Wilson Pro Staff X vs Blade pro

[Pro_Tour_630]

Wilson introduced it as a Blade Pro 16X19 exclusive to touring pros at their pro labs, now all of the sudden it is a Pro Staff ?!?!?. Many prosumers could not handle the high SW of the Blade pro, including myself, opting for the lowest SW of many batches since Quality control was all over the place check Wilson Blade Pro Labs thread . Wilson wanted to capitalize on the success of the Blade pro by offering it to consumers at a less demanding SW ( they hope ). I will do a side by side comparison coming soon. My original frame was the Pro Tour 630 but as I aged 55 now I went to the Prestige pro which is now the prestige tour. I acquired four Blade Pros 16X19 and loved them only they are demanding and take a toll on your arm if you are not fit. If Wilson lowers SW on the pro staff X it would be a winner.

 

[gold325]

Pro Staff X has 322* SW at TW

Also since it is a retail racquet you can use MRT to get the target spec you want!

So it wont be an issue if the player doesn't mind playing the little extra for MRT.

 

[Curtennis]

Wilson introduced it as a Blade Pro 16X19 exclusive to touring pros at their pro labs, now all of the sudden it is a Pro Staff ?!?!?

What?

 

[brownbearfalling]

Pro tour: looking forward to your comparison.

The beam width and design do look similar to the BP. But my guess is the two frames will play different. To me the hoop shape looks different. The PSX has pws. Minimal but still a factor. Also I’m guessing the layups are distinctly different.

 

[Pro_Tour_630]

Pro tour: looking forward to your comparison.

The beam width and design do look similar to the BP. But my guess is the two frames will play different. To me the hoop shape looks different. The PSX has pws. Minimal but still a factor. Also I’m guessing the layups are distinctly different.

The numbers do look very similar, PWS should be for stability and stiffness but they are talking bending and flexibility. We have to ask why was the Pro staff X born ?

 

[am1899]

We have to ask why was the Pro staff X born ?

We do?

 

[PrinceYonex]

Wilson introduced it as a Blade Pro 16X19 exclusive to touring pros at their pro labs, now all of the sudden it is a Pro Staff ?!?!?. Many prosumers could not handle the high SW of the Blade pro, including myself, opting for the lowest SW of many batches since Quality control was all over the place check Wilson Blade Pro Labs thread . Wilson wanted to capitalize on the success of the Blade pro by offering it to consumers at a less demanding SW ( they hope ). I will do a side by side comparison coming soon. My original frame was the Pro Tour 630 but as I aged 55 now I went to the Prestige pro which is now the prestige tour. I acquired four Blade Pros 16X19 and loved them only they are demanding and take a toll on your arm if you are not fit. If Wilson lowers SW on the pro staff X it would be a winner.

What makes you think they are essentially the same racquet?

 

[Vicious49]

What makes you think they are essentially the same racquet?

This is where Im getting confused as well. Im guessing this is the OPs opinion. Evey review has said the PSX is a 100” version of the PS97 - same beam, string pattern, etc. Not sure how the BP comes in to play.

 

[Trip]

@Vicious49 - I hear you. @Pro_Tour_630 - Perhaps you've gotten your wires crossed a bit? Isn't the Pro Staff X essentially more of a Six.One 100 replacement in 100" PS97 form? I don't see a whole lot of similarity to the Blade Pro, main due to balance and weight distribution. I could see a decent amount similarity in layup/feel, but not a whole lot more... care to clarify where you're coming from?

 

[SupahMan5000]

@Vicious49 - I hear you. @Pro_Tour_630 - Perhaps you've gotten your wires crossed a bit? Isn't the Pro Staff X essentially more of a Six.One 100 replacement in 100" PS97 form? I don't see a whole lot of similarity to the Blade Pro, main due to balance and weight distribution. I could see a decent amount similarity in layup/feel, but not a whole lot more... care to clarify where you're coming from?

Six.one 100 is still an existing model. the pro staff x has the flatter beams and is heavier

Wilson Pro Staff Six.One 100 v14 Racquet | Tennis Warehouse

www.tennis-warehouse.com

Wilson Pro Staff X v14 Racquet | Tennis Warehouse

www.tennis-warehouse.com

 

[Trip]

@SupahMan5000 - Thank you! So the Six.One is still alive in v14 form. Noted.

 

[FREDerer_NadAUGUSTO]

I am curious too about the differences between pro staff v13 six.one 100 and pro staff v14 100, because I havr the former and am a bit interested in buying the latter

 

[AVSH]

I am curious too about the differences between pro staff v13 six.one 100 and pro staff v14 100, because I havr the former and am a bit interested in buying the latter

all i know is that they're different molds and balances. I think 6.1 comes from the Pro lab series so probably smaller sweet spot than the V14 X. Also 6.1 has glossy PJ where the V14 X is matte

 

[naturalexponent]

Six.One 100 is not Pro Labs. It was a new model introduced with the v13. Correct that they’re different molds. Six.One has more of the oval beam cross section associated with that line, with the horizontally symmetrical head, vs. the egg shape.

 

[FREDerer_NadAUGUSTO]

Six.One 100 is not Pro Labs. It was a new model introduced with the v13. Correct that they’re different molds. Six.One has more of the oval beam cross section associated with that line, with the horizontally symmetrical head, vs. the egg shape.

So, six.one 100 = egg shape head and pro staff X = more symmetrical/isometric horizontal head?
what about peformance? Can I say that Pro Staff X can "pancake" the ball better than Six.one 100? Because that was what I felt when compared six.one 100 to RF97
In power scale, how would it fare compared to let's say a Pure Drive?

 

[vivaforza]

Does any one know whether the six one 100 v14 is foam filled?

 

[Voxshall]

My H22 is 343g, 8pt HL, 58RA and 325sw but there is not much material left on the top bumper. It feels very easy to swing and is no problem in long matches like my other 12oz plus rackets. I ordered a couple of Blade Pro bumper grommet sets to replace the top bumper and increase swingweight on the next string change, but now you have me thinking it might not be the best idea to mess with such a good thing.

One of the new top bumper guards is 11g the other one is 13g so it will be interesting what the old bumper guard on the H22 comes out at, does anyone know if I take the old bumper guard out is it easy enough to put back in?

 

[naturalexponent]

So, six.one 100 = egg shape head and pro staff X = more symmetrical/isometric horizontal head?
what about peformance? Can I say that Pro Staff X can "pancake" the ball better than Six.one 100? Because that was what I felt when compared six.one 100 to RF97
In power scale, how would it fare compared to let's say a Pure Drive?

I played the Six.One 100 v13 and thought it was fairly low on power but otherwise very easy to play with. I like the RF97 a lot. No idea how either compares to the X, because it just came out and haven't had a chance to play with it yet.

 

[brownbearfalling]

This is where Im getting confused as well. Im guessing this is the OPs opinion. Evey review has said the PSX is a 100” version of the PS97 - same beam, string pattern, etc. Not sure how the BP comes in to play.

Maybe the TW description is not detailed enough but it says the PSX does NOT have aramid in the layup. For me, the aramid lay up is felt only when hitting very hard. It's less noticeable at slower speeds. Overall, the aramid makes the racquet stiffer in my opinion. With that difference, i don't think it is truly "just" a 100 sq in version of the PS 97.

Same goes for the Sixone 100. The 95 version always had aramid lay up. the 100 listed as not having it. but yes the six one 100 has the same beam shape and general proportions of the six one 95.

Anyone do a side by side yet to shed some light on the 2 frames?

 

[berkyboy]

PSX is glossy shinny

 

[FREDerer_NadAUGUSTO]

Maybe the TW description is not detailed enough but it says the PSX does NOT have aramid in the layup. For me, the aramid lay up is felt only when hitting very hard. It's less noticeable at slower speeds. Overall, the aramid makes the racquet stiffer in my opinion. With that difference, i don't think it is truly "just" a 100 sq in version of the PS 97.

Same goes for the Sixone 100. The 95 version always had aramid lay up. the 100 listed as not having it. but yes the six one 100 has the same beam shape and general proportions of the six one 95.

Anyone do a side by side yet to shed some light on the 2 frames?

wow that makes sense for why my six.one 100 feels so different from my six.one 90

 

[Vicious49]

PSX is glossy shinny

It's not. The Eurostaff is shiny. The PSX has the same paintjob as the standard PS97.

 

[Lendl]

No I customized to make heavier like my Speeds. For sale they go!

 

[vsbabolat]

The numbers do look very similar, PWS should be for stability and stiffness but they are talking bending and flexibility. We have to ask why was the Pro staff X born ?

Because psychologically 100 sounds better than 97 in this day and age.

 

[ressling]

Can't speak for the PS 100 but I do have a pair of the 6.1 95 v13 18x20 Pro Labs and can attest that they both play like a traditional PS 6.1 95... basically identical with the exception of the glossy paint. Solid sticks if you can wield them!

 

[ryushen21]

Can't speak for the PS 100 but I do have a pair of the 6.1 95 v13 18x20 Pro Labs and can attest that they both play like a traditional PS 6.1 95... basically identical with the exception of the glossy paint. Solid sticks if you can wield them!

Respect for the 6.1 95 love and the DelPo avatar.

 

[PrinceYonex]

I use the blade pro as my main racquet, and I hit briefly with the PS X. In some respects, the racquets are quite different— the ps has a slightly larger hoop (but it’s not that noticeable, actually), has a more open string pattern, the hoop has the PWS, and the ps has a higher static weight, lower swingweight, and lower balance.

All that said, there are some strange similarities. The throats on the racquets look identical, and the beam shape and width look identical. I found the PS to be a somewhat easier to use version of the blade pro— the PS has a bit less plow and thump but also is a little faster thru the air. But it wasn’t hard to switch back and forth between them.