PDA

View Full Version : Anyone else tried the new Tecnifibre 320?


couch
09-10-2006, 09:24 AM
I know it's been discussed a couple of times but I was wondering if anyone else has tried this racquet that hasn't posted (esp. 16 x 20).

I currently play with the original Volkl Tour 8 and am potentially looking for something with a heavier static weight but still with a lower swingweight and the 320 looks like the perfect fit. I'm looking for something a little more solid that the ball won't fly with.

Can anyone compare the 320 to a "tweener" (11 oz) racquet?

If it helps I'm a 5.0 player who is a baseliner playing doubles. My strengths are definitely my returns and groundstrokes. Serve is pretty good but not overpowering. I tend to try to hit a good percentage of first serves in doubles. Volleys have always been my one weakness. Backhand volley is pretty good but forehand volley needs some work.

I have tried the DNX 9 and like it but was wondering about the TF 320 or anyother suggestions you guys might have.

Thanks in advance,
Couch

oncourt
09-10-2006, 10:30 AM
Am getting my hands on one tomorrow .So will let you know. Have been waiting for the 16x20. Did hit with the 335 18x20 which is an awesome racquet just a bit heavy for me as I am young junior girl but it might work for you. Also liked the yonex 001 mid.This racquet is very solid at the net and
still has enough controlled pop from the baseline. I suspect that many players don't demo this
racquet because of the head size but it really has no negatives and may end up being my stick if the 320 does not pan out.

couch
09-10-2006, 10:55 AM
Thanks. Look forward to your feedback.

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 05:19 PM
If it helps I'm a 5.0 player who is a baseliner playing doubles.

For some reason, I'm having some trouble comprehending that sentence. ;) LOL

Anyway, I just demoed the TF 320 but with the 18x20 pattern. It's a very nice racquet with excellent control and very ample power. Serves are great with it, and I can get good spin on my groundstrokes even with the dense pattern. Has a nice dampened solid feel to it that's pretty close to something old school but with lots more power. If you like lighter player's type racquets, then you would probably like this one. To me, it doesn't feel like a tweener as it doesn't have that tweener feel to it, meaning it doesn't have overwhelming power and poor control, but instead has very "controllable power". It also doesn't feel "tinny" nor "pingy" like many tweeners feel. It's also pretty maneuverable and volleys well. However, the larger head and thicker beam makes it less than ideal in maneuverability for me compared to my regular racquet.

If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.

FuriousYellow
09-10-2006, 05:31 PM
Am getting my hands on one tomorrow .

Me too. I'll be comparing the 16x20 version against the Dunlop M-FIL 200 2006.

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 05:40 PM
Me too. I'll be comparing the 16x20 version against the Dunlop M-FIL 200 2006.

Funny, as I'm also demoing the M-Fil 200 2006 side-by-side with the TF 320. I definitely like the TF 320 better, I think mostly because of the slightly heavier weight, and thus, more solid feel.

sureshs
09-10-2006, 05:51 PM
For some reason, I'm having some trouble comprehending that sentence. ;) LOL

Anyway, I just demoed the TF 320 but with the 18x20 pattern. It's a very nice racquet with excellent control and very ample power. Serves are great with it, and I can get good spin on my groundstrokes even with the dense pattern. Has a nice dampened solid feel to it that's pretty close to something old school but with lots more power. If you like lighter player's type racquets, then you would probably like this one. To me, it doesn't feel like a tweener as it doesn't have that tweener feel to it, meaning it doesn't have overwhelming power and poor control, but instead has very "controllable power". It also doesn't feel "tinny" nor "pingy" like many tweeners feel. It's also pretty maneuverable and volleys well. However, the larger head and thicker beam makes it less than ideal in maneuverability for me compared to my regular racquet.

If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.

Have you used the 315? How does it compare with it if you have?

Also, the 315 power is rated low-medium by TW and the 320 is low. I like the extra pop of the 315. I am afraid the 320 will be too low powered for me. What do you think?

FuriousYellow
09-10-2006, 05:53 PM
Funny, as I'm also demoing the M-Fil 200 2006 side-by-side with the TF 320. I definitely like the TF 320 better, I think mostly because of the slightly heavier weight, and thus, more solid feel.

I know you've demoed a lot of sticks as have I. I've demoed the M-Fil once already, but how would compare the feel of the TF to the M-Fil or the RDS001? I thought the M-Fil had a bit more pop than the RDS. How about the TF?

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 06:11 PM
Have you used the 315? How does it compare with it if you have?

Also, the 315 power is rated low-medium by TW and the 320 is low. I like the extra pop of the 315. I am afraid the 320 will be too low powered for me. What do you think?

I've never tried the 315 (nor any other Tecnifibre racquet, for that matter). This is the first TF racquet I've ever hit with. But I would say it's definitely lower powered than most tweeners, like something from Babolat. It's more of a control stick than a power stick IMO, but it has ample power for my needs. I tend to like very, very low-powered racquets. Actually, usually the lower the power, the better for me. :D

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 06:13 PM
I know you've demoed a lot of sticks as have I. I've demoed the M-Fil once already, but how would compare the feel of the TF to the M-Fil or the RDS001? I thought the M-Fil had a bit more pop than the RDS. How about the TF?

I agree that the M-Fil has more pop than the RDS. I'd say the TF is in between the M-Fil and the RDS.

couch
09-10-2006, 06:24 PM
Breakpoint, have you ever hit with the DNX 9? I can't remember in the DNX 9 thread if you had or not and don't really feel like going through the 500 posts. If you have, can you compare it to the TF 320?

I guess you could call me a modern day doubles player. I'm a converted singles player that plays mostly doubles now. I tend to return really well and stay back. I do, however, serve and volley on both 1st and 2nd serves. Volleys just aren't my strength. ;)

couch
09-10-2006, 06:27 PM
Oh yeah, thanks for the feedback BP. Sounds like a good stick to demo based on what I'm looking for.

Furious Yellow, I hope you have a chance to post a review. What kind of racquet do you use currently?

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 06:31 PM
couch,
Sorry but I have never played with the DNX 9 so I really can't make a comparison with the TF 320. I will say this though, even though it's lighter and swings lighter, I felt that the TF 320 was just about as solid feeling as the DNX 10 Mid. I think the near box beam (it says "Square Section" on the frame right above the grip) of the TF 320 gives it lots of good feel, the type of feel that I like better than on the Volkls.

couch
09-10-2006, 06:38 PM
couch,
Sorry but I have never played with the DNX 9 so I really can't make a comparison with the TF 320. I will say this though, even though it's lighter and swings lighter, I felt that the TF 320 was just about as solid feeling as the DNX 10 Mid. I think the near box beam (it says "Square Section" on the frame right above the grip) of the TF 320 gives it lots of good feel, the type of feel that I like better than on the Volkls.

Okay, you've gotta stop. The more you talk about this frame the more I like it. I've been known to make some quick purchases in the past.

As I mentioned, I play with the Volkl Tour 8 and am trying to find something a little more solid but not with a real high swingweight. I bought a Volkl DNX 9 because it fit the bill but the more I played with it the more I just didn't mesh with it. So I'm hoping this might fit the bill.

My local shop carries a lot of TF's so I'll contact them tomorrow to see when they will get this one in and take it for a test drive.

How do you get to demo all these racquets? Seems like you've demoed a lot.

SC in MA
09-10-2006, 06:53 PM
Breakpoint: Does the swingweight of the 320 (18x20) feel like TW's posted SW of 308 ? That seems like an incredibly low SW and would make this racket incredibly manueverable I would think. If it feels solid with that sort of SW, I would guess it would be a great doubles racket.

FuriousYellow
09-10-2006, 07:01 PM
Oh yeah, thanks for the feedback BP. Sounds like a good stick to demo based on what I'm looking for.

Furious Yellow, I hope you have a chance to post a review. What kind of racquet do you use currently?

Let me add my thanks Breakpoint. I was hoping the TF would have more pop than the RDS.

I'm currently using a PK 5G. I'll try and post some impressions on the two. Unfortunately, I'm not going to have as much time to demo them next week as I normally would like due to work.

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 07:06 PM
My local shop carries a lot of TF's so I'll contact them tomorrow to see when they will get this one in and take it for a test drive.

How do you get to demo all these racquets? Seems like you've demoed a lot.

I got this one from TW. I was supposed to get both the TF 335 16x20 and the TF 320 16x20, but they screwed up and didn't get the new demo sticks strung and then after they strung them they sent them out to other customers by mistake instead of to me even though I placed my order earlier. Anyway, by the time I figured out what happened, all they had left in stock was the TF 320 18x20, so I figured I'd try it anyway.

Hmmm....interesting that your local shop carries lots of TF's, as I haven't seen ANY shops near me that carry TF's. :(

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 07:13 PM
Breakpoint: Does the swingweight of the 320 (18x20) feel like TW's posted SW of 308 ? That seems like an incredibly low SW and would make this racket incredibly manueverable I would think. If it feels solid with that sort of SW, I would guess it would be a great doubles racket.

I would say that the TF 320 is pretty easy to swing but is not as maneuverable as it's swingweight would indicate IMO. As we all know, there's much more to a racquet's maneuverability than just it's swingweight rating. In my opinion, the larger head and the thicker beam decrease this frame's maneuverability. The TW listed SW of 308 seems a tad low to me. To me, it feels more like 312-313 or so.

couch
09-10-2006, 07:19 PM
I got this one from TW. I was supposed to get both the TF 335 16x20 and the TF 320 16x20, but they screwed up and didn't get the new demo sticks strung and then after they strung them they sent them out to other customers by mistake instead of to me even though I placed my order earlier. Anyway, by the time I figured out what happened, all they had left in stock was the TF 320 18x20, so I figured I'd try it anyway.

Hmmm....interesting that your local shop carries lots of TF's, as I haven't seen ANY shops near me that carry TF's. :(

I live in Louisville and our local shop is connected with the University of Louisville Men's Tennis Team somehow and U of L is sponsored by Tecnifibre. I think they are the only shop in town that carries them though.

neo
09-10-2006, 08:00 PM
If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.

:D

I want a car EXACTLY like this minivan, only with 500hp, all wheel drive, 7 speed manual sequential gearbox, 20' low profile tires, slick body with two seats and a Ferrari badge.

BreakPoint
09-10-2006, 08:37 PM
:D

I want a car EXACTLY like this minivan, only with 500hp, all wheel drive, 7 speed manual sequential gearbox, 20' low profile tires, slick body with two seats and a Ferrari badge.

Yes, but a minivan like you've described would cost a fortune to make, so that's why they don't make one. The racquet I want wouldn't cost any more to make than what's on the market. They should just go ahead and make it.

couch
09-10-2006, 08:54 PM
If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.

Yeah, I got a kick out of that one too. :D

Nar57981
09-11-2006, 03:22 AM
Hmmm....interesting that your local shop carries lots of TF's, as I haven't seen ANY shops near me that carry TF's. :(

I know that the TF Rep lives in Chicago, and has spent some time getting the sticks in arround Cincinatti, Ohio (around a sports store in the mid west :P). Since they just got on the market a year or two ago, they're still looking for shops to stock them

neo
09-11-2006, 04:35 PM
Yes, but a minivan like you've described would cost a fortune to make, so that's why they don't make one. The racquet I want wouldn't cost any more to make than what's on the market. They should just go ahead and make it.

The point was that what I have described was not a minivan. Just like what you have described was not a TF 320.

If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.

Just read that statement again and have a laugh like we did. :D

BreakPoint
09-11-2006, 05:02 PM
The point was that what I have described was not a minivan. Just like what you have described was not a TF 320.


And my point is that if Tecnifibre made a racquet like I described (relative to the TF 320), I would buy one. :D

oncourt
09-12-2006, 07:54 AM
Finally got a chance to hit with both the TF 320 16x20 and 18x20. This
followed my demoing the TF 335 18x20. I thought that I would like these
rackets based on the specs and the fact that they were a bit lighter however I really came away feeling that the TF 335 is a much better racket for me even though with an overgrip it weighs in at 12.5. The 335 was more stable in all areas of the court . I also seemed to be able to generate more
pace with it. Of the two 320's I preferred the 16x20 -for some reason it
seemed to be the more stable of the two. Spin potential is good for all of these racquets. Serves were adequate with the 320's but awesome with
the 335. Touch shots were also easy with all three though I preferrred the
335 again. During practice last night I hit with a college- age boy
and was told to serve and volley my points for about .5 hour. The 320's
were a little less solid at the net than I would have liked. I was killing him with
the 335. Hit again with my coach this morning just to verify my feelings.
Will go back now and decide between the 16x20 and the 18x20 TF335. I
finally think I have found my new racquet and although its a bit weighty
because I'm young and only 90 lbs I think I will grow into it, especially
since I have size 12 feet. Thanks for all your help and advice! Oh, by the way all the racquets
were strung with nxt at midrange.

Thor
09-12-2006, 08:02 AM
If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.
(thank god you didnt change the grip...)
i think you could probably say that about every racquet in the market

champ2087
09-12-2006, 08:03 AM
i demoed both the 320 and 335 too, and felt the exact same way. While the 320 was a decent racquet, the 335 just felt so much better. I even felt this wy just holding them before I hit with them.

BreakPoint
09-12-2006, 10:55 AM
Finally got a chance to hit with both the TF 320 16x20 and 18x20. This
followed my demoing the TF 335 18x20. I thought that I would like these
rackets based on the specs and the fact that they were a bit lighter however I really came away feeling that the TF 335 is a much better racket for me even though with an overgrip it weighs in at 12.5. The 335 was more stable in all areas of the court . I also seemed to be able to generate more
pace with it. Of the two 320's I preferred the 16x20 -for some reason it
seemed to be the more stable of the two. Spin potential is good for all of these racquets. Serves were adequate with the 320's but awesome with
the 335. Touch shots were also easy with all three though I preferrred the
335 again. During practice last night I hit with a college- age boy
and was told to serve and volley my points for about .5 hour. The 320's
were a little less solid at the net than I would have liked. I was killing him with
the 335. Hit again with my coach this morning just to verify my feelings.
Will go back now and decide between the 16x20 and the 18x20 TF335. I
finally think I have found my new racquet and although its a bit weighty
because I'm young and only 90 lbs I think I will grow into it, especially
since I have size 12 feet. Thanks for all your help and advice! Oh, by the way all the racquets
were strung with nxt at midrange.

Thanks for the great review, oncourt! :D

Did you get your demo racquets from TW? I'm still waiting for the TF 335 16x20 to be returned to TW so that I can demo it.

BTW, I'm having some trouble with the mental image of someone who's only 90lbs but with size 12 feet. ;) How old are you?

oncourt
09-12-2006, 04:49 PM
You are welcome! No ,I did not demo from TW because I am lucky enough to live close to several really well equipped shops. I do buy things from TW rather regularly though. I'm a girl and I just turned 14 and with these feet I definitely am not going to blow over! Hit with both TF 335's tonight and have decided to go with the 18x20. The hit with it just seems to be a bit more solid and I like that.
Although I like to demo racquets, I am glad to finally find one that I like this
well and that will continue to grow with my game. Next phase-string
tweaking-that should be fun! Any suggestions?

couch
09-12-2006, 07:29 PM
oncourt, what racquet do you currently play with? Just curious.

phat
09-13-2006, 04:59 AM
Oncourt, you can definitely go with some 17 or 18 gauge for even better bites on the ball. If I am going to get the 335 18X20, i will string it with Luxilon timo18 at 50. I love the (no) feel of the luxilon collection. Some hate the stiffness but I have no problems with my shoulder/elbow so.... What is your current racquet & string set up, so that we can have some direction for advice.

oncourt
09-13-2006, 07:26 AM
Thanks for the help. I currently play with a leaded up 300 RDX Yonex strung at 62 with NXT 16. Would still recommend this racquet to any young juniors. Have played with it for about 1.5 yr. Great platform frame but has become increasingly too light for me and after a point with additional lead it just seemed too dead feeling even after experimenting with different strings and tensions. I have strung with Luxilon before primarily the ALU and I like it very much and have experimented with other strings as well. I have a tendency not to prefer hybrids but maybe I just haven't found the right combination yet. The 335 was strung with nxt at mid range. I have a stringer of my own and I string myself. I personally feel that a good string choice is as important as the racquet. I have been going through about 2 sets of string a week but this may increase as I am currently working on additional topspin in my game and am rapidly becoming stronger. Thanks again!

couch
09-13-2006, 08:46 PM
Thanks for the help. I currently play with a leaded up 300 RDX Yonex strung at 62 with NXT 16. Would still recommend this racquet to any young juniors. Have played with it for about 1.5 yr. Great platform frame but has become increasingly too light for me and after a point with additional lead it just seemed too dead feeling even after experimenting with different strings and tensions. I have strung with Luxilon before primarily the ALU and I like it very much and have experimented with other strings as well. I have a tendency not to prefer hybrids but maybe I just haven't found the right combination yet. The 335 was strung with nxt at mid range. I have a stringer of my own and I string myself. I personally feel that a good string choice is as important as the racquet. I have been going through about 2 sets of string a week but this may increase as I am currently working on additional topspin in my game and am rapidly becoming stronger. Thanks again!

Man oncourt, sounds like you are a player. :) You are making me feel weak and meager. I'm a 36 year old guy who plays with an 11 oz racquet but at least I do use polyester. :D

BreakPoint
09-14-2006, 12:36 AM
Yeah, I used a 13.5 oz. wood racquet when I was 14, so a 12.4 oz. racquet shouldn't be too much of a problem for oncourt. ;)

You see why many of us find it a bit strange that many grown men today complain that even a 12 oz. racquet is too heavy now? :confused:

phat
09-14-2006, 03:58 AM
BP, I guess the problem is that more and more people are using the PDs & other powerful frames...... The ball is coming back at a faster pace. So my 1HBH (the hard court I play on is fast). I either have to stand 5 feet behind the baseline to keep using the 13oz frame, or stand on the baseline 2 feet behind the BL to play with a 12oz or below frame.

phat
09-14-2006, 05:02 AM
Oncourt, if you have tried and like Luxilon alu, that's great. I feel that a 18x20 with alu or timo will provide a consistant string bed with great bite.... Alu is great when strun below 60 (preferably in the below 55) and Timo 18 is great in 52 and below range.....

sureshs
09-14-2006, 08:29 AM
BP, I guess the problem is that more and more people are using the PDs & other powerful frames...... The ball is coming back at a faster pace. So my 1HBH (the hard court I play on is fast). I either have to stand 5 feet behind the baseline to keep using the 13oz frame, or stand on the baseline 2 feet behind the BL to play with a 12oz or below frame.

Yes we must keep up with the others. It is like everyone is buying more powerful and bigger automobiles (at least before the gas prices went up) because you need that extra horsepower and torque to force your way from a ramp into the freeway. And the bigger body is more safety against the bulldozers that others are driving.

oncourt
09-14-2006, 09:01 AM
Thanks so much for the string info, I will try both of your recommendations.
Just a thought about the last input. I have noticed that although the ball
may travel faster with a lighter racquet- it is usually not as heavy or solid feeling. If you work on technique i.e. getting the ball before its out of your hitting zone, getting ready faster , swinging through the ball and fast follow through -a heavier racquet seems to really win out. Its much easier for me to "push" bigger people around with this heavy racquet as opposed a lighter, faster one. Also hitting faster rather than being more patient and working the point does work against you. Thanks again for all your help!

Hal
09-14-2006, 09:18 AM
Anyway, I just demoed the TF 320 but with the 18x20 pattern. It's a very nice racquet with excellent control and very ample power. Serves are great with it, and I can get good spin on my groundstrokes even with the dense pattern. Has a nice dampened solid feel to it that's pretty close to something old school but with lots more power. If you like lighter player's type racquets, then you would probably like this one. To me, it doesn't feel like a tweener as it doesn't have that tweener feel to it, meaning it doesn't have overwhelming power and poor control, but instead has very "controllable power". It also doesn't feel "tinny" nor "pingy" like many tweeners feel. It's also pretty maneuverable and volleys well. However, the larger head and thicker beam makes it less than ideal in maneuverability for me compared to my regular racquet.

If it had a smaller head (like a 90), more weight, a thinner beam, and a less rectangular grip shape, I would probably buy one.

BP, how does it compare to the PS 6.0 95 and the nCode nSix-One 95 (16x18 )?

BreakPoint
09-14-2006, 11:57 AM
BP, I guess the problem is that more and more people are using the PDs & other powerful frames...... The ball is coming back at a faster pace. So my 1HBH (the hard court I play on is fast). I either have to stand 5 feet behind the baseline to keep using the 13oz frame, or stand on the baseline 2 feet behind the BL to play with a 12oz or below frame.

Hmmm...I find the opposite to be true. With a heavier racquet, I can stand closer to the baseline and take balls right off the bounce (hitting on the rise) because the racquet is much more stable to withstand the greater momentum the ball has right off the bounce, and allow me to still control my shot. It's almost like half-volleying the ball from the baseline with great control (a la Federer, Agassi, etc.)

With a lighter racquet, I have more trouble doing this because the racquet has less mass to counteract the high momentum the ball has right off of the bounce, which causes the racquet to get pushed back and a subsequent loss in stability and control. So with a lighter racquet, I need to stand further back from the baseline and wait for the ball to lose most of its momentum and start dropping after the peak of the bounce, so that I can take a full swing with the lighter racquet. Since the ball is moving much slower at that point, I don't need as much mass to counteract the smaller momentum that the ball has at that point, and can take a big cut at the ball with the lighter racquet.

BreakPoint
09-14-2006, 12:09 PM
BP, how does it compare to the PS 6.0 95 and the nCode nSix-One 95 (16x18 )?

The TF 320 swings much lighter than the nCode 95 (16x18 ), and just a hair lighter than the PS 6.0 95. The nCode 95 is more stable (but it's more stable than just about anything out there), and it's close in stability to the PS 6.0 95. The TF 320 serves about as well as both the PS 6.0 95 and the nCode 95. The nCode 95 hits a heavier ball than the TF 320. I can also hit my backhand better with both the PS 6.0 95 and the nCode 95 better than with the TF 320 due to the extra weight of those two racquets.

The TF 320 has a less muted feel than the nCode 95 and has a comfortable, more direct feel, like the PS 6.0 95 does. The TF 320 seems to have a more uniform flex, whereas, the PS 6.0 95 is stiffer in the throat and flexier in the hoop.

The TF 320 is not a bad racquet, and a good choice for someone looking for a lighter weight, not overly powerful, player's type racquet. I'd say the 18x20 version that I tried is comparable to the Head LM Radical MP, which is another very good racquet.

FuriousYellow
09-14-2006, 12:16 PM
I hit with both the TF 320 (16x20) and the M-Fil 200 06 for about 45 minutes last night. I agree with Breakpoint's assessment the TF feels much more substantial. It feels heavier than the M-Fil and more solid. The closest comparison to the TF 320 I can think of is the Maxply.

Like the Maxply, I found the TF to be too stiff for my liking. TW lists the RA stiffness rating as 65 but the rating printed on the racquet says 68 and it feels like. Conversely, the rating printed on the M-Fil says 67, but it feels closer to TW's rating of 64.

The SW also feels noticeably higher than the M-Fil despite the lower SW rating. I played the M-Fil with an overgrip and the TF without so their static weights and balance should have been pretty close. It's amazing how two racquets of such similar specs can feel so different.

I'll try and post more opinions as I play around with them more.

Hal
09-14-2006, 02:06 PM
Thanks BP! This gives me a great understanding of how the TF 320 plays.

couch
09-14-2006, 02:20 PM
Yeah, I used a 13.5 oz. wood racquet when I was 14, so a 12.4 oz. racquet shouldn't be too much of a problem for oncourt. ;)

You see why many of us find it a bit strange that many grown men today complain that even a 12 oz. racquet is too heavy now? :confused:

BP, I do think it's a bit strange that grown men complain about playing with a 12+ oz racquet. I don't think there is much of a difference in playing 2 hours with an 11 oz frame as opposed to a 12 oz frame when it comes to fitness. I do think the weight of a racquet, however, affects people's strokes differently.

I have gotten accustomed to playing with an 11 oz racquet and it has suited me fine for the last 4-5 years but as I have improved (went from 4.0 to 5.0 in about 6 years) I tend to think a heavier racquet is going to benefit me a little more against better players.

I have played and demoed 12 oz frames and have played okay with them but I think something in the 11.5-11.8 oz range is going to suit me best. I really like to hit with a lot of topspin and hit extreme angles while playing doubles and a racquet I can really "whip" through the strike zone seems to help me and fit my game and the way I like to play the best.

So, as with anything, there is a point of diminishing returns with racquets. You should try to play with one that maximizes your strengths and minimizes your weaknesses, whether it's an 11 oz racquet, a 12 oz racquet or a 15 oz racquet. And people also change over time. Some people get better and stronger and might want a heavier more stable racquet and some people get a little slower and a little weaker as they age and may want a lighter more powerful racquet.

TW Staff
09-14-2006, 04:23 PM
Like the Maxply, I found the TF to be too stiff for my liking. TW lists the RA stiffness rating as 65 but the rating printed on the racquet says 68 and it feels like. Conversely, the rating printed on the M-Fil says 67, but it feels closer to TW's rating of 64.

The RA listed by the manufacturer is for an unstrung frame. A strung racquet will have a lower RA rating. We list strung specs. The typical drop is around 3 units for a strung racquet, which would put both your examples right on spec.

Chris, TW.