PDA

View Full Version : BLX90 power question


gplracer
11-10-2012, 09:59 AM
I see that the BLX90 is rated to have more power than my 6.1 95. The 6.1 is easier to get power with for me. Is that because the assumption is that the rackets are being swung at the same speed and the BLX90 is harder to get up to speed? I think my 6.1 95 has a high static weight. Maybe the swing weight is greater?

corners
11-10-2012, 10:36 AM
Where is it "rated" as having more power?

gplracer
11-10-2012, 12:59 PM
TW University. Maybe I was wrong. I was looking at power but I think that is a percentage of the total power now power potential. Under shot speed the ball comes off the strings of the 95 at .7 miles per hour faster.

Mick3391
11-10-2012, 03:12 PM
I see that the BLX90 is rated to have more power than my 6.1 95. The 6.1 is easier to get power with for me. Is that because the assumption is that the rackets are being swung at the same speed and the BLX90 is harder to get up to speed? I think my 6.1 95 has a high static weight. Maybe the swing weight is greater?

It's probably because you hit the 95 easier and more consistantly. I think my K95 is more powerful than my BLX90, but I have no idea if that's true, the specs are so close it's probably up to the player.

MikeHitsHard93
11-10-2012, 03:29 PM
Knowing wilsons QC, your 95 might be heavier or more headheavy than your 90. That would make sense.

corners
11-11-2012, 09:13 AM
TW University. Maybe I was wrong. I was looking at power but I think that is a percentage of the total power now power potential. Under shot speed the ball comes off the strings of the 95 at .7 miles per hour faster.

Yeah, but what 95 are you talking about? TWU has tested six different 6.1 95s (The K, BLX and 2012 BLX versions in both string patterns.) Each of those frames is slightly different. Furthermore, each of those six frames tested is slightly different than than every other 6.1 95 in existence, especially because Wilson's swingweight QC on the 6.1 line is notoriously awful.

My guess is that you're comparing the BLX 90 to the BLX 6.1 95 18x20. The BLX 90 frame that TWU tested had swingweight of 330 and the 18x20 6.1 95 that TWU tested had swingweight of only 324. Power Potential (the inherent power of the racquet) is almost directly proportional to swingweight. So the BLX 90 with the higher swingweight is going to have a high power potential. But now check out the 16x18 version - the frame they tested had a much higher swingweight and so the power potential is quite a bit higher than both the 18x20 they tested and the BLX 90.

If you could compare a BLX 90 and a BLX 6.1 95 that had identical swingweights, the only differences you would see is that the 95 is slightly more powerful than the 90 on shots struck near 3&9, 10&2 and towards the tip because of it's stiffer hoop. Shots struck in the center of the stringbed would be about the same.

Take a look at the K90 and K95s if you want a comparison like this, as the individual frames they tested were all within 1 swingweight unit of each other.

xFullCourtTenniSx
11-11-2012, 02:43 PM
Does it matter? You're the one hitting with the racket. Only your opinion on what is the better racket matters.

gplracer
11-11-2012, 05:20 PM
My 6.1 95 is a kfactor 6.1 95 (16x18) TW says the average frame has a swing weight of 337. I will take it to work tomorrow and weigh the actual frames for a better comparison.

sunof tennis
11-12-2012, 02:46 PM
My 6.1 95 is a kfactor 6.1 95 (16x18) TW says the average frame has a swing weight of 337. I will take it to work tomorrow and weigh the actual frames for a better comparison.

Yes, the K95, if it within specs, will have a higher swingweight than the
PS90. That, together with the open string pattern, will give it slightly more inherent power.
To me, however, the K95 was boardy and doesn't have the feel of the PS90.

xFullCourtTenniSx
11-12-2012, 06:22 PM
My 6.1 95 is a kfactor 6.1 95 (16x18) TW says the average frame has a swing weight of 337. I will take it to work tomorrow and weigh the actual frames for a better comparison.

TW listed it as 345. At least 340+.