Formula for Swingweight?

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by Jalapeno2006, Jan 25, 2006.

  1. Jalapeno2006

    Jalapeno2006 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    56
    I have came to the conclusion that i have no idea how to estimate a racquets swingweight. I used to think that it simply had to do with weight and balance, but i am finding that racquets of the same weight that are more head heavy can have a lower swing weight than a more head light racquet.

    Example: Head Classic Tour vs. Prince Graphite Classic Midplus

    Headsize----------93-----------------------------93
    Length-------------27-----------------------------27
    Weight------------12.1---------------------------12.1
    Balance---------6 pts HL-----------------------8 pts HL
    Swing Weight------320----------------------------328


    They are speced almost identical. One would think that the more headlight stick would have a lower swingweight. They even have then same beam width (19 mm).

    Are there other factors that go into determining swingweight? Such as aerodynamics or - in other instances - headsize... assuming that weight and balance are still the same.

    Or... is swingweight more of a guideline that ought not to have as much attention as it should?
     
    #1
  2. foucapol

    foucapol Guest

    That's related to distribution of mass.

    For convenience, let's suppose that there are four parts in the racquet - handle, throat, lower hoop, & upper hoop, and that the four parts have even length. (In many 98sq. standard length frames, the even balance point is located at the end of lower hoop.)

    One racquet's distribution is repectively 80g-80g-80g-80g, while the other's is 100g-60g-60g-100g. Then, the static weight and balance are exactly same for the two racquets (320g, even). However, swing weight differs due to the different distribution.

    There is no simple formula to calculate the swing weight.
     
    #2
  3. Jalapeno2006

    Jalapeno2006 New User

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    56
    That makes a lot of sense. I'm quite embarassed that i didn't reason that out myself. Thank you for that easily understandable explanation.
     
    #3

Share This Page