String weights

Discussion in 'Strings' started by Rabbit, Oct 14, 2007.

  1. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    I read in another thread about someone using a multi in the crosses to reduce swingweight. Well, being a curious individual and the proud owner of a set of digital scales, I decided to put some strings on the scales. Here is what I found out.

    Let me go ahead and say one thing. I love you guys, but I did not take a set of gut out of its bag. No, I just strung a couple of frames with gut and to get the weight of gut took the empty bag and put it on the scales. I then took the bag with gut in it and subtracted the difference. I also, and get this, took a set of IsoSpeed off the reel it comes on, wieghed it, and put it back on the reel. Finally, I weighed one of those clip things that hold the string together. I tried a couple of different ones, and none of them would register even one gram on my scales. So, I don't take them into account.

    Now my findings:

    1. Natural Gut - Pacific Prime 17 - 1.25 mm - 12.2 m = 19 Grams
    2. Volkl PowerFibre 17 - 1.25 mm - 12.2 m = 17 Grams
    3. Luxilon ALU 16L - 1.25 mm - 12.2 m = 21 Grams
    4. IsoSpeed Professional 17 - 1.2 mm - 12.2 m = 15 grams
    5. Pacific Xtreme PolyForce 16L - 1.25mm - 12.2 m = 22 grams
    6. Prince Synthetic 16 w/Duraflex - 1.30mm - 12.2m - 20 grams
    So, from heaviest to lightest:
    1. Pacific Xtreme Polyforce 16L - 22 grams
    2. Luxilon ALU 16L - 21 grams
    3. Prince Synthetic 16 - 20 grams
    4. Pacific Prime 17 - 19 grams
    5. Volkl PowerFibre 17 - 17 grams
    6. IsoSpeed Professional 17 - 15 grams
    So, if one was using the Mojo set up with gut / IsoSpeed, here's what you would have:

    9.5 grams (1/2 set of gut) + 7.5 grams (1/2 set of IsoSpeed) for a total weight of 17 grams.

    If you took that set up and altered it, ostensibly to reduce the swing weight and used a multi, here's what you'd have:

    9.5 grams (1/2 set of gut) + 8.5 grams (1/2 set of PowerFibre) for a total weight of 18 grams!

    So, if you were trying to reduce swingweight, you really shot yourself in the foot.

    To quantify: I used those little "O" ring dampeners, the kind you can buy at Lowe's or Home Depot. I weighed one of those. It weighs one gram. That's really not enough difference to make a difference in the swingweight of a frame, IMO. But it is the difference between the above two set ups if anyone wants to "feel" the difference in their hand.

    By contrast, a dry regular length Tournagrip weighs 5 grams.
    Take that same Tournagip and let it get soaked with sweat, and the weight goes to 9 grams.
     
    #1
  2. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    its I who notices that poly strings add more swingweight than multis. any qualified person would say that. i think the poster bagung has perceived this as well, and likely some others.

    you are speaking of static weight of an unstrung stringset which is far diffferent than swingweight.

    you are obviously not understanding that because poly strings arent very elastic it usually takes quite a bit more poly material to string a racquet than it would a stretchy multi. i think people can understand that if a stringjob takes more material it will weigh more.

    your little o ring dampener is situated nearer to the balance point and in one spot, so the change by that amount of weight in that location is insignificant compared to the extra weight distributed over an entire stringbed. also technifibre tauts their little vibraclip dampener as weighing only 2 grams and being among the lightest, so maybe your calculation of an o damp only weighing 1 gram is bad..you may want to check your scale. strings are different than vibe damps. further suggest to you that overgrips are different than strings and that the overgrip being located on the racquets handle hasnt nearly the effect of adding extra weight to the head (stringbed).

    common knowledge indicates that your average bear poly string adds 4-5 swingweight points more than your average bear multi of the same gauge. any quality stringer would confirm. there is something about distributing that extra weight over the entire stringbed which ups the swingweight. people sensitive to such things notice things like that..others dont

    congrats on such a stellar effort with the sole purpose obviously being to attempt to discredit me. no offense, but i suggest your testing procedure and corrresponding results are very flawed..you are talking static weight..i am talking swingweight. suggest you string up a number of frames with a number of combinations of strings and vibe damps and overgrips, measure their swingweights and then post your results..then we will be talking about the same thing

    signed,
    NoBadMojo <creater of the mojo setup <so named by the poster Craig Clark>>...many many people like this sertup and are very happily using it
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #2
  3. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Why the sheer vitriol? Why all the ire? You clearly are wrong if you think adding more weight to the end of your frame will lessen swingweight. As to the voracity of my scales, I have checked them and they are accurate. Your quips are unfounded and really low road.

    You really have demonstrated that you will try to defend an incorrect position even when faced with the cold hard facts, that is unfortunate. It's even more unfortunate because you're driving away long-time contributors. My participation in the boards has declined due in large part to the kind of mean-spirited reply above. You have tried to discredit and personally attack anyone who disagrees with you, even when you're wrong. It really just isn't worth the time to post when faced with such a mean spirited reply. The dark part of your life, my friend, isn't on these boards, it lies elsewhere.

    I was curious and weighed string. IsoSpeed came out clearly lighter than a multi.

    Now, to retort. If the "there is something about distributing that extra weight over the entire stringbed which ups the swingweight" as you say is true, then wouldn't 1 extra gram of weight add more swingweight rather than less? I really hope that you can make a civil reply rather than the one above which is clearly shirll and acidic.

    Yes, but even you have said that IsoSpeed is not a poly like other polys! You said that because you had indicated previously that all polys were bad. Check back over your posts. Now which is it? The knife can't cut both ways. And, it's pretty clear that IsoSpeed weighs 6 - 7 grams less than the "other" polys. That is a substantial difference.

    IsoSpeed clearly weighs considerably less than either of the other two polys that I weighed. It weighed less than Prince Synthetic. That is a fact that can't be disputed! I encourage anyone reading to do the same thing I've done with a set of digital scales which will weigh in grams. It's clear.

    If I were to deduce anything, it would be that your sudden change in string set up coincides with the distributorship of IsoSpeed changing.

    But, I wanted to see for myself if a multi weighed less than IsoSpeed or other polys. It's clear that IsoSpeed is one of, if not the lightest string available.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #3
  4. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    you're way off base and pls excuse me from our 'conversation'. i feel no need to defend myself and it is insulting you are essentially calling me a liar when all i do is post the truth as best i know it
    EDIT: The truth is I have been using straight Excellerator in my B11's because I use straight Excellerator in the summer as it plays more consistently for me from day to day in the summer climate than gut. I have posted this in the forum. I also use Excellerator in all the new frames I test as my bell cow string..i liked this B11 racquet and setup so much and the fact THAT THIS STRING ADDS LESS TO THE SWINGWEIGHT works well for me. The B11 is right around my swingweight limits.
    Now that the weather has changed I may or may not go to the Mojo setup, and think you are trying to bust me because I posted elsewhere in the forum that I am going to try my previous setup which is Legend/Excellerator to keep the swingweight down..this is all true and has nothing to do with your espionage accusation about how i am changing because of some change in Distributors..thats flat out wrong and insulting..so there you have the accurate info...why i take the time to explain all this escapes me, and why people are so intent on trying to bust me on something...anything, really is quite bizarre
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2007
    #4
  5. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    you havent read or are choosing to ignore the most operative words from my post which I even highlightred for you. Polys donts stretch much..it takes a lot more material to string w. poly than with a stretchy multi like Excellerator....more material weighs more than less material so therefore adds more swingweight than a multi..typically 4-5 points. not my fault you arent understanding this or just dont want to acknowledge you are wrong

    now i am laughing..you think i am spinning some sort of intricate web of deception on a tennis forum in response to a change in Isospeed distribution..thats a good one

    in any case, i'm out of this thread. you may of course have last word and will likely continue with your diatribe of insults. it's expected.

    to summarize, you keep going WAY out of your way to bust me on something by removing products from their packaging, weighing them, repackaging them, etc in some sort of bizarre effort to bust me because I have <for the moment anyway> changed my string set- up. when i politely explain to you why your experiment is flawed you come back and blame me for everything with a launching of insults..i dont wish to play..
     
    #5
  6. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    did you want a shovel to dig that hole deeper?
     
    #6
  7. armand

    armand Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,747
    Location:
    RDS001 90: SPPP 1.18 @ 63/61
    Wow, good info, thanks rabbit. If you come across other strings, please update!

    As for the other stuff[​IMG]
     
    #7
  8. jackcrawford

    jackcrawford Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    839
    He did it before in the Stepanek thread, why not go for it again?
     
    #8
  9. Kevo

    Kevo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,157
    IsoSpeed is not a "Poly". It's a Polyolefin Ribbon. It doesn't fit the traditional concept of poly at all. If it can be called a poly because the material is a type of poly then it could also be called a multi because it's made up of multiple strands of material. In any case it seems like you guys are arguing over nothing. BTW, the difference in addtional swingweight between the 17g and 16g of IsoSpeed is quite substantial.

    BTW, what would you call Head Rip Control? A polymulti? ;-)
     
    #9
  10. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    or a multipoly?
     
    #10
  11. drak

    drak Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,256

    I thought MoJo's part time job was as a grave digger, he certainly is a 6.0 at diggin his own. He got "diggin Mojo"... LOL
     
    #11
  12. steve s

    steve s Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    651
    Good post Rabbit, I always enjoy your comments. Do not let a low swingweighted person get under your skin.
     
    #12
  13. insiderman

    insiderman Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Location:
    in a house
    Hummm, seems someone who ACTUALLY has an RDC and to measure ACTUAL swingweight, should step in here...Hey! Guess that could be me - as well as having an RDC, I have a MOI Lab devise, so...give me a few days - all I can say is one poster here is quite close in his observation, and another is not so 'close' in his discussing swingweight - something I do know a bit about...
     
    #13
  14. au

    au New User

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    67
    How does the Isospeed professional 17 play? Is it anything like the Lux strings? I use to use Kirschbaum Competition 17g but it added too much weight compared to multis at the head of the racket for my taste. I add tons of weight to my grip to make the racket super head light so any little extra weight at the head I will notice. Thanks for the information!
     
    #14
  15. au

    au New User

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    67
    also, im interested in how much other Lux strings weigh. can someone with Lux strings please weigh them.
     
    #15
  16. jb193

    jb193 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    243
    Hey, thanks for the information Rabbit.

    I played a couple of weeks ago with 2 if the same racquets, one strung with 16g SPPP & another with 17g RIP control. The difference was substantial, to say the least. My Head Classic Tour with SPPP felt sluggish and I couldn't "whip" the ball it. My Classic tour with RIP control felt noticeably more maneuverable and I withouth a doubt played better with the frame with the RIP control.......
     
    #16
  17. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,606
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    IMO, IsoSpeed Pro plays nice, but it does lose tension pretty quick. In comparison to Xtreme and TiMo, it doesn't hold tension as well and I didn't have as good a control with it. It spins well and is very comfortable. The biggest hit it takes, IMO, is tension maintenance. In order, Xtreme, TiMo, Pro for holding tension (best to worst).
     
    #17
  18. bagung

    bagung Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,397
    just thought someone might be intrested.....
    head rip control 17g is 15.02 gm
    isospeed pro classic is 15.04 gm
    klip legend 18g is 19.04 gm
    klip armourpro 16 g is 22.58 gm
    shrinkage-sleeve half size is 10.75 gm
    shinkage-sleeve full size is 17.03 gm
     
    #18
  19. lucu

    lucu Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    247
    so, seems like poly is the heaviest, then natural gut.
    by putting lighter strings will reduce the SW than the heavier strings such as poly? enough to tell the difference?
     
    #19
  20. lucu

    lucu Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    247
    i need to install full sized shrinkage-sleeve to make 4 1/4 to 4 1/2. it means that i will make my racquet heavier by 17g? and increase the SW more?
     
    #20
  21. gjoc

    gjoc Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    One full-size sleeve would only increase the grip by one full size, to 4 3/8.

    You’ll need two sleeves to go up two sizes, to 4 1/2.

    Weight will go up, yes, but swingweight will barely go up at all because the weight is so low.
     
    #21
  22. gjoc

    gjoc Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    Yes.

    Maybe--depends on you. ;)
     
    #22
  23. lucu

    lucu Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    247
    two? to make it to 4 1/2 from 4 1/4?
    two sleeve is additional 34g, wow that is heavy.
     
    #23
  24. gjoc

    gjoc Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    Arlington, VA
    Two sizes = two sleeves, yes.

    As far as the weight, yes, it is kind of a lot, but that is a big change in size.
     
    #24

Share This Page