PDA

View Full Version : Can the PS BLX 95 be saved?


FedMex
01-21-2012, 02:25 PM
For background, I play with an RDS 001 leaded at 12, 10 and 9, overgripped and recent measurements suggest I play 345-355g static, 340-348g swing and between 5 and 7 pts headlight. I was surprised I've moved up to this level as the K90 felt too difficult for me 2 years ago. I recently hit with BLX 90 and still find an occasional inability to get around a fast serve or penetrating groundstroke hit to my forehand to the sweetspot. My serves are probably 5mph faster and slightly more accurate with the blx tour 90. hats off to the prostaff, the epitome of an all court players racquet.

I hit with the BLX PS 90 and 95 for 20 min this week thinking with the better maneuverability I've been reading about I might like the new 90 better. I was surprised how comfortable and almost acceptable the 95 was. yes it was probably too light in stock form and whippy due to the increased flex but it has alot of the feel and benefits of the box beam prostaff 90. Maybe it's because i'm used to the RDS's bigger sweet spot that I liked it. I now wonder if leading up the 95 to 11.7 or 12oz and keeping its balance point, you have the perfect prostaff? I think you'd need to add lead in the handle and of course adding a leather grip will increase weight.

In my mind, the big tradeoff will be how does it perform on finishing shots where the 90's stiffness can probably kill off a soft bouncer in the middle of the court with its access to power. I'll have to try a more extended demo to see if the 95's flexibility doesn't kill the ability to access power on a flatter hit. Also will the lead and higher weight get close enough to the 90's serve potential.

Anyone have thoughts on leading up the 95 and residual downsides vs the 90?

FedMex
01-21-2012, 02:32 PM
Sorry not that the shot is hit to the sweetspot, but my ability to hit on the sweetspot. IE, I still shank here and there with the BLX90.

J011yroger
01-21-2012, 06:43 PM
I would think that the last time you would need power from a frame would be to finish off a short, slow ball inside the court.

Maybe that is just me?

J

FedMex
01-21-2012, 10:41 PM
Yes that's true. I guess I generally do play a hop skip approach to a corner.

Sometimes I do flatten out my forehand on a high bouncing shot that's near the baseline though.

rofl_copter3
01-22-2012, 01:07 AM
Honestly the downside you suggest is negligible, once you add the weight to the 95 it will have plenty of pop and you're more likely to benefit from the increased stringbed size towards reducing the number of miss hits

Shaochieh
01-22-2012, 02:59 AM
I think it takes some time to modified the frame from stock but not impossible. I got a lot of pop from full bed of multi and after the lead on the 12 and a little less control since I have no counter weight and it is hard to get the stick around. So you have many trade offs if you put more weight on the head. Control for me is maneuverability.

SteveI
01-22-2012, 03:14 AM
For background, I play with an RDS 001 leaded at 12, 10 and 9, overgripped and recent measurements suggest I play 345-355g static, 340-348g swing and between 5 and 7 pts headlight. I was surprised I've moved up to this level as the K90 felt too difficult for me 2 years ago. I recently hit with BLX 90 and still find an occasional inability to get around a fast serve or penetrating groundstroke hit to my forehand to the sweetspot. My serves are probably 5mph faster and slightly more accurate with the blx tour 90. hats off to the prostaff, the epitome of an all court players racquet.

I hit with the BLX PS 90 and 95 for 20 min this week thinking with the better maneuverability I've been reading about I might like the new 90 better. I was surprised how comfortable and almost acceptable the 95 was. yes it was probably too light in stock form and whippy due to the increased flex but it has alot of the feel and benefits of the box beam prostaff 90. Maybe it's because i'm used to the RDS's bigger sweet spot that I liked it. I now wonder if leading up the 95 to 11.7 or 12oz and keeping its balance point, you have the perfect prostaff? I think you'd need to add lead in the handle and of course adding a leather grip will increase weight.

In my mind, the big tradeoff will be how does it perform on finishing shots where the 90's stiffness can probably kill off a soft bouncer in the middle of the court with its access to power. I'll have to try a more extended demo to see if the 95's flexibility doesn't kill the ability to access power on a flatter hit. Also will the lead and higher weight get close enough to the 90's serve potential.

Anyone have thoughts on leading up the 95 and residual downsides vs the 90?

What are you worried about... Wilson will have a new PS 95 out next year..:-)

FedMex
01-26-2012, 07:58 AM
So I hit with both the 90 and 95 more properly yesterday for 90m, switching back and forth on groundies and volleys 8-10 min each. i was on an indoor court that plays pretty fast and hitting with a guy who has solid 4.5 to 5.0 rallying capability (not sure if he can win matches since he's returning to tennis and isn't serving right now).

I liked the 90 much more and feel I can finally wield it and do more with my game. The 95 might be customizable to something less flimsy, but then I'd have my RDS001 again (.5 oz lighter than the PS 90) and I don't see the point. Even for doubles, I think I'd prefer the RDS001 to the PS 95. Adding lead to the 95 without going to the trouble of counterweighting would likely make it a head heavy wilson racquet.

My shots were on average 3 to 4 feet shorter, and volleys were terrible. Too many times the 95 felt like it was about to break, particularly if the ball hit the top part of the racquet, which is not to far from my elevated sweet spot. Didn't have issues with stability on baseline backhands, but again volleys had no punch. Serves are accurate just like with the 90, but with less sting and ultimately more spin-y. Several down the line forehands went long for me, and at those times I felt like I felt the extra power the 95 has over the 90 but couldn't control it.

The PS 90 is amazing given it's maneuverability. It does sound different than the BLX on impact and I can see how others believe it feels less solid. But aside from the slight degradation if sound on most shots, what the wand produces is amazing and I believe will make tennis even funner for me. On one shot that I hit super cleanly, super flat, the racquet made the loudest boom I've ever heard, like a cannon going off. It was amazing.

Racer41c
01-26-2012, 02:09 PM
So I hit with both the 90 and 95 more properly yesterday for 90m, switching back and forth on groundies and volleys 8-10 min each. i was on an indoor court that plays pretty fast and hitting with a guy who has solid 4.5 to 5.0 rallying capability (not sure if he can win matches since he's returning to tennis and isn't serving right now).

I liked the 90 much more and feel I can finally wield it and do more with my game. The 95 might be customizable to something less flimsy, but then I'd have my RDS001 again (.5 oz lighter than the PS 90) and I don't see the point. Even for doubles, I think I'd prefer the RDS001 to the PS 95. Adding lead to the 95 without going to the trouble of counterweighting would likely make it a head heavy wilson racquet.

My shots were on average 3 to 4 feet shorter, and volleys were terrible. Too many times the 95 felt like it was about to break, particularly if the ball hit the top part of the racquet, which is not to far from my elevated sweet spot. Didn't have issues with stability on baseline backhands, but again volleys had no punch. Serves are accurate just like with the 90, but with less sting and ultimately more spin-y. Several down the line forehands went long for me, and at those times I felt like I felt the extra power the 95 has over the 90 but couldn't control it.

The PS 90 is amazing given it's maneuverability. It does sound different than the BLX on impact and I can see how others believe it feels less solid. But aside from the slight degradation if sound on most shots, what the wand produces is amazing and I believe will make tennis even funner for me. On one shot that I hit super cleanly, super flat, the racquet made the loudest boom I've ever heard, like a cannon going off. It was amazing.

I played last weekend with some buddys and we all hit the 90 and 95. Everyone hit a much better ball with the 90. Very heavy and much more consistent. One of the guys is buying an 90, too heavy for me.

corners
01-26-2012, 02:11 PM
So I hit with both the 90 and 95 more properly yesterday for 90m, switching back and forth on groundies and volleys 8-10 min each. i was on an indoor court that plays pretty fast and hitting with a guy who has solid 4.5 to 5.0 rallying capability (not sure if he can win matches since he's returning to tennis and isn't serving right now).

I liked the 90 much more and feel I can finally wield it and do more with my game. The 95 might be customizable to something less flimsy, but then I'd have my RDS001 again (.5 oz lighter than the PS 90) and I don't see the point. Even for doubles, I think I'd prefer the RDS001 to the PS 95. Adding lead to the 95 without going to the trouble of counterweighting would likely make it a head heavy wilson racquet.

My shots were on average 3 to 4 feet shorter, and volleys were terrible. Too many times the 95 felt like it was about to break, particularly if the ball hit the top part of the racquet, which is not to far from my elevated sweet spot. Didn't have issues with stability on baseline backhands, but again volleys had no punch. Serves are accurate just like with the 90, but with less sting and ultimately more spin-y. Several down the line forehands went long for me, and at those times I felt like I felt the extra power the 95 has over the 90 but couldn't control it.

The PS 90 is amazing given it's maneuverability. It does sound different than the BLX on impact and I can see how others believe it feels less solid. But aside from the slight degradation if sound on most shots, what the wand produces is amazing and I believe will make tennis even funner for me. On one shot that I hit super cleanly, super flat, the racquet made the loudest boom I've ever heard, like a cannon going off. It was amazing.

I haven't tried the 95 yet, so what do I know. But I'm not about to jump on the bash the PS95 bandwagon just yet. It's hard for me to believe that they could mess this frame up as badly as some are claiming. Since you have the opportunity, and presumably the interest (since you went through the trouble to get the 90 and 95), you owe it to yourself to match the 95 to your RDS 001. I mean match, not slap some lead on the head and randomly counterweight in the handle. But actually match the specs - weight, balance and swingweight. Then, you can compare them, apples to apples, and you can ask yourself, "Does this offer me anything in terms of forgiveness, power, sweetspot size, touch or feel that my RDS 001 doesn't? Does it do anything better than the PS90." Properly leaded up, it should offer some advantages. If it doesn't then it really is a blunder by Wilson.

Comparing sticks that differ by 20+ swingweight units just isn't fair to either stick. Despite their appearance the PS90 and 95 are far, far apart. If you want to compare the PS95 to something in stock form compare it to its peer group - Bio 200 Lite, Pure Storm Limited (if it isn't better than that feeble noodle then it really is a bust), etc. etc.

And please let us know how it turns out. If you need help with the customization shoot me an email.

Vasuri
01-27-2012, 11:19 AM
A few very preliminary impressions on pro staff 95. I am looking for a new racquet and was about to leave the 95 off my short list due to all the bad press it has gotten.

My local tennis club had a demo of 95. Had a chance to hit with it for only about 30 minutes. I do currently play with Prince exo3 tour 16x18 with a little lead at 10 and 2, swingweight of about 328. So given all the press on low power level and stability of pro staff 95 I leaded it with 2 gr on each of 3, 9 and 12. Total of 6 gr, should bring the swingweight to about 322. No time or chance to courterweight in the handle, the test racquet had no overgrip either. Test racquet also had stock wilson sensation strings.

So very preliminary impressions. Power level was ok. I was actually hitting clearly heavier ball with pro staff than with my Prince. If I stepped on the gas and really hit through the ball pace was very good. Depth came easily. Accuracy and placement felt noticably better than with Prince tour. I have to say that very quickly I felt more confident with pro staff than Prince tour.

Stability felt ok, too early to say much. Serves had good pace and placement was easy. Again very preliminary but felt better serving than with Prince. I did not really play at net, so experience at all on volleys.

Overall, very positive first impression. Will definitely demo the pro staff 95 again more thoroughly. My two main gripes with Prince exo3 tour are control and pace, pro staff 95 seemed to improve on both accounts.

cknobman
01-27-2012, 12:52 PM
A few very preliminary impressions on pro staff 95. I am looking for a new racquet and was about to leave the 95 off my short list due to all the bad press it has gotten.

My local tennis club had a demo of 95. Had a chance to hit with it for only about 30 minutes. I do currently play with Prince exo3 tour 16x18 with a little lead at 10 and 2, swingweight of about 328. So given all the press on low power level and stability of pro staff 95 I leaded it with 2 gr on each of 3, 9 and 12. Total of 6 gr, should bring the swingweight to about 322. No time or chance to courterweight in the handle, the test racquet had no overgrip either. Test racquet also had stock wilson sensation strings.

So very preliminary impressions. Power level was ok. I was actually hitting clearly heavier ball with pro staff than with my Prince. If I stepped on the gas and really hit through the ball pace was very good. Depth came easily. Accuracy and placement felt noticably better than with Prince tour. I have to say that very quickly I felt more confident with pro staff than Prince tour.

Stability felt ok, too early to say much. Serves had good pace and placement was easy. Again very preliminary but felt better serving than with Prince. I did not really play at net, so experience at all on volleys.

Overall, very positive first impression. Will definitely demo the pro staff 95 again more thoroughly. My two main gripes with Prince exo3 tour are control and pace, pro staff 95 seemed to improve on both accounts.

Nice to hear vasuri. Im in a very similar situation to you as I play with the exo3 tour 16x18 as well. I have always felt the tour lacks power due to the flexy and comfy frame so I ended up adding lead at 3 and 9 to bring the final weight to an even 12oz (with dampner and overgrip). Its better but I feel like the tour loses string tension way too fast so I am looking to make the switch.

When Wilson announced the Pro Staff 95 and I looked at the specs I thought it was my dream racquet as it contained all the specs I wanted out of a racquet. Only reason I moved away from Wilson to begin with was the discontinued the K Pro Tour and totally botched the BLX version.

I figured with a little lead at 10 and 2 or 3 and 9 and a leather grip to bring the weight of the ProStaff closer to 12oz and this would be the Wilson I have been waiting for.

Now Im concerned as it seems everyone is trashing this racquet. I have a demo on order from TW (supposed to get it by Feb 1) and am afraid I will be let down after reading all the negative comments about it.

FireMan12
01-27-2012, 05:16 PM
Nice to hear vasuri. Im in a very similar situation to you as I play with the exo3 tour 16x18 as well. I have always felt the tour lacks power due to the flexy and comfy frame so I ended up adding lead at 3 and 9 to bring the final weight to an even 12oz (with dampner and overgrip). Its better but I feel like the tour loses string tension way too fast so I am looking to make the switch.

When Wilson announced the Pro Staff 95 and I looked at the specs I thought it was my dream racquet as it contained all the specs I wanted out of a racquet. Only reason I moved away from Wilson to begin with was the discontinued the K Pro Tour and totally botched the BLX version.

I figured with a little lead at 10 and 2 or 3 and 9 and a leather grip to bring the weight of the ProStaff closer to 12oz and this would be the Wilson I have been waiting for.

Now Im concerned as it seems everyone is trashing this racquet. I have a demo on order from TW (supposed to get it by Feb 1) and am afraid I will be let down after reading all the negative comments about it.

Understanding Wilson's QC can be off at times, my PS95 unstrung was 11.2oz, Strung with Babolat RPM 18g and Wilson NXT 16g, wilson pro overgrip and a small dampner it was 11.85oz. I thought I was going to have to do a lot of customizing but it plays really solid. I enjoy all aspects, my serve is powerful with really good kick when desired, ground strokes are solid on both wings, slice is nice, and easy to volley. As I completely become adjusted to this frame, I may tinker around with the set up. I'm glad I demoed this frame, when I first heard the news of the Pro Staff line I was really excited, then I began to read everyone bashing it, definitely made me second guess but I still demoed it and loved it. To me it seems that this may be the new "era" of racquets, lots of racquet companies making traditionally known racquets lighter static and swing weight. I'm assuming to appeal to a larger group and make more money? Makes sense. Easily customized to your liking IMO, that's part of the fun anyways right?

cknobman
01-27-2012, 05:34 PM
Understanding Wilson's QC can be off at times, my PS95 unstrung was 11.2oz, Strung with Babolat RPM 18g and Wilson NXT 16g, wilson pro overgrip and a small dampner it was 11.85oz. I thought I was going to have to do a lot of customizing but it plays really solid. I enjoy all aspects, my serve is powerful with really good kick when desired, ground strokes are solid on both wings, slice is nice, and easy to volley. As I completely become adjusted to this frame, I may tinker around with the set up. I'm glad I demoed this frame, when I first heard the news of the Pro Staff line I was really excited, then I began to read everyone bashing it, definitely made me second guess but I still demoed it and loved it. To me it seems that this may be the new "era" of racquets, lots of racquet companies making traditionally known racquets lighter static and swing weight. I'm assuming to appeal to a larger group and make more money? Makes sense. Easily customized to your liking IMO, that's part of the fun anyways right?

Nice to hear Fireman, your giving me hope that this still could be the racquet for me.

And yes part of the fun (for me at least) of getting a racquet is tinkering with it until it suits me perfect. When I was new to tennis I did not know enough and was too scared to mess around with my racquets so I "made do" with stock frames. Now days I relish the opportunity to customize a racquet.

Mister drool
01-28-2012, 05:40 PM
About the new blx pro staff 95

can anyone give some thought about the comfort and power level of this new frame?
Specifically I have had some wrist issues in the last month and my radical lite is the one frame my wrist can take when the pain is hard. I can endure my Redondo mid as well but with very, and I stress, very soft strings. I use the k90 to train myself, but I have to stop for about 3 to 4 weeks and see if it heals nicely.
Anyyyyyway, I love the k90 but I guess it is about time I take part with this frame, well I will never leave it completely, but for competitive play I have to use something more friendly. One of the first advice I got when I entered this forum was not to give in the temptation of going into tweener land. Im guessing that the new pro staff 95 is something of a tweener frame, but I have also hear some good things about its comfort level and that is what I am aiming for.
As far as I know a lot of people say that the Redondo in stock form is a low powered frame, but I never got any issues with producing power with it as I string low tension. I would buy another Redondo mid in a heart beat, but these days a new Redondo is hard to find in Europe. I keep wondering more and more about this new pro staff 95, low power and comfortable, I hear the same about the Redondo and I am glad that I bought it.
Now for facts
The Redondo is 10pts head light (or more)
The pro staff 95 is 10 pts head light unstrung, soooo about 7 HL strung?
The Redondo has a healthy weight of more than 12 ounces strung.
The pro staff is about 11.6 / 11.7 strung?
Tw says the redondo swingweight is about 320
The pro staff 95 is far lower at about 306 or 310 strung?
Flex rating or the Redondo is at 56, and I believe it religiously, the frame is just soooooo comfortable
Flex rating for the pro staff 95 is at 62, but the main good praise people who demoed it is for its comfort level.

If the power level of this new pro staff is about the same as the Redondo, even If I have to add some lead to get there, I would realy enjoy the frame. No doubt that I am a fan of the Wilson pro staff series, and the only other frame I might consider getting is the new prestige S.
I also played with the Dunlop 4d 100 and the new bio100 but those where reaalllly low powered and actually played quite stiff comparing to the k90, even if TW says the k90 has a higher stiffness, I never understood, both dunlops where really stiff even with the same string and same tension, and Iím talking about mcs mains and msv focus hex crosses at low 50. so im guessing/wishing those donít compare to the new pro staff.
Please share some thoughts if you have demoed the pro staff and have an empiric knowledge of the Redondo mid for comparison. It is the only frame I have that I can compare intellectually.
and no I dont have the oportunity to demo myself. here in portugal is rather hard to get good deals for new frames let alone demo one....

tlm
01-28-2012, 06:11 PM
The 95 is definitely comfortable with good feel, but as far as power goes it has to much for me. It amazes me on how many people have said that it is low powered.

I tried a few different string jobs and raised the tension up and still it was to powerful for me. But i have been using an asian version blx 90 which is very low powered

Mister drool
01-29-2012, 11:50 AM
The 95 is definitely comfortable with good feel, but as far as power goes it has to much for me. It amazes me on how many people have said that it is low powered.

I tried a few different string jobs and raised the tension up and still it was to powerful for me. But i have been using an asian version blx 90 which is very low powered

So you certainly would not call it a stiff racquet right?
From memory, what racquet do you figure shares the most comfort like characteristics with the ps95?

Aaaand by the way, the most power like too!

God I just wish it is close to my k90ís , just a little softer and way more lightÖ

FedMex
02-06-2012, 11:09 PM
So my final demo play with the 95. I added 6g of lead split across 10' and 2 o'clock. I counterbalanced with 5g on the butt cap. Didn't weigh the racquet at this weight but it was certainly heavier, closer to the RDS 001.

Not for me. Still too much power on returns (sailing out) but certainly that hollow shanking sound was gone. More solid, but not as much control for me as the RDS001.

I believe the RDS001 suits my game better. I don't have to change my swingpath to get more spin/top on the ball to keep it in. If I'm hitting a heavy hitter, I switch to the PS 90 and I can instantly be in sync. Vice versa on the RDS001. Not the same for the 95. Given my swingpath I will not control the 95. I wanted to like it for doubles, but the RDS001 is better.

If I really wanted a super light racquet with low power, I liked the Babolat AeroDrive Tour better (can't believe i'd choose a babolat over the 95 but it worked better for me).