Official Pro Staff 97 S Club

SpinToWin said:

Disagree. The 85 and the especially the 90 do not hit like tanks in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Will disagree. I could unload on balls with those shots and it felt very secure and stable.

ClintimusPrime said:

Are you only interested in using a full bed of poly?

Click to expand...

Yes.

I used to use Hybrids with my K/BLX90s. I was eating up the gut so quick it just became economically unviable for me to continue.

I would be interested to hear what specs people are seeing on the higher end in terms of SW. It sounds like a fair few people here are getting lighter hoops. Sounds like most need some more weight. Has anyone played both the burn 95 and the 97S? I have always played the tour line from wilson (n-tour, k-tour, etc) and like the even balance and plow it offers. I am wondering if the 97S gives the same sort of feel.

Thanks!

Say Chi Sin Lo said:

Umm... No. Have you hit with what I mentioned?

Click to expand...

I've never tried the 85, but I tried the RF for a couple of sessions and I own two versions of the 90, the 2010 and the 2012 version.
I used the latter in match play for ~1 year, so I guess I'm qualified to disagree with you here.

MasturB said:

Will disagree. I could unload on balls with those shots and it felt very secure and stable.

Click to expand...

That has more to do with their less lively response I'd say, the 97S is more forgiving and stable than either of them in my experience.

dmcb101 said:

I would be interested to hear what specs people are seeing on the higher end in terms of SW. It sounds like a fair few people here are getting lighter hoops. Sounds like most need some more weight. Has anyone played both the burn 95 and the 97S? I have always played the tour line from wilson (n-tour, k-tour, etc) and like the even balance and plow it offers. I am wondering if the 97S gives the same sort of feel.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

Highest I recall getting was 330 when strung with Max Power 17.

MasturB said:

I will agree. That's exactly what I felt when I would return high kickers or really any first serve over 110. Even if I hit it dead center to block or bunt it back, it just feels unstable.

I decided not to try and customize it, and I've ordered my Pure Control Tours now. It's been almost 2 years since I had my Pure Storm Tours, and I was playing arguably some of my best tennis with it, so I'm glad to be going back to it.

Click to expand...

Yeah, being comfortable with a racquet is often times the most important aspect, regardless of what the racquet is supposed to delivery on its own.

SpinToWin said:

That has more to do with their less lively response I'd say, the 97S is more forgiving and stable than either of them in my experience.

Click to expand...

Forgiving? Sure, but that's simply because of the larger headsize compared to those true 6.0 lineage frames. But there's no substitute for mass. The PS97S are too light.

SpinToWin said:

Well he may not be qualified to speak in regards to the 85, but surely you jest in regards to the 90? Playing a frame competitively for a year is more than enough to get accustomed to it. And he doesn't need to play all models in the 90 lineup either, that much should be clear.

Click to expand...

If he played with the 90 competitively for a year, that's nothing but an instant in tennis. Maybe he switches racquets all the time so we're on different time scales. But I don't take racquet switches lightly. I don't switch unless I'm 100% convinced and comfortable, and can use it as an extension of my arm. I also don't switch unless I'm 100% convinced my current racquet is lacking. You spend the first several months just discovering the new racquet and attempt to understand its tendencies and qualities. So yeah, 1 year is nothing.

So yeah, he can't talk about them. Let's take a poll, and let's see how many think this PS97S is more stable than the PS 6.0 85, PS90, RF97A.

Say Chi Sin Lo said:

Forgiving? Sure, but that's simply because of the larger headsize compared to those true 6.0 lineage frames. But there's no substitute for mass. The PS97S are too light.

Click to expand...

That's why I customise... It's physics in regards to kinematics for complex collisions.

Saying a racquet is unstable at a lighter spec than another racquet is... Well... Duh.

Up the swingweight on the (in my experience) mostly under-spec frames and the inherently higher twistweight does the rest for you.

And @MasturB the Pure Storm Tour mostly had a higher swingweight and more mass than the 97S... It's a rather unfair comparison in that sense really, unless you're absolutely set on playing frames in stock form despite severe quality control issues of all big brands m... In which case you'll hate the Pure Control Tour though, considering its anaemic swingweight

SpinToWin said:

That's why I customise... It's physics in regards to kinematics for complex collisions.

Saying a racquet is unstable at a lighter spec than another racquet is... Well... Duh.

Up the swingweight on the (in my experience) mostly under-spec frames and the inherently higher twistweight does the rest for you.

And @MasturB the Pure Storm Tour mostly had a higher swingweight and more mass than the 97S... It's a rather unfair comparison in that sense really, unless you're absolutely set on playing frames in stock form despite severe quality control issues of all big brands m... In which case you'll hate the Pure Control Tour though, considering its anaemic swingweight

Click to expand...

I customized my playtest too. 355g/30.0cm unstrung PS97S vs 355g/30.0cm PS 6.0 85, PS 90, RF97A, and the PS97S will lose to all of them in stability. String pattern aside, this was the other major reason why I decided the PS97S is not the racquet for me if I were to move away from my 90.

Say Chi Sin Lo said:

If he played with the 90 competitively for a year, that's nothing but an instant in tennis. Maybe he switches racquets all the time so we're on different time scales. But I don't take racquet switches lightly. I don't switch unless I'm 100% convinced and comfortable, and can use it as an extension of my arm. I also don't switch unless I'm 100% convinced my current racquet is lacking. You spend the first several months just discovering the new racquet and attempt to understand its tendencies and qualities. So yeah, 1 year is nothing.

So yeah, he can't talk about them. Let's take a poll, and let's see how many think this PS97S is more stable than the PS 6.0 85, PS90, RF97A.

Click to expand...

In stock form? That defeats the point, as I said.

A year in tennis is enough, come on. Give me a racquet for a year and I'll know it very well.

Say Chi Sin Lo said:

I customized my playtest too. 355g/30.0cm unstrung PS97S vs 355g/30.0cm PS 6.0 85, PS 90, RF97A, and the PS97S will lose to all of them in stability.

Click to expand...

And you ignored the probably most important stat, swingweight... That's kinda the point I'm making.

SpinToWin said:

In stock form? That defeats the point, as I said.

A year in tennis is enough, come on. Give me a racquet for a year and I'll know it very well.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and I've used these PS 6.0 85/90 for 10+ years. I know more, and he doesn't know what he's talking about.

SpinToWin said:

And you ignored the probably most important stat, swingweight... That's kinda the point I'm making.

Click to expand...

The PS 6.0 85 and 90 had lower swingweights than the PS97S, and they're more stable. That's the point I'm making.

I'm not trying to trash the racquet. I don't like it, I listed the reasons why I don't like it. It's a light racquet for those who are used to a lower weight to try that Pro Staff feel. I'm fine with that. And to say that the 6.0 85, ALL PS/Tour 90, RF97A are less stable than this PS97A is just blasphemy. Especially now that I know he hasn't hit with them to even make such comparison.

It's just not a real Pro Staff with that weight and that balance. And damn sure not as stable as true Pro Staffs 340g/30.0cm (6.0 85, ALL PS/Tour 90, RF97A).

One thing that baffles me, with both the RF97A and PS97S, is Wilson's reasoning behind fronting these two as their serious PS alternatives, and replacement for the 6.1 95 and PS95. Both are great, but marginal/niche frames, with odd static weight (RF97A), balance, string pattern (PS97S).

I reckon their strategy was an all-in beat on Fed's brand power as well as the PS97, but the latter doesn't have any of that 6.1. 95/RF97A or PS95/PS97S DNA imho.

smalahove said:

One thing that baffles me, with both the RF97A and PS97S, is Wilson's reasoning behind fronting these two as their serious PS alternatives, and replacement for the 6.1 95 and PS95. Both are great, but marginal/niche frames, with odd static weight (RF97A), balance, string pattern (PS97S).

I reckon their strategy was an all-in beat on Fed's brand power as well as the PS97, but the latter doesn't have any of that 6.1. 95/RF97A or PS95/PS97S DNA imho.

Click to expand...

I actually can understand the 97S. Thin beamed frames with more traditional balance points do not offer the power that most want nowadays, and this design offers a good compromise of modern requirements despite the otherwise more classical design. Just my .02$. I do agree that there now is a gap in their offerings, but I suppose that's where the game on average is moving towards.

SpinToWin said:

I actually can understand the 97S. Thin beamed frames with more traditional balance points do not offer the power that most want nowadays, and this design offers a good compromise of modern requirements despite the otherwise more classical design. Just my .02$. I do agree that there now is a gap in their offerings, but I suppose that's where the game on average is moving towards.

Click to expand...

I agree the PS97S works with the stock balance, despite what one would think before trying it. However, it is a far step from the 6.1 95's and PS95's, but it seems their strategy is to fill this gap with the FST and perhaps even Blade lines. I don't really understand why they couldn't just make a 6.1 97 - and a PS97 with the PS95 beam cosntruction?

smalahove said:

I agree the PS97S works with the stock balance, despite what one would think before trying it. However, it is a far step from the 6.1 95's and PS95's, but it seems their strategy is to fill this gap with the FST and perhaps even Blade lines. I don't really understand why they couldn't just make a 6.1 97 - and a PS97 with the PS95 beam cosntruction?

Click to expand...

The line that has me scratching my head are the FSTs... Just why are these there? The 95 surprisingly seems to be popular, but it could have just been a 6.1 really. The 99S had me shaking my head.

I really wish they kept the Pro Staffs with a thin beam. The RF would have been so sweet with a 17-18mm beam.

Seems kinda silly to argue over a racquet. Everyone is allowed their opinion. Anyone add any weight in the hoop to these sticks? I know everyone seems to be concerned with the balance and what not, adding to the butt, but for those who say its not stable enough, have you added weight to the hoop?

dmcb101 said:

Seems kinda silly to argue over a racquet. Everyone is allowed their opinion. Anyone add any weight in the hoop to these sticks? I know everyone seems to be concerned with the balance and what not, adding to the butt, but for those who say its not stable enough, have you added weight to the hoop?

Click to expand...

I have, love it. Needs low powered strings though in my opinion.

Has anyone been able to find a very light/very HL PS97S thanks to Wilson's quality control?

Or is trying to get the PS97S anywhere near the specs of a PS95 just a pipe dream?

SpinToWin said:

I have, love it. Needs low powered strings though in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Have you tried gut/poly? When you say low powered do you mean like 4g?

theostrouble said:

Has anyone been able to find a very light/very HL PS97S thanks to Wilson's quality control?

Or is trying to get the PS97S anywhere near the specs of a PS95 just a pipe dream?

Click to expand...

Id say good luck. I thought the PS95 was way to light in the hoop. It needed a ton of protein to make that thing own the collision with the ball!

dmcb101 said:

Id say good luck. I thought the PS95 was way to light in the hoop. It needed a ton of protein to make that thing own the collision with the ball!

Click to expand...

I agree - thats why I liked the stability offered by the 97S, but just couldn't get over the sluggish feeling compared to the PS95. I was hoping that somehow I could get it to 4/5 points HL (at least) while still keeping the static weight relatively low.

theostrouble said:

I agree - thats why I liked the stability offered by the 97S, but just couldn't get over the sluggish feeling compared to the PS95. I was hoping that somehow I could get it to 4/5 points HL (at least) while still keeping the static weight relatively low.

Click to expand...

I bet if you smooth out your strokes you could still get a nice response with the 97S. I went to the burn 95(335 sw) from the six.one 95s (317) and found that I just needed to have smooth, less erratic approach to the ball and the extra mass really made up for that. I prefer a high sw though to own the contact between ball and racquet.

theostrouble said:

Has anyone been able to find a very light/very HL PS97S thanks to Wilson's quality control?

Or is trying to get the PS97S anywhere near the specs of a PS95 just a pipe dream?

Click to expand...

Sort of? Lowest I got was low 320 swingweight with 17 gauge poly. Balance would be relatively easily moved to what you want.

dmcb101 said:

Have you tried gut/poly? When you say low powered do you mean like 4g?

Click to expand...

Don't see the need for gut/poly in this frame, plenty forgiving and comfortable as is. I mean Kirschbaum Max Power low powered, and I suppose 4G too works. I'll be trying Black Shark today as well.

It depends on the player I suppose, my perception of the stringbed is lively, whereas a friend of mine said the ball was going nowhere.

"Has anyone been able to find a very light/very HL PS97S thanks to Wilson's quality control?"
I have 2 with lighter than Listed TW SW.. This enables me to actually use these frames..

"Or is trying to get the PS97S anywhere near the specs of a PS95 just a pipe dream?"
I also have a PS95s.... SW is not even in the same universe..

I like both, But 2 different approaches...

Say Chi Sin Lo said:

Have any of you guys leaded this up to 12oz/340grams+?

Or have all of you accepted the fact that this will forever be a lightweight Pro Staff, much like the PS95?

Click to expand...

I'm using hyper prostaff 95.. This high sw (6.5) racquet forced me to use my max swing speed aka high energy consumption every time I play.. So I decided to add lead tape by try and error at different weight and lead tape position.. But still, couldnt reach the finest tune, until I extended (diy) the grip by half inch.. Now, it feel great..

KaiserW said:

I really wish they kept the Pro Staffs with a thin beam. The RF would have been so sweet with a 17-18mm beam.

Click to expand...

That's why I was excited about the 97S. Thinner beam but the string patter is brutal.

MasturB said:

That's why I was excited about the 97S. Thinner beam but the string patter is brutal.

Click to expand...

Yeah I thought about demoing it but would have to add a boatload of weight to get the balance I like.

Welp. My brand new PCT are coming in Monday. So my 97S is on the market officially if anyone wants it. I'd say it's 8.5 condition.

I'm gonna use my old RF97's until my PCT come in.

MasturB said:

Welp. My brand new PCT are coming in Monday. So my 97S is on the market officially if anyone wants it. I'd say it's 8.5 condition.

I'm gonna use my old RF97's until my PCT come in.

Click to expand...

Whats the grip size on yours?

Say Chi Sin Lo said:

Also, I think there's some inherent instability with this frame. A 97 square inch frame is quite large and couple that with a thin 19mm beam, this racquet twisted quite a bit in my hand. Even with dead center impacts, it felt as if the racquet is going to give. It's a very insecured feeling, borderline worrisome.

I kind of wish Wilson will stop with the whole Spin Effect string pattern design. Most advanced players are not adapting to it for reasons both me and you have stated. These are fun racquets to hit with in practice, but in matches, the lack of control and mass on half-swings and retrievals make this a very unpredictable racquet when points are on the line. The Spin Effect pattern in this racquet doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Honestly, this thing played more like a dense 18x20 and the spin really wasn't anymore impressive than the RF97 or my PS90. Someone mentioned that even with this "Spin Effect" pattern, the squares between the strings aren't any bigger than a 16x19.

Yes, you can always add weight yourself. But it's nothing compared to a setup that is evenly distributed from factory. I always think that weight and balance changes should be kept to a minimum to tune the racquet. I ended up adding 30grams of weight to the end of the handle. That's not tuning the racquet, that's changing the racquet.

Also, I can't afford to keep restringing this racquet once a week. Breaking gut in about 10hours gets ridiculous after a few times.



That's quite head heavy.

Click to expand...

Not really. It plays really well. I use it for feeding balls during lessons and hitting with it, haven't had a single issue with the weight. It's all about how you setup for shots. Proper setup and the racquet is perfect. Lazy setup bites you in the butt, so just don't be lazy.

dmcb101 said:

I would be interested to hear what specs people are seeing on the higher end in terms of SW. It sounds like a fair few people here are getting lighter hoops. Sounds like most need some more weight. Has anyone played both the burn 95 and the 97S? I have always played the tour line from wilson (n-tour, k-tour, etc) and like the even balance and plow it offers. I am wondering if the 97S gives the same sort of feel.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

Already stated above, but here:
348.5 grams
4pts HL
343 SW

ClintimusPrime said:

Already stated above, but here:
348.5 grams
4pts HL
343 SW

Click to expand...

Thanks. Sounds like you added some lead. Where did you add it?

ClintimusPrime said:

Not really. It plays really well. I use it for feeding balls during lessons and hitting with it, haven't had a single issue with the weight. It's all about how you setup for shots. Proper setup and the racquet is perfect. Lazy setup bites you in the butt, so just don't be lazy.

Click to expand...

... right... sure man.

Ordered a reel of Kirschbaum Black Shark, this string plays well fairly long in this frame, even in the 17 gauge. Clocked in around 6-7 hours now and I'm ready to restring, but it still was enough to take a set off the number 1 in the club in my most recent session. If anybody has issues with control I can only recommend this string. If you are using a lighter spec than me though drop the tension. I strung it up at 24/22kg and would drop at least 1kg at a lighter spec, for it does play firmer than the vast majority of polys out there (Max Power too).

I'm a newbie in terms of rackets, I use a burn 100uls and i kinda like my racket!!!

This week I ordered a demo of the PS97s and oh boy what a racket it is...

The power the ball comes from it, the easy shots without applying strength and in the net I'm pretty comfortable with this racket cause my opponents can't abuse me...

My shoulder is not used to that weight so he kinda reminds me in the end of the matches that i have to go to the gym to play with that...

Like i said, I'm a newbie in terms of aspects of the racket but i really liked the frame!!!

The big difference i noticed was the lack of acceleration in low balls... I had a lot of difficulties to accelerate the racket but that was because is weight!!!

I think I felt in love by this one...

Now what ? Should I buy this one or should I go for another week demo ??

My opinion is to try the frame longer. Everything is gravy and sunshine in the beginning. You know how you can tell if this is the racquet for you? You need to see how it performs and debate whether or not this still the racquet for you.

dmcb101 said:

Seems kinda silly to argue over a racquet. Everyone is allowed their opinion. Anyone add any weight in the hoop to these sticks? I know everyone seems to be concerned with the balance and what not, adding to the butt, but for those who say its not stable enough, have you added weight to the hoop?

Click to expand...

I felt the racquet was acting hash and unstable in stock form, so I switched to a synthetic grip and tinkerered with up to 20g blue tack in the handle. It didn't make it headlight enough to make the balance feel 'right', so I tried more moderate weight in the handle with 1/2 gram lead 'Power Strips' at 3 and 9, and the racquet immediately became way stabler, and I was suddenly much more able to hold my own in hard baseline rallies against people using Pure Aeros and RF97s and such, whereas without the weight at 3 and 9 I actually had to swing really hard to make the 18x17 pattern grip and control the ball, and was virtually unable to block hard shots back flat. I still think the racquet mold would be more ideal with 16x20 or maybe 18x19 string pattern, 18x17 still feels occasionally unpredictable and launchy after many months, but at 12.1 oz with overgrip, dampener, 10ish g in handle, and just a measly gram split between 3 and 9, the racquet became Much more comfortable, Much more stable.

Kalethan said:

I felt the racquet was acting hash and unstable in stock form, so I switched to a synthetic grip and tinkerered with up to 20g blue tack in the handle. It didn't make it headlight enough to make the balance feel 'right', so I tried more moderate weight in the handle with 1/2 gram lead 'Power Strips' at 3 and 9, and the racquet immediately became way stabler, and I was suddenly much more able to hold my own in hard baseline rallies against people using Pure Aeros and RF97s and such, whereas without the weight at 3 and 9 I actually had to swing really hard to make the 18x17 pattern grip and control the ball, and was virtually unable to block hard shots back flat. I still think the racquet mold would be more ideal with 16x20 or maybe 18x19 string pattern, 18x17 still feels occasionally unpredictable and launchy after many months, but at 12.1 oz with overgrip, dampener, 10ish g in handle, and just a measly gram split between 3 and 9, the racquet became Much more comfortable, Much more stable.

Click to expand...

For me it depends on the string gauge funnily enough. With 16 gauge I had little to no problems, with 17 gauge I have 2g split between 3 and 9 as well.

This racquet is a bit of a tortured love affair for me, to be honest. I'm 34 years old, OHBH, maybe a 5.0 or higher, but I don't really know because i've never played tournaments as an adult The PS97s makes/allows me to play a very Dimitrovian game, actually, high Magic quotient but fundamentally somehow inconsistent in a way that makes it easy for me to lose. I don't get any free power, and can feel pushed around by good tweener opponents unless I play Very hard, and am swinging super aggressively at every stroke. I can create a great deal of spin, but the high-spin shots do not feel 'heavy' or appear especially difficult for my opponents to handle. If I try to hit flat, I can crush the ball, but it feels very sproingy and unreliable when hitting flat. Blocking returns flat without a full stroke tends to produce a very wispy, thin ball which is immediate pounce-fodder. But! i have sensitive tendons, and can still play long 3 setters with this frame without elbow or wrist discomfort. After many different hybrids at a range of tensions, I have just tried an amazing string combo which is making me think the racquet may be perfectable after all: Ashaway Zyex Monogut 16g mains with Lux Element 17g crosses. I was shocked and delighted by the way this combo upped the power and the spin at the same time, leading the racquet to feel almost like a magic wand for the first several hours of string life. Even after 6 hours, while control is decreasing, neither string is notched, they are returning to position still, and the combo is still totally comfy on my joints. I can hit crazy drop shots and have a great feeling of creative expressivity with this racquet, and really, along with arm comfort so I can play sustainably (2-3 times a week), that's my most important criteria for a frame: does it excite me and allow me to play interesting tennis where I can occasionally channel greatness... the 97s requires weight customization in the handle and at 3 and 9 for my taste, and seems very string and tension sensitive (can change playing characteristics pretty wildly with just a small change in tension), but in the end is super fun to use.

Here's hoping we're approaching a day where I can order this exact mold with a variety of string patterns (I am bitter that Wilson is only offering 16x20, the best string pattern ever, on their elongated Burn 95, which I 'cannot' use, as I have taste and stiffness standards that forbid it). I would buy this in 16x20, 18x18, 18x19, and 18x20, if they offered it. Would not even hesitate or need to demo. Perplexing but seductive frame.

yours in G.A.S.,
EZ Ace Machine

"Paris, France, 1789. Under the rule of Louis the sixteenth, longstanding grievances between aristocrat and peasant were about to boil over. The pot in which these troubles boiled was kindled by the firewood of oppression and heated by flames that sucked the air from gasping peasants. Would the pot cool off? Would it merely simmer, or would it boil over, to stain the floor of history...forever!?!"

-Start The Revolution Without Me

I took this racquet out for another casual hit (below) yesterday, this time I added 4 gms of lead to the top of the hoop(via, 2-8 inch strips, spanning across the top). The weight is now at 348 gms because I had added 20 gms of Blue-Stik into the handle the day I got it. This last 4 grams really seemed to help it immensely. In static form ie. just picking it up in the house, it feels very non-ProStaff-like, but as soon as you hit a ball with it, the head heaviness seems to be not noticeable and it crushes the ball. This is a really mysterious racquet, but I think I like it!

Kalethan said:

This racquet is a bit of a tortured love affair for me, to be honest. I'm 34 years old, OHBH, maybe a 5.0 or higher, but I don't really know because i've never played tournaments as an adult The PS97s makes/allows me to play a very Dimitrovian game, actually, high Magic quotient but fundamentally somehow inconsistent in a way that makes it easy for me to lose. I don't get any free power, and can feel pushed around by good tweener opponents unless I play Very hard, and am swinging super aggressively at every stroke. I can create a great deal of spin, but the high-spin shots do not feel 'heavy' or appear especially difficult for my opponents to handle. If I try to hit flat, I can crush the ball, but it feels very sproingy and unreliable when hitting flat. Blocking returns flat without a full stroke tends to produce a very wispy, thin ball which is immediate pounce-fodder. But! i have sensitive tendons, and can still play long 3 setters with this frame without elbow or wrist discomfort. After many different hybrids at a range of tensions, I have just tried an amazing string combo which is making me think the racquet may be perfectable after all: Ashaway Zyex Monogut 16g mains with Lux Element 17g crosses. I was shocked and delighted by the way this combo upped the power and the spin at the same time, leading the racquet to feel almost like a magic wand for the first several hours of string life. Even after 6 hours, while control is decreasing, neither string is notched, they are returning to position still, and the combo is still totally comfy on my joints. I can hit crazy drop shots and have a great feeling of creative expressivity with this racquet, and really, along with arm comfort so I can play sustainably (2-3 times a week), that's my most important criteria for a frame: does it excite me and allow me to play interesting tennis where I can occasionally channel greatness... the 97s requires weight customization in the handle and at 3 and 9 for my taste, and seems very string and tension sensitive (can change playing characteristics pretty wildly with just a small change in tension), but in the end is super fun to use.

Here's hoping we're approaching a day where I can order this exact mold with a variety of string patterns (I am bitter that Wilson is only offering 16x20, the best string pattern ever, on their elongated Burn 95, which I 'cannot' use, as I have taste and stiffness standards that forbid it). I would buy this in 16x20, 18x18, 18x19, and 18x20, if they offered it. Would not even hesitate or need to demo. Perplexing but seductive frame.

yours in G.A.S.,
EZ Ace Machine

"Paris, France, 1789. Under the rule of Louis the sixteenth, longstanding grievances between aristocrat and peasant were about to boil over. The pot in which these troubles boiled was kindled by the firewood of oppression and heated by flames that sucked the air from gasping peasants. Would the pot cool off? Would it merely simmer, or would it boil over, to stain the floor of history...forever!?!"

-Start The Revolution Without Me

Click to expand...

Did you try gut/poly hybrids?
And how's the playability duration of the Ashaway/Element hybrid?

Thanks.

Fxanimator1 said:

I took this racquet out for another casual hit (below) yesterday, this time I added 4 gms of lead to the top of the hoop(via, 2-8 inch strips, spanning across the top). The weight is now at 348 gms because I had added 20 gms of Blue-Stik into the handle the day I got it. This last 4 grams really seemed to help it immensely. In static form ie. just picking it up in the house, it feels very non-ProStaff-like, but as soon as you hit a ball with it, the head heaviness seems to be not noticeable and it crushes the ball. This is a really mysterious racquet, but I think I like it!

Click to expand...

Mine feel to light in the hoop. I will be adding mass as well. Weirdly enough I have a burn 95 that has a similar swingweight and weight, but the burn feels much more solid. The 97s is much easier to swing though.

dmcb101 said:

Mine feel to light in the hoop. I will be adding mass as well. Weirdly enough I have a burn 95 that has a similar swingweight and weight, but the burn feels much more solid. The 97s is much easier to swing though.

Click to expand...

Measure the swingweight and weight. Most of mine came under spec.

Surion said:

Did you try gut/poly hybrids?
And how's the playability duration of the Ashaway/Element hybrid?

Thanks.

Click to expand...

I have not tried gut/poly yet, because of the cost/not wanting to get addicted. I know it would be pretty special/magical feeling, but one of the lamest things about the 97s/my stringing situation is that I need a whole bunch of string to complete the mains; it's almost an extra foot of string on both ends to reach the tensioning gripper for the final pull, so unless I resort to shenanigans and other tools I cannot usually get 2 mains string jobs out of 1 forty foot set. The exception to this seems to be Zyex Monogut, which stretches to a truly outlandish degree, enough for me to do two mains jobs no problem, though I have not yet done it. I have been impressed with the peak playability more than the long-haul playability of the setup, as it's getting a little wild around 6ish hours, but I am impressed with the ongoing comfort because I usually can't enjoy poly for more than a few hours, and the Element is soft enough to allow some elasticity even as it goes 'dead' and is still smooth enough for the monogut mains to ride the rails and return to center. I think I went for a pretty big tension differential, 60 lbs mains to 50 crosses, and also dropped weight slowly and multiple times on each main because zyex monogut stretches such an absurd amount. I do notice that there is less control now than for the first 5 or so hours, but it actually feels like the crosses have lost more tension/changed character more than the mains, so I think stringing the Element at 54 or so, maybe higher, would lead to more control in the 'long run' if one's goal were to get the longest possible decent playing setup. I am not sure stringing Lux strings (even their softest, even just in the crosses) too much higher will be acceptable for me due to comfort concerns, so I am willing to string them low and maybe cut them out around 6 to 8 hours. I think the real wildcard in this string setup will be whether Zyex eventually notches while continuing to get more powerful/wild, but it feels as though it has stabilized in a decent place but the Element has stabilized several pounds too loose. this seems to me to be a function of the 17 crosses not being enough to 'hold' the mains as they loosen. I actually have seen a marked increase in 'control' just from putting on a tight 'worm' dampener, in essence creating more drag, mimicking another cross string to some degree. I'm excited to try this string combo asap on my other 97s, but life has been insanoflex and is standing between me and my tennis this last week.

hope some of this makes sense/is relevant; everyone's experiences with racquets and strings are so subjective...

EZ Ace Machine

"Paris, France, 1789. Under the rule of Louis the sixteenth, longstanding grievances between aristocrat and peasant were about to boil over. The pot in which these troubles boiled was kindled by the firewood of oppression and heated by flames that sucked the air from gasping peasants. Would the pot cool off? Would it merely simmer, or would it boil over, to stain the floor of history...forever!?!"

-Start The Revolution Without Me

Kalethan said:

...one of the lamest things about the 97s/my stringing situation is that I need a whole bunch of string to complete the mains; it's almost an extra foot of string on both ends to reach the tensioning gripper for the final pull, so unless I resort to shenanigans and other tools I cannot usually get 2 mains string jobs out of 1 forty foot set.

Click to expand...

You need to use the "starting clamp, bridge trick" for the mains so you don't waste string.