Volkl C10 stats/different models

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by Ross K, May 15, 2008.

  1. Ross K

    Ross K Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,232
    Off the TT Racquet Finder I have this:

    HS: 98... L: 27... W: 12.2... SW: 323... STIFF: 63...

    However, I believe there are are different versions (specially re static weight and stiffness), and would appreciate it if any Volkl connoisseurs out there happen to know some of the other C10 MP models and their key stats (I've no idea how many but would be v/int to find out) - by which I mean something like the particular year a version of the C10 Pro MP was produced and it's particular stats.

    Cheers

    R.
     
    #1
  2. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    I'll probably get flamed for this, but I don't think there's enough difference between them to matter. I've played with every version from the fish scale to the last yellow model to the black model and haven't found enough of a difference to warrant any concern. I play as well with one as another.

    That said, the grip shape does feel different to me on the black model. It does feel more squarish. I put some pallets on some C9s and the feel is more what I'm used to, so there is a difference there.
     
    #2
  3. louis netman

    louis netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,386
    Location:
    SoCal
    C10 graphics since inception (chronological order):

    Fish-scale, ALL CAPS
    Fish Scale, Classic 10 Pro (red outline)
    Fish Scale, Classic 10 Pro (grey outline)
    Fish Scale, C10 Pro
    Non-FS, Classic 10 Pro
    Non-FS, C10 Pro
    Black

    I have determined that there is as much within group variability as there is between groups with all manufacturers. Without an adequate random sample of each incarnation, it is impossible to document significant differences between groups, if any. My immediate observation has been a slight reduction in SW between the earliest to the latest model and a slight difference in vibration sensed in the hand. Hope this helps!
     
    #3
  4. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    i would also add that the newer ones are stiffer than the older ones and that there is less graphite content in the newest ones vs the oldest ones and the type of graphite in the prepreg has been changed over time. this frame has been a current production frame for a long time. they changed them over the years. it's a fairly standard thing to do with a frame with a long history..make them lighter and stiffer over time. same thing w. the v1Classic, except more dramatic
     
    #4
  5. Ross K

    Ross K Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,232
    Thanks for the replies everyone.

    So, if I understand correctly, these stats then are more or less accurate and applicable for ALL the different C10 incarnations?... I mean, for example, they all come in close to 12oz?... have a flex of 63 or v/near?... and the SW is in the early 320's? (Please correct if I'm mistaken.)

    Anything ppl have to say on the matter, well, I'm eager to hear it!

    Cheers

    R.
     
    #5
  6. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    i would say those specs reflect fairly upon the latest iteration of the c10pro and everything except the flex would be a fair estimation of the specs throughout its run. out of date or earlier specs would indicate a flexier frame and perhaps a heavier one as well. it's not like the racquet has gone through any major changes over the years.
     
    #6
  7. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    ^I agree in part. The flex to me has not changed. Again, I have one I bought in 1997 or 1998 and some I bought this year, 2008. But, without a machine to measure the flex, it's impossible for anyone to objectively state that there has been substantial change.

    As far as weight goes, I can categorically say that the weight of the C10 is within a 5 gram tolerance of what it was back in '98. So they weigh what they weighed back then.
     
    #7
  8. Ross K

    Ross K Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,232
    Okay guys. I'll be hitting with one of these (yellow '95 model) next week. But, just so I know what to expect, which in your opinion is the most powerful out of these frames (the 1st three I have good first-hand experience of) :

    . Dunlop 200G MW

    . PT 630

    . Fischer Pro No 1

    . C10 Pro

    If you could actually rank them in terms of power that would be fantastic.


    Many thanks,

    R.
     
    #8
  9. nickb

    nickb Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,292
    For me this is how they would rank:

    (Low to high).

    PT630

    MW200G

    Volkl C10

    Fischer Pro No1

    Others will prob feel thats wrong but power levels are very subjective to the player.

    Nick
     
    #9
  10. fuzz nation

    fuzz nation Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,609
    I've accumulated four different used C10's and all are post-fishscale graphics, but one that looks older than the others has a Sensor Handle System (I think) while the other three have the newer Twin Absorber handles. The old one and one other with "Precise Frame" printed inside the throat weigh in near 13 oz. without any mod's (that I know of) and my other two are around 12.6 oz. No mistaking the higher swingweights of the heavier ones, but the upside for me is that I prefer the heaftier ones for doub's, while the lighter pair are nicer for singles.

    All four have a very similar "C10 feel" and I might take a peek under the bumper of one of the heavier ones the next time I string it just to check if there's any lead hiding in there - doubt it though. I should just figure out when each one was produced.
     
    #10
  11. louis netman

    louis netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,386
    Location:
    SoCal
    Volkl ran out of Twin Absorber printed buttcaps and started using the newer Sensor Tour printed buttcaps. Don't know about the new black one, but the C10 never actually had the Sensor Tour system in the handle...IMO, it's what gives the C10 a bit more feel compared to the ST equipped Tour10, VE and GII frames...
     
    #11
  12. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    If you take a racket apart, the only thing that makes up this 'system' is the butt cap. Do you really think it made that much difference? Here lately, I've been doing some work on some frames. Once you get the grip off, you have the butt cap and the pallet. Take both of those off, and you've got a bare square of graphite.

    I replace the butt caps that come on the C10, and I don't feel any difference.

    I kinda thought the whole sensor/twin absorber thing was just marketing rhetoric after that. What did I miss?
     
    #12
  13. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    sensor handle and twin absorber handle are two diff handle systems. they use <or used> the twin absorber handle on the c10 and v1. the rest of the volkl line gets the sensor system. the becker line gets the new sensor system. the butt caps are just adornments indicating what lies inside the handle other than being cushioned. the handles are more than bare squares. as louie netman indicated, evidently they ran out of twin absorber buttcaps so they put the sensor ones on. or they decided to change the handle system from twin absorber to sensor <which are two diff things>, which would make for a another change in the c10. because both systems use the same pallet system, the buttcaps are interchangeable.
    on a sidenote, i use volkl handle pallets and sensor buttcaps on my b11mids which takes some minor surgery...doing this does change the feel
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2008
    #13
  14. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Please elaborate.

    When I pull the grip off a C10, there is a butt cap and a pallet. Remove the 4 staples in the butt cap and slide it off there is a pallet glued directly to the shaft of the frame that comes down.

    The pallets themselves are nothing more than shaped pieces of plastic which are sized by 1/4".

    Removing the pallets leaves the painted portion of the shaft and then the rest of the shaft which is, in the case of the C-series, a square shaft. This shaft is hollow except for a piece of graphite which runs through the center of it like a wall. The result is two square cells on either side.

    Other than this, I don't see anything that would vaguely resemble a 'system'.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2008
    #14
  15. louis netman

    louis netman Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,386
    Location:
    SoCal
    IMO, Volkl C10s (and C9s) "system" is its inherent flex and comfort. Indeed, there's nothing in the handle that represents a true, dedicated system, Twin Absorber or otherwise. Examine the C7 and C8 and you'll find the precursor to the Sensor Tour; a red layer of high density foam wrapped around the graphite shaft, and covered by non-removable pallet material...
     
    #15
  16. NoBadMojo

    NoBadMojo G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    11,915
    Location:
    Parts unknown
    yes, foam dampening material. also the sensor handle has a bar running through the handle. there is also a cushioned butt cap. all that is where the damped feel comes from. more so than the racquet itself. i would call that a system...if you look at the Slaz X1 handle system, thats the same sort of deal. it did a similar thing cushioning/dampening the ball feel of an otherwise harsh hit.
     
    #16
  17. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Mojo's quote above indicated that the C10 had such a system which is not true.
     
    #17
  18. WChiang

    WChiang Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    320
    Yes. Obviously a "cushioned butt cap" doesn't make a "system" or provide more dampening than the racquet itself, lol. BTW, thanks for the continued good info on the C10 and C9 Rabbit.
     
    #18
  19. Rabbit

    Rabbit G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    12,545
    Location:
    at the bottom of every hill I come to
    Well, it just didn't make sense to me either. Especially in light of the fact that changing butt caps had no impact whatsoever on the feel of the frame.

    Thanks...I'll keep telling the truth as I see it and remember....

    the truth is out there...
     
    #19

Share This Page