Most Powerful Racquets

Discussion in 'Classic Racquet Talk' started by rodracquet, Feb 15, 2014.

  1. rodracquet

    rodracquet Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    194
    I don't hit with to many racquets because I am not in retail or coaching etc. As a social hitter the two most amazingly powerful racquets I have hit with are the PRINCE TRIPLE THREAT RING with that amazing fanned & looped stringing pattern and a recently acquired HEAD I.X 16 CHIP SYSTEM. The beam on this is very wide and the ball just flies off this. I know string tensions can make a difference but some racquets just seem to have more punch than others. Open to all for comment.
     
    #1
  2. KingGrayskull

    KingGrayskull New User

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Messages:
    46
    Some of the old Hammer racquets had monster power. I haven't played with it in over a decade but I remember one of the first ones, the Hammer 2.7 110, being an absolute cannon slinger. It may or may not compare today, but it blew me away at the time.
     
    #2
  3. retrowagen

    retrowagen Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,912
    My benchmark was the original Wilson Profile 110 (aka Profile 2.7, or Kuebler Resonanz if you were in Germany)...

    Then one day I found a nice used Ray-Co Longfeather that was a 32" long widebody... Now I can hit a very hard forehand with a 27" thinbeam mid, and an exceptionally hard forehand with a crazy widebody, but with that extra long widebody, it was hilariously, ridiculously hard... if I had time to set up for it.
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2014
    #3
  4. Hi I'm Ray

    Hi I'm Ray Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,504
    ^^ I've got the Hammer 2.7 110 & OG Profile 110 (27.25in length), I get more power from the Profile but the Hammer comes close and with better control from the 18x20 pattern. I've tried a small number of the more modern OS power frames and they are either around the same power level or lower, haven't tried anything more powerful. The big difference is the newer frames feel lighter, better balanced, and more dampened. They went overboard w/the whole Hammer weighing system ultra head-heavy stuff but the manufacturers seem to have toned it down and some of these newer ones feel pretty good stock. The Hammer 2.7 110 was very awkwardly balanced but light, and once customized I think its got a great combination of manuverability, good control, spin, and massive power. I'd really like to try a 32" frame or a Big Bubba.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2014
    #4
  5. Rorsach

    Rorsach Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Prince Thunderstick, anyone?
     
    #5
  6. joe sch

    joe sch Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4,773
    Location:
    Hotel CA
    I would also nominate the profile for the 90s and for the 80s, the Wilson Ultra II, which was actually used by some of the tour players, unlike the Profile and most other "power rackets" that were too powerful for most good players.
     
    #6
  7. v-verb

    v-verb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2012
    Messages:
    2,076
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yamaha Secret 04 was a monster! Unassuming looking, not a super wide beam - think Aero Drive wide. But probably the stiffest frame made (80 RA I think).

    It plays really well with poly strung at 30 lbs. I used to have syngut at 60 lbs and it was unplayable with that string
     
    #7
  8. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    37,239
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    I tried Profile 2.7's.
    Just got rid of my Thundersticks.
    I can hit harder with my 4DAero300's.
    You only hit hard with those big rackets because you cannot generate any swingspeed.
    IF you had swingspeed, you will know a Bab PDR hit's the hardest.
     
    #8
  9. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,766
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    My elbow hurts just reading that number.
     
    #9
  10. WhiteStripes

    WhiteStripes Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    394
    Actually, the Secret absorbed vibration VERY well. I believe it was one of things Yamaha boasted/advertised about the stick. Not saying it was the most arm-friendly stick in the world, but given the hefty weight + the fact that the stick absorbed vibration very well, it's probably much more arm friendly than many stiff tweeners of today.

    If you had the ability of maintain your swingspeed with the stick, the old big widebodies (e.g., original Profile 110, Secret, CTS Thunderstick 110 in particular) would makes any Pure Drive Roddick seem underpowered, and I've played with a modified PDR and a PD Swirly weighted up to 330g unstrung a while back. It doesn't hold a candle compared to a Secret 04 if you're swinging both at the same speed (which is no easy feat given that the Secret was a beast to swing). The Secret was an ounce heavier, had a more open pattern, and stiffer to boot. Simple physics.
     
    #10
  11. Kalin

    Kalin Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,498
    Exactly. The Profile and the Thunderstick beams went up to 36 mm thick (T'stick at the tip, the Profile in the middle)! The Secret 04 was a stealthy constant 25mm beam but stiff as he**. Plus, they were traditionally weighed sticks; over 12 oz. Modern 'power' sticks are puny by comparison.

    Lee, physics unfortunately disagrees with you. With those old sticks one hit big without swingspeed and much, much bigger with one. The problem was keeping the ball in the court.
     
    #11
  12. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    37,239
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Pros are always looking for more power.
    PDR is currently the most powerful today.
    Thunderstick and Profile's have lots of power for players with slow swingspeeds.
    How many ATP or WTA pros used the Tstick and Profiles?
    How many ATP or WTA pros use thin beam flexible rackets?
     
    #12
  13. struggle

    struggle Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Messages:
    4,276
    Location:
    Western North Carolina
    sorry, thread title doesn't mention pro players, only rackets.

    the original wilson profile (1988 or so, the gold colored monster fat thing) is the craziest i ever felt in terms of power. I'm sure it's been one-upped but i wouldn't know.
     
    #13
  14. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    37,239
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Sorry you don't know about rackets.
    A Profile is the most powerful racket for a player with short slow swings.
    A Thunderstick fits that catagory also.
    At the same time, a thin beam soft racket is very soft hitting for a player with slow swing speeds.
    And, a thin beam soft racket can hit the most powerful shots for a player with a fast swing speed.
    Meaning, for someone with a fast swing speed, like ATP pros, there are no Profiles or Thunderstick around at that level.
    But, for someone with slow swingspeeds, like your typical playground tennis player, there are TONS of Profiles, Thundersticks, and all the new 115+ granny sticks.
     
    #14
  15. Kalin

    Kalin Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,498
    Lee, pros are looking for the most power that they can still keep in the court! So, with the current state of the art in technique and strings it so happens that the PD/APD range fits that description.

    The Thunderstick and the Profile were too powerful for pros; that's why they never made it big on Tour (although I've seen some very high level players with the 95 sqin original, heavy Profiles). That's exactly the point.

    A racquet that's very powerful with a short, slow swing will be even more powerful with a fast, long one. Simple physics :)
     
    #15
  16. chunlimeyers

    chunlimeyers Rookie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2004
    Messages:
    164
    Ok, bored enough tonight to answer this. Someone answered this earlier, its power PLUS spin that makes a racket "pro worthy", or, even "you worthy".. What happens is if you have a wilson profile 2.7 in your hands, and you block the ball back with all its thick beamed "power".. The power PLUS spin I can make with my, say, classic pro staff 85 with 12.3 ounces and a 10 points light head balance, allows me to hit MUCH MORE SPIN than your profile(as this thin beamed 17mm width frame is designed to go very fast through the air).

    The profile also is a tank with horrible aerodynamics, and a very even or worse balance to it, so it was purposely designed to swing much slower through the air(Or else if you could, say, make it 10 points head light, somehow fix the aerodynamics(which is why Lee D digs his aeropro, and why they do make some killer power, a wide racket, head light but still cuts through the air well)which would probably make it close to 15 ounces when done, would be able to hit the ball probably 2 to 3 courts lenghtwise!(and you would have to be strong enough to swing a racket this heavy!)

    Ok, with all that said. If I play against old men with profiles, what happens is when they have their short swings and "block" the ball back, my topspin comes off their racket as backspin, and the ball flies out like it was sent in orbit. So, yes, if the net was much lower, and their was no spin in today or even yesteryear's game, or everyone you play with uses absolutely no spin? Get a wilson profile 2.7. Else wise, my next racket is going to be the pro staff 95s with me weighing and balancing it the same as my trusty pro staff 85(I have already done this with a demo, and it is INSANE!).

    So, you see why your question really just takes you nowhere if you only ask for "the most power". Power even on serve without spin, unless your 6 foot 9, is mostly useless in today's game.(Pete Sampras had not only one of the biggest serves in the game, but also the most spin.. all with a pro staff 85(heavily modified)).
     
    #16
  17. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    37,239
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    Never thought of it that way, the spin.
    All the guys using big wide, thick rackets COMPLAIN of the spin I hit, and belittle spin as a means to winning, instead saying pure power is the way to go.
    BUT, I serve harder (faster) than them.
    I also swing much harder to hit any groundie, while they, as said, basically just block my shots back for a no spin, easy sitter for me to pummell!.
    So, maybe Lack of Spin is one determinating factor in advanced tennis.
    I know, my g/f who doesn't play tennis, hits harder with my PrinceTT's than my Aero300's.
     
    #17
  18. FD3S

    FD3S Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,173
    Surprised the 6.1 Classic and the 2001 Pure Control haven't been brought up - both sticks are heavy, stiff, and assuming you swing properly let you murder the hell out of the ball. The plowthrough on these two racquets is just unreal.
     
    #18
  19. Ben

    Ben New User

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    20
    PK Ti 20g is powerful

    If you want power, plus a nice looking racquet, go to the Pro Kennex Ti 20g Reach. I am not sure other racquets can match it.
     
    #19
  20. muddlehead

    muddlehead Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    297
    Have used for many years Wilson Profile Widebody (ca 1990) 95 sq in. Lead and 31 lbs string tension. Not for everyone, of course. Plenty powerful. Volleys wonderfully as you would imagine. Most power I've ever swung - same racket, but, 120 sq in. Wow. Would be my answer for most powerful stick ever.
     
    #20

Share This Page