes to volley. I'd want to get him a racket that he can grow comfortably into.
The thing with the Pro Tour FT, as I see in the picture and the real thing, there's the little "bulge' at the butt. Does the length 27.4" include the bulge? And is the 0.4" extension measured in decimal of an inch or is it 4/8"?
The funny thing with me is I'm not a brand fan eventhough I'm a brand communication consultant! That's why I'm looking at the Fischer and the Salz!
06-11-2005, 08:21 AM
as with most racquets, the length includes the buttcap...however with Fischers the buttcap is barely existant...some people find this to be awkward....no buttcap to keep your hand from slidding off the end...others would find this to be an advantage as you can grip the racquet as close to the butt end as possible....as for the length...it is gonna be 27 and 4/10" I think...I remember it was just a hair shorter than my 27.5" racquets.
06-11-2005, 11:07 AM
Thanks for all the responses.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.