PDA

View Full Version : Finally the Dual Core Donnay racquets for sale on TW


Miami Tiburon
05-26-2011, 07:46 PM
There finally available, but I do have one question for everyone who has used these frames. Can it be that every Donnay frame X series or now Dual core be low power ? I cant find one that says , low medium , medium . I want to hear from people who have used the different models and see if you agree that they all are low powered. If this is the case its a world record
of low powered models by one Company in the history of racquets .

Thanks !

Power Player
05-26-2011, 07:52 PM
According to the way TW does it, I have to say I am not surpried. They also say the PSTGT is low powered, and that is simply ridiculous.

Plat 99 at 61 RA! 94 at 65! woah..I knew mine was comfortable, but ...interesting.

SW at 315? I dont know about that..i'd day it swings heavier, 320ish..usually TW is high on their swingweights though.

SlowButSure
05-26-2011, 08:04 PM
According to the way TW does it, I have to say I am not surpried. They also say the PSTGT is low powered, and that is simply ridiculous.

Plat 99 at 61 RA! 94 at 65! woah..I knew mine was comfortable, but ...interesting.

SW at 315? I dont know about that..i'd day it swings heavier, 320ish..usually TW is high on their swingweights though.

Yours may well be 320.

My 3 silvers have SWs of 325/327/327, which is great for me, but a good ways off spec/what TW's samples measured.

Being +/-10 in swingweight is really very good. It's not uncommon at all for racquets to be off by more than that.

Power Player
05-26-2011, 08:11 PM
Yeah..it swings light but hits a heavy ball so it is tough to think it would be much less than 320. Did you measure yours on a babolat machine? I need to do that when i can.

Fuji
05-26-2011, 08:24 PM
I've been drooling over the Gold for a few weeks now. Boy I would love to pick one up, darn being broke! :(

Hopefully I can pick one up soon for my collection. I might not even play with it, but it's just so nice!!!

-Fuji

vegasgt3
05-26-2011, 08:31 PM
The Blue 99 is a powerhouse, I am demoing it now and i will buy one it is amazing. I am also demoing the Red 99, not as powerful, but still pretty good. i would not say it is low powered, maybe medium.

highgeer
05-26-2011, 08:52 PM
I would say that the Plat 99 is about 65, Gold 99 about 63 (the weight makes you think it is stiffer, but it is not), and the 94s about the same. The 94s feel stiffer because of the smaller hoop accentuates the Dual Core. I do not feel much flex in a RA 70 racket like APDGT, PDGT, 500 Tour, etc, so I know these Donnays are less stiff than stated. But, they are not a 61 like Rebel 95, Volkl PB 10 Mid, Dunlop 4D 200 Tour, etc. The Silver definitely feels stiff to me, so it is somewhere in the 67-68 range (but the weight might be fooling me). What amazes me is how stable they are for their weight; 11.8, 11.5, and 11.1 are crazy light for how much plow through and stability you get. On really big servers I tend to go want about 13.3+ oz., but these Dual Cores handle it at weights between 10.6 and 11.8. Can you tell I'm impressed?

Mike

Miami Tiburon
05-28-2011, 06:03 AM
any more feedback on the power of the racquets

SFrazeur
05-28-2011, 06:42 AM
Shame TW is bringing in any of the extended length Donnays.

-SF

highgeer
05-28-2011, 06:43 AM
I would definitely call the Gold and Silver lite low powered. To me the Silver has the most followed by the Plat 99, then PLat 94, then Gold 99, Gold 94, Silver Lite. The Silver, and Platinums are quite powerful, but not too powerful.

Mike

HurricaneDominic
05-28-2011, 07:03 AM
I'm really loving the look of the Silver 99!

pshulam
05-28-2011, 07:25 AM
Yours may well be 320.

My 3 silvers have SWs of 325/327/327, which is great for me, but a good ways off spec/what TW's samples measured.

Being +/-10 in swingweight is really very good. It's not uncommon at all for racquets to be off by more than that.
Agreed - that's only about 3% tolerance.

ptr
05-28-2011, 07:25 AM
Regarding stiffness... for me is good, I prefer low/medium powered frames, but if it is true Donnay QC is poooooor.

v1nx
05-28-2011, 08:14 AM
I would definitely call the Gold and Silver lite low powered. To me the Silver has the most followed by the Plat 99, then PLat 94, then Gold 99, Gold 94, Silver Lite. The Silver, and Platinums are quite powerful, but not too powerful.

Mike

highgeer, how would you rate the gold vs silver in terms of comfortability and easy to play with? on specs, their weights are so close but is the gold substantially heavier than the silver? in general, which one do you like to play with?

Power Player
05-28-2011, 08:49 AM
Regarding stiffness... for me is good, I prefer low/medium powered frames, but if it is true Donnay QC is poooooor.

They explain the unstrung stiffness ratings on their site.

Basically the racquets play like they have a higher stiffness than they actually do. So the platinum gives you the power of a 70 stiffness racquet, but is much easier on the arm.

highgeer
05-28-2011, 09:13 AM
v1nx,
The Silver and the Gold are way different. THe Silver is definitely more powerful because of the stiffness and balance (2-3 points HL). I get way more control out of the Gold while still being able to hit a very heavy ball. The silver feels like a more modern rackets(like APDGT, etc.) and the Gold has more of a modern take a on a traditional frame (more stable, more powerful Pro Staff). The difference in SW and overall weight seems small, but the differences are big. THe Silver actually feel heavier to me because of the balance. They both volley very well, but the Gold gives me more control.

Mike

Miami Tiburon
05-28-2011, 09:30 AM
They explain the unstrung stiffness ratings on their site.

Basically the racquets play like they have a higher stiffness than they actually do. So the platinum gives you the power of a 70 stiffness racquet, but is much easier on the arm.

Xenecore technology plays with more power and stiffer than for example
a RA61 hollow racquet because of the high tensile strength and higher
coefficient of restitution , which means how fast a frame returns to original
state after impact. Stiffness during play is Dynamic RA which is higher on
Donnay frames than in hollow racquets.

Limpinhitter
05-28-2011, 10:34 AM
There finally available, but I do have one question for everyone who has used these frames. Can it be that every Donnay frame X series or now Dual core be low power ? I cant find one that says , low medium , medium . I want to hear from people who have used the different models and see if you agree that they all are low powered. If this is the case its a world record
of low powered models by one Company in the history of racquets .

Thanks !

Well, according to TW's sweetspot/power comparison tool, the X-Blue 99 seems have the largest sweetspot and the most power of any racquet on the market except for a handful of oversized game improvement frames. The Dual Core frames aren't up on the tool, yet.

On another note, I posted this question in the Dual Platinum 94 vs. 99 thread. Hopefully, someone can provide an informed answer:

Would someone be good enough to explain the differences between the X and Dual series in terms of construction and playing characteristics? Also, why does the Platnum seem to be the more popular other Dual frames on TT?

Thanks!

ptr
05-28-2011, 10:41 AM
They explain the unstrung stiffness ratings on their site.

Basically the racquets play like they have a higher stiffness than they actually do. So the platinum gives you the power of a 70 stiffness racquet, but is much easier on the arm.

So on the Babolat and other machines there will be less than 70 but in real game it will be 70 yes? as summary - arm friendly...

Power Player
05-28-2011, 11:10 AM
So on the Babolat and other machines there will be less than 70 but in real game it will be 70 yes? as summary - arm friendly...

Yes pretty much.. They feel real good on the arm but have controllable power.

ptr
05-28-2011, 11:17 AM
Yes pretty much.. They feel real good on the arm but have controllable power.

70RA isn't pretty controllable :)

Miami Tiburon
05-28-2011, 05:36 PM
Well, according to TW's sweetspot/power comparison tool, the X-Blue 99 seems have the largest sweetspot and the most power of any racquet on the market except for a handful of oversized game improvement frames. The Dual Core frames aren't up on the tool, yet.

On another note, I posted this question in the Dual Platinum 94 vs. 99 thread. Hopefully, someone can provide an informed answer:

Would someone be good enough to explain the differences between the X and Dual series in terms of construction and playing characteristics? Also, why does the Platnum seem to be the more popular other Dual frames on TT?

Thanks!

X Series - has one core of the xenecore running thru the frame

Dual Core - has 2 cores running thru it

I have even tried a triple core prototype , the more cores increase the power of the frame , but still keep the frames comfortable because xenecore also acts as a dampening agent in the frame.

The platinum even though the construction is the same seems to have a little more pop
and plays a little stiffer than the other models.

AlpineAce
05-28-2011, 11:42 PM
They explain the unstrung stiffness ratings on their site.

Basically the racquets play like they have a higher stiffness than they actually do. So the platinum gives you the power of a 70 stiffness racquet, but is much easier on the arm.

sorry but you are wrong here, it DOES NOT give you the power of a 70 stifness frame. Ive gotten more power out of a 58 stiffness frame than any of the new donnays.

these are still the lowest power frames on the market. Compared to a pure drive, there is no contest. even prestiges have more power than the most powerful donnay. The dual core helped but, I'd still like a bit more power.

v1nx
05-29-2011, 01:53 AM
v1nx,
The Silver and the Gold are way different. THe Silver is definitely more powerful because of the stiffness and balance (2-3 points HL). I get way more control out of the Gold while still being able to hit a very heavy ball. The silver feels like a more modern rackets(like APDGT, etc.) and the Gold has more of a modern take a on a traditional frame (more stable, more powerful Pro Staff). The difference in SW and overall weight seems small, but the differences are big. THe Silver actually feel heavier to me because of the balance. They both volley very well, but the Gold gives me more control.

Mike

Thanks a lot Mike! I'm going for the gold!

ricardo
05-29-2011, 01:45 PM
Use http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/contours.php and click on zone rankings..

you can see that Donnay Blue 99 is the most powerful Donnay racket. Take note however that the x-dual rackets are not yet included in the power zone listings..the x-blue rackets maybe more powerful...

hope this helps..

stevewcosta
05-29-2011, 01:56 PM
Thanks a lot Mike! I'm going for the gold!

Good to hear Mike. Can't wait for my Gold to arrive next week!

tlm
05-29-2011, 02:03 PM
sorry but you are wrong here, it DOES NOT give you the power of a 70 stifness frame. Ive gotten more power out of a 58 stiffness frame than any of the new donnays.

these are still the lowest power frames on the market. Compared to a pure drive, there is no contest. even prestiges have more power than the most powerful donnay. The dual core helped but, I'd still like a bit more power.

I would agree that the donnay rackets are not as powerful as a pure drive, but to say that they are the lowest powered rackets on the market is a real stretch.
Also a prestige is really low powered, many of the donnay rackets have more power than a prestige.

SlowButSure
05-29-2011, 02:37 PM
Use http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/contours.php and click on zone rankings..

you can see that Donnay Blue 99 is the most powerful Donnay racket. Take note however that the x-dual rackets are not yet included in the power zone listings..the x-blue rackets maybe more powerful...

hope this helps..

The blue-99 racquet TWU tested had a SW considerably higher than average (344 with a balance of 33.25, whereas the average was 331). It's very unlikely any Dual Core they test will come close as they have lower SWs accross the board. I'd guess some of the DCs would come out more powerful on TWUs tests, but only if you modified the SW up to a similar range.

SlowButSure
05-29-2011, 02:45 PM
Power of a racquet is pretty individual. As you swing harder, the racquet contributes less (percentage wise). At pro racquet speed, the difference becomes so small that going from an extremely low powered frame to a extremely high powered frame may not even be discernable (power wise, obviously would feel different).

Always have to keep in mind that when people refer to how powerful a racquet is, they are usually just referring to how deep a ball it hits for them. That likely has a lot more to do with stroke mechanics and timing, which can all be thrown off when using a racquet with weight/balance/SW different than what they're used to.

A good example of this was in the TW video review of the BLX Pro Tour. Spencer noted how he got more power from the new racquet as a result of the 18x20 pattern. More likely he got less spin, which resulted in balls landing deeper.

There's a good bet that people that find most racquet too powerful have lower speed swings (where the racquet contributes a larger percentage of power, and thus differences are more apparent) with low amounts of spin (which would also magnify power differences in the racquets).

tlm
05-29-2011, 07:23 PM
Power of a racquet is pretty individual. As you swing harder, the racquet contributes less (percentage wise). At pro racquet speed, the difference becomes so small that going from an extremely low powered frame to a extremely high powered frame may not even be discernable (power wise, obviously would feel different).

Always have to keep in mind that when people refer to how powerful a racquet is, they are usually just referring to how deep a ball it hits for them. That likely has a lot more to do with stroke mechanics and timing, which can all be thrown off when using a racquet with weight/balance/SW different than what they're used to.

A good example of this was in the TW video review of the BLX Pro Tour. Spencer noted how he got more power from the new racquet as a result of the 18x20 pattern. More likely he got less spin, which resulted in balls landing deeper.

There's a good bet that people that find most racquet too powerful have lower speed swings (where the racquet contributes a larger percentage of power, and thus differences are more apparent) with low amounts of spin (which would also magnify power differences in the racquets).

This makes sense, but if the same person is testing different rackets using the same technique then i think that his assessment of the power being to much or not enough should be accurate.

SlowButSure
05-29-2011, 08:23 PM
This makes sense, but if the same person is testing different rackets using the same technique then i think that his assessment of the power being to much or not enough should be accurate.

Sure, it's accurate, for them. But the same racquet that is too powerful for player A, may be underpowered for player B, even if player B is 'better' than A.

tlm
05-29-2011, 08:44 PM
Sure, it's accurate, for them. But the same racquet that is too powerful for player A, may be underpowered for player B, even if player B is 'better' than A.

I agree one of my hitting partners is demoing some rackets, he tries one and says that it is a little dead. I try the same racket and to me it is to powerful, so yes it is highly individual.

Power Player
05-29-2011, 09:13 PM
sorry but you are wrong here, it DOES NOT give you the power of a 70 stifness frame. Ive gotten more power out of a 58 stiffness frame than any of the new donnays.

these are still the lowest power frames on the market. Compared to a pure drive, there is no contest. even prestiges have more power than the most powerful donnay. The dual core helped but, I'd still like a bit more power.

Speak for yourself. The Platinum has plenty of power, and myself and many others will probably think you are wrong instead.

It serves huge and the groundstrokes are real big.

If you think these are the lowest powered frames on the market you need to lift weights or try other sticks. The Dunlop 200s and 300s are some of the lowest powered frames, the dual cores are not even close to low.

tennisfarmer
05-29-2011, 09:24 PM
Speak for yourself. The Platinum has plenty of power, and myself and many others will probably think you are wrong instead.

It serves huge and the groundstrokes are real big.

If you think these are the lowest powered frames on the market you need to lift weights or try other sticks. The Dunlop 200s and 300s are some of the lowest powered frames, the dual cores are not even close to low.

yes, his comments scared me, do you think i the gold 99 or plat 99 would suit me better, I have an all around game, 4.0, I have a two handed backhand and I hit with quite alot of spin,(semi western), also does the plat feel stiff because 70 RA seems very stiff, thanks

Power Player
05-29-2011, 09:29 PM
No, they feel flexible but crisp. Less stiff than a wilson pro staff, but plow the ball just as well.

To me the Gold would be too light..I know the Red 99 was, so I had to go with the platinum. Swings a little lighter than the prestige mid to me.

MMQB14
05-30-2011, 04:43 AM
Hi all

I am very intrigued by the X-Dual Gold 99 and the X-P Dual (102).

I am 43; I have been away for the game for 20 years while playing other sports (mainly soccer & volleyball). I took up tennis again 3 years ago but miss the "feel"/"plow-through" that I had with some of the old school rackets...

Having some wear-n-tear issues with me right shoulder & elbow, I currently play with two ProKennex rackets: 1) PK Ki 5x (against heavier hitters), 2) PK Ki 5 (295) against lighter hitters / for doubles. The Ki 5x sometimes feels a bit hefty at almost 12oz and at 27.5 in. The Ki 5 (295) on the other hand feels really underpowered with a swing weight of only 290.

I play at the 4.0 stroke-level with a double-handed back-hand.

What would you suggest in comparing the X-Dual Gold 99 vs. the X-P Dual?

Miami Tiburon
05-30-2011, 06:21 AM
You have to try the x-p 102 your gonna get more power thanthe Dual Core Gold 99 . There both great sticks very comfortable and stable at impact. It just come down to wether you need the extra power or not. If you dont need the extra power than go with the Gold better for control with the ultra thin beam .

GoodSamaritan
05-30-2011, 11:07 AM
Anyone know if Head pallets will fit on Donnay Dual Cores?

mrkenny
05-30-2011, 12:55 PM
i have been playing with the x99 red for about 6 months no weight strips the 10g butt cap, leather grip, strung at 52lbs. with 110 timo, i am a 4.0 all around
player, if any of you can't play with this racquet with this setup try another sport. by the way the racquet weighs in at 12.2 but don't let the weight scare you it's also 5pts. head light so you can crush the ball

MMQB14
05-30-2011, 01:43 PM
You have to try the x-p 102 your gonna get more power thanthe Dual Core Gold 99 . There both great sticks very comfortable and stable at impact. It just come down to wether you need the extra power or not. If you dont need the extra power than go with the Gold better for control with the ultra thin beam .

OK - I hear from you that the X-P Dual might help me with adding a bit of power on my DHBH (which is still an issue as I am converting from an old-school SHBH slice).

I have one question though:
How does the Dual Core Silver 99 fit in among the Dual Core 99 (more control) and the Dual Core X-P (more power; bigger sweet-spot with its 102in racket head)? Can't quite place what the strengths of the Dual Core Silver 99 are supposed to be as it seems to be positioned to be the racket for "stronger intermediate to advanced players adding a more powerful and crisper feel"...

Miami Tiburon
05-31-2011, 01:26 PM
OK - I hear from you that the X-P Dual might help me with adding a bit of power on my DHBH (which is still an issue as I am converting from an old-school SHBH slice).

I have one question though:
How does the Dual Core Silver 99 fit in among the Dual Core 99 (more control) and the Dual Core X-P (more power; bigger sweet-spot with its 102in racket head)? Can't quite place what the strengths of the Dual Core Silver 99 are supposed to be as it seems to be positioned to be the racket for "stronger intermediate to advanced players adding a more powerful and crisper feel"...

Not much difference between the Silver an the Gold in my opinion
esecially when you can customize both with the Donnay kit

Limpinhitter
05-31-2011, 08:42 PM
X Series - has one core of the xenecore running thru the frame

Dual Core - has 2 cores running thru it

I have even tried a triple core prototype , the more cores increase the power of the frame , but still keep the frames comfortable because xenecore also acts as a dampening agent in the frame.

The platinum even though the construction is the same seems to have a little more pop
and plays a little stiffer than the other models.

Thanks, MT!

Limpinhitter
05-31-2011, 08:46 PM
Use http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/contours.php and click on zone rankings..

you can see that Donnay Blue 99 is the most powerful Donnay racket. Take note however that the x-dual rackets are not yet included in the power zone listings..the x-blue rackets maybe more powerful...

hope this helps..

FYI, from the TWU power/sweetspot combination comparison tool, with the exception of a handful of game improvement frames, the X-Blue 99 appears to have the largest sweetspot and have the most power of any other racquet (player, tweener or otherwise) available from TW.

Check it out here: http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/poweruniverse.cgi

maxpotapov
06-01-2011, 01:59 AM
FYI, from the TWU power/sweetspot combination comparison tool, with the exception of a handful of game improvement frames, the X-Blue 99 appears to have the largest sweetspot and have the most power of any other racquet (player, tweener or otherwise) available from TW.

Check it out here: http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/poweruniverse.cgi

Check out Boris Becker 11 Special Edition 98:
Power Potential: 45.6%
Sweet Zone Size: 21.0 sq. in.

Or KPro Staff 88:
Power Potential: 43%
Sweet Zone Size: 18.55 sq. in.

:shock:

On the other hand,
Babolat Pure Storm Ltd GT (NEW)
Power Potential: 38.2%
Sweet Zone Size: 11.8 sq. in.

Babolat Pure Storm Ltd. GT 2009
Power Potential: 37.5%
Sweet Zone Size: 11.25 sq. in.

MMQB14
06-01-2011, 04:57 AM
Not much difference between the Silver an the Gold in my opinion
esecially when you can customize both with the Donnay kit

Thank you MT - this helps.

So I am thinking the Dual Gold 99 as singles stick (at my 4.0 level).

However, I am still intrigued by the X-P Dual as a potential doubles racket with the ability to customize it:

How's the sweet-spot with the larger head size? Is it stable enough?

Has anybody played with the X-P Dual?

Limpinhitter
06-01-2011, 05:47 AM
Check out Boris Becker 11 Special Edition 98:
Power Potential: 45.6%
Sweet Zone Size: 21.0 sq. in.

Or KPro Staff 88:
Power Potential: 43%
Sweet Zone Size: 18.55 sq. in.

:shock:

On the other hand,
Babolat Pure Storm Ltd GT (NEW)
Power Potential: 38.2%
Sweet Zone Size: 11.8 sq. in.

Babolat Pure Storm Ltd. GT 2009
Power Potential: 37.5%
Sweet Zone Size: 11.25 sq. in.

It does seem counterintuitive, doesn't it! If you look at this tool which measures both power and sweetspot on a graph: http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/poweruniverse.cgi - there are only about 6-7 frames that have both more power and a larger sweet spot than the Donnay X-Blue 99.

The BB and KPS88 you mentioned are two of them. Both are 12.5+ oz frames which supports my premise that mass is probably the most important single factor in measuring racquet power. This, in turn, supports my long held premise that modern frames are not that much more powerful than heavier wood frames.

[Runs for cover]

UWBTennis
06-01-2011, 06:02 AM
It does seem counterintuitive, doesn't it! If you look at this tool which measures both power and sweetspot on a graph: http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/poweruniverse.cgi - there are only about 6-7 frames that have both more power and a larger sweet spot than the Donnay X-Blue 99.

The BB and KPS88 you mentioned are two of them. Both are 12.5+ oz frames which supports my premise that mass is probably the most important single factor in measuring racquet power. This, in turn, supports my long held premise that modern frames are not that much more powerful than heavier wood frames.

[Runs for cover]

I believed that the modern materials actually do a lot more than the wood, if we look at the invention of the graphite racket by Rene Lacoste and patented into the Wilson T-2000 back then, it actually did give a lot more power while being in a lighter package at only a slightly larger head size, now the invention of new technology doesn't seem to do much, the only technology that 5 seem to notice that increases the playability of a frame is youtek from head and the o-ports/ speedport/ exo3 ports from prince, granted I only play with wilson, prince, and head frames before so my opinion is limited.

Miami Tiburon
06-01-2011, 06:33 AM
Thank you MT - this helps.

So I am thinking the Dual Gold 99 as singles stick (at my 4.0 level).

However, I am still intrigued by the X-P Dual as a potential doubles racket with the ability to customize it:

How's the sweet-spot with the larger head size? Is it stable enough?

Has anybody played with the X-P Dual?
I have played with both the X-P Dual Light and the heavier
X P Dual . The great thing about the Xenecore and the fact the racquets
are solid, is stability. Regardless of the weight the light racquets from
Donnay all feel stable.

Limpinhitter
06-01-2011, 07:09 AM
I believed that the modern materials actually do a lot more than the wood, if we look at the invention of the graphite racket by Rene Lacoste and patented into the Wilson T-2000 back then, it actually did give a lot more power while being in a lighter package at only a slightly larger head size, now the invention of new technology doesn't seem to do much, the only technology that 5 seem to notice that increases the playability of a frame is youtek from head and the o-ports/ speedport/ exo3 ports from prince, granted I only play with wilson, prince, and head frames before so my opinion is limited.

Completely contrary to popular opinion back in the wood racquet days, it is now thought that increased frame rigidity and decreased string tension both increase power. IMO, "modern materials" allow a more rigid frame and a lighter weight at the same time. The lighter frame allows for more racquet speed, but, at the cost of less power due to lower mass.

I had already been playing tennis for a few years when the T2000 became THE most popular frame among club level players. I don't know when it was first manufactured. Wood racquets came in 3 weights - light, medium and heavy. As far as I know, there was no standardization of these labels. But, generally unstrung lights were in the 12's, mediums in the 13's and heavies in the 14's. Typically, juniors and ladies used lights. Men used medium and heavy.

To my recollection, the T2000 also came in these 3 weights and did not vary significantly from the norm in weight or head size from wood racquets. No one paid much attention to exact weight or head sizes back then either. By today's standards, the T2000 feels like a club. The stiffness of the T2000 might have been slightly stiffer than wood racquets, but, it was very flexible by today's standards.

The increased power of the T2000 over wood frames was thought to come from the design of the string mechanism which amounted to a heavy wire attached to the inside of the frame in a serpentine pattern with loops in the wire to thread string through. That wire was, of course, much more flexible than the frame itself causing a slight trampoline effect in the string bed. That's where the power was thought to come from. Many pros played the T2000 including BJK, Butch Buchholz, Clark Graebner, Torben Ulrich, Jimmy Connors and a few others. To my knowledge, only Connors stayed with it for good reason. IMO, Connors hit harder with the T2000 than with any graphite frame he later used.

UWBTennis
06-01-2011, 07:28 AM
Completely contrary to popular opinion back in the wood racquet days, it is now thought that increased frame rigidity and decreased string tension both increase power. IMO, "modern materials" allow a more rigid frame and a lighter weight at the same time. The lighter frame allows for more racquet speed, but, at the cost of less power due to lower mass.

I had already been playing tennis for a few years when the T2000 became THE most popular frame among club level players. I don't know when it was first manufactured. Wood racquets came in 3 weights - light, medium and heavy. As far as I know, there was no standardization of these labels. But, generally unstrung lights were in the 12's, mediums in the 13's and heavies in the 14's. Typically, juniors and ladies used lights. Men used medium and heavy.

To my recollection, the T2000 also came in these 3 weights and did not vary significantly from the norm in weight or head size from wood racquets. No one paid much attention to exact weight or head sizes back then either. By today's standards, the T2000 feels like a club. The stiffness of the T2000 might have been slightly stiffer than wood racquets, but, it was very flexible by today's standards.

The increased power of the T2000 over wood frames was thought to come from the design of the string mechanism which amounted to a heavy wire attached to the inside of the frame in a serpentine pattern with loops in the wire to thread string through. That wire was, of course, much more flexible than the frame itself causing a slight trampoline effect in the string bed. That's where the power was thought to come from. Many pros played the T2000 including BJK, Butch Buchholz, Clark Graebner, Torben Ulrich, Jimmy Connors and a few others. To my knowledge, only Connors stayed with it for good reason. IMO, Connors hit harder with the T2000 than with any graphite frame he later used.

Sorry I'm not old enough to know the difference :P, thanks for the educational lesson though.

DrT
07-08-2011, 02:19 AM
v1nx,
The Silver and the Gold are way different. THe Silver is definitely more powerful because of the stiffness and balance (2-3 points HL). I get way more control out of the Gold while still being able to hit a very heavy ball. The silver feels like a more modern rackets(like APDGT, etc.) and the Gold has more of a modern take a on a traditional frame (more stable, more powerful Pro Staff). The difference in SW and overall weight seems small, but the differences are big. THe Silver actually feel heavier to me because of the balance. They both volley very well, but the Gold gives me more control.

Mike

Been looking for a detailed thread on the Donnays.Thanks for the info.Re: the Gold 99,how did it fair with flat-shot hitting?I have had a bad experience with them Head Youtek Extreme Pros(16/19 pattern).All my flat shots were sailing long(May b the stiffness rating?).Currently using the Six.One 95 18/20,maneuverability/RH speed and head size downsides!The Gold 99 my prime interest but wary of probable loss of control due to the 16/19 cos i hit flat(1st Serve/FH/BH)??Avoiding the PlatINUM d2 the stiffness rating,fear for my arm en over-hitting!Please give input,thanks.

10ACE
07-08-2011, 06:14 AM
Been looking for a detailed thread on the Donnays.Thanks for the info.Re: the Gold 99,how did it fair with flat-shot hitting?I have had a bad experience with them Head Youtek Extreme Pros(16/19 pattern).All my flat shots were sailing long(May b the stiffness rating?).Currently using the Six.One 95 18/20,maneuverability/RH speed and head size downsides!The Gold 99 my prime interest but wary of probable loss of control due to the 16/19 cos i hit flat(1st Serve/FH/BH)??Avoiding the PlatINUM d2 the stiffness rating,fear for my arm en over-hitting!Please give input,thanks.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=370945&page=58

Starts somewhere close to that page.

DrT
07-09-2011, 01:53 AM
Will check it out,many thanks.

cayzi
08-07-2011, 03:41 PM
Thank you MT - this helps.

So I am thinking the Dual Gold 99 as singles stick (at my 4.0 level).

However, I am still intrigued by the X-P Dual as a potential doubles racket with the ability to customize it:

How's the sweet-spot with the larger head size? Is it stable enough?

Has anybody played with the X-P Dual?

So what did you find out about GOLD, SILVER or XP Dual?

Did you bought them or not in the end.

Many thanks!

MMQB14
08-08-2011, 04:17 AM
>So what did you find out about GOLD, SILVER or XP Dual?
>Did you bought them or not in the end.

Bought the Gold99 and the X-P Dual at the end. Use the X-P Dual for doubles resp. when I play against my wife and therefore don't face heavy pace.

The Gold99 is my singles racquet.

cayzi
08-08-2011, 04:34 AM
>So what did you find out about GOLD, SILVER or XP Dual?
>Did you bought them or not in the end.

Bought the Gold99 and the X-P Dual at the end. Use the X-P Dual for doubles resp. when I play against my wife and therefore don't face heavy pace.

The Gold99 is my singles racquet.

good!

did you manage to compare gold vs. silver?

MMQB14
08-08-2011, 01:51 PM
>did you manage to compare gold vs. silver?

my wife plays with the silver lite racquet. it definitely plays stiffer than both the gold99 and the x-p dual (she's even able to string it with tf black code as she has no shoulder/arm issues and therefore hits with a lot of spin).

the x-p dual is definitely the most comfortable racquet between the gold and silver. it also is more forgiving if you don't manage to hit the sweet spot regularly.

mx x-dual set-up is the following: 10gr butt-cap and the 3gr slide weights at 3 and 9 o'clock. it nows weighs almost the same as the gold99. if i have off day and don't manage to hit well with the gold99, i am able to switch to the x-p dual and get some more forgiveness on off-center hits.

hope this helps.

cayzi
08-08-2011, 02:52 PM
my wife plays with the silver lite racquet.

Which spec of Silver lite does she have.

I can have BAR code starts with: 289328(weight+balance) or 286329.

MMQB14
08-08-2011, 03:46 PM
Which spec of Silver lite does she have.

I can have BAR code starts with: 289328(weight+balance) or 286329.

i think she has the 286329 barcode.

tlm
08-08-2011, 03:56 PM
>did you manage to compare gold vs. silver?

my wife plays with the silver lite racquet. it definitely plays stiffer than both the gold99 and the x-p dual (she's even able to string it with tf black code as she has no shoulder/arm issues and therefore hits with a lot of spin).

the x-p dual is definitely the most comfortable racquet between the gold and silver. it also is more forgiving if you don't manage to hit the sweet spot regularly.

mx x-dual set-up is the following: 10gr butt-cap and the 3gr slide weights at 3 and 9 o'clock. it nows weighs almost the same as the gold99. if i have off day and don't manage to hit well with the gold99, i am able to switch to the x-p dual and get some more forgiveness on off-center hits.

hope this helps.



Did you mean the silver is less stiff than the gold? I know it is listed a few points less and to me it seemed more flexible than the gold.

levy1
08-09-2011, 06:18 AM
Has anyone hit with the Silver light and the extended silver light? Are the two frames playing about the same?

cayzi
08-09-2011, 06:39 AM
I need a recommendation for a good multi string for Silver and XP Dual and what tension for 3.5 player.

Thanks

levy1
08-09-2011, 07:56 AM
I need a recommendation for a good multi string for Silver and XP Dual and what tension for 3.5 player.

Thanks
If you like crisp I use Klip Natural gut 18Ga mains and Head Rip Control 17ga crosses.

MMQB14
08-09-2011, 02:19 PM
Did you mean the silver is less stiff than the gold? I know it is listed a few points less and to me it seemed more flexible than the gold.

According to the TW stiffness specs: Gold99 - 63 // SilverLite99 - 61 so yes the Silver is more flexible.

What I meant was that with the TF BlackCode string-bed the Silver Lite FELT more stiff playing than my Gold99 and its VS Team string set-up.

Sorry for the confusion.

Mig1NC
08-09-2011, 03:26 PM
According to the TW stiffness specs: Gold99 - 63 // SilverLite99 - 61 so yes the Silver is more flexible.

What I meant was that with the TF BlackCode string-bed the Silver Lite FELT more stiff playing than my Gold99 and its VS Team string set-up.

Sorry for the confusion.

Here is the comparison of the TW specs:
http://www.racquetfinder.com/compare.php?pcode=DDCG99%3BDDCS99%3BDCSL99&x=64&y=29

Donnay claims the silver is stiffer than the gold, but TW testing shows otherwise.

Almost all manufacturers list stiffness on unstrung frames, TW tests strung frames on an RDC machine. Most racquets loose about 3pts of stiffness when strung.

For some reason I think stiffness characteristics change more with Donnay racquets and maybe the RDC machine doesn't quite account for that.

Another thing to consider is that RDC machines only list stiffness for a single point of flex. A racquet may be stiffer in the hoop and flexier in the throat and read with less stiffness on an RDC but still have more power than their stiffness may indicate.

tlm
08-09-2011, 09:03 PM
According to the TW stiffness specs: Gold99 - 63 // SilverLite99 - 61 so yes the Silver is more flexible.

What I meant was that with the TF BlackCode string-bed the Silver Lite FELT more stiff playing than my Gold99 and its VS Team string set-up.

Sorry for the confusion.

You are comparing rackets with one strung with poly and the other strung with gut? Uh not a very good idea the racket with poly would obviously feel stiffer than the other with nat. gut.

tlm
08-12-2011, 03:48 PM
I have made the switch from the x 99 white to the dual core silver lite. Both are great rackets but the sl is really nice, it serves better and puts even more spin and juice on the ball than the white does.

I have been demoing all the donnay rackets for months now. The x series do have a more precise feel and distinct hit. But the dual core seem to be more comfortable and vibration is really eliminated.

They both have their strong points and it is a personnel preference of which one works out better for different players. But to me the donnays are different than all the other rackets out there.

The sl with 10 grams added to butt cap weighs in at 11.2 ounces with a 6 point head light balance. This is a pretty light stick but the dual core makes it feel and play with more plow through and stability than its specs.

I would suggest to anyone interested in these rackets to take your time and demo them all. Because they play different than what most rackets do. The heavier versions swing easier than other sticks of the same weight and the lighter ones are more solid than other rackets of that weight.

gd!
08-13-2011, 06:15 AM
Out of a dozend frames same dealer has currently in stock
X-Silver 1x 68, 2x69, rest 70
X-Gold 1x63, 2x64, rest 65

Discrepancies are larger in between X-Silver weight from 300 till 310, balance from 318 till 325. That's not too close, though.

Mig1NC
08-13-2011, 08:33 AM
Out of a dozend frames same dealer has currently in stock
X-Silver 1x 68, 2x69, rest 70
X-Gold 1x63, 2x64, rest 65

Discrepancies are larger in between X-Silver weight from 300 till 310, balance from 318 till 325. That's not too close, though.

Did you get that from the bar code or the label?

gd!
08-13-2011, 08:46 AM
Did you get that from the bar code or the label?

Yep.

Highly recommend to ask dealer for barcode info to choose racquets which provide close specs, however imo such barcodes are great anyway.

Mig1NC
08-13-2011, 10:49 AM
Yeah. That is great, I wish every manufacturer did that.