View Single Post
Old 09-12-2012, 10:39 AM   #9
kaiser's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Holland - Belgium
Posts: 695

Originally Posted by TW Professor View Post
Without looking at the details, my answer would be this: to get the spin window measurements, I measure the frame thickness 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 25 inches from the butt. I do the same for the inner width of the racquet face at those locations. So the window size will be location dependent on each racquet, even if they have the same head size and/or thickness.
Dear TWProf,

When I looked up the spin window for the BLX Prostaff 90, I was surprised to find that it is listed as being nearly 0.42 inch larger than for the BLX Six.One Tour, and even more surprised to a difference in location width at 21 inch measured as 0.47 inch! Similarly, the location width for the BLX PS90 is listed as 0.31 inch larger than for the K6.1 Tour 90 and even 0.16 inch larger than for the BLX PS95! If true, this would mean that the effective head size of the PS90 is similar in size to to most 95 rackets.

So my question is: is this difference real (ie the PS90 typically has a wider head than the other Wilson 90s)? And if not, is it due to measurement error on your part or is there such a large variability in head shape between different rackets?

If the difference is real, the PS90 would suddenly become a very attractive alternative to my current Dunlop 4D 200 Tours...

5.71 in.
Location width: 9.29 in.
Clearance height: 0.35 in.
Ball slide: 0.95 in.

BLX 6.1 Tour:
5.29 in.
Location width: 8.82 in.
Clearance height: 0.35 in.
Ball slide: 0.95 in.
kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote