Please correct the error on the Microgel Radical Pro specs and Review

Discussion in 'TW Questions/Comments' started by Pro_Tour_630, Oct 14, 2007.

  1. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Chris et al, it would be nice if you take a closer look at the Microgel Radical Pro and correct the error in specs in regards to beam width. It is 20mm not 21mm. It would be nice if you can update it in the review as well. And say something to the fact that the pro is thinner than the MP or OS. Thanks
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #1
  2. Safina

    Safina Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    538
    I asked them about this before ordering, (wanted a thinner beam), and supposedly TW re-measured the Pro, but said it was still 21mm.

    I know you (michael chaho) definitely think/know the Pro is thinner, but without visual evidence, I can't say... so I had to take TW word that the Pro is same beam width as MP.

    Michael, if you have pictures of both side by side, that would be a great help to getting the specs changed. I tried to get them to change it since HEAD obviously says the Pro is thinner, but they stuck by their specs.
     
    #2
  3. Anton

    Anton Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    3,208
    Location:
    Staten Island
    I've had the two frames side by side laying on the counter and pro was obviously a bit thinner.

    I'll try to make some pics, if I'll get ahold of my buddy with the Pro
     
    #3
  4. ollinger

    ollinger Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2004
    Messages:
    6,041
    chaho's might be thinner because he likes to remove the paint on the racquet to increase flexibility, per his prior thread on the subject.
     
    #4
  5. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    thank you for agreeing, you have eyes, not sure I can say the same thing in regards to your feedback sense :) try looking at the Bridge and bumper, or just look at the inside of the frame.
     
    #5
  6. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    It is a shame, I will make them change it, you watch. This does not look good on their part, especially since no one picked up on it in the REVIEW. THIS IS A FACT THAT SHOULD BE STATED IN THE REVIEW. AND PEOPLE ARE BEING MISLEAD FOR NO REASON. WHY I HAVE NO IDEA.
     
    #6
  7. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    this one is for you, enough said

    [​IMG]
     
    #7
  8. JW10S

    JW10S Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,896
    While I at first did not think a difference of 1mm would be readily visible to the naked eye, when I put my MG Radical MPs next to my MG Radical Pros it is clear the Pros do indeed have thinner beams--surprisingly it's pretty obvious. I'm surprised that the listed specs on TW have not been corrected to coincide with HEAD's specs.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #8
  9. Safina

    Safina Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    538
    great macro picture, but it could use a caliper or measuring tape to actually show the beam width, or compare to MP radical frame.
    HEAD definitely says it is thinner.... on the racquet and on their website.
    Very strange!
    show some pics JW10s, or the Microgel Radical line will continue to be shrouded in mystery.
    (since I asked TW if the PRO was thinner since I wanted a 20mm frame, I will be disappointed if it is
    easily viewable as thinner beam!)

    (( but I do like my Radical MP frames, so no big deal now... but why they wouldn't correctly spec the MG PRO after several requests, I dunno. I blame SPENCER, no no.. maybe it was the goofy-looking Nadal guy!)) <--never get tired of that line ;)
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #9
  10. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    you do have eyes after all. Like I said people think I am seeing things or 1mm is irrelevant to even notice. Yet some people can clearly see it and some don't.

    Sorry Safina my caliper is at work and I returned my MP. I will take a photo of the top bumper which is a dead give away
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #10
  11. Safina

    Safina Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    538
    :mrgreen: looks like TW got right on this!!! lolrofllol :mrgreen:
    :mrgreen:
     
    #11
  12. TW Staff

    TW Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    24,345
    Location:
    Tennis-Warehouse.com
    We have measured some racquets and have noted 21 mm in the shaft and 20 mm in the head. We've updated our specs to reflect this and thank you for bringing it to our attention.

    Chris, TW.
     
    #12
  13. bertrevert

    bertrevert Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Location:
    Syd, Oz
    I guess it is what we will have to call "tapered" therefore?
     
    #13
  14. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    #14
  15. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,154
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2007
    #15

Share This Page