View Single Post
Old 09-12-2012, 01:49 AM   #40
stoneage
Rookie
 
stoneage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 243
Default Next step

Just when you though you understood it, I am going to hit you with an alternative curve

Well, actually it is showing the same thing and I think it is an improvement. Instead of showing the equivalent mass, I am showing the equivalent mass for the racquet divided by the equivalent mass for a reference frame. And as the reference I am using a 70 cm long 320 g heavy* racquet with a completely even mass distribution and balance. By doing this it will be easier to see the difference between racquets. And the slope of the curve now also means something: A rising slope means that it is relatively heavier to swing at a short radius compared to the neutral racquet. And inverse for the falling curve.

Three examples, first our old friends the Pro Staff and the Cierzo:



Then Johns two racquets:



Finally an answer to DEH's question of taking travlerajm's racquet and make it 320 g. With balance 32 cm and swingweight 305 they look similar:



A new excel sheet is available here for your amusement

Digest and tell me what you think.

/Sten

*Note. I picked the weight of the reference racquet to be 320 g as it is an average of the racquets in the tenniswarehouse database. The value, however, is not so important since it will only shift the scale of the y-axis up or down.

Last edited by stoneage : 09-12-2012 at 01:56 AM.
stoneage is offline   Reply With Quote