I shortened my NXG OS!

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by travlerajm, Apr 6, 2007.

  1. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    I love my NXG OS frames, especially for groundies. With my current setup at SW2, my groundstroke game - especially my return game - has risen to new heights. But I have yet to get my serve back to the level that I served at with my Wilson Profile, and later my PS 4.7. It's not a power issue, but a control issue. I simply have too many bad serving days with too many double faults.

    After experimenting with a lot of different frames, I haven't quite found a frame that gives me the plush feel and amazing bite of my NXG. But I did find that I tend to serve best with standard length frames at SW2. So to revive my serve-and-volley game, I took a big risk.

    I sawed off half an inch from my NXG using a pocket knife. It wasn't easy to cut through the graphite - the NXG has a very strong construction. When I replaced the butt cap and slid it all the way in. The length was decreased by 0.6". So the new length is now 26.9".

    The shorter length allows me to add ~20g of lead to the upper hoop. I have one layer from 8 to 4, plus another layer from about 9 to 3. The new swingweight is about 365, with a balance point of 12.75", at about 12.6 oz. It's strung with dead broken-in Ashaway Crossfire II at 67 lbs.

    I can't wait to test it out on court and tune it. This thing is solid now! I have high hopes for this one. I'm hoping it will improve both my serve and my volleys. And hopefully my forehand will benefit too without taking away anything from my 2hb.

    I know what you're thinking... why didn't I just go lead my POG OS up to SW2?

    Two reasons. 1) the POG has more 1/2-oz weight in the handle. I didn't want a 13-oz. frame. 2) I really like the technology improvements that the NXG has (I love the double-tube More construction, as well as the lack of grommets).
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2007
    #1
  2. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    No, I was wondering why you didn't just choke up on the racquet when serving. Pretty easy to move your hand to the same position as it would be with a 27inch racquet and then slide it back for groundstrokes.
     
    #2
  3. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    Don't worry, I've tested that approach plenty. But moving my hand 1/2" drops the effective swingweight by 20 pts, so the serve power level drops off noticeably. I get maximum power and spin in the 365-370 SW range.

    Also, I was intrigued by the chance to add even more mass to the hoop to further enhance stability without increasing my swingweight.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2007
    #3
  4. Jack & Coke

    Jack & Coke Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,099
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Interesting.. I wonder if some of your problems (serving) would be better solved if you put as much time and effort into proper instruction, technique, and training, as you do with experimenting with your racquet (i.e. SW2).

    For the tour professionals, the difference could be in their equipment, thus a need for racquet customization. Their tennis techniques are pretty much top notch and as good as they're probably gonna get. That is, not that much more room for improvement.

    For the non pro, improvement in their game comes more from advancement and refinement in their technique and training, than fiddling with the minute swing weights of their racquets.

    But hey, they do say it's a mental game too right? If fussing over the SW of your racquet by a few points makes you think you play better, then I guess it's worth it in the end, aye?

    :)
     
    #4
  5. haerdalis

    haerdalis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    Location:
    Lund, Sweden
    Experimenting with equipment makes the game even deeper and more interesting for alot of people. Me included.
     
    #5
  6. jelle v

    jelle v Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,978
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    So your racket now actually is shorter than a standard length racket.. :confused:
     
    #6
  7. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    Why didnt you shorten it to 27 or was it a mistake?
     
    #7
  8. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    I cut off 0.5". But the buttcap was apparently stapled with 0.1" space between it and the edge of the graphite. As I indicated in my "Next Frontier in Weight Customization" thread, I'm interested in testing out the advantages of a shorter-then-standard length frame. So I pushed it in all the way to get to 26.9".
     
    #8
  9. goober

    goober Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,491
    A pocket knife? That must have been some pocket knife to cut through graphite! I'll take your word for it but have you considered something more reasonable like a hacksaw? :D
     
    #9
  10. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    I didn't have a serated blade at home. I gave myself a blister doing the job.
    I had to stop sawing after every 20 seconds because the blade kept heating up to dangerously hot temperatures from the friction. I burned myself before I realized this.

    BTW, I posted the review in my "Next Weight Customization Frontier" thread:

    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=1364575&postcount=28
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2007
    #10

Share This Page