Pro Kennex 5g vs Pro Kennex 5g SMI?

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by Tennisaurus, Jun 5, 2005.

  1. Tennisaurus

    Tennisaurus Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    I recently came across a Pro Kennex 5G SMI (Secondary Mass Index) - and I cannot find any information on the SMI (Used 10 search engines on internet) and no ref on PK web site. I own a 5G (which I think is great).

    Any one know about the PK5g SMI? (Comparative weight - head balance) Is it as arm friendly as the PK5g?

    What does "Secondary Mass Index" mean? I would appreciate your insights.
     
    #1
  2. Steve H.

    Steve H. Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    Messages:
    758
    I had one briefly -- wasn't it a longbody version of the original 5g, maybe 28" even? It seemed pretty unwieldy.
     
    #2
  3. Tennisaurus

    Tennisaurus Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Pk 5g Smi

    It seems about the same length and head size is very close. However, the weight is heavier - and the head seems heavier.
     
    #3
  4. mo10s

    mo10s New User

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    20
    i have one. it is a 28" older version of the current PK5. i actually cut off 1" off the end to make it a 27" and it's a pretty sweet racket. i also use the current PK5 (not the ionic version).

    it plays very similar to a PK5, a little softer feel.
     
    #4
  5. destan

    destan New User

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    51
    I have two of them and am currently using them. For mine, the length is 27" and the head size is about 98 (compared with the 300G). I don't know if it is an older model as the cosmetics is slightly different from the 5g I see on the net. The colour scheme is black, yellow and a little white. The obvious difference is that the throat is black (with the word "Kinetic" in silver) whereas the ones seen in TW silver.

    Slightly more head heavy than the specs on TW, but nevertheless, very comfortable for the elbow.

    I bought mine in Asian and maybe PK has different versions for different parts of the world.

    Anyone can enlighten us?
     
    #5
  6. destan

    destan New User

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    51
    #6
  7. Tennisaurus

    Tennisaurus Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Destan,

    Thank you for that information, especially the pix. I have the same racquet. You indicated that you may have the specs - I have not found them and, to me, the SMI seems heavier with a head heavier feel than the 5G. (They are supposed to be the same! The SMI being the "original" 5G).

    Would you have the actual SMI specs? And have if you had the opportunity to compare the SMI with the 5G - any specific impressions?

    Thanks!
     
    #7
  8. netman

    netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,616
    Had one for a short while. Weighed in at 12.3 oz. Very stiif as well. It was unwieldy and nowhere near as nice as the standard 5g.

    See my post on this racquet further down for more info from other board members.
     
    #8
  9. Steve Huff

    Steve Huff Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,263
    SMI was just part of the name describing the technology in it. Similar to "LM", "Ionic" or "NCode". It was the pre-2001 5g. In 2001, ProKennex changed the paint scheme and dropped the "SMI" from the name. So, don't go expecting some big change just because it has "SMI" written on the side. It's just the older model.
     
    #9
  10. netman

    netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,616
    Found the TW info on this racquet. Now I know why it felt like such a beast. Here are the TW specs:

    Weight = 13 oz
    Stiffness = 72
    Swingweight = 376
    Balance = 9 pts HL.

    Very heavy and very stiff. A real load. No wonder the ball exploded off of the strings.
     
    #10
  11. destan

    destan New User

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    51
    Sorry, I do not have the specs, but it is definitely different from what netman has described.

    I added some lead to my 5gs at 3 and 9 o'clock, and a little at the handle, and they tipped the scale at 330g (or 11.6 ounce) each. The balance for each is about 3- 4 pt HL (stock) and they definitely do not have swingweight of 376! And they definitely do not feel as stiff as 76.

    Maybe it is the Asian model?, but anyhow, the 5g saved my arms and elbows. Had very bad TE about mid last year. When I started using the 5g about Feb this year, the TE came very much under control and I do not have any problems now. Whether it is the old model or not, I am pleased with it as it does the job!
     
    #11
  12. Tennisaurus

    Tennisaurus Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Some Personal Observations

    The heavier racquet that netman refers to may be the PSE or its precursor the "Tour" model.

    Yesterday I got a scale and weighed both racquets (strung) : the PK5G came in marginally higher at 11.80 oz vs the SMI at 11.75 oz.

    Lengths : PK5G was 27" and the SMI came in, surprisingly, 1/8 to 1/4 inch shorter (I will double check).

    Head Balance : In my unscientific manner - using a dowel - I found and noted the balance points of each and then measured the difference of the respective balance points from the end of the butt). The SMI came in 2pts head heavier. (May explain why its swingweight "feels" heavier to me)

    Field Test : Yesterday, I alternated use of my PK5G and SMI against a backboard and the PK5G felt "softer" - less stiff. Possible reasons : the PK5G had a Prokennex dampenener (may also explain the .05oz weight discrepancy, too), strings type/tension. (Didnt know the types/tension-this most likely a key contributing factor). The SMI head did feel heavier as I noted slight stress difference on my arm as I hit FH and BH.

    I am thinking of adding some weight to the butt of the SMI to make it more head-light. I definitely prefer a head lighter racquet.

    Anyone have a simple way of doing this? Should the lead tape go on the very bottom of the butt or somewhere higher? Think an overgrip or wrap could get me there? Do I need to take this racquet to a pro shop to remove the existing grip and then adjust it? (I never customized a racquet before)

    Your thoughts and suggestions would be appreciated!
     
    #12
  13. netman

    netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,616
    Yes, I posted the specs on the old Tour model from 1999.
     
    #13
  14. Mark Ng

    Mark Ng New User

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    I have this racket also. Similar comments as Destan. It is lighter and more head heavy than the white/ yellow and black 5G model. Mine weighs approx. 10.80oz with overgrip and is around 4 pts HL. Seems more flexible than the newer model.
     
    #14
  15. claycourter01

    claycourter01 New User

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    25
    5G SMI: the new St. Vincent?

    Steve Huff is correct that the black 5G with the SMI decal was the pre-2001 version of the 5G. I was so impressed with this racquet that I ordered a second one, after 2001, not knowing that the cosmetics had changed, and was disappointed in the newer version. I did not keep a copy of the specs of the SMI but as I recall, as listed in the TW descriptions, PK was claiming that the change was only cosmetic and that the specs were the same.

    The SMI does feel different; it is difficult for me to describe; I have the 2 racquets strung differently so I can't make an exact comparison. But my impression is that the SMI is a bit more flexible, while at the same time giving a "crisper" response. I also have a St. Vincent Pro Staff and the SMI and the feel reminds me of that in some ways. But perhaps, in each case, part of the appeal is trying to recapture a unique racquet that is no longer available.

    I actually don't use the 5G in matches often, because I found that it (like the Pro Staff) is a bit too low-powered for me, but I certainly enjoy using it occasionally.
     
    #15

Share This Page