PDA

View Full Version : Best MIDsize players' racquet


Tennis Man
09-15-2006, 07:23 AM
I'm still trying to narrow it down and hear some feedback on the smallest, thinnest, meanest and toughest frames out there. I just love the feel and look of my n6.1 Tour 90, but maybe I'm missing something?

Does RDX 500 has larger sweetspot and is more comfortable?
Does 85 sq. inch head of PS6.0 feels similar to n6.1 Tour 90?
Are Redondo, Prestige and O3 like apples and oranges?

Note: I listed head and beam size next to the names. i'm sorry if not all popular frames are listed.

anirut
09-15-2006, 07:32 AM
You forgot the PC600 ...

And the Volkl mids ...

0d1n
09-15-2006, 07:37 AM
Yeh, but he did post 3 Prince rackets ... way to go ...

Tennis Man
09-15-2006, 08:25 AM
Sorry, I ran out of space ... 10 entries allowed only plus I'm not a big fan of Volkl

drakulie
09-15-2006, 08:47 AM
Sorry, I ran out of space ... 10 entries allowed only plus I'm not a big fan of Volkl

You are correct, Volks are horrible.

By the way, the PS85 and ncode 90 are totally different in feel.

MTChong
09-15-2006, 09:14 AM
I put the Redondo Mid, as it is the one I play with currently; the Vantage 90 - for me - was a close second. I also liked the Diablo Mids I used to play with; however, a huge reason I list the Redondo Mid is the flexy feel that allows my elbow to be pain-free! The POG, though amazing, was a bit stiff as were the Wilson's that I have tried: PS 6.0 85, nCode 90, PS Tour 90, etc. Also, I have not played with a PC 600 so I cannot comment on that - though I would love to; the Redondo seems to follow a similar design.

armand
09-15-2006, 10:04 AM
WTF is going on? I'm not familiar with any of those racquets! 17cm beam? I can't even imagine how that looks!

Tennis Man
09-15-2006, 10:13 AM
WTF is Hall of Fame then? Can't you guess :)

travlerajm
09-15-2006, 10:33 AM
O3 Tour mid is the best midsize frame I have demo'd.

jackson vile
09-15-2006, 10:55 AM
O3 Tour mid is the best midsize frame I have demo'd.


I hated it, string bed was incosistant, I think I want to demo this racket again

snoflewis
09-15-2006, 11:43 AM
the n6.1 tour 90 and 6.0 85 are definitely different. the 6.1 tour 90 doesnt have as much feel but feels much more powerful while 6.0 85 is more demanding and less power...although it has an amazing feel.

i voted for the rds001 because that's the racket that's best suited for me or at least that i've tried.

and btw, some of those frames aren't constant beams. the yonex ones are 18mm-20mm

Tennis Man
09-15-2006, 11:55 AM
the n6.1 tour 90 and 6.0 85 are definitely different. the 6.1 tour 90 doesnt have as much feel but feels much more powerful while 6.0 85 is more demanding and less power...although it has an amazing feel.

i voted for the rds001 because that's the racket that's best suited for me or at least that i've tried.

and btw, some of those frames aren't constant beams. the yonex ones are 18mm-20mm


I know some beams are not constant. So I put the max. They are still very thin and I love it. I find it very comfortable for slices and drop shots.

BTW, Babolat APD/PD has the widest beam width range (22-25, 23-26). I understand the concept but I often frame my slices and they are too powerful for my fast swing.

BreakPoint
09-15-2006, 12:18 PM
WTF is Hall of Fame then?

I think adely is kidding. I think he owns like half the racquets on your list.

chowdhurynaveen
09-15-2006, 12:23 PM
a little bit thicker beam, but the dunlop mfil 200 (12.1 oz version) is my current all time favorite! :)

armand
09-15-2006, 12:56 PM
WTF is Hall of Fame then?Hall of fame = a lot of wasted time on here!

But yeah, Bp was right, I own many of those racquets but I can assure you, no racquet, and especially not a players racquet, have beam widths like 17 centimeters or more. That would be insane!

I think you may be referring to millimeters, not centimeters. The beauty of the metric system is supposed to be that it's easier than the Imperial system. There are 10mm in 1cm, 100cm in a meter and 1,000 meters in a km. Water boils at 100 degrees celsius and freezes at 0. And so on.

But trying to figure out how many inches are in 10' is not only more difficult and time consuming, it's less precise as well. Even more advanced organizations like NASA use the metric system even though they are American.

All hail the metric system! My racquet is 584 cm2, and that's they way I likes it! And anyone who plays with anything greater than 600cm2, can consume a lolipop!

Tennis Man
09-15-2006, 09:03 PM
Any1 else has a mid?

skuludo
09-15-2006, 10:17 PM
Yonex RD Ti 70 88 sqaure inches. I am liking the racket so far.

This racket allows me to play with strings that are a month old and still have decent control is what I predict.

Need to work on avoiding mishits.

Tennis Man
10-06-2006, 09:54 AM
Bump, any more voters?

haerdalis
10-06-2006, 10:12 AM
The PS 6.0 85 is far ahead in the grand slam count so that must be it!

Tennis Man
10-06-2006, 10:28 AM
The PS 6.0 85 is far ahead in the grand slam count so that must be it!

Well, that's only partially true as most of GS are won with it by Sampras ...
I did actually forget PC600 from currently "available" frames and it must be MOST of the other 13 votes :)

BTW, I would include iPrestige and LMP but the are discontinued :(

Offshore
10-06-2006, 11:05 AM
without question the Volkl Tour 10 mid and the newer DNX mid have been the best sub 95" frames that I have hit with. I also liked the stability/control of the LM Prestige mid very much. If I had to choose now, though, it would be the DNX Tour 10 mid with its open string pattern and large sweet spot for a 93" stick.

0d1n
10-06-2006, 11:39 AM
See my signature...I didn't bother to vote "other"..."other" would be offensive to my Volkl no. 10 :mrgreen:. The O3 and the Flexpoint BS might have been better suited to "other" though...:cool:

Tennis Man
10-06-2006, 02:40 PM
See my signature...I didn't bother to vote "other"..."other" would be offensive to my Volkl no. 10 :mrgreen:. The O3 and the Flexpoint BS might have been better suited to "other" though...:cool:

Thanks for the feedback, though and for being loyal to your Volkl BS :)

tennis_nerd22
10-06-2006, 04:18 PM
Hall of fame = a lot of wasted time on here!

But yeah, Bp was right, I own many of those racquets but I can assure you, no racquet, and especially not a players racquet, have beam widths like 17 centimeters or more. That would be insane!

I think you may be referring to millimeters, not centimeters. The beauty of the metric system is supposed to be that it's easier than the Imperial system. There are 10mm in 1cm, 100cm in a meter and 1,000 meters in a km. Water boils at 100 degrees celsius and freezes at 0. And so on.

But trying to figure out how many inches are in 10' is not only more difficult and time consuming, it's less precise as well. Even more advanced organizations like NASA use the metric system even though they are American.

All hail the metric system! My racquet is 584 cm2, and that's they way I likes it! And anyone who plays with anything greater than 600cm2, can consume a lolipop!

great post *applauds* :cool: