View Single Post
Old 12-24-2012, 01:06 PM   #31
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
 
JackB1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 11,723
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pneumated1 View Post
In the hand they feel similar, and they swing similar, but I think that's where similarities end. I picked up on a very stiff hoop in both, but the Tour is a fraction softer, and somewhere in the frame, either tip or throat, there's a hint of flex.

I sensed that the M 3.0 pockets the ball slightly better, as would be expected with the open string pattern, which was obvious with the same string and what felt to be the same tension. But the M 3.0 is definitely stiffer.

Therefore, the M 3.0, at least for me, launched the ball longer before biting the court, whereas the F 3.0 produced noticeably more revolutions and bit much more quickly. I've always hit more spin with a tight string pattern and more of a driving ball with an open pattern. That's where the stiffness of the M 3.0, and its quick release, had me hitting long. And if I didn't stay on the gas with the F 3.0, my spinny balls were falling short or catching the tape.

I really like the new frame geometry of the M 3.0 but wish it was in the 62-63 stiffness category, to slow the response down just a bit. Strings may make a difference there; I don't know.
thanks for your take....I am not sure why nether of these racquets are generating much discussion on these forums. It seems like Dunlop lost a lot of its following the last couple of years. I think the move to the Biomimetic line started this downturn?
JackB1 is online now   Reply With Quote