I've had a couple of Yonex rackets that were made in China, so not ALL Yonex rackets are made in Japan. But, as someone stated, it's up to the company to set the tolerances of the product they accept. Tighter tolerances = increased cost = higher price to the consumer. I'd have to say that of the rackets I've strung lately, Head needs to pay more attention to their details the most. I've seen too many of them that have burrs around the drilled holes where the grommets come through. I look at Pro Kennex like a Mercedes car. It has more features, so more things to go wrong. Whenever I hear or feel a bad vibration, I know it's the handle. I take off the butt cap, remove the cylinder weight, add a little rubber cement (depends on how much weight I want to add), and it's better than new. Should it be redesigned? Probably. They deserve a lot of credit though for looking into arm-safe rackets when everyone else was making their rackets bigger, stiffer and longer. Oh, and PK, redesign the grommets. I've never had a racket split grommets more than the 5g does. Prince's new O 3 line is nice for the most part. They've tried some things, like the MORE system, that just didn't seem to be thought all the way through. And, even on the O 3 system, sometimes it can be a nightmare getting that last cross tied off, especially if you didn't leave yourself enough string to put it through the next to last cross's hole before it's tensioned. As for Wilson, I've really never encountered too much bad about their workmanship. I wish they'd place their tie-off for the last cross someplace other than in a hole where the last main gets in the way of the knot, and place it closer to the hole the last cross exits. I suppose they just wanted to be "different"--not necessarily better, just different. Babolat's--well, for a company that markets half sets of string, they sure don't make the tie-offs for two-piece stringing very obvious. Yonex rackets have always seemed nicely made. Some of the models with wood handles though are awfully easy to damage the handle, especially when you are experimenting and taking the buttcap off and putting it back on frequently. I have a Fischer now, and it seems well-made. One thing about Fischers though, and it's a small point, is their fancy, buttcap that isn't flat. On small scales, I often just stand the racket on its buttcap to weigh it. Well, not with these. I know, I could get rid of the clutter on my work table so that I can lay the racket down, but sometimes, I just have to work around the clutter. I don't have unlimited room. So to summarize, none are perfect. Some have manufacturing flaws, while others seem to be design flaws (my opinion anyway). Ultimately, if you play better with one company's frames, none of these flaws will matter anyway.
