Dunlop F 3.0 Tour

[JackB1]

Originally Posted by themitchmann

I hit with it while testing several frames, including the new Head Speeds and Instincts, as well as the Steam 99S.

The Dunlop was the worst of the group. Very tinny feeling to me. Too light for a "Tour" racquet.

It's too bad, as I really wanted to like it. I dig the pj, though.

I agree. The 3.0M did have a "tinny" feel for me as well. I also loved the new pj and really wanted to love this frame, but it fell short. On the other hand, I am LOVING the Steam 99s! Very solid feeling frame for its weight.

[themitchmann]

Originally Posted by JackB1

I agree. The 3.0M did have a "tinny" feel for me as well. I also loved the new pj and really wanted to love this frame, but it fell short. On the other hand, I am LOVING the Steam 99s! Very solid feeling frame for its weight.

The Steam is much better in the feel department.

[catpower]

Is the grip size and shape similar to the previous biomimetic range?
Because the previous versions didn't have much of a buttcap, will probably get a size smaller and build up the buttcap if they are still the same.

[oldSchool]

I am really liking Technifibre X-1 Biphase 17 gauge in this new frame. This has been my go-to string for a couple of years now, and I have yet to find a frame that these strings play better in. This frame seems to offset some control issues I have had with this string in the past in frames including the Bio 200 Tour, Bio 300 Tour, and Bio 200G. With these frames hitting out was a much riskier proposition in terms of timing and racquet face angle than with the F3.0 Tour, and I feel the F3.0 Tour delivers more power than any of these other frames when hitting out. More similar to the Bio 400 Tour (where I used Black Widow), but still more power, and control, and feel, and much more stability.

[buffalobill3]

I use to play with the 4D 300 Tour and am now playing with the F 3.0 Tour. I get just as much control with the F 3.0 as the 4D with more power and I serve really well with it too. I didn't notice a tinny feel with the racquet but I don't play with poly.

[tom4ny]

i don't think that the F3.0 feels "tinny" but I can understand that impression if this frame is strung tight and it certainly does not have the feel of a box beam, but that is by design. The new frame geometry and "true oval" head shape is meant to create a "modern" racket where the ball comes off the strings fast and shots are more powerful. Feel is intentionally compromised that is why there will be a classic series as well.

I agree that there is good power for a lighter players frame. Add a little lead along the upper hoop and it is even better.

Interesting comment on X-1 Biphase. I like that string also but did not like it in my Bio 300T as it was too lively compared to the lower powered Isospeed strings that I am used to. It may be something to try again in the F3.0 Tour.

The grip is similar to the Bio range but they inproved on the tackiness and it is not as tacky and more comfortable. Also, the grip is at least an inch longer now for those with a 2 handed bh. The butt cap size seams the same to me.

[themitchmann]

Originally Posted by buffalobill3

I use to play with the 4D 300 Tour and am now playing with the F 3.0 Tour. I get just as much control with the F 3.0 as the 4D with more power and I serve really well with it too. I didn't notice a tinny feel with the racquet but I don't play with poly.

I tried it with a full bed of Silk. I was really surprised it felt so bad.

[Shangri La]

Too bad the new version doesnt have the old school Dunlop feel..

[JackB1]

Originally Posted by Shangri La

Too bad the new version doesnt have the old school Dunlop feel..

That's the whole idea...they are going for a more "modern" feel.

[ccmtennis]

Originally Posted by JackB1

That's the whole idea...they are going for a more "modern" feel.

Yeah I totally agree with you. I think this is a definite "game changer" for any like me who was not even a dunlop fan. Everything from a small sweet spot to the frame shape and feel was appealing even with their new line. This is a real sleeper and absolutely fantastic with some added weight in the upper hoop. Too bad it doesn't have the mass appeal of Babolats or wilson but I think this is a welcomed addition and won me over. I never thought I would even like a 18x20 pattern and I was coming from the BB london and occasionally APDGT

[JackB1]

Originally Posted by ccmtennis

Yeah I totally agree with you. I think this is a definite "game changer" for any like me who was not even a dunlop fan. Everything from a small sweet spot to the frame shape and feel was appealing even with their new line. This is a real sleeper and absolutely fantastic with some added weight in the upper hoop. Too bad it doesn't have the mass appeal of Babolats or wilson but I think this is a welcomed addition and won me over. I never thought I would even like a 18x20 pattern and I was coming from the BB london and occasionally APDGT

the London is similar to a 18x20 because the drill pattern is very tight in the center of the London.

So you like the smallish sweet spot on the F 3.0? That was something I didn't like. I felt it was too easy to miss and anything hit outside the sweetspot didn't go anywhere.

[mike_l]

looking at TWU data for F/M 3.0, sweet spot doesn't look that small, anyone share JackB1's experience?

[Hominator]

I think both ccmtennis and Jack found the sweetspot to be small, to be fair.

I personally do not find the sweetspot small at all, but - and I hope this doesn't come out the wrong way - from the looks of the fraying on my stringbed, I'm hitting pretty cleanly.

I bet string tension would also play a role as to whether the sweetspot feels small.

[mike_l]

the previous versions of 300/300t (4d,bio) had smaller sweet spots, this might influence some people's experiece, but i'm not judging, we feel what we feel, unfortunately blinded testing in tennis is very rarely a possibility

[ccmtennis]

Originally Posted by Hominator

I think both ccmtennis and Jack found the sweetspot to be small, to be fair.

I personally do not find the sweetspot small at all, but - and I hope this doesn't come out the wrong way - from the looks of the fraying on my stringbed, I'm hitting pretty cleanly.

I bet string tension would also play a role as to whether the sweetspot feels small.

No sorry I meant to say that I always felt that their old lines had a much smaller sweet spot than this. I think this stick is awesome and unlike anything they have offered before. I did not like the PJ too much and had a suboptimal experience ownig the new max 200g...frankly did not think I would like it but bought it after my first match with it. Customizing to add a little weight is easy and make it sing

[ccmtennis]

[quote=JackB1;7055925]the London is similar to a 18x20 because the drill pattern is very tight in the center of the London.

Agreed I never used to pay too much attention to that but I do now

[Hominator]

Originally Posted by ccmtennis

No sorry I meant to say that I always felt that their old lines had a much smaller sweet spot than this. I think this stick is awesome and unlike anything they have offered before. I did not like the PJ too much and had a suboptimal experience ownig the new max 200g...frankly did not think I would like it but bought it after my first match with it. Customizing to add a little weight is easy and make it sing

Sorry, my bad!

[tom4ny]

in my opinion the F3.0 Tour has a bigger sweetspot than the Biomimetic 300 Tour, and it is also higher up on the racquet face. I'm still not convinced that it has more power than the prior version but the F3.0 definitely has a livelier stringbed and is "snappier". The older box beam shape feels nicer and more traditional but both frames hit a heavy ball and are very stable given their static weight and beam width.

I believe and understand other people's experiences and their feeling that the F3.0 has a small sweetspot. From the stringing error made with my F3.0 i can say that it is not as friendly or forgiving if strung close to 60 lbs. Once I had my setup of 55/52 it played awesome - the sweetspot was larger and the stringbed less jarring.

If a large sweetspot is desired than I believe that a rounder headshape is better. An oval shaped frame is better for flat ball strikers and aggressive all court players who place a premium on control. My game is not well suited for a powerful frame so I tend to like the oval head shape. The new F3.0 is trying to find a middle ground which I think Dunlop acheived. They also fixed the need for adding lead to the upper hoop, though I still did.

[MrFlynntastic]

Has anyone modified the F 3.0 Tour for weighting?

[tom4ny]

Originally Posted by MrFlynntastic

Has anyone modified the F 3.0 Tour for weighting?

I have added 4 grams to the top hoop spread over the "Dunlop" graphic. The F3.0 Tour was stable without lead but I like the added plow I get and now it serves as well as my modified Bio 300 Tours.