Rossignol F200 vs Wilson ProStaff 6.0

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by haerdalis, Nov 6, 2008.

  1. haerdalis

    haerdalis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    Location:
    Lund, Sweden
    I played today with the F200. Absolutely sweet frame when hitting the sweetspot. Feels like everything just falls into place. This is a very flexy frame, much more flexy than the ps 6.0 but I feel control is not as good and power is better which seems it shouldnt be. I could absolutely cream the ball but I could also launch way long at times which I never do with the ps 6.0.
    It felt almost like it feels when hitting with a golf driver with a flexy shaft which at some speeds adds power but in tennis this shouldnt be I think.
    Anyone care to comment and share their experiences on matters such as this?
     
    #1
  2. galain

    galain Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,007
    Ok - I'll pop in again! Give yourself some time. I think the inverted bridge that Rossignol marketed was one of the few technologies that actually worked re - control. It does take a little getting used to though, but after you've had a few hours you really do get nicely rewarded and it's not hard to hit what and where you want to hit.

    The F200 back in the day did have a reputation for being fairly powerful. Despite the fact Wilander left it to look for something with more muscle it wasn't a pansy. In fact, a lot of people used to string this at the high end to help control the power.

    I did a comparative review last year I think of the F200, the Max 200G, the Kneissl White Star Lendl Pro and the Prince Mag 90. I'm on my way out the door now but see if you can find it because I go into a little more detail in that thread.

    Glad you're enjoying though!
     
    #2
  3. psp2

    psp2 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,102
    The F200 (charcoal colored version) had a fairly high SW (~350) and a hefty weight behind its shots thus adding to the power. The flex and the inverted bridge (shorter middle mains) definitely helped to reduce the power somewhat. It did have a buttery feel upon impact.
     
    #3
  4. m1stuhxsp4rk5

    m1stuhxsp4rk5 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,344
    Location:
    los angeles,ca
    #4
  5. haerdalis

    haerdalis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    Location:
    Lund, Sweden
    Ah super review galain. Nice read.
    Yeah I think the f200 probably has a higher sw. The weight and balance of it seems like a perfect match for my serve. Not for my groundies though unfortunately.
     
    #5
  6. Speedygonzalez

    Speedygonzalez Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Messages:
    372
    I played with the white version recently and loved the feel. I liked it especially for volleying. Put it aside though since I don't have a good spare frame and it probably will take me a long time to get fully used to it.
    The second one I have is a grey version with serious cracks underneath the bridge. I compared it with the white one and noticed that it was 15 grams heavier (375 to 360 grams)!!!
    Moreover, the white version was 1 cm shorter! Was quality control not as good during those days?
     
    #6
  7. haerdalis

    haerdalis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    Location:
    Lund, Sweden
    Mine is the gray one, the first version I believe. It weighs 360 grams with the gosen grip I have on it. It feels solid but not heavy despite the probably hefty sw.
     
    #7

Share This Page