PDA

View Full Version : Anyone own both Mfil 200 and HM 200G?


theJuniorACE
01-09-2006, 03:22 PM
so is there anyone that has both and can provide a good comparason between them.
sorry but its just that i cant decide on which1.
thanks for your input,
gabe

jackson vile
01-09-2006, 04:54 PM
Well I would like to see the those compared to also the MW200g

Sweden
01-10-2006, 12:36 PM
I don't know how the m-fil plays, however I know how the HM plays since I use them and it is an okay racket (feels a little bit like a head racket, something between Ti Radical and the i.prestige. When using it it is quite hard to hit the sweetspot, especially if you string with a high tension. So unless you are a solid player, stay away from the HM.

badmice2
01-10-2006, 04:09 PM
Own them both; on top of that, i've played with the MW also...before I start my rambling, things you should know...

- My MFil is stock; string used are X1 BiPhase main/ PSG cross 16 @ 63 lbs.
- 200 HM all have leather grip; 2 are strung with BB ALU + Titan Guts 16@ 57 main/59 cross, 1 is strung with LiveWire + PSG at 62 lbs

The frame on the mfil definitely feels stiffer comparing to the HM; therefore is a feels a bit more powerful than the HM. You can still feel the racket flex with MW and HM, but mfil feels more like a board (in a good way i guess). Without the leather grip, the racket swing weight feels heavier; the spec does say 5/6 pt head light and 337 on swing weight (maybe I'm used to the extra weight from the leather grip?). Mfil plays more muted, probably due to the "Mulit-FILament". In spec, the MFil is slightly heavier, but you wont be able to tell the difference.

Both rackets feel solid. Ground strokes can be place with precision; but you have to supply the spin and power. The HM i think have a bit more spring than the MFil. Both have great touch at the net; my preference goes to Mfil more...it's got a better feel. On serve, both rackets lacks power.

basil J
01-10-2006, 05:00 PM
I also have used all 3 and in order of preference I would go with:
200G MW: best feel, most flex, great feel in hand. Lowest in power of the three, but I thought it was one of the best racquets that have come along in 10 years. Great for serving and groundstrokes. Like a laser!
200G HM: Stiffer with less flex than the MW. The throat is wider than the MW. It plays lighter than the MW and the upper hoop is stiffer. Great playing racquet, with a more "modern feel" than the MW. Due to the lighter swing weight of the HM, I actually enjoyed them off of the ground quite a bit. It was a weaker serving stick than the MW
MFIL: Although the specs say headlight, I felt that it played like a head heavy version of the HM. It was stiffer than the HM, more muted and felt like it was heavier than both of the older versions. Great serving stick. Just OK IMO from the ground. I think the Mfil I tried had crap strings, so that may have made a big difference. I use the MW for over 5 years,before my last pair was ripped off. I used the HM for a year and then switched over to the 03 Tour.
All three are good traditional 18 x 20 20MM beamed players racquets, they just have a different feel to each. I know players that love each version, so you you should demo if you have the chance.

AndrewD
01-10-2006, 06:20 PM
basil J,

I find it interesting that you were such a fan of the old MW 200G and are now using (at least you were last time I read one of your posts) the Wilson HPS 6.1. Our current State champion, a former touring pro, has been using the old MW for the last 5 years and only just changed over to the HPS when his last Dunlop broke. Two other players at the State level, both former MW 200G users, have done the same.

Do you feel there is there some similarity between the two racquets? Possibly all coincidence but I thought I'd ask anyway.

theJuniorACE,

I found the HM 200G a much more solid and enjoyable hit than the MFil-200. It seemed to have a response closest to the Head Prestige Pro I'd been using, not quite as comfortable (havent found anything that is) but still nicely cushioned. Doesn't seem to produce a lot of spin although i did find that my slice backhand had a lot of weight and penetration to it. I didn't particularly like the feel or balance of the MFil-200 and could never get into a groove on groundstrokes the way I could with the HM version.

Of course, that's just my impression of the racquet.

Deuce
01-10-2006, 11:53 PM
I didn't find the M-Fil 200 to be stiff at all. It was relatively soft and quite comfortable.

I traditionally have liked soft, flexible frames, and I could see myself adapting to the M-Fil 200 rather easily if I chose to.

Marius_Hancu
01-11-2006, 03:29 AM
I find it interesting that you were such a fan of the old MW 200G and are now using (at least you were last time I read one of your posts) the Wilson HPS 6.1. Our current State champion, a former touring pro, has been using the old MW for the last 5 years and only just changed over to the HPS when his last Dunlop broke. Two other players at the State level, both former MW 200G users, have done the same.

Do you feel there is there some similarity between the two racquets? Possibly all coincidence but I thought I'd ask anyway.

I got yesterday an M-fil 200 and compared it immediately with my other racquets, and the one which is most similar with in terms of hoop shape is the HPS 6.1. A special oval there.

Hopefully, not that stiff.

basil J
01-11-2006, 05:38 AM
Hey Andrew,
I have been bouncing back and forth between the 03 tour and the HPS 6.1 recently, enjoying good tennis with both frames at the moment. I don't know if it is a smilarity or more of transition of an ease of use. I also know a few guys who migrated from the 200GMW to a HPS 6.1 and all have since moved on to yet different frames. I just think that the HPS 6.1 is a good solid players racquet that is extremely fun to serve with. Both are good players frames that serve all court tennis well.
Deuce, I think If I had the mfil 200 demo with good strings, I may have had a different reaction to using it. I just thought that it played heavy with lack of feel. Strings obviously can make an incredible difference. the demo had Mfil strings on it which were pretty beat when I received the racquet. I know a couple of guys using the mfil 200 and they love them, though ironically they were all babolat PD users prior to switching over.

papasito
01-11-2006, 05:19 PM
I personally like the M-Fil better. I find it to offer softer touch and better feeling. I have played with all of the Dunlop 200 reincarnation, beginning with the Dunlop MAX 200G which is still my favourite. Just in case you were wondering how much credibility you may expect from the different people posting here, I have been playing tennis since I was eight years old (now I am 27). I have played some on the pro tour too.

elbuzzard_lives
01-14-2006, 02:01 PM
I like my muscle weave. i have tried hot melt and m-fill.
I am a pro also. I am from germany and I used to have a pony tail. i sold my harley and now i have a KTM 450.

Marius_Hancu
01-14-2006, 02:33 PM
I like my muscle weave. i have tried hot melt and m-fill.
I am a pro also. I am from germany and I used to have a pony tail. i sold my harley and now i have a KTM 450.

hello Tommy ...

Richie Rich
01-14-2006, 03:45 PM
hello Tommy ...

you mean "hello "wannabe i have no life and know so much about Tommy's personal life Tommy""

BTW, I prefer the m-fil over the MW and HM versions. I like the stiffer feeling. The MW felt like it was bending at a 45 degree angle every time I hit a ball and the HM was only a little firmer.

But, diff strokes for diff folks and i prefer slightly stiffer players frames ie i.prestige MP.

jackson vile
01-14-2006, 06:33 PM
I was using the MW 200g to day and it has some serious stability and power!:o


I did not expect that especially with the low SW

basil J
01-17-2006, 05:02 PM
In retrospect, IMO for all court play, the 200g MW was probably the best frame I have had the pleasure of using. I probably was never good enough to really reap the benefits, but it was extremely comfortable, stable and consistant. In the 5 years that I used it, off and on, it never surpised me with a sprayed ball or shanked volley. Every error made was a user error and feedback was immediate. My last 2 were ripped of in a NH club and I have since moved on to other frames. I don't know of anyone still using these frames except my teaching pro. He is a S&V player and loves them. I tried the HM and Mfil but neither matched the sweet feel of the MW.