PDA

View Full Version : Question regarding flex


Bloodshed
05-23-2011, 04:43 PM
What's the difference if I play with a Speed Pro that has a sw of 345 with a stiffness of 70 vs a flexy frame PT57A leaded up to a sw of 345 but with a flex of 59?

Is it just more arm friendly and a little less power?

OldButGame
05-23-2011, 04:57 PM
The flex pulls some of the 'force' off your shots. The stiffer stick will be more powerful all other things being equal. (also harder on your body)

Fuji
05-23-2011, 05:01 PM
Yup! OldButGame has it pretty much right on the nose. More flex = more dwell time vs More stiffness = less dwell time and more power all others being equal.

It also depends on where the flex is, (IE: in the throat, or in the head.)

-Fuji

Bloodshed
05-23-2011, 05:06 PM
Yup! OldButGame has it pretty much right on the nose. More flex = more dwell time vs More stiffness = less dwell time and more power all others being equal.

It also depends on where the flex is, (IE: in the throat, or in the head.)

-Fuji

How can you tell if the flex is in the throat or in the head if you don't mind me asking?

Fuji
05-23-2011, 05:10 PM
For me at least, it's much more of a "feel" type of thing. My RQiS1Tour has it's flex mostly in the throat and when you hit the ball, it feels like the shaft itself is moving and then flinging it back, sort of like hitting with a wood racket.

In the hoop/head, your stick won't "bend" as much, but it will still have that softer feel. I believe that the C10 Pro's have this feeling, and my PSC 6.1 does as well. It's all very subjective and I'm sure someone can go into much more detail then I can. :)

As for just checking stat wise, I'm not even sure there is a way to tell where the stick flexes, it's more of a trial thing; for me at least!

-Fuji

Bloodshed
05-23-2011, 06:35 PM
For me at least, it's much more of a "feel" type of thing. My RQiS1Tour has it's flex mostly in the throat and when you hit the ball, it feels like the shaft itself is moving and then flinging it back, sort of like hitting with a wood racket.

In the hoop/head, your stick won't "bend" as much, but it will still have that softer feel. I believe that the C10 Pro's have this feeling, and my PSC 6.1 does as well. It's all very subjective and I'm sure someone can go into much more detail then I can. :)

As for just checking stat wise, I'm not even sure there is a way to tell where the stick flexes, it's more of a trial thing; for me at least!

-Fuji

Hmm it's been quite some time since I last demoed a C10 Pro so I don't quite remember the flex feel. Hmm can you tell from the Speed, Radical and Prestige Lines which one that flexes in the head and which one from the throat? That might help me out a little better.

Thanks.

TheBoom
05-23-2011, 06:57 PM
I belive that the radical and psltd gt flex in the hoop? I know my 300 tour flex's in the throat area

Fuji
05-23-2011, 07:37 PM
I believe the radical is in the hoop and the prestige is in the throat... If I remember correctly! I've never played with the speed, that I can remember so I can't help with that one sorry!

-Fuji

Bloodshed
05-23-2011, 08:33 PM
I believe the radical is in the hoop and the prestige is in the throat... If I remember correctly! I've never played with the speed, that I can remember so I can't help with that one sorry!

-Fuji

That definately helps since the Prestige Mid and Speed Pro flexes the same way and they are my 2 fav demos soo far.

One last thing if it's not too much to ask but the KBlade Series (KBlade 98, KBlade Tour), the Donnay racquets and Vantage Racquets, and the PB 10 Mid, which ones flexes in the throat?

Fuji
05-24-2011, 03:25 PM
For sure! :)

The PB10Mid felt like it flexed sort of everywhere tbh. A lot in the hoop and a bit in the throat. I thought it was a super comfortable stick, but a bit too expensive for me to justify buying atm.

I haven't played with either Donnay or Vantage, but a lot of people on here have and they might be willing to pitch in.

The KBlade 98 flexed a lot in the hoop if I remember correctly. It had a sort of "cupping" feel in the middle of the string bed. I could be wrong on this one since I haven't played with one for over a year.

Hope it helps!

-Fuji

Tommy Haas
05-24-2011, 04:19 PM
Does the new Dunlop Bio 200 Lite flex in the hoop or throat? Can you compare it with the old MW 200G? That racket was really flexible in the throat which I liked. I just didn't like the dense string pattern which is why I'm considering the Bio 200 Lite now. What's the real flex rating of this racket? TW says it's 65, Dunlop 63, and TE 57.

Fuji
05-24-2011, 04:21 PM
I'm not sure if this is directed at me, but I haven't played with any of the Dunlop 200's as of yet. :( I hope to soon!

-Fuji

fuzz nation
05-24-2011, 07:05 PM
Something that's worth considering in terms of "power" when referring to a racquet. While the stiffer frame will typically have a higher measure of "pop" or more lively response off the strings, it can be tougher to control shots with that more powerful racquet. Another frame with more flex that's otherwise similar in layout may have a lot more control and predictability on the courts.

So while a stiffer frame might have more power, the softer racquet might allow you to play with more power. That greater control that's enjoyed with the more flexible option may allow a player to take bigger cuts at the ball and still keep those shots down on the courts. I like a stiffer frame for snappy volleys and serves, but a softer racquet with enough heft and stability can thump a serve just fine while also giving me night-and-day better spin and control with my strokes.

One isn't necessarily better than the other. I've found some stiff racquets to be too harsh and "hot" in their response, but I've also had a go with a few super-softies that were just too dead for me to be able to punch the ball around the court without a whole lot of extra effort.

Fuji
05-24-2011, 07:09 PM
Something that's worth considering in terms of "power" when referring to a racquet. While the stiffer frame will typically have a higher measure of "pop" or more lively response off the strings, it can be tougher to control shots with that more powerful racquet. Another frame with more flex that's otherwise similar in layout may have a lot more control and predictability on the courts.

So while a stiffer frame might have more power, the softer racquet might allow you to play with more power. That greater control that's enjoyed with the more flexible option may allow a player to take bigger cuts at the ball and still keep those shots down on the courts. I like a stiffer frame for snappy volleys and serves, but a softer racquet with enough heft and stability can thump a serve just fine while also giving me night-and-day better spin and control with my strokes.

One isn't necessarily better than the other. I've found some stiff racquets to be too harsh and "hot" in their response, but I've also had a go with a few super-softies that were just too dead for me to be able to punch the ball around the court without a whole lot of extra effort.

Hey Fuzz! If you don't mind me asking, which rackets were those. I have yet to play with a stick that is too dead. It's become sort of a hobby of mine to play with super low powered sticks. :)

-Fuji

fuzz nation
05-25-2011, 10:36 AM
Hey Fuzz! If you don't mind me asking, which rackets were those. I have yet to play with a stick that is too dead. It's become sort of a hobby of mine to play with super low powered sticks. :)

-Fuji

Howdy amigo.

I have to rate our old 6.1 Classics as rather powerful racquets, given their stiffness and heft. I've only used a couple of other frames that were even more hot and uncontrollable for me in an all court role, including the Yonex RDS 002 Tours - okay for serve and volley, but just couldn't rein them in around the baseline and generate decent spin without excessive effort.

Since I'm used to a racquet with heft and the inherent stability that comes with that, the softer RQiS 1 Tour was borderline too dead for me until I put a few inches of lead tape at 3 and 9 o'clock. That extra inertia was a big help for me with that one - not sure if you've experimented with any in that frame yourself.

TW's Limited Edition of the Donnay Pro One 95 was a soft, old-school racquet with an ocean of control on hand, but even when I strung that frame with livelier multifiber such as X-1 Biphase, my ability to really bully the ball with authority was always rather limited. Volleys had nowhere near the zip with that frame compared with the 6.1's, but I could swing away with almost no worry of spraying my strokes.

My super hefty "training racquets" are a pair of LM Prestige mids with a lot of lead tape on the handles to give them comfortable HL balance (around 11 points HL and 13.4 oz.). While they're certainly hefty and stable, they're also pretty soft and relatively lifeless. I can crush the ball with control when I take a full rip with those frames, but blocking or punching the ball with some touch is a whole lot more difficult for me. Those racquets are only fun for me at full speed.

I currently enjoy some old Prince NXG mids, which are sort of civilized alternatives to those Prestiges. They have similar flex and balance, a little less heft, but a good deal more touch for me along with phenomenal spin potential. These frames actually changed my mind about the idea of dense sting patterns making less spin. While the NXG mids are what I'd call low-powered, I'd rate them as mellow, not dead.

Fuji
05-25-2011, 04:18 PM
Oh great! That's pretty nifty!

Yeah I added just one PS Power strip to each side @ 3 and 9 on the RQiS Tour. It REALLY helped serving I found. It just added that nice bit of plow when going for heaters down the T.

That Donnay Pro One 95 seems interesting! I'd love to try it out some day! Also your Prestige mids sound like a joy to hit with! Those are some good training rackets!

I've never even heard of Prince NXG mids! When were they released???

-Fuji

fuzz nation
05-26-2011, 07:54 AM
The thing that looks especially attractive to me with the current crop of Donnays is the customizing kit that you can get for them. Two of their "94" models that I'm hoping to try at some point both look nice and soft, but they also don't have the HL balance that I like in my gear in their stock setup. Those kits allow for adding weights to the buttcap as well as stabilizing weight out at 3/9 o'clock on the hoop (how cool is that?).

Compared with the TW edition of the Pro One 95, these new Donnays look phenomenal to me.

The Prince NXG was Prince's grommet-free racquet that they put out right before their O3 generation of frames. I suppose they're around eight or ten years old. The mid is around 13.0 oz. stock with a rather narrow beam (18 mm?), 92 sq. inches, 18x20 pattern, and a flex rating at maybe 59.

The mid-plus has a 100" hoop, 16x19 pattern, one extra mm of beam width and one more tick on the stiffness rating, 12.5 oz., and 27.25" length (the mid is 27"). Both have a lot of HL balance and Tennis magazine gave the mid-plus model a top rating among a batch that they reviewed in the year they released. They even put out an OS model, but I haven't used one.

I've found a great "fit" with the NXG mids, which have a bit of the old "upside-down teardrop" head shape. Despite their smaller hoops, all I have to do is wave them at the ball and it's easy for me to consistently find the sweet-spot. Their heft lets me club the ball when I want, but I can get circus act spin with these on both my strokes and serves. Plus, their flex is super easy on my arm - I string with 17 ga. syn. gut.

In my view, the mid-plus seems to be superior in some ways to the Volkl C10 Pro 98, especially in terms of spin potential. The NXG's have been criticized for having overly muted feel with their "Air Handles", but I haven't had that problem. I'd expect the mid-plus Donnays to perform somewhere in the neighborhood of the NXG mp's. Their flex ratings are quite low and their open string patterns may help to churn out some funky rpm's on the ball.

Sorry for any hijacking here, but at least we're talking about soft racquets.