PDA

View Full Version : quick questions on 2 point mounting system


TLy963
04-16-2012, 03:28 PM
Does a 2 pt mounting system really distort the racquet frame?
If so then is there any way to fix that?
If so then does it affect play?
If so then how long (# of jobs?) might it take to noticeably distort it?
Am i being paranoid?

btw i have a klippermate- Thanks

zapvor
04-16-2012, 07:53 PM
not if you mount it correctly. many machines have 2pt and they work out fine. classic example is the neos

jgrushing
04-17-2012, 04:12 AM
Yes, you are being paranoid. Mount the racquets carefully and securely. I have racquets that I've strung 100 times on my KM. Their dimensions remain intact. Machines that, by nature, damage racquets would not last on the market. The Klipper and other two point mounts have been around for many, many years.

Ramon
04-17-2012, 04:30 AM
My new machine has 6-point mounting. What I have to show for it so far is a racquet with a damaged head guard and another one with chipped paint. LOL

oldcity
04-17-2012, 04:48 AM
Those mounts have a ridge on the face from the mold. Might want to smooth them out or cover them with something soft.

kabrac
04-17-2012, 05:11 AM
I have a NEOS and love it. Very quick and very secure.

4sound
04-17-2012, 09:41 PM
2pt doesn't distort the frame.

I have the 2pt version of the Gamma 6004. I had always had 6pt machines in the past. I prefer the 2pt and will never go back unless someone gives me a Tecnifibre Ergo Select. (not likely) haha.

Irvin
04-18-2012, 04:09 AM
Correct me if I am wrong but the NEOS and Gamma 6004 2 pts are not really two point moounts. The Gamma X-2 and KMate are two point mounts. Either way it does not matter. It is not just mounting the racket correctly it also has a lot to do with how the racket is strung. With a two point mount the more mains you string on one side before you switch over to the other side will produce deformation in the frame. As long as the rackets are mounted and strung correctly there should not be a problem no matter which machine you have.

sstchur
04-18-2012, 04:28 AM
Correct me if I am wrong but the NEOS and Gamma 6004 2 pts are not really two point moounts. The Gamma X-2 and KMate are two point mounts. Either way it does not matter. It is not just mounting the racket correctly it also has a lot to do with how the racket is strung. With a two point mount the more mains you string on one side before you switch over to the other side will produce deformation in the frame. As long as the rackets are mounted and strung correctly there should not be a problem no matter which machine you have.

I hadn't heard this before. I always alternated at 3s on my 6pt and have been doing the same on my 2pt. Have not noticed any distortion. The only thing I've noticed is that I sometimes shorten the frame by about 1/16 of an inch, but this seems to happen primarily when I string the crosses lower (which makes sense), and I most often DO string them lower, by about 3lbs.

Rabbit
04-18-2012, 05:56 AM
Correct me if I am wrong but the NEOS and Gamma 6004 2 pts are not really two point moounts.

So you'd call them a 4-point?


With a two point mount the more mains you string on one side before you switch over to the other side will produce deformation in the frame.

Like sstchur, this is news to me. And again, like sstchur, I alternate 3 a side when pulling mains. I've been using a Neos for over ten years, and I've never see any frame distortion due to pulling mains in the manner described above. It simply hasn't happened. But then again, since the Neos by your definition isn't a 2-point, I shouldn't have seen it happen. ;)

edit: I should correct one thing. I do string for a guy who used to use the old maroon Rafter double bridged Prince. He strung them at 78 - 80. With those frames, I did handle with great care and alternate one main at a time simply because they were old, strung with high tension, and strung many many times. He has since moved to the POG 90 and while maintaining 80 pounds, the frames are stronger. But, again, I alternate every main with his frames.

Ramon
04-18-2012, 06:26 AM
I hadn't heard this before. I always alternated at 3s on my 6pt and have been doing the same on my 2pt. Have not noticed any distortion. The only thing I've noticed is that I sometimes shorten the frame by about 1/16 of an inch, but this seems to happen primarily when I string the crosses lower (which makes sense), and I most often DO string them lower, by about 3lbs.

What's the reason for alternating at 3s? Is it because the fixed clamps get in the way?

sstchur
04-18-2012, 08:07 AM
What's the reason for alternating at 3s? Is it because the fixed clamps get in the way?

For me, the reason I do 3 is that (IIRC) the USRSA says 3 is the max you should go ahead on a given side. Also, a lot of frames I string are 16 mains, so I just like the rhythm that I get into this way. I do 3 on one side, 6 on the other, go back to the first side and do the remaining 5 and tie off. Then go back and finish the last two on the other side and tie off.

I just find I have good efficiency that way.

Irvin
04-18-2012, 08:19 AM
What's the reason for alternating at 3s? Is it because the fixed clamps get in the way?

So you don't distort the racket. If you take a two point (like a KMate) and string all the mains on one side it will distort that side. It is the way you string the racket that causes the distortion not the mounting system. Getting no more than three mains ahead on either side will prevent distortion.

EDIT: If you have a four or six point it will distort it less but there is still distortion. I believe that at one time the USRSA said it was ok to string all the mains on one side IF YOU HAD A SIX POINT but I don't think they say that any more.

Ramon
04-18-2012, 08:26 AM
For me, the reason I do 3 is that (IIRC) the USRSA says 3 is the max you should go ahead on a given side. Also, a lot of frames I string are 16 mains, so I just like the rhythm that I get into this way. I do 3 on one side, 6 on the other, go back to the first side and do the remaining 5 and tie off. Then go back and finish the last two on the other side and tie off.

I just find I have good efficiency that way.

Makes sense. I normally do 2 on one side, 3 on the other side, and then switch after every 2. 3-6-3 does seem like it might be quicker, but with a drop weight I know I won't be blazing through anyway.

zapvor
04-18-2012, 08:27 AM
Irvin can you explain why neos and such isnt 2pt??

Irvin
04-18-2012, 08:54 AM
Irvin can you explain why neos and such isnt 2pt??

It is a two point per se but if you look at the top and bottom supports there are two point on each for better support.
http://www.photostringer.com/images/prince_neos_1000_061121-002.jpg

zapvor
04-18-2012, 03:49 PM
i see....i guess you see it differently. cool beans

Clintspin
04-18-2012, 03:54 PM
I guess it's all in how you look at it but as far as surface to surface contact-Klippermate and Neos have the same and Klippermate may have more.

TLy963
04-18-2012, 04:01 PM
thanks for the info. when starting the mains i alternate every string and then do two at a time on each side. i usually string crosses higher than i string the mains so maybe that also helps prevents distortion.

jgrushing
04-19-2012, 04:43 AM
I guess it's all in how you look at it but as far as surface to surface contact-Klippermate and Neos have the same and Klippermate may have more.


I was thinking the same thing. Regardless, they both work just fine when used properly. Those are the two main machines I've strung on. Never deformed a racquet except for one time that I forgot to tighten supports.

Valjean
04-21-2012, 04:36 AM
FWIW, some years back when the USRSA did a relative comparison of multi-point versus two-point systems, its upshot was a nod in favor of at least a four-point one. The reason given then was less frame distortion while the stringing was going on.

When I measured the difference myself too, I found that the crosses in particular benefited; i.e. came off the multi-point machine at a higher tension than when the racquet was strung on a two-point one.

Ramon
04-21-2012, 04:50 AM
One thing I notice is that the typical 6-point mounting system, like the one on my Alpha Pioneer DC+, only prevents the frame from rounding. It doesn't prevent elongation. In fact, I notice that when I'm done, the frame is no longer flush with the 12 and 6 o'clock posts. Is this typical?

Irvin
04-21-2012, 06:31 AM
^^ 'Ramon' I never had that issue maybe you are not getting all your support snug (not tight) to start with.

Ramon
04-23-2012, 07:45 PM
^^ 'Ramon' I never had that issue maybe you are not getting all your support snug (not tight) to start with.

As I understand it, the 12 and 6 o'clock posts are supposed to be snug (finger tight) while the 4 outer supports are supposed to be just touching. I'm afraid to make the 4 outer supports any tighter because I've already ruined the head guard on a couple of practice racquets. Would tighter supports actually help this, even though it sounds counter-intuitive? How would you describe the correct tightness of the supports?

Irvin
04-23-2012, 08:02 PM
^^I make all six about the same. The side supports are not tight but neither are the 6 and 12. They are all six finger tight I guess I would say.

Ramon
04-25-2012, 05:21 AM
^^ 'Ramon' I never had that issue maybe you are not getting all your support snug (not tight) to start with.

I think I see what happened. I stringed a racquet last night, and I noticed that one of the towers appears to have moved slightly. I need to make sure the screws at the base of the towers are tight.

chopstic
05-04-2012, 12:06 PM
I think I see what happened. I stringed a racquet last night, and I noticed that one of the towers appears to have moved slightly. I need to make sure the screws at the base of the towers are tight.

I made that dreadful mistake one time last year. I forgot to tighten one of the towers to the sliding base on my x2. Luckily I had an identical racquet to compare it to, and noticed the new string job shrunk my racquet by half an inch by comparison. I cut the strings out immediately, and it went back to normal. lol... I'll never make that mistake again