Donnay Formula 100

[drakulie]

Originally Posted by VOLLEY KING

I agree with you . Drakulie on the other hand thinks we are crazy for having that opinion.

I don't think you are crazy at all. But it is very obvious you have never played with either of these frames or simply have no idea how to distinguish between two completely different playing frames.

[VOLLEY KING]

Originally Posted by drakulie

I don't think you are crazy at all. But it is very obvious you have never played with either of these frames or simply have no idea how to distinguish between two completely different playing frames.

Actually you mean that you don't think WE are crazy because I'm not alone.

But lets recap what your exact contention is :

Originally Posted by drakulie

these two frames couldn't be more further apart. They play nothing like the other.

My contention 

[quote =VOLLEY KING] they play differently but saying these two frames couldn't be further apart is a bit of a stretch [/quote]

Im doing this from memory but I do think therse are the stats:

APD : 11.3 ounces
DP: 11.5 ounces 

APD : 5 pts head light
DP:  4 pts head light

Apd tip : 23.00 mm
DP: 21.5

Apd: beam width is VERY thin....actually  TW say 0.0 ??
DP: pretty thin as well 21.5

APD : 16 x 19
DP : 16x19

APD swing weight : 324
DP swing weight:  327

APD head size : 100
DO head size : 97

Conclusion : I think that I can  
" possibly find two racquets further apart".... For example I think a Wilson Sampras Pro staff and a Big Bubba would be further apart .

Do the APD and the Donnay play differently ? Yes they do ....in fact the DP is better in my opinion......
But two say there are no two racquets that could be more different is just a stretch in my opinion and the numbers prove that.

I do think the APD and DP are "similar" in that they are in the same 
"family" of racquets.

They both have about the same amount of power and are both maneuverable and actually now that I look more closely they are not as far away in beam width .

For example the APD is actually 
22 mm  where it counts , the DP is 21 mm everywhere while the Formula is a whopping 27 mm everywhere!

The "aero" is made to cut through the air like a thinner frame . The DP cuts through the air as a thin frame but plays thicker as it is not hollow, while the formula at 27 inches plays like a much thicker frame as it is not hollow.

But I don't want to get into tho with you Drak. Let's just agree to disagree ok?

Can I please be entitled to my opinion and move on? I certainly do respect yours. Ok?

[drakulie]

Again, you are going off published specs, not how they actually feel and play in the real world.

They play NOTHING alike. Zero, zilch, nada!

The formula is much more similar in play to the PD and APD.

Stop posting bs and bad information.

[Automatix]

Originally Posted by drakulie

The formula is much more similar in play to the PD and APD.

Stop posting bs and bad information.

Quoted for truth.

[VOLLEY KING]

Originally Posted by drakulie

Again, you are going off published specs, not how they actually feel and play in the real world.

They play NOTHING alike. Zero, zilch, nada!

The formula is much more similar in play to the PD and APD.

Stop posting bs and bad information.

I did go off published specs. They are right off the TW compare racquets. Just check it out for yourself.

But as Agassi says "image is everything" here is why thin Donnay frames play as far thicker frames:

[VOLLEY KING]

and here are the three racquets lined up side by side by TW. (I dont know how to post it as a pic....if anyone knows how please do it for me).

http://www.racquetfinder.com/compare.php?pcode=DFORM

[mhj202]

Originally Posted by VOLLEY KING

and here are the three racquets lined up side by side by TW. (I dont know how to post it as a pic....if anyone knows how please do it for me).

http://www.racquetfinder.com/compare.php?pcode=DFORM

FYI- only the Formula shows up on the comparison chart when I click on the link.

[Automatix]

Originally Posted by VOLLEY KING

I did go off published specs. They are right off the TW compare racquets. Just check it out for yourself.

But as Agassi says "image is everything" here is why thin Donnay frames play as far thicker frames:

Ohh my...

Vantage...


Prince...


Wilson...


Foam filled frames.

[VOLLEY KING]

Hey thats cool !!! I didnt know that??? why dont they advertise that? I thought Donnay had a patent on it??

But can you male the pics a bit smaller because it would be easier to comapre the two companies . Plus by making it so large you look like you could be an interested party.


.

[VOLLEY KING]

Originally Posted by mhj202

FYI- only the Formula shows up on the comparison chart when I click on the link.

yeah I know....I screwed up. can you help me out here? Im computer challenged. I had put all three sticks on. ill try again in a moment

[Automatix]

First of all the examples given are foam filled frames not Xenecore.

Secondly those pictures aren't mine, they're from this forum.

Additionally the patent on Xenecore construction mentions the frame production is supposed to be less labour intensive and thus should be cheaper not more expensive than other brands - vide the prices when the new Donnay started to offer their products.


To sum up if you don't have the knowledge you shouldn't quarrel with knowledgeable posters such as drakulie who REALLY knows his stuff. THE END.

[VOLLEY KING]

I think I have all three lines up here?

http://www.racquetfinder.com/compare.php?pcode=DPRO1



...

[VOLLEY KING]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ nope it doesnt work....


crap

but its easy for me to copy by hand

DP Head size: 97
APD : 100
Formula: 100

dp length 27
apd 27
formula 27

weight:

dp: 11.5
apd: 11.3
formula 11.2

balance

dp: 4 hl
apd: 5 hl
formula: 3 hl

swingweight

dp 327
apd 324
formula 321

stiffness

dp 64
apd 67
formula 69

tip/shaft

dp 21.5/21.5
apd 23 / 26
formula 23.5 ,23

beam width

dp 21.5
apd: 0.0.....I dont get why they say this....but i assume cause its so thin?
apd 26.5

pattern

dp 16x19
apd 16x19
formula 16x19

power level

dp low-medium
apd low-medium
formula medium

[VOLLEY KING]

Originally Posted by Automatix

First of all the examples given are foam filled frames not Xenecore.

Secondly those pictures aren't mine, they're from this forum.

Additionally the patent on Xenecore construction mentions the frame production is supposed to be less labour intensive and thus should be cheaper not more expensive than other brands - vide the prices when the new Donnay started to offer their products.


To sum up if you don't have the knowledge you shouldn't quarrel with knowledgeable posters such as drakulie who REALLY knows his stuff. THE END.

1- how do you know? and I never said they were yours.

2- I asked if it was patented ..it was a question.

3- Im not quarreling. I simply posted the specs. Drak said there could be no two racquets farther apart. The fact is that a pro staff and a big bubba are vastly further apart. Its not a "quarel" but rather its just math.

[VOLLEY KING]

hey now i see....hey you have to excuse me...I didnt even know I posted the vantage one.

Im not so great with computers. I just saw a Donnay was filled with something. I have no idea if its foam or xenocore.

[SteveI]

Originally Posted by VOLLEY KING

1- how do you know? and I never said they were yours.

2- I asked if it was patented ..it was a question.

3- Im not quarreling. I simply posted the specs. Drak said there could be no two racquets farther apart. The fact is that a pro staff and a big bubba are vastly further apart. Its not a "quarel" but rather its just math.

Hey Volley King,

The specs and the power ratings are a great place to start when a comparison is needed. You only get so much from the frame's numbers. The only true way to tell is by playing them. I have ignored frames based on specs and really have been excited about new frames published specs. I have been wrong a number of times on both counts after playing with a frame. I try to use the comments here and read all the reviews..and read between the lines if possible. Sometimes the math lies or does not tell the entire story. Demo is the only way... Welcome to the fight.. Enjoy!!

[VOLLEY KING]

Originally Posted by SteveI

Hey Volley King,

The specs and the power ratings are a great place to start when a comparison is needed. You only get so much from the frame's numbers. The only true way to tell is by playing them. I have ignored frames based on specs and really have been excited about new frames published specs. I have been wrong a number of times on both counts after playing with a frame. I try to use the comments here and read all the reviews..and read between the lines if possible. Sometimes the math lies or does not tell the entire story. Demo is the only way... Welcome to the fight.. Enjoy!!

Actually I have played with all three extensively.

My impressions were that the APD and the Pro One played similar except that the Pro one was more control oriented and more manueverable than the APD.

Drak feels that there are no two racquets that could possibly be more disimilar and that the Formula was far closer to the APD.

My playtesting and personal opinion is quite different. I found the Formula to be more powerful than either of those sticks and by the way so does TW.

The Formula is just a bulky power stick that in my opinion plays completely different than the APD. I dont think anyone above a 3.0 should play with the formula.

on the other hand Asyou can see from TW and my personal experience the Pro one and the APD are similar in power but the difference is that the Pro one is thinner and the head is smaller. Its more manueverable and controllable and the power level is the same.

I tossed my APD out in favor of the Pro one and wont look back. But thats just my personal opinion. Drak has a different one and I respect his opinion. Who is to say who is wrong or right.

ButI dont agree that "there are no two racquets that can be further apart". Thats not an opinion but thats just math. The numbers dont lie...he is just mistaken in that assertion.

[BobFL]

Originally Posted by VOLLEY KING

Hey thats cool !!! I didnt know that??? why dont they advertise that? I thought Donnay had a patent on it??

But can you male the pics a bit smaller because it would be easier to comapre the two companies . Plus by making it so large you look like you could be an interested party.


.

You are hilarious. All major brands and a few that don't exist anymore were using foam-injection before Bobby Choe heard about tennis as a whole.

[VOLLEY KING]

Originally Posted by BobFL

You are hilarious. All major brands and a few that don't exist anymore were using foam-injection before Bobby Choe heard about tennis as a whole.

Hey Im just a regular guy and not a racquet guru....so please go easy on me. I find that really interesting.

Apparently Donnay has fooled everyone because they say all other racquets are hollow??

Is xenocore really just foam? Is it all BS??

They did come out with 15mm racuets that are as powerful as much thicker frames. The Pro one is as powerful as the APD but its thinner. So how did they do it?

[Pro_Tour_630]

automatix, I need royalties for the wilson photo, please go to paypal and donate money, thanks

seriously, I think the APD, does not play like any frame out there, it is unique.

spec wise two frames can look "IDENTICAL" on paper but when it comes to different layup, handle, bumper, shape of throat, bridge etc.. it will make two IDENTICAL FRAMES play/feel differently. "World apart" if you are a gear junkie like most of us here in the racquet section and I would agree but to the rest of the tennis playing population. They are just different.