Head Rip Control Vs Luxilon 4G

Tennisguy3000 · 01-13-2013, 10:06 PM

Head Rip Control Vs Luxilon 4G

I was wondering if anyone has hit with both strings & can give me their thoughts/experiences (and/or my current string Luxilon M2 Pro 16L)

I am looking to demo the new Head Speed & MP tomorrow & want to get some new strings on my current frame at the same time

I have read a lot about both strings but not sure which one to try next.

Current String: Luxilon M2 Pro 16L (@ 60 lbs)
3.5 all court player (fast swing) currently playing more doubles than singles. I use a lot of slices & like to use heavy topspin. Looking for something that is relatively arm friendly (fighting some tennis elbow). Also like more of a plush feel.

Current String: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Luxi...LM2PRO16L.html

Thanks for your input & time, much appreciated.

Cheers ~ TG

Doubles · 01-14-2013, 12:59 AM

If you're dealing with TE avoid 4G. It's stiff and low powered. Rip is on the opposite side of the spectrum. It's a multi so it will be significantly softer, but still provides good spin.

mikeler · 01-14-2013, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doubles

If you're dealing with TE avoid 4G. It's stiff and low powered. Rip is on the opposite side of the spectrum. It's a multi so it will be significantly softer, but still provides good spin.

RIP Control is also low powered for a multifilament string but should still offer a lot more power than a poly at the same tension.

Doubles · 01-14-2013, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikeler

RIP Control is also low powered for a multifilament string but should still offer a lot more power than a poly at the same tension.

That, and unless he strings it at a ridiculous tension, it will be plenty softer. Someone complaining about an elbow injury shouldn't even consider 4G.

ChicagoJack · 01-14-2013, 09:12 AM

Wow, those two are very different. Doubles is correct. Lux 4G is one of the stiffest polys on the market. From the database currently available in the TW university, it ranks the 7th stiffest out of 239 currently available. Not a good choice for TE sufferers. Dont even go within 100 feet of that string!

Rip Control is quite a bit more comfy. While there are certainly more comfortable multis available, few are more durable or as spin friendly. It's a very rare bird, quite a unique string. It has a ribbon based outer coating, which creates a uniquely damp, muted, muffled feel. For comfort, spin, and durability, its tough to beat. The outer layer does I think, lead to inconsistent string bed response as the string bed ages. I've noticed that as the tension drops, the mains kind of bag out, and they don't snap back into place as well as when they are freshly strung. Many have reported the occasional, odd mystery ball sailing long on a stroke that felt good. I think that aging process I've described would be a possible explanation.

If you are a TE sufferer, you might consider taking a look at the stiffness digits available at the USRSA site. While the digits dont always jive with player perception, it might be wise to temper subjective opinion with objective data as well.

http://www.racquetsportsindustry.com...ctor_2012.html

-Jack

mrmike · 01-14-2013, 10:52 AM

I noticed something strange about RIP Control. In the 2012 RSI string guide, they list the diameters of RIP control 17 at 1.28 and RIP control 16 at 1.38. Seems like the unique construction of this string adds to the overall diameter depending on where you measure it. I would be more apt to try the 17G if this is the case.

mikeler · 01-14-2013, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrmike

I noticed something strange about RIP Control. In the 2012 RSI string guide, they list the diameters of RIP control 17 at 1.28 and RIP control 16 at 1.38. Seems like the unique construction of this string adds to the overall diameter depending on where you measure it. I would be more apt to try the 17G if this is the case.

Interesting stuff.

ChicagoJack · 01-14-2013, 11:45 AM

^^^ Hmm.. I'm not following. 17g ( 1.28 ) is smaller than 16 ( 1.38 ) the gauges and diameters seem consistently related to each other. Is it that you'd expect a bigger difference than .10 btwn 16g and 17g? Am I missing something?

mikeler · 01-14-2013, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChicagoJack

^^^ Hmm.. I'm not following. 17g ( 1.28 ) is smaller than 16 ( 1.38 ) the gauges and diameters seem consistently related to each other. Is it that you'd expect a bigger difference than .10 btwn 16g and 17g? Am I missing something?

When I think of 16g it is usually 1.30 to 1.32 and 17g is 1.25 to 1.27. So the 17g is not too far out of whack but the 16g is pretty darn thick.

Say Chi Sin Lo · 01-14-2013, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrmike

I noticed something strange about RIP Control. In the 2012 RSI string guide, they list the diameters of RIP control 17 at 1.28 and RIP control 16 at 1.38. Seems like the unique construction of this string adds to the overall diameter depending on where you measure it. I would be more apt to try the 17G if this is the case.

After being out on the market for pretty much a decade and then some, RIP continues to baffle us one way or another.

Such a weird but wonderful string.

ChicagoJack · 01-14-2013, 02:06 PM

Mike - aha, I see it now. I think you are right. Pretty sure I have purchased 1.38 mm that was packaged as 15L. My hunch is that this has to do with HEAD's packaging / branding. I think they figure 16 would a much easier sell than 15L , and they are probably right about that.

mikeler · 01-15-2013, 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChicagoJack

Mike - aha, I see it now. I think you are right. Pretty sure I have purchased 1.38 mm that was packaged as 15L. My hunch is that this has to do with HEAD's packaging / branding. I think they figure 16 would a much easier sell than 15L , and they are probably right about that.

That is probably correct.

Tennisguy3000 · 01-24-2013, 12:43 PM

Thanks for all if your input everyone, I tried the Head Rip Control @ 60 lbs & like the soft muted feel & control.

I am about to order a new Head Speed MP and considering Head Rip Control again but have also read great things about Black Widow for slice/spin & durability.

Any thoughts?

I appreciate your help & advice. Cheers ~ TG

Federerkblade · 01-24-2013, 01:23 PM

Using 4g with gut mains should lower the stiffness significantly right?

Doubles · 01-24-2013, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Federerkblade

Using 4g with gut mains should lower the stiffness significantly right?

In theory, yes. It all depends on what tension you use, and how sensitive you are to string stiffness.

01-13-2013, 10:06 PM	#1
Tennisguy3000 Rookie Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 228	Head Rip Control Vs Luxilon 4G Head Rip Control Vs Luxilon 4G I was wondering if anyone has hit with both strings & can give me their thoughts/experiences (and/or my current string Luxilon M2 Pro 16L) I am looking to demo the new Head Speed & MP tomorrow & want to get some new strings on my current frame at the same time I have read a lot about both strings but not sure which one to try next. Current String: Luxilon M2 Pro 16L (@ 60 lbs) 3.5 all court player (fast swing) currently playing more doubles than singles. I use a lot of slices & like to use heavy topspin. Looking for something that is relatively arm friendly (fighting some tennis elbow). Also like more of a plush feel. Current String: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Luxi...LM2PRO16L.html Thanks for your input & time, much appreciated. Cheers ~ TG

01-14-2013, 12:59 AM	#2
Doubles Hall Of Fame Join Date: May 2010 Location: Approaching the net Posts: 3,284	If you're dealing with TE avoid 4G. It's stiff and low powered. Rip is on the opposite side of the spectrum. It's a multi so it will be significantly softer, but still provides good spin. __________________ All aboard the Gulbis bandwagon!

01-14-2013, 09:12 AM	#5
ChicagoJack Professional Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,326	Wow, those two are very different. Doubles is correct. Lux 4G is one of the stiffest polys on the market. From the database currently available in the TW university, it ranks the 7th stiffest out of 239 currently available. Not a good choice for TE sufferers. Dont even go within 100 feet of that string! Rip Control is quite a bit more comfy. While there are certainly more comfortable multis available, few are more durable or as spin friendly. It's a very rare bird, quite a unique string. It has a ribbon based outer coating, which creates a uniquely damp, muted, muffled feel. For comfort, spin, and durability, its tough to beat. The outer layer does I think, lead to inconsistent string bed response as the string bed ages. I've noticed that as the tension drops, the mains kind of bag out, and they don't snap back into place as well as when they are freshly strung. Many have reported the occasional, odd mystery ball sailing long on a stroke that felt good. I think that aging process I've described would be a possible explanation. If you are a TE sufferer, you might consider taking a look at the stiffness digits available at the USRSA site. While the digits dont always jive with player perception, it might be wise to temper subjective opinion with objective data as well. http://www.racquetsportsindustry.com...ctor_2012.html -Jack __________________ (9) Donnay Pro One, 16x19 \| 12.4oz, -12Pts, ~330sw Mains: Babolat Tonic Gut, X's: Red WC Mosquito Bite \| 54/50 lbs. Last edited by ChicagoJack : 01-14-2013 at 09:26 AM.

01-14-2013, 11:45 AM	#8
ChicagoJack Professional Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,326	^^^ Hmm.. I'm not following. 17g ( 1.28 ) is smaller than 16 ( 1.38 ) the gauges and diameters seem consistently related to each other. Is it that you'd expect a bigger difference than .10 btwn 16g and 17g? Am I missing something? __________________ (9) Donnay Pro One, 16x19 \| 12.4oz, -12Pts, ~330sw Mains: Babolat Tonic Gut, X's: Red WC Mosquito Bite \| 54/50 lbs. Last edited by ChicagoJack : 01-14-2013 at 11:52 AM.

01-14-2013, 02:06 PM	#11
ChicagoJack Professional Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,326	Mike - aha, I see it now. I think you are right. Pretty sure I have purchased 1.38 mm that was packaged as 15L. My hunch is that this has to do with HEAD's packaging / branding. I think they figure 16 would a much easier sell than 15L , and they are probably right about that. __________________ (9) Donnay Pro One, 16x19 \| 12.4oz, -12Pts, ~330sw Mains: Babolat Tonic Gut, X's: Red WC Mosquito Bite \| 54/50 lbs. Last edited by ChicagoJack : 01-14-2013 at 04:46 PM.