PDA

View Full Version : Almost convinced to abandon Wilson...Quality Control is unbelievable.


Arthuro
07-25-2011, 12:17 PM
The quality control from wilson is terrible. I sent a racquet back that was 344 grams (stock), 6 pts HL, and had a swing weight of 324 kg/cm2. Mind you this is well out of the specs of the other 11 frames I own which all weight 342 grams, 8 pts HL, and have a swingweight of 315 kg/cm2.

So I get a letter back saying.Upon inspection, our technicians conclude that the racquet you submitted was within the acceptable specification range for weight and balance. It did indeed measure 6 pts HL in the strung condition, which is within the allowable tolerance for that specific frame...we hope this decision will not discourage you from using Wilson products in the future."

I am lost. In 4 years, I have never sent a racquet back for B.S reasons. It has to be horribly out of spec or bubbling up cosmetically. For them to admit it is indeed the specs I measured, but within their manufacturing specs, when all 11 of my other frames are lighter seems unacceptable. Perhaps they are correct, but how can I use it if my other frames are modified and still weigh less and have a lower swing weight than this stock frame.

This is ridiculous. Does anyone think I am over reacting? If they don't make this right...I am having a K Blade Tour auction.

CDestroyer
07-25-2011, 12:27 PM
I don't get why its such a big deal for people to get a 30 dollar scale, balance board and lead tape to match your racquets up. You are whining over a discrepancy less than an ounce.

HiroProtagonist
07-25-2011, 12:27 PM
Frankly 2gs and 2pts balance variance is tiny compared to other cases I have seen. Yes you are unlucky that the frame happens to be on the heavy side of the variance but I don't think you can blame Wilson for not handing you a new frame.

VGP
07-25-2011, 12:28 PM
Two points head balanced and two grams heavier?

Man, what are you expecting?

Feel lucky you got 10 other frames at the specs you want.

If you want them spot on to 342g, 8 pts headlight, you'll have to pay extra for matching to spec.

Fed Kennedy
07-25-2011, 12:28 PM
if you are ordering wilsons order those suckers matched.

TheOneHander
07-25-2011, 12:30 PM
I don't get why its such a big deal for people to get a 30 dollar scale, balance board and lead tape to match your racquets up. You are whining over a discrepancy less than an ounce.

Frankly 2gs and 2pts balance variance is tiny compared to other cases I have seen. Yes you are unlucky that the frame happens to be on the heavy side of the variance but I don't think you can blame Wilson for not handing you a new frame.

Two points head balanced and two grams heavier?

Man, what are you expecting?

Feel lucky you got 10 other frames at the specs you want.

If you want them spot on to 342g, 8 pts headlight, you'll have to pay extra for matching to spec.

/thread. ......

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 12:32 PM
I am confused here...the racquet I play with is lighter and I have 11 of them matched. You cannot match a heavier racquet with a higher swingweight and balance without changing the other 10 of them. All the weight is in the hoop. If you put in the calculations to the TW calculator you will see it doesn't work. Try it.

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 12:38 PM
I don't get why its such a big deal for people to get a 30 dollar scale, balance board and lead tape to match your racquets up. You are whining over a discrepancy less than an ounce.

Perhaps you didn't notice I have a prince precision tuning center. If someone can make this racquet fit the specs I gave without changing the other 11 let me know. I measured it and tried to fit it before I sent it back. So your position is that while I matched all the other racquets I purchased from wilson to fit and corrected variances of 5-7 grams...because this one is the heaviest of the bunch its my problem? So now I should suck it up and add even more lead to the other 11 or so because of one bad apple. So now just play with a heavier racquet and totally different balance and 10-15 grams of difference in the swingweight...mind you this is not overgripped...which is 4-5 grams to static weight.

VGP
07-25-2011, 12:39 PM
I know you can't match the heavier frame to the lighter ones without bringing them all up to different specs.....

Why not sell the heavy one and get another one that matches your other 10?

Even Fischer's no tolerance spec guarantee was for static weight and not balance. There's only so much a company can do to make it cost effective for them.

If you want them spot on to your specs like I said pay the extra to TW to spec match off the shelf or better still call up RPNY or P1.

Larrysümmers
07-25-2011, 12:41 PM
I know you can't match the heavier frame to the lighter ones without bringing them all up to different specs.....

Why not sell the heavy one and get another one that matches your other 10?

Even Fischer's no tolerance spec guarantee was for static weight and not balance. There's only so much a company can do to make it cost effective for them.

If you want them spot on to your specs like I said pay the extra to TW to spec match off the shelf or better still call up RPNY or P1.

yeah pretty much sums everything up.

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 12:44 PM
I know you can't match the heavier frame to the lighter ones without bringing them all up to different specs.....

Why not sell the heavy one and get another one that matches your other 10?

Even Fischer's no tolerance spec guarantee was for static weight and not balance. There's only so much a company can do to make it cost effective for them.

If you want them spot on to your specs like I said pay the extra to TW to spec match off the shelf or better still call up RPNY or P1.

The static weight is even wrong...

meowmix
07-25-2011, 12:53 PM
It was wrong by two grams. Even Fischer's no-tolerance only guaranteed them to be within 1 gram.

VGP
07-25-2011, 12:55 PM
I don't know the posted specs of the KBlade Tour but 2 grams off is I'm sure within their tolerance window....unless your other 10 are somehow at the up or down extreme.

I read in Michael Chang's book 'Holding Serve' that when he was working with Prince to develop his signature longbody racket that Prince would send him and Carl dozens of frames only to keep one or two out of the batch that were the specs that he wanted.

If that's going on for a grand slam champ and former number 2 in the world don't **** and moan about 2 grams and 2 points on one racket.

If you have the tools available to you to measure them, pay extra for racket matching and confirm what they send you. You can't expect a retailer to pull a random frame off the shelf and have it be exactly what you want.

Like I said, sell your heavy one. Consider yourself lucky that you got 10 others where you want them.

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 01:05 PM
People it is the 10+ gram swingweight that is the problem. I am not complaining about two grams. If you picked up the racquet or understood the specs, you could see that this is two very different frames altogether.

But thanks for your input.

VGP
07-25-2011, 01:10 PM
I understand that it's different. Not just two grams static weight heavier, but also head heavy. That translates to an even higher swingweight.

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 01:16 PM
I understand that it's different. Not just two grams static weight heavier, but also head heavy. That translates to an even higher swingweight.

No worries. I will try to do something with the frame...but I don't see how 10+ grams is the window if that is the case that means the lightest racquet I modified had a swingweight of 306 strung with synthetic 18 overgripped. We are talking +/- 21 kg/cm2 people. Surely this must make a difference somehow...I am just saying if you had to fix every racquet you got, then got one you couldn't fix wouldn't you be a little upset over a company that you have been a loyal customer to, not considering that you don't want the world just a racquet KBT or BBT that can be matched...this is unreasonable?

BreakPoint
07-25-2011, 01:44 PM
Perhaps you didn't notice I have a prince precision tuning center. If someone can make this racquet fit the specs I gave without changing the other 11 let me know. I measured it and tried to fit it before I sent it back. So your position is that while I matched all the other racquets I purchased from wilson to fit and corrected variances of 5-7 grams...because this one is the heaviest of the bunch its my problem? So now I should suck it up and add even more lead to the other 11 or so because of one bad apple. So now just play with a heavier racquet and totally different balance and 10-15 grams of difference in the swingweight...mind you this is not overgripped...which is 4-5 grams to static weight.
Well, if you want all of your racquets to be matched precisely from Wilson, then become a top pro and they will allow you to use the services of the Wilson Pro Room. :) LOL

Feel VERY lucky that you were able to find 11 frames that were able to be matched. Why do you need to have a 12th frame anyway? :confused:

Besides, 2 grams and 2 pts. balance off spec is nothing. I've owned and have seen Wilsons that were more than 14 grams and/or 5 pts. balance off spec. :shock:

NBM
07-25-2011, 02:03 PM
It's always a good policy when buying an additional racquet to match your others <like in your case>, to specify that whoever pulls the stick from the rack find one within the specs you need. most places are happy to do this at no charge for weight and balance. yes it is really hard to lower the swingweight unless you start removing bumper material and that's not something that usually should be done. so consider it lesson learned....
Mojo

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 02:39 PM
It's always a good policy when buying an additional racquet to match your others <like in your case>, to specify that whoever pulls the stick from the rack find one within the specs you need. most places are happy to do this at no charge for weight and balance. yes it is really hard to lower the swingweight unless you start removing bumper material and that's not something that usually should be done. so consider it lesson learned....
Mojo

It is. I have always never thought quality control was a big deal since I could just weight and balance them myself. This situation made me a little frustrated since I figured hey send wilson the numbers so they can check it explain why this was an issue and it should not be a problem. I guess I never thought they would tell me I am right, but even though all your numbers about the specs are fine, we don't consider a 10 gram swing weight from your other 10 frames a problem. Just disappointed that's all.

TheOneHander
07-25-2011, 02:53 PM
Racquet companies don't guarantee swingweight though. Only certain weight and balance tolerances.

UCSF2012
07-25-2011, 05:37 PM
Even Federer's rackets aren't matched. He had to hire Priority 1 Tennis to match them for him. So, they're not gonna bother to deal with you.

If you're going to return rackets in the future, add massive amounts of lead tape under the bumper and grommets, and return the rackets to Wilson strung. They'll take it back once they weight the racket. Just don't be stupid at weight it down to 14oz.

UCSF2012
07-25-2011, 05:42 PM
But hey, a while back, Wilson refused to replace rackets because they were within the "acceptable range." I recently bought 3 Prince rackets, and I may try Head in the near future. First time in my life I've bought a non-Wilson racket.

...Prince actually hits pretty well, so it turned out. This is an opportunity to explore. You have many options outside of Wilson.

VGP
07-25-2011, 06:16 PM
If you're going to return rackets in the future, add massive amounts of lead tape under the bumper and grommets, and return the rackets to Wilson strung. They'll take it back once they weight the racket. Just don't be stupid at weight it down to 14oz.

Please, no more tips on how you try and scam the racket companies.

Arthuro
07-25-2011, 06:23 PM
Even Federer's rackets aren't matched. He had to hire Priority 1 Tennis to match them for him. So, they're not gonna bother to deal with you.

If you're going to return rackets in the future, add massive amounts of lead tape under the bumper and grommets, and return the rackets to Wilson strung. They'll take it back once they weight the racket. Just don't be stupid at weight it down to 14oz.

While I appreciate the advice, it is this sort of thing I have always avoided as a loyal customer. As a huge KBT fan, I just thought this request was reasonable.

Timbo's hopeless slice
07-25-2011, 07:20 PM
It's interesting. I haven't really had a lot to do with Wilson (they are nowhere near as common outside the states) but one of the other pros at our club is sponsored by them and he was showing me his Six.One.Teams. The QC is awful! Not only are they all different weights and balances, the paint is really thin and seems to chip if you even look sideways at it. I had no idea they were as bad as that, and this is one of their premium frames!
I won't bang on about my sponsor anymore (Agent Orynge will spank me) but I encourage you to look at other makers, OP.

bluetrain4
07-25-2011, 08:56 PM
Two grams is nothing in terms of weight.

Though, I'd be concerned about 2 pts difference in balance.

nyc
07-25-2011, 09:14 PM
The KBT actually plays quite nicely at around 350g static weight with lead at 3 and 9.

maybe match your ten (why so many??) with the heavy one?

or bay the heavy one and buy my old ones.

HiroProtagonist
07-25-2011, 09:28 PM
Please, no more tips on how you try and scam the racket companies.

I really dont get why you guys defend/defended racquet companies, they are making obscene profits on each racquet they sell. They manipulate and just plain deceive the unwise with their technology claims and pro's PJ's. Corporations like sporting good companies do all they can to cut production costs, and in effect quality, spending that money on misleading advertising and player sponsorships allowing them to mark up their prices.

TheOneHander
07-25-2011, 09:29 PM
I really dont get why you guys defend/defended racquet companies, they are making obscene profits on each racquet they sell. They manipulate and just plain deceive the unwise with their technology claims and pro's PJ's. Corporations like sporting good companies do all they can to cut production costs, and in effect quality, spending that money on misleading advertising and player sponsorships allowing them to mark up their prices.

But they couldn't do that if there weren't people still willing to buy their product.

And we're not defending the racquet companies. We're saying that what he is doing is plain wrong. It's fraud.

UCSF2012
07-25-2011, 09:39 PM
But they couldn't do that if there weren't people still willing to buy their product.

And we're not defending the racquet companies. We're saying that what he is doing is plain wrong. It's fraud.

Who said I did it? It's a suggestion, not even a serious suggestion.

Racket companies instruct their pros to claim they use a certain racket, when in reality they use something completely different. That's pure deception. And all to make a buck.

Take your pick. Which is more wrong? Returning a racket under false pretenses or misrepresentation to millions of hopeful tennis customers. (Having Del Potro claim he's using the BLX when he uses the classic. Having Pro Room rackets that are painted with BLX designs. Making a heavier racket for a certain pro. Giving Federer an open pattern nCode while the retail version is closed ....etc)

TheOneHander
07-25-2011, 09:42 PM
Who said I did it? It's a suggestion, not even a serious suggestion.

Racket companies instruct their pros to claim they use a certain racket, when in reality they use something completely different. That's pure deception. And all to make a buck.

Take your pick. Which is more wrong? Returning a racket under false pretenses or misrepresentation to millions of hopeful tennis customers.

Uh...you did? You posted about scamming Wilson as a kid.

And it is deception. It is to make a buck. But it's not about trying to get back at the companies, you shouldn't have to rationalize your behavior. You should take the high road and do what is right instead of getting even.

Bud
07-25-2011, 10:13 PM
One KPS88 I spec'd weighed 12.9 oz and was 2 pts. HL strung (4pts. more HH versus one properly balanced). Absolutely horrid QC, IMO... especially for a frame which can't be modified due to it's already high stock weight.

Here are the specs of the (4) strung 88's which passed through my hands:

12.9 oz. / 2 pts. HL
12.9 oz. / 6 pts. HL (only acceptable frame, IMO)
12.9 oz. / 3 pts. HL
13.0 oz. / 4 pts. HL (ended up replacing the butt cap with a trap door and added about 6-7g inside the butt cap to bring it up to 6 pts. HL) - Modified was 13.25 oz. and 6 pts. HL

This really poor QC definitely didn't help the 88's popularity

BreakPoint
07-25-2011, 10:53 PM
I really dont get why you guys defend/defended racquet companies, they are making obscene profits on each racquet they sell. They manipulate and just plain deceive the unwise with their technology claims and pro's PJ's. Corporations like sporting good companies do all they can to cut production costs, and in effect quality, spending that money on misleading advertising and player sponsorships allowing them to mark up their prices.
Um...no, they are not. That's why so many racquet companies go out of business or are barely hanging on (e.g., Fischer, ProKennex, Volkl, Adidas, etc.). Tennis racquets are not a very profitable business. If it were, Nike (the profit machine) would be all over it.

Fed Kennedy
07-25-2011, 10:59 PM
It's always a gamble with wilson, but if you really want more than one, just pony up the matching fee from TW and you're golden.

HiroProtagonist
07-25-2011, 11:19 PM
Um...no, they are not. That's why so many racquet companies go out of business or are barely hanging on (e.g., Fischer, ProKennex, Volkl, Adidas, etc.). Tennis racquets are not a very profitable business. If it were, Nike (the profit machine) would be all over it.

What I meant is how much it costs to make an individual racquet compared to how much they sell it for. I would also venture a guess that the reason fringe racquet companies go out of business/do not thrive is the big 3 dominate the market with Prince and Dunlop thrown in there, and they most likely spend more money to do so.

But I am completely willing to accept that I may be wrong and these are of course simply my opinions.

BreakPoint
07-25-2011, 11:28 PM
Who said I did it? It's a suggestion, not even a serious suggestion.

Racket companies instruct their pros to claim they use a certain racket, when in reality they use something completely different. That's pure deception. And all to make a buck.

Take your pick. Which is more wrong? Returning a racket under false pretenses or misrepresentation to millions of hopeful tennis customers. (Having Del Potro claim he's using the BLX when he uses the classic. Having Pro Room rackets that are painted with BLX designs. Making a heavier racket for a certain pro. Giving Federer an open pattern nCode while the retail version is closed ....etc)
That's on the pros, not just the racquet companies. The companies couldn't do this without the pros willingly accepting millions of dollars from the companies to knowingly deceive the public. Was Wilson able to fool the public as to what racquet Sampras was really using? No. So blame the pros for accepting bribes.

BreakPoint
07-25-2011, 11:35 PM
What I meant is how much it costs to make an individual racquet compared to how much they sell it for. I would also venture a guess that the reason fringe racquet companies go out of business/do not thrive is the big 3 dominate the market with Prince and Dunlop thrown in there, and they most likely spend more money to do so.

But I am completely willing to accept that I may be wrong and these are of course simply my opinions.
But what does what it costs to make something have anything to do with what that something sells for? :confused: What something sells for is what the buyer is willing to pay. There's a lot more that goes into the selling price of a product than just what it cost to make it (cost of goods sold). There's R&D, G&A, marketing, depreciation, taxes, etc.

How much did it cost to make that pair of designer jeans that sells for $300? How much did it cost to build that house that just sold for $2 million?

UCSF2012
07-26-2011, 12:05 AM
Uh...you did? You posted about scamming Wilson as a kid.

And it is deception. It is to make a buck. But it's not about trying to get back at the companies, you shouldn't have to rationalize your behavior. You should take the high road and do what is right instead of getting even.

Uh, no I didn't. I didn't send back KPS88's as a kid, because they didn't exist then. I'm stating a hypothetical.

Look at all these Mother Theresas. The world through the eyes of Jesus Christ.

HiroProtagonist
07-26-2011, 12:06 AM
But what does what it costs to make something have anything to do with what that something sells for? :confused: What something sells for is what the buyer is willing to pay. There's a lot more that goes into the selling price of a product than just what it cost to make it (cost of goods sold). There's R&D, G&A, marketing, depreciation, taxes, etc.

How much did it cost to make that pair of designer jeans that sells for $300? How much did it cost to build that house that just sold for $2 million?

In bold is a valid point, and yes what people are willing to pay does set the cost but as we have seen inflation out race wages(at least in U.S.) I think people who pay $300 for designer jeans are, as nicely as I can put it, not smart.

But I do not believe it is entirely there fault as the insane amount of money and research that has been poured into marketing and advertising over the years has created a verging on, if not already there, criminal manipulation system which has been completely integrated into the fabric of the culture making it nearly impossible to grow up not wanting those $300 designer jeans and be willing to exceed one's means to get them.

All indicating that companies set their prices much higher, creating their own market value, knowing that people will buy their product whether they can afford it or not. Look at the amount of credit card debt nation wide.

Again I am not saying these are the facts, just my opinions.

UCSF2012
07-26-2011, 12:10 AM
But what does what it costs to make something have anything to do with what that something sells for? :confused: What something sells for is what the buyer is willing to pay. There's a lot more that goes into the selling price of a product than just what it cost to make it (cost of goods sold). There's R&D, G&A, marketing, depreciation, taxes, etc.

How much did it cost to make that pair of designer jeans that sells for $300? How much did it cost to build that house that just sold for $2 million?

Look at all the made-up business babble. Arguments are meaningless when they're fabricated.

origmarm
07-26-2011, 12:13 AM
OP this is exactly why, after over 10+yrs as a Wilson customer I will never buy another frame from them again and haven't for 6yrs. I "inherited" some Pro Opens recently and while I quite liked it in some ways (softer PD I think), the specs between the two were all over the place, about 3pts difference in balance and about 8g different in weight.

Their specs used to be stated as a figure i.e. 8pts headlight for example. Now with BLX you will note they are stated as a range +/-2 pts and +/- 5g on the ones I had anyway. This means you can be up to 4pts different in balance and 10g out in weight before you are out of tolerance which I find ridiculous. Unfortunately many of the major manufacturers are the same. It does seem however that most never actually hit those tolerances.

I can understand your frustration as I share it. You would think that if someone was clued in enough to return it stating the balance was off by 2pts (i.e. being that specific) that Wilson would just call it goodwill and send you another frame. I guess we have our scam artists friends to thank for the absence of any remaining goodwill.

Best of luck sorting it out, probably best to sell it on and try and find a new one matched. Or better still, by a Prestige :)

Cheers,

Orig

UCSF2012
07-26-2011, 12:19 AM
Rackets that are significantly different from intended shouldn't have been sold. They should've been discarded. Instead, they're sold at much higher prices. That means the company made money where they should've lost money to begin with.

This lessens the fraud claim. Arturo should've received a high quality product he expected. Instead, he got a factory 2nd that should've been discarded. He's asking to be placed where he should've been to begin with.

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 05:22 AM
OP this is exactly why, after over 10+yrs as a Wilson customer I will never buy another frame from them again and haven't for 6yrs. I "inherited" some Pro Opens recently and while I quite liked it in some ways (softer PD I think), the specs between the two were all over the place, about 3pts difference in balance and about 8g different in weight.

Their specs used to be stated as a figure i.e. 8pts headlight for example. Now with BLX you will note they are stated as a range +/-2 pts and +/- 5g on the ones I had anyway. This means you can be up to 4pts different in balance and 10g out in weight before you are out of tolerance which I find ridiculous. Unfortunately many of the major manufacturers are the same. It does seem however that most never actually hit those tolerances.

I can understand your frustration as I share it. You would think that if someone was clued in enough to return it stating the balance was off by 2pts (i.e. being that specific) that Wilson would just call it goodwill and send you another frame. I guess we have our scam artists friends to thank for the absence of any remaining goodwill.

Best of luck sorting it out, probably best to sell it on and try and find a new one matched. Or better still, by a Prestige :)

Cheers,

Orig

Thanks for the support. Over the years, I have recommended wilson, I have overlooked the variances since I knew how to modify and correct for them. I have sent my students their way, and plugged their products during games. While they did send me a racquet back in december (allegedly goodwill) because the paint on a K Blade was bubbling up and chipping everywhere...I don't see how this justifies their decision in this case. This really disappoints me both as a player and a customer. I just got in some Prince Rebels, but one of them weighs 337grams compared to two that are 330. Let's see what happens there.

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 05:24 AM
Rackets that are significantly different from intended shouldn't have been sold. They should've been discarded. Instead, they're sold at much higher prices. That means the company made money where they should've lost money to begin with.

This lessens the fraud claim. Arturo should've received a high quality product he expected. Instead, he got a factory 2nd that should've been discarded. He's asking to be placed where he should've been to begin with.

I agree. I didn't think my position outlined above was that controversial. I just wanted a product I could do something with. Thanks for the support. K blades for everyone....

dadozen
07-26-2011, 06:47 AM
I feel your pain Arthuro.

I am also very crictical about my tennis gear, and I want to have the most similar racquets possible.

When I had 7 4D100s, they all had similar weight( difference of 2-3g ) and balance( difference lower than 0.5 pt ). I always praised about Dunlop's QC, as I could get them from all around the world and they would still be similar. I don't have ways to measure SW, but if the weight and balance are similar, chances are that the SW is also similar( I'm OK with small variations ).

But I'm having a hard time with my BM200s. I already bought 6 and could get only 3 with similar specs.

michael valek
07-26-2011, 06:52 AM
try kneissl. excellent qc and tolerance management.

Gasolina
07-26-2011, 07:07 AM
Related question: If you leaded up similar racquets (like the Blades here) to the same weight and balance... would they have the same swingweight?

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 07:18 AM
Related question: If you leaded up similar racquets (like the Blades here) to the same weight and balance... would they have the same swingweight?

Yes...for the most part. There are going to be small changes that may need to be made on a per racquet basis, but as a general rule if you have the same weight and balance the swingweight should be close. But even if it is not, I can or do just change the swingweights on my frames which will change the weight and balance by effect.

MAX PLY
07-26-2011, 07:32 AM
I love the feel of the Wilsons and always use the TW matching service. Never a problem. Frankly, from what I have seen and used over the years, all manufacturers have similar tolerances and most times, the variances, when they occur, are easily remedied. I find it hard to imagine that such small differences significantly affect anyone's ability to play the game (if it is in your head, well, lead tape won't solve that).

Gasolina
07-26-2011, 07:36 AM
Yes...for the most part. There are going to be small changes that may need to be made on a per racquet basis, but as a general rule if you have the same weight and balance the swingweight should be close. But even if it is not, I can or do just change the swingweights on my frames which will change the weight and balance by effect.
Thanks. A friend have asked me to put lead tape on his BLX 6.1. I guess lead tape, a scale, and a ruler for balance will do the job ;-)

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 07:49 AM
I love the feel of the Wilsons and always use the TW matching service. Never a problem. Frankly, from what I have seen and used over the years, all manufacturers have similar tolerances and most times, the variances, when they occur, are easily remedied. I find it hard to imagine that such small differences significantly affect anyone's ability to play the game (if it is in your head, well, lead tape won't solve that).

Max Ply: Come on...I am not simply trying to create a magical or psychologically induced coping strategy for my tennis game. I coach, string, and customize frames as I thought could be gathered from the thread. This is about having paid for a racquet that cannot be used inter-changeably with my other frames. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. No need for the ad hom.

MAX PLY
07-26-2011, 08:08 AM
Sorry, the "your" wasn't really directed at you--it was meant to be more of a general statement. My intent was not to offend so I am sorry if you took it that way. My point is really that racquets not being identical is not unique to any manufacturer and I suspect that the QC is better today than ever across the board (think about wood sticks or even the early graphites). I suspect it is also true for golf clubs, baseball bats, etc. I have been playing for over 40 years and have been a CRT for a very long time and find most differences are minute and easily remedied. Likewise, I find it astonishing that such small differences truly affect anyone's game (Pete Sampras' OCD not withstanding)--irritating perhaps, but not nearly as big a deal as different strings or tensions can be. I have never lost a match because one of my racquets "let me down."

I think most folks like a frame for how it "feels" in their hand when they strike a ball--that's where one dervives confidence--weight and balance are just fine tuning after that.

Playtimefun
07-26-2011, 08:09 AM
First... I agreee with you whole heartedly. Wilson's QC is absoloutely HORRIBLE. Considering when I switch racquets, I generally wind up owning about 6 of them and I always tune them to be the same weights and balance (or as close as I can without having to go way up in weight).

BUT in comparison to what you got for specs and the relative "closeness" and in comparison to some of the huge variances that I have seen, you got about as close and you can possible get from Wilson in terms of their QC.

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 09:06 AM
First... I agreee with you whole heartedly. Wilson's QC is absoloutely HORRIBLE. Considering when I switch racquets, I generally wind up owning about 6 of them and I always tune them to be the same weights and balance (or as close as I can without having to go way up in weight).

BUT in comparison to what you got for specs and the relative "closeness" and in comparison to some of the huge variances that I have seen, you got about as close and you can possible get from Wilson in terms of their QC.

I understand and take the points made in the thread seriously. Its just that this variance went the wrong way and as such I am left out in the cold so to speak.

TennisCJC
07-26-2011, 11:34 AM
if you are ordering wilsons order those suckers matched.

TW will match them for about $10 per frame. I asked for 2 matched and they were exact bal, exact SW, and 2.5 grams difference in static weight. I can live 2.5 grams difference in static weight and this was well worth the $20 ($10 per frame) to me. If you send in the spec you want, they may be able to get something really close for you. Call them and see.

By the way, I bought 2 blx 6.1 awhile back off the self and the balance was perfect and the static weight difference was under 3 grams. Not sure about the SW but they felt identical. I did have the shop throw them on the scale to make sure they weighed the same before I bought them. Under 3 g with exact balance is pretty good QC - less than 1% variance.

BreakPoint
07-26-2011, 12:29 PM
Rackets that are significantly different from intended shouldn't have been sold. They should've been discarded. Instead, they're sold at much higher prices. That means the company made money where they should've lost money to begin with.

This lessens the fraud claim. Arturo should've received a high quality product he expected. Instead, he got a factory 2nd that should've been discarded. He's asking to be placed where he should've been to begin with.
But the racquet the OP sent in was within Wilson's spec tolerance. Why should Wilson discard a racquet that's within their specified tolerance?

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 01:38 PM
But the racquet the OP sent in was within Wilson's spec tolerance. Why should Wilson discard a racquet that's within their specified tolerance?

I was not given any proof of these variances. I am curious to know how a racquet 306 kg/cm2 and a racquet with 324kg/cm2 could be in the same limit? The current racquets I have are 315 kg/cm2...9 kg/cm2. That's an amazing variance.

Bud
07-26-2011, 02:13 PM
But the racquet the OP sent in was within Wilson's spec tolerance. Why should Wilson discard a racquet that's within their specified tolerance?

The issue is their stated tolerances are way too loose :)

I can imagine the next generation of Wilson frames: ±15g and ±6 pts. balance

BreakPoint
07-26-2011, 02:47 PM
The issue is their stated tolerances are way too loose :)

I can imagine the next generation of Wilson frames: ±15g and ±6 pts. balance
Yes, I understand. But Wilson is not going to discard a racquet that falls within their specified tolerance specs.

Larrysümmers
07-26-2011, 03:07 PM
seeing your sig i see that you have done the free market thing, and move on. until robots control 100% of the process, there will be some error, hence the tolerance of specs. if you dont like it, then go to a different brand.

pvaudio
07-26-2011, 03:53 PM
OP, I'm not too sure why you just got blasted to hell and back. I'm with you completely. While the weight difference is rather negligible for a non pro, the swing weight difference is atrocious. If that's within their tolerance range, then yep, it's just more of the same from Wilson I'm afraid.

pug
07-26-2011, 04:50 PM
OP, I'm not too sure why you just got blasted to hell and back. I'm with you completely. While the weight difference is rather negligible for a non pro, the swing weight difference is atrocious. If that's within their tolerance range, then yep, it's just more of the same from Wilson I'm afraid.


+1.

I bought 2 BLX 95 and they were 10 grams different. Same problem, I had to match to the higher weight which was more than I wanted.

Glad I didn't post that here and get smacked around.

sheridanengland
07-26-2011, 04:55 PM
i don't know....i tend to chew up my frames pretty quickly trying to dig out low volleys (i'm a S&V). even if my rackets were exact spec when i bought them, they get "head lighter" pretty quickly. i wonder if anybody considers normal wear (grommets getting worn down) when trying to match specs....

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 05:26 PM
OP, I'm not too sure why you just got blasted to hell and back. I'm with you completely. While the weight difference is rather negligible for a non pro, the swing weight difference is atrocious. If that's within their tolerance range, then yep, it's just more of the same from Wilson I'm afraid.

I don't know either. I guess I should post my tennis resume so people think I am a serious player. The fact that I string and coach wasn't good enough for me to know what I am talking about, or the small fact that I owned 11 of these racquets. Which I am totally willing to give/sell away...I don't want to support this corporation given this response. But hey its an internet forum any complaint can be turned to evil...

Timbo's hopeless slice
07-26-2011, 05:36 PM
It's an internet forum, Arthuro, don't worry too much. Any post will always draw responses from well informed folks who wish to help and idiotic comments from numpties with no idea.
I'll let you decide which is which!

cheers

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 07:51 PM
Someone from Wilson Tennis replied and apologized for the problem. I don't know what they will do, but it meant a lot to me personally that they are attending to the problem. This at least makes me feel better that a corporation is claiming some responsibility for their product. Bravo Wilson Sporting Goods, Bravo!

UCSF2012
07-26-2011, 08:39 PM
Someone from Wilson Tennis replied and apologized for the problem. I don't know what they will do, but it meant a lot to me personally that they are attending to the problem. This at least makes me feel better that a corporation is claiming some responsibility for their product. Bravo Wilson Sporting Goods, Bravo!

How'd you manage to pull that off? My last return to Wilson ended up with them sending my racket back, just like you. I had the same reason, wrong balance. I'm now 3 rackets into Prince, unfortunately for Wilson.

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 08:57 PM
How'd you manage to pull that off? My last return to Wilson ended up with them sending my racket back, just like you. I had the same reason, wrong balance. I'm now 3 rackets into Prince, unfortunately for Wilson.

Just called back and complained again. What Prince racquets?

TennisMaverick
07-26-2011, 08:59 PM
Industry Standards:

10 grams+/-
10 mm+/- (Recently moved to there)

Yonex, Head, BB/Volkl, and Babolat, all come out of the same factory. Maybe Wilson needs to pay a little more to their manufacturer and switch.

Fugazi
07-26-2011, 09:46 PM
Why 12 racquets?

UCSF2012
07-26-2011, 09:50 PM
Just called back and complained again. What Prince racquets?

Exo3 Graphite 93. It's a pretty good racket. Harder to string because of the port holes, but hits well. Slightly wider head, so it's more forgiving. Hits very well. Even better that it's $90 shipped.

Fugazi
07-26-2011, 09:56 PM
Someone from Wilson Tennis replied and apologized for the problem. I don't know what they will do, but it meant a lot to me personally that they are attending to the problem. This at least makes me feel better that a corporation is claiming some responsibility for their product. Bravo Wilson Sporting Goods, Bravo!
Looks like somebody from Wilson read your thread...

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 10:06 PM
You might be right...

tennis4josh
07-26-2011, 10:13 PM
Arthuro

There is nothing wrong with you wanting a racket which matches your other rackets. But I am wondering how did you end up with this situation. Since you know the specs you want, you could have specified your requirements to the shop where you bought the racket.

For example, if you call TW to place an order and request them to send you something that is close to your specs, I am sure they will oblige.

-Josh

Arthuro
07-26-2011, 10:18 PM
i don't know....i tend to chew up my frames pretty quickly trying to dig out low volleys (i'm a S&V). even if my rackets were exact spec when i bought them, they get "head lighter" pretty quickly. i wonder if anybody considers normal wear (grommets getting worn down) when trying to match specs....

I do. I measure the racquet from 4 specs. Frame, frame w/grommets, frame w/overgrip, frame and overgrip and strung. I keep these specs in excel files for myself and my customers and print out tags for the frames with the specs for the customers to view and know.

SStrikerR
07-26-2011, 10:51 PM
Unless you're relying on your racquets for survival or money, I don't care. You don't even need that many racquets anyway.

dadozen
07-27-2011, 04:59 AM
seeing your sig i see that you have done the free market thing, and move on. until robots control 100% of the process, there will be some error, hence the tolerance of specs. if you dont like it, then go to a different brand.

Larry, the thing is that even if controlled 100% by robots, there will still be variances. That's because the tooling used has a life-time expectation, thus it needs periodical maintenance. In one cycle between each maintenance work, the tooling produces different parts, and that's why the variances happen.

I know that because I work at the automotive industry and it's common to get deffective parts even from good batches.

Arthuro
07-27-2011, 05:32 AM
Arthuro

There is nothing wrong with you wanting a racket which matches your other rackets. But I am wondering how did you end up with this situation. Since you know the specs you want, you could have specified your requirements to the shop where you bought the racket.

For example, if you call TW to place an order and request them to send you something that is close to your specs, I am sure they will oblige.

-Josh

Josh TW does not sell the KBT anymore...nor does anyone else online outside of the auction site. I found a place with some and tried to scoop them up and ended up with a bogus one.

Arthuro
08-05-2011, 10:40 AM
Wilson did send out a new racquet prestrung...unfortunately it was the wrong make and wrong grip size. I was sent a BLX Blade team in a 4 1/2 grip.

I guess they tried, but I can't really use the racquet.

stoble
08-05-2011, 02:19 PM
Give Pacific a shot. They got some racquets that offer zero tolerance.

Arthuro
08-08-2011, 02:11 PM
I have officially made a change...while I feel they tried, ultimately Wilson has disappointed me...so long to a 5 year relationship.

forthegame
08-08-2011, 02:43 PM
I have officially made a change...while I feel they tried, ultimately Wilson has disappointed me...so long to a 5 year relationship.

How does the Prince EXO3 Rebel compare to your KBTs? Was it difficult to transition? Just curious. I hope your results stay the same or improve after this switch, that's the ultimate yardstick, no?

Arthuro
08-08-2011, 03:36 PM
It swings well. The Rebel is not as hard on my arm, though the KBT wasn't either really, but you can feel the different. Serves are harder with the rebel probably from the increased swing weight and the volleys and touch are sick. The transition is not difficult...I have to put leather grips on my Rebels though...I hate...HATE...the synthetic grip it comes with standard. I put the prince premier string in it, but am starting to hybrid that with the X-1 biphase (my favorite multi). Groundstrokes with the Rebel are deeper and are heavier than the KBT, though the KBT seems to give more access to spin.

forthegame
08-09-2011, 04:19 PM
Cool. Glad you're getting on well. I have 2 "identical" Wilson frames that feel and swing differently. First time I've ever had 2 of the same so cannot blame QC with my limited experience.

nalvarado
08-09-2011, 05:00 PM
That's a shame. I've been debating buying a blade recently to see how it stacks up against my prestige but after reading this I'd rather just get another prestige.

wilfreb
08-09-2011, 05:45 PM
get a dunlop and forget about this...

TennisMaverick
08-09-2011, 05:50 PM
That's a shame. I've been debating buying a blade recently to see how it stacks up against my prestige but after reading this I'd rather just get another prestige.

I know a couple of guys who switched from the Prestige to the Melbourne.