Flexy widebody, whats the point?

[haerdalis]

I was just browsing through to find some flexy oversized racquets. The avery m5 looks very nice as does the gamma ipex 7 and the new kneissl balck star (although i am unsure about the flex on that). Then I saw that the wilson n5 nforce OS has a flex rating of 55, but a fram width of 26 mm. What is the point of having such a wide frame on a flexy racquet? Could be a nice racquet if it had no more than a 22 mm frame I think.

[Tour 90]

the n5 force is not flexy, my grandma had it and it was stiff as a pure drive

[haerdalis]

The racquet or your grandma?
Well maybe the widebody somehow screws up the way of measuring flex then?

[treo]

Flexy widebody=larger print area for logo

[kreative]

flexy widebody = pop w/ comfort.

for frames, the way to make it more powerful is wider beam or increase stiffness. alot of people can't handle stiff frames, so they go for the wider beam. that's my take on it anyway.

[Ripper]

Originally Posted by haerdalis

The racquet or your grandma?
Well maybe the widebody somehow screws up the way of measuring flex then?

Anyway, if the flex rating is low and it's wide at the hoop, maybe, it's designed to flex at the throat... Or the flex rating is just wrong... And I'm not talking about his grandma...

[tennisbass]

It could have gotten that stiffness rating due to the triad design at the throat. Rest of the frame could be stiff.

[haerdalis]

Originally Posted by kreative

flexy widebody = pop w/ comfort.

for frames, the way to make it more powerful is wider beam or increase stiffness. alot of people can't handle stiff frames, so they go for the wider beam. that's my take on it anyway.

But where does the pop come from if the frame is not stiff? Can it be that it is stiff in the direction if the shot but flexy in the direction of the strings?

[d-quik]

The best questions never get a straight up answer. So, guys

WTF IS T3H POINT?

[LeeD]

Wide bodies that are flexy can be made with cheaper, more flexible materials. Since carbon is stiff, you can make cheap rackets leaving the carbon out, use soft resins and cloth, and widen the body to get the amount of flex you are looking for.
OS rackets that are soft is another matter. Old farts often lose their eyesights, do tend to congregate towards bigger hoops. Old farts also tend to have stiff joints, injured rotators, so a soft racket allows them to play tennis without pain, the the size can moderate the effects of mishits.
Probably harder to play ATP level tennis with big soft hoops. Old farts tend not to play at that level.
I use a MicroGelOS, 57 flex and 107 hoop, so I qualify as old fart.

[magnut]

IMO they offer more stability. If you take a thin beam, same wieght, same flex and then compare it to a Widebody, same wieght, same flex....I think you will find that the stability is better with a widebody frame.

At least thats always been the feel for me. And its all about feel IMO.

I guess the feel of increased stability give a feel of better plow through in a general sense. I would also say that in my experience you can go a little lighter with a widebody flexy frame than a narrow body flexy frame and not loose the plow through feeling.

This is assuming that the throat area is the same width as the hoop.

There really are not a whole lot of flexy widebodies out there. Not currently made anyways.

Technicaly the Dunlop max 200g is a widebody. Compare it with a thin frame of close flex and wieght and you get the drift (even though the 200gs are made a little different).

[LeeD]

Pretty much, sooner or later in your tennis shelflife, you have to like a certain feel, and dislike another feel.
Yesterday, was hitting with a fellow old fart, 9 years my senior. He was using a couple of wide body OS racket's, both really stiff and really lightweight.
I was using a thin beam OS, moderate weight (MGOS).
We traded constantly.
He didn't like the lack of easy power with my racket, saying he couldn't hit with power when he needed to.
I thought his racket's were toys, super stiff, huge, wide beam, no feel whatsoever and waaaay too light to return hard shots.
We both play around 4.0.

[magnut]

Its kind of hard to explain honestly. You really have to spend some time hitting with them. A decent cheep frame is the Wislon High Beam Aggressor 8.5. Great feel, terrific power, weight is moderate. The biggest downside is they are extremely fragile and dont last long. This is ussually the case with most of the flexy widebodies as they tend to have thin walls with more fiberglass in them. I think a poly string or High tension string job would shorten the life even faster as there is not give and the racquet is going to take a pretty big hit.

Its actually kind of a grey area in frames. Most widebodies are very stiff. I think a nice frame would be a 90-100 inch widebody frame with a stiffness below 55 weighing around 11-12 ounces with a foam core. The foam would get rid of the hallow toyish feeling widebodies tend to have.

This way you could keep the wieght down, remain stable, have a solid feel, and give a moderate level of power.

There are not many frames out there with those specs though. I cant think of one with a foam core....not that you cant foam fill it yourself (its just a bit messy).

Somebody should come up with one. Pro kennex used to make some pretty nice widebodies that were innexpensive with good control and decent flex. I am sure they could come up with one fairly easily as they are proabably the most consistantly innovative of all the racquet manufacturers (and the best IMO).