Specs. on the Dunlop Max 200G

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by TearsOfGlass, May 12, 2005.

  1. TearsOfGlass

    TearsOfGlass New User

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    27
    I was wondering if anybody would know what the specs. are to the Dunlop Max 200G. (i.e. head size, weight, rec. string ten., point HL or HH, etc.) Thanks.
     
    #1
  2. ffrpg

    ffrpg Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,147
    Location:
    Colorado
    String Tension: 50-60lbs
    Head Size: About 85 sq in (I'd say a little smaller though)
    Balance: I think it's 6 pts headlight. I don't remember, it's in that area though
    Weight: 12.5-13oz
     
    #2
  3. max200G

    max200G Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2004
    Messages:
    112
    The max 200G spesifications :

    Weight:12.9 oz
    Ballance:32 1/2 cm HL
    Inertia:355
    Flex Strung:36
    Beam:22mm
     
    #3
  4. andirez

    andirez Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    340
    I really wonder how it feels to play with such an incredibly low flex.
     
    #4
  5. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    Not a racquet for topspin. If you're happy hitting flat and with slice then you'll do fine. Personally, I think if you can get used to the frame design (boxy and an odd feel in the hand) you'll find the most comfortable hit you've ever had. Smaller head than 85sq, soft flex but you dont feel the racquet flexing due to the graphite injection. Very cushioned response and operates best at low tensions. Thin gauge strings work best and give an interesting response. Stable like you wouldn't believe. The racquet does not twist even when you hit off centre. Due to the boxy, graphite injected frame the ball is likely to still travel the length of the court.

    Another way to put it is, a huge number of Americans rave about the POG and PS 6.0 85. For an equal number of, or more, Europeans, Australians and Brits this is the racquet they rave about. While they've been able to make cheap imitations of the Wilson and Prince they've never been able to come close to copying the Dunlop. Pretty much the most unique 'players frame' (by that I mean used by top professional players) there's ever been and if I could buy them new Id still be using it.
     
    #5
  6. ffrpg

    ffrpg Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,147
    Location:
    Colorado
    The flex isn't that low, but still low. I believe it was around 46.
     
    #6
  7. tandayu

    tandayu Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,351
    This is a good racket and unique. I thought it would be hard to play with this heavy frame, thick beam, and smaller head in comparison with even the PS 6.0. However, with low string tension, the feel at impact is very lively. Surprisingly good control with low string tension, and very crisp at hitting volley at midcourt.

    On top of that, as other posters has mentioned, this frame is nice on my arm, does not result in soreness, fatigue, stiffness, etc. after 3 days in a row of 4 sets of tennis.

    I agree with AndrewD, this racket is also one of the frame to be remembered and chosen. It is one of my favorites.
     
    #7
  8. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    Kind of bowled over to read that it was 12.9 ounces. I played the 200G from the time I was 15 until I stopped playing competitive tennis at 20 and the weight never even occurred to me. Makes me kind of wince because I had a fair amount of lead tape up at the 12, 9, 6 and 3 o'clock positions. So, if the 200G was 12.9 ounces then I must have been swinging something close to 14 ounces LOL.

    I guess that's why, when I picked up the Head Prestige Pro which weighs pretty much on 12.5 ounces Ive felt right at home. Actually, the Prestige Pro is the closest thing Ive come to the old 200G in terms of weight of shot and comfort. Serves better than the 200G but doesn't volley as well.

    Still trying to find that elusive replacement for my greatly missed old stick. Does anyone who has played the 200G know how the Wilson ROK compares. Dont expect the same kind of 'fee' (that's too unique) but something in the same ballpark would be nice.
     
    #8
  9. ffrpg

    ffrpg Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,147
    Location:
    Colorado

    The Wilson Rok is a pretty sweet frame. I enjoy it a lot. It's got a fairly large sweetspot, not as big as the Max 200g though. The Rok is also fairly comfortable to play with. The Rok is definitely more spin friendly (I even played with 16g string) than the Max 200g. Overall, it's not a bad compromise to the Max 200g. Of course it won't be the same, but I feel the Rok is more solid and stable than the Prestige Classic.
     
    #9
  10. gash-b

    gash-b New User

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    #10
  11. Jet Rink

    Jet Rink Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    677
    Gash - amazing, we must be on the same wavelength! I just did the same and concur.

    Jet
     
    #11
  12. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    ffrpg,

    thanks very much for the input. Unfortunately you can't get the ROK out here any longer but I might just take a punt on it in the hopes it plays up to expectations. One of the big bonuses would be, going on the TW review, that you need to string it quite loosely. I use the Prestige at 45lbs which is still controllable and reminds me, vaguely LOL, of the old Dunlop. Is the ROK your current frame ? If so, Id be curious to ask a few more questions about it.

    gash-b,
    I wish I could find my old 'Tennis' magazine or 'World Tennis' magazine that actually has a review of the 200G. I can't be 100% certain but Im pretty sure the headsize is listed as 82sq.

    That may sound a bit small to most of you, however, if you've ever played with the 200G -or get to play with it- then compare that headsize to the Wilson 85sq's I think you'll agree it feels a touch smaller. I know, at the time, the Prince 90sq felt obscenely large in comparison LOL.
     
    #12
  13. gash-b

    gash-b New User

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    Hi Jet,
    When I first saw the post, I recalled seeing the specs somewhere before, and I remembered the old MW 200G review.

    Andrew,
    The Dunlop site here in Japan has a nice page about the history of the rackets. It's in Japanese, but here is the translation for the Max 200G Pro-II.
    http://tennis.dunlop.co.jp/gear/racket/history/history.html

    1988, Grand Slam Achievement Model
    23% Mid (84 square inches)
    Material: Graphite, Nylon
    Size: SL-2,3, L-3,4

    I am not sure what the term "23% Mid" means. However, for the other rackets, "46% Mid" is listed for a 100 square inch racket.

    I guess one way to really determine the size is to take a string, run it along the inner diameter of the frame. Then, by forming the string into a square or rectangle, one can easily calculate the area. I may try it later....
     
    #13
  14. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,581
    gash-b,
    thanks for that, very kind of you.

    I seem to recall, in days gone by, that they referred to racquets in that percentage fashion. I can't remember exactly what the original size is, but I believe it was a standard sized head (as on a wooden racquet).

    So, if a standard head is 68sq, then 23% larger = 83 and 46% larger than standard = 99. Guess that makes sense. That would mean the Dunlop is 23% larger than standard, so has a headsize of 83.6sq, the PS 6.0 85 has a headsize of 25% larger than standard which works out to be 85sq and a Babolat PD has a headsize of 46% larger than standard which = 99.28

    Thanks again, wonderfully informative post.

    Great to be able to see the development of the 200G, from the 150G (slightly smaller head I think) to its later versions. Interestingly, there's a guy on **** at the moment selling both a 150G and 200G.
     
    #14
  15. gash-b

    gash-b New User

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    Hello Andrew,

    Sure, no problem at all. It's always interesting to discuss famous vintage models.

    You might be interested in the following page.
    http://www50.tok2.com/home/sabe/tennis/titem99.htm

    I have posted this link before in other threads in the past, but just in case you haven't seen it, you may want to check it out. Sorry if it is in Japanese, but the author seems to have a rather large collection. He gives his impression on a lot of rackets, so it's quite an interesting page. At the very least, you can take a look at the pictures.

    I know I have a magazine somewhere with a lot of info regarding the Max 200G. If I can find it, I will send you a post later.
     
    #15
  16. Deuce

    Deuce Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,270
    Location:
    A not so parallel universe...
    Slazenger (Dunlop's 'sister company') also had a few Injection Molded frames in the 80s that looked quite similar to the Dunlops, except for the graphics.
     
    #16
  17. yip kok kuin

    yip kok kuin Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    201
    I have both. The one thing that is similar is the ROK like the 200G has ton of control and actually plays better if strung low. Really low like 42 pound. That's where it feels a little more power and more control!!. A strange combination as usually you have to give up one to get the other. Beside that, they are different. For those with injury, max200G (or any of the rest of the injection series) is the better choice. Playing with the injection series (I have tried all of them except the max500i), is like having a massage done to your shoulder. No wristy stuff here as they are pretty heavy. This series of racket should not have been discontinued. Do you agree?
     
    #17
  18. I am not so sure the string method would really be all that accurate. Perhaps a more accurate method would involve imagining the head as an ellipse and using the ellipse area formula.

    http://www.csgnetwork.com/mthareaellipse.html
     
    #18
  19. gash-b

    gash-b New User

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    33
    Thanks for the ellipse formula. Just looking at the racket, the head seems to be an ellipse, in other words, not a tear drop shape, so the formula should be okay.

    To answer the question about the head size, I just did a rough measurement, and here are the results.
    Area = (pi)(long axis=30 cm)(short axis=23 cm)/4 = 541.65 cm^2
    Therefore, in in^2 you get:83.96 in^2

    Not quite 85 square inches, but pretty close. The 84 square inch figure listed on the Dunlop site seems to be right.
     
    #19
  20. ilian

    ilian Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    469
    I agree 100%!!! Bring it back!
     
    #20
  21. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    It took JMac using it to get any attention. It was around for 4 years before he used it. That is a bit surprising.
     
    #21
  22. Deuce

    Deuce Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,270
    Location:
    A not so parallel universe...
    McEnroe began using it in 1983, I believe. Are you sure it was on the market in 1979? Seems a little early.

    Considering that it came on the market at a time when midsize graphite frames were just entering the market, in the midst of people - pros and recreational players alike - making the conversion from standard size wood frames, it is not surprising at all, but perfectly logical that people didn't notice it until a top pro began using it.
    Patrick was using it before John - John borrowed his brother's frame one day, and that's how he began with it.

    Many players were still playing with wood at that time in the early 80s.
     
    #22
  23. vsbabolat

    vsbabolat Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    8,804
    I seem to remember the Max 200G coming out in 1982. The Black Max (a very different racquet) came out around 1979 though.

    There was also a standard head size of the Injection Molded Frames called the Max 150G that came out at the same time as the Max 200G. The Max 150G was not sold in the U.S.A.
    Deuce, I agree with you.
     
    #23
  24. max

    max Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,682
    A simply wonderful frame. Perhaps not so good for serving, but excellent for approach shots, half-volleys, volleys and even some nice, flat, wopping ground strokes.
     
    #24
  25. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    From what I could gather, the Max 200g was introduced in 1980. JMac began playing it in 1983 (you are correct, I thought 84 for some reason. I read his book, just thought it was 1984). But I have seen pics of the racquet advertisement and it showed 1980. Don't forget, the POG was ontroduced in 1979 or earlier.

    I always thought the racquet came out when JM started playing it, but am surprised it took so long considering it was such a heralded racquet.
     
    #25
  26. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    check this..pic notates 1980. I also thought it came out in 1983, but not according to the info under picture..could it be wrong?

    http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Reviews/MW200G/MW200GReview.html

    More

    http://tennis.about.com/od/racquetsballsstringing/a/evolmodracquet_3.htm
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2008
    #26
  27. MAX PLY

    MAX PLY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    1980 sounds about right. I switched to it as a college player in either spring of my junior year or the fall of my senior year (I graduated in 1982) and I know the frame had been out for a little while by then. I was playing with a Dunlop A-Player mid-sized wood at the time I switched. My recollection was McEnroe switched sometime later than that (I think Patrick was playing with the frame at the time and John tried some of Patrick's frames but that could be rumor). I played with them forever (and still have a few new frames that are for my old age playing days :).
     
    #27
  28. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    ^^ thanks for the confirmation. :)
     
    #28
  29. vsbabolat

    vsbabolat Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    8,804
    The pic is wrong. In that pic is a Max 200G with 1986-1987 cosmetics.

    Anyway here is photo from the Dunlop Catalog from 1982 saying the Max 200G and Max 150G are new for the 1982/1983 Catalog.
    http://80s-tennis.com/pages/dunlop8283_6.html

    Here is the Translation:
    The new Max!

    Dunlop graphite from a cast racquet.
    The enfolgreich Max 150G has a big brother. Max 200G This new Max 200G, the sensational gleihe plastic technology Polymid with 30% graphite fibers in Injected-Molding-Forfeited Ahern vemrbeitet He has good about the same characteristics of: maximum strength at the lowest weight is much force in little effort!

    The Max 200G was manufactured for 10 years from 1982-1992.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2008
    #29
  30. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    I see the picture does look odd now that you mention it. The black grip was pre 1984, but the stripes look like the newer model (1986-whenever). That advertisement does not really prove much either. I am still looking for something definitive.:)
     
    #30
  31. Azzurri

    Azzurri Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    7,884
    Location:
    Next door to Elisha Cuthbert.
    Are you certain? If you graduated in 1982, then you must have had the racquet in 1981...yes?
     
    #31
  32. vsbabolat

    vsbabolat Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    8,804
    The first Max 200G cosmetics from 1982-1985 had two green stripes. The first year of the Max 200G had a black perforated grip. Then in 1983 grip change to a black grip with Dunlop written small in gold running through out the grip.

    It is definitive that the Max 200G came out in 1982.
     
    #32
  33. FloridaAG

    FloridaAG Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,176
    Location:
    Hollywood/Key West, Florida
    I bought mine in 1985 -
     
    #33
  34. bluetrain4

    bluetrain4 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    8,768
    In high school, I used a 200g derivative - the Max 400i, and absolutely loved it. It was lighter, but still heavy, and stiffer, but not "stiff" like today's frames. Same injection molding - incredibly stable.

    I had friends and saw guys at the courts with 200gs and other than hitting with one once for a few minutes, I never used one.

    I wish I would have experienced the 200g in full.
     
    #34
  35. MAX PLY

    MAX PLY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    It is possible that I didn't switch until the spring season (which would have been '82) but I do know I played the spring season with it and there are pictures. Since we got our racquets from the Company reps (in our team's case we had deals with Head, Prince and Dunlop for racquets, Boast for clothes and Nike for shoes) in those days and there wasn't the retail proliferation we have today, I have no idea whether it was available to the general public then.
     
    #35
  36. MAX PLY

    MAX PLY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    I also just did a quick Google search and found a book titled Materials in Sports Equipment by Mike Jenkins and it cites on p. 226 that the 200g was a 1980 vintage. From what I can tell, it looks like McEnroe started playing with it in 1983 which is when its popularity really began.
     
    #36
  37. vsbabolat

    vsbabolat Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    8,804
    What it says and I quote is " In 1980 Dunlop developed a unique injection molding process used for their popular Max 200G...." No where does it say that the Max 200G came out in 1980. What Jenkins says is that Dunlop Developed the Injection Molding Process in 1980. There was a Injection Molded racquet that came out before the Max 200G that was the the standard head size Max 150G.

    http://80s-tennis.com/pages/dunlop8283_6.html
    The 1982/83 Dunlop Catalog:
    [​IMG]
    The English Translation:
    "The new Max!

    Dunlop graphite from a cast racquet.
    The Max 150G has a big brother the Max 200G. This new Max 200G, the sensational gleihe plastic technology Polymid with 30% graphite fibers in Injected-Molding-Forfeited Ahern vemrbeitet He has good about the same characteristics of: maximum strength at the lowest weight is much force in little effort!

    The Max 200G is the art piece of plastic in Midsize it has 24% more racquet face. The sweet spot is almost 2 1 / 2 times larger than that of a Normal racquet head. The advantages of the new technology Dunlop will now also play all Midsize racquet benefit - with the MAX 200G
    MAX 150G and the New MAX 200G - Dunlop Graphite Racquets from a cast."

    Here is a Dunlop ad from early 1982 with the whole Dunlop line that was available in the U.S. in early 1982.
    http://80s-tennis.com/pages/dunlop-racquets_82.html
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2008
    #37
  38. ilian

    ilian Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    469
    1982-83 seems to be the right time for the introduction of the MAX 200G.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2008
    #38
  39. markwillplay

    markwillplay Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,248
    the head is small but the sweet spot on mine with tension at about 55 is huge. Its like the hole face is fairly sweet and this really shows on volleys. I think it does serve pretty well..the heft of the stick really does a lot of the work if you let it.
     
    #39
  40. ilian

    ilian Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    469
    That is very true. Just relax, hit on time and the racquet does it for you... The whole head of this racquet is a sweet spot. It is a wonder in the world of tennis racquets. It produces the most solid strokes ever. It is almost unbelievable how this racquet feels. I would say magic... ...or INJECTION MOLDING + perfect weight and ballance.
     
    #40
  41. max

    max Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,682
    I found that it matters not what string you put in your Max 200 G: the frame is pretty much the defining factor. Of course, tension counts, and a thinner gauge gives you a tad more oomph. . . but I never really found the frame to be very string-sensitive.
     
    #41
  42. MAX PLY

    MAX PLY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    I used to string mine at 50 lbs. with Gosen OG Sheep Micro 17. Very forgiving with that string at that tension. Much tighter than that and the racquet had a tendency to spoon. Very solid, woody feel which, for me, made it an easy transition frame from the wood days. Also very easy on the arm.
     
    #42
  43. Bud

    Bud Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    31,165
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Do you mean 1982-83?
     
    #43
  44. m1stuhxsp4rk5

    m1stuhxsp4rk5 Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,344
    Location:
    los angeles,ca
    the flex is awesome one of the best rackets i every hit with in terms of feel.
     
    #44
  45. ilian

    ilian Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    469
    Yes, sorry...:)
     
    #45
  46. gsquicksilver

    gsquicksilver Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    645
    Location:
    SoCal
    is it me, or does some of the earlier models weigh heavier than the later models?
     
    #46
  47. Tomas

    Tomas New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26
    Location:
    Midlothian, Virginia
    I played many years with Max 150G. I have never played with a better racket. I am still hunting for a new racket that's closest to the feeling of Max 150G. My current racket is Dunlop Mfil 200, which is not so bad with some lead. I also have my eye on Babolat Pure Storm Ltd.

    Tomas
     
    #47
  48. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    That is exactly right. The story that was told was that John was having some arm issues, tendonitis. He was home and went to hit with Patrick and PMac was playing with the 200G. PMac suggested John try it and the rest is history.

    The original 200G is one of the few rackets I never hit with. I had changed to the Wilson ProStaff when these two frames and the Prestige were the popular frames. For whatever reason, I liked the ProStaff so much I wasn't interested in hitting with either of the others...
     
    #48
  49. ilian

    ilian Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    469
    I understand what you are saying... I felt the same way with the MAX 200G and didn't want to try any other racquet. For that reason, I had absolutely no clue what to switch to when Dunlop discontinued the racquet. By the way, I like the Wilson PS 6.0, but I absolutely hate the Head Prestige.
     
    #49
  50. hrstrat57

    hrstrat57 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,696
    Location:
    RI
    more 200g love

    I agree with this.

    I have a two green stripe version....with a black leather grip and two with the green/gold graphics pictured in your 9/8 post above.

    Of course as I have said before all the graphics on two of the racquets have almost completely rubbed off.

    One of the flakey gold graphic frames is near mint....both of the gold/green frames have fairway leather grips.....

    If I recall correctly I bought the gold flake graphic frames new in about 1986 and picked up the older version used....prob about 1990....but my memory is as faded as the two frames...

    Although I am a big string guy I agree that these frames play beautifully regardless of string. I strung with Prince syn gut 16 or 17 for years at 55 lbs....of course when I could afford to treat myself to some gut....well the feel and control became ridiculous.....it felt like throwing a ball with the racquet at times.....and for the 83 frame size the racquet has a big sweet spot, much bigger IMO than a PS 85.

    Again, repeating myself from other posts and threads but a strong serve and volleyer can still even today search long and hard and not find a better stick for carving it up in the frontcourt. I put the 200g's back in my bag for a couple of months last summer. I found when I was attacking the net they were as good as I remembered but when I tired(I am 10/20 yrs older now since I played these frames) and had to stay back and defend the baseline it was hard to create enough pace and depth to stay in the point for long.

    My 2 Head i prestige MP have bumped them out for good. Serve with more pace(tho less spin potential) volley nearly as good and hit big from the backcourt. Similar precision and a lot more forgiving.....

    I have a couple of PS 85's / sv and china which also got back in the bag for a bit and they suffered the same fate....though the ps 85 hung in at the baseline a bit better than the max 200g's.

    Again, amazingly I have never played an original Head Prestige much to my continued dismay. I will snag one at some point.
     
    #50

Share This Page