Pro Line II vs. Big Ace

Discussion in 'Strings' started by pow, Jul 24, 2008.

  1. pow

    pow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,439
    Has anyone tried the two, please comment on which you preferred. I've used the 1.15mm version of the Pro Line II but I'm interested in the 17 gauge version but any experience with the two strings will do. I'm hoping that the transition between the two strings will be a smooth one. I'm actually hoping that the Big Ace is better because it's cheaper. :)
     
    #1
  2. bruiser

    bruiser New User

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    69
    Big Ace is fine but I've played with both and I use Pro Line II in my hybrids regularly. I definitely prefer it to Big Ace. People on this board seem to LOVE Big Ace and it is a great string for the price. However, in terms of performance, my opinion is that Pro Line II is better in all respects.
     
    #2
  3. old coach

    old coach Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    219
    Both of the strings a very good. And you should try both. If you do a full job I think Big Ace has an edge.
     
    #3
  4. bchamaki

    bchamaki Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    257
    Yea, proline 2 is definatly better. People on these boards are big ace fans. I agree that Proline is better.
     
    #4
  5. PROTENNIS63

    PROTENNIS63 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,722
    Both are great strings however Big Ace has slightly better tension maintenance and the price/performance ration is much better with Big Ace.
     
    #5
  6. Noisy Ninja

    Noisy Ninja Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    397
    I've tried both as a full setup in K90's strung at 52/50.
    IMO, Big Ace felt softer and offered more feel & power (most competent poly at the net I've tried to date). Pro Line II played noticeably crisper (especially during the first hour of play) and had a mite more control from the baseline. Spin potential is similar with both strings.
    As both strings are "polys in thin gauges", both strings aren't exactly great at maintaining tension. I thought both strings displayed similar tension loss. I've typically broken or cut out both setups ~ the 5 hour mark.
    It's a doubled edged sword using a thin gauged poly. On one hand, you get spin potential and a bit more power & softness (than thicker gauged poly). The downside is that the thinner gauge results in faster rate of tension loss and less durability.
    If you're a hard hitter, you'll have to string pretty often to deal with the lessened durability and/or lack of tension maintenance. For me, price was a big deciding factor in choosing which string to stock up with considering the re-string turnover involved.
     
    #6
  7. pow

    pow Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,439
    Which maintains its characteristics longer?
     
    #7
  8. PROTENNIS63

    PROTENNIS63 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,722
    I felt Big Ace does.
     
    #8
  9. Noisy Ninja

    Noisy Ninja Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    397
    The ability to maintain playing characteristics has a lot to do with tension maintenance and the difference is very minute when comparing the two strings; I honestly couldn't say one was substantially better than the other in maintaining its playing characteristic(s). Sensitivity to tension loss or playability is very subjective and your best route is to string two similar racquets at the same tension to compare and ultimately decide.

    However, as food for thought...string lab testing (which won't necessarily reflect real playtesting) of the two strings say that tension loss is 19.34 lbs for BA Micro and 18.92 lbs for Kirsch Proline II; BA Micro tested softer at 219 lbs/in versus 224 lbs/in for Proline II.
    We're splitting hairs in my opinion...and that brings us back to the subject of price...
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2008
    #9

Share This Page