> Dunlop Users Association >

Strayfire

Strayfire

Rookie
IMG_20200708_135634.jpg


:)
 
WYK

WYK

Hall of Fame
I'm not sure if I've offered it yet, but if there's anyone in Europe that wants a once strung 200G MW with almost no time on it, let me know.
 
WYK

WYK

Hall of Fame
S3.0 on a scale. These things are marked PT321C if I recall. Basically a stripped 3.0 mold with minimal sheets, not weighted or balanced at the factory, at 285g bare. ~2pts head heavy when strung. This one wears two grips, so is closer to even balance strung. I had it leaded up for a bit, but then the wife wanted to use it, so removed all the lead. It's a strange bird this. It weighs nothing, has a control pattern tight 16X19 stringbed, and is fairly low powered even though it weighs less than my Clash. Being light with no power makes it a fun stick to use. You can get great RHS and spin and control. Not great at flat serves, especially strung with revolve. I have revolve in it at low tension to increase the stringbed response and spin. But I would bet a hybrid string job on this stick would wake it up. I may try to put NXT in the crosses.

170967059.WIavTQHW.DSC_9959.JPG
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
Is Biomimetic 200 Lite worth paying 50 dollars for (in mint condition)? I've played with similar racquets (e.g. 4D Aerogel 200, CX200) and had Biomimetic 200 for a while. It was nice but probably a tad too heavy and the string pattern was extremely (too) dense for my liking, as it is a 95:er. Been yearning for the Lite version for years but I'm a bit unsure if I'd still be disappointed in the end. I would add an overgrip and some lead in 3 & 9 to get up to around 335-340g which is my wheelhouse nowadays.
 
Songs For A Dead Pilot

Songs For A Dead Pilot

Semi-Pro
Notorious_Junkballer said:
Is Biomimetic 200 Lite worth paying 50 dollars for (in mint condition)? I've played with similar racquets (e.g. 4D Aerogel 200, CX200) and had Biomimetic 200 for a while. It was nice but probably a tad too heavy and the string pattern was extremely (too) dense for my liking, as it is a 95:er. Been yearning for the Lite version for years but I'm a bit unsure if I'd still be disappointed in the end. I would add an overgrip and some lead in 3 & 9 to get up to around 335-340g which is my wheelhouse nowadays.
Click to expand...
Have two of them. They are much lighter from Bio 200 and the string pattern is also much more open from HEAD 16x19. They seem a bit stiffer and more powerful.
 
C

ccjta

Rookie
25 year Dunlop Dealer and former Advisory Staff Member. Dunlop had/has the best racquets for the best price of any racquet manufacturer.
Dunlop 300G
Dunlop M-Fil 200
Dunlop Aerogel 200
Dunlop Aerogel 4D 100 (best control racquet ever)
Dunlop Biomimetic 200 Lite
Dunlop Biomimetic 400 Tour
Dunlop Biofibre M 2.1
Dunlop iDapt Force 100S
Dunlop Precision 98 Tour
Dunlop Srixon Revo CV 3.0 F Tour
Dunlop SX 600
 
mtommer

mtommer

Hall of Fame
Nice little revived thread. I guess I'll add my racquets to the list.
2 Aerogel 4D 100 (fun to use every once in a great while)
3 Aerogel 4D 200 (18x20) (Missed out on getting more when I had the chance so now they just sit but I did like it)

I've been playing these for years now and have these left...
10 M-Fil 200 (18x20)
15 MuscleWeave 200 95
Pretty much interchangeable at my spec but I do like the MW a tiny bit more than the M-Fil.

Just ordered 2 CX 200 Tour (18x20) for a longer term demo with my full racquet specs. I liked the initial demo I did earlier, unlike the iterations of the 200 series prior to the CX Tour. I'm really, really, really hoping it plays similarly at my spec so I can replenish my supply.
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
mtommer said:
Just ordered 2 CX 200 Tour (18x20) for a longer term demo with my full racquet specs. I liked the initial demo I did earlier, unlike the iterations of the 200 series prior to the CX Tour. I'm really, really, really hoping it plays similarly at my spec so I can replenish my supply.
Click to expand...
With some stabilizing lead at 3&9 they'll play super. I have both 18x20 and 16x19.
 
Hidious

Hidious

Professional
mtommer said:
Nice little revived thread. I guess I'll add my racquets to the list.
2 Aerogel 4D 100 (fun to use every once in a great while)
3 Aerogel 4D 200 (18x20) (Missed out on getting more when I had the chance so now they just sit but I did like it)

I've been playing these for years now and have these left...
10 M-Fil 200 (18x20)
15 MuscleWeave 200 95
Pretty much interchangeable at my spec but I do like the MW a tiny bit more than the M-Fil.

Just ordered 2 CX 200 Tour (18x20) for a longer term demo with my full racquet specs. I liked the initial demo I did earlier, unlike the iterations of the 200 series prior to the CX Tour. I'm really, really, really hoping it plays similarly at my spec so I can replenish my supply.
Click to expand...
Keep us posted, I'm curious to know what you think about the CX.
 
aidanzman73

aidanzman73

New User
F2.0 Tour not featured enough up in here! Great racket and improved my game when I got my first many years ago now. Just picked up a new one for £40! Be interesting to see how it plays next to my dr98s that I moved to
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
aidanzman73 said:
F2.0 Tour not featured enough up in here! Great racket and improved my game when I got my first many years ago now. Just picked up a new one for £40! Be interesting to see how it plays next to my dr98s that I moved to
Click to expand...
I just dusted off my old Biomimetic M2.0 and strung it with Cyclone 16 at 20 kg, switched to a leather grip and added an overgrip. It weighs now 350 grams and plays better than ever. I never really liked it before, coming from those thinner and flexier 200's. Cyclone 16 increased the weight by 4-5 grams from what it was with Silk and that's why I wanted to increase the tail-weight even more. "Loosely" strung Cyclone plays really nice in this frame that has medium power.
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
snoflewis said:
are you playing it stock and what rackets did you use previously?
Click to expand...
I come from heavier racquets, like the previous generations of Dunlop 200's, so I found the CX a bit too light in stock form, and in addition a bit too unstable. So some extra weight at least at 9&3 was a must. I also added some weight in the handle to preserve the head light balance. The racquet weighs now 340 g and plays really smoothly. I have the 18x20 version too. It has even more control but the launch angle is also lower. So in short, they are both great racquets for player with consistent technique, as they are very demanding and won't give you anything for free. A poorly set-up shot with bad footwork or timing will end up in the ceiling, in the net or in your own service box. In other words, nothing for beginners. I'd say you need to be at least 4 to be able to use them effectively.
 
Last edited:
S

snoflewis

Legend
Notorious_Junkballer said:
I come from heavier racquets, like the previous generations of Dunlop 200's, so I found the CX a bit too light in stock form, and in addition a bit too unstable. So some extra weight at least at 9&3 was a must. I also added some weight in the handle to preserve the head light balance. The racquet weighs now 340 g and plays really smoothly. I have the 18x20 version too. It has even more control but the launch angle is also lower. So in short, they are both great racquets for player with consistent technique, as they are very demanding and won't give you anything for free. A poorly set-up shot will end up in the ceiling, in the net or in your own service box. In other words, nothing for beginners. I'd say you need to be at least 4 to be able to use them effectively.
Click to expand...

thanks for the insight. i used the aerogel 200 about 10 years ago, but haven't touched a dunlop since. i'm wondering if the CX would be closer to a wilson 6.1 95 16x18 with some added weight. it's been hard to find a modern stick that compares to the 6.1s other than a prestige pro, but the string pattern is a bit dense for my tastes.
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
snoflewis said:
it's been hard to find a modern stick that compares to the 6.1s...
Click to expand...
If you like the stick, why don't you just stick with it? :)
I've never tried 6.1 95 so I can't compare to CX. The lighter ncode 95 18x20 I've played with on a couple of occasions. It was nice, tough a little too light for my liking.
 
S

snoflewis

Legend
Notorious_Junkballer said:
If you like the stick, why don't you just stick with it? :)
I've never tried 6.1 95 so I can't compare to CX. The lighter ncode 95 18x20 I've played with on a couple of occasions. It was nice, tough a little too light for my liking.
Click to expand...

i would, but it's been tough finding enough used ones in good condition in the same grip size. the search continues!
 
Strayfire

Strayfire

Rookie
snoflewis said:
Anyone still using the cx 200 tour 16x19?
Click to expand...
IMG_20200521_131334.jpg

I did a demo of the CX 200 Tour 16x19. It feels raw, honest and almost the spitting image of my ProStaff 90 K-Factor (Asian). I gave it to my friend who used the ProStaff 90 K-Factor (USA) as well and he remarked that it was the "most playable" of the sticks I demoed.

The main difference is that it is much easier to swing, but lacks the solid and stable punch that a ProStaff 90 (Asian or USA) will give you.

Notorious_Junkballer said:
I come from heavier racquets, like the previous generations of Dunlop 200's, so I found the CX a bit too light in stock form, and in addition a bit too unstable. So some extra weight at least at 9&3 was a must. I also added some weight in the handle to preserve the head light balance. The racquet weighs now 340 g and plays really smoothly. I have the 18x20 version too. It has even more control but the launch angle is also lower. So in short, they are both great racquets for player with consistent technique, as they are very demanding and won't give you anything for free. A poorly set-up shot with bad footwork or timing will end up in the ceiling, in the net or in your own service box. In other words, nothing for beginners. I'd say you need to be at least 4 to be able to use them effectively.
Click to expand...

100% agree with adding weight. If I bought the CX 200 Tour I would at least lead it up to 320g unstrung (my spec)/ ~340g strung with overgrip.

I will say that if you didn't add weight, the frame might be easier to play with. The demo stick sure felt easier to play with.

*For me, all racquets I play with are relative to the Prostaff 90, so I never feel like any frame is hard to hit with.

Same TennisOnly ran out of CX200 Tour 16x19s. They're selling them at half price on TennisOnly and Tennis Warehouse (which won't ship to me), so I'm kinda mad I can't pick one up.
 
Songs For A Dead Pilot

Songs For A Dead Pilot

Semi-Pro
Strayfire said:
I did a demo of the CX 200 Tour 16x19. It feels raw, honest and almost the spitting image of my ProStaff 90 K-Factor (Asian). I gave it to my friend who used the ProStaff 90 K-Factor (USA) as well and he remarked that it was the "most playable" of the sticks I demoed.
The main difference is that it is much easier to swing, but lacks the solid and stable punch that a ProStaff 90 (Asian or USA) will give you.
100% agree with adding weight. If I bought the CX 200 Tour I would at least lead it up to 320g unstrung (my spec)/ ~340g strung with overgrip.

I will say that if you didn't add weight, the frame might be easier to play with. The demo stick sure felt easier to play with.

*For me, all racquets I play with are relative to the Prostaff 90, so I never feel like any frame is hard to hit with.

Same TennisOnly ran out of CX200 Tour 16x19s. They're selling them at half price on TennisOnly and Tennis Warehouse (which won't ship to me), so I'm kinda mad I can't pick one up.
Click to expand...

I never played too much with ProStaff 90 – preferred Prestige Tour 60 or IG Prestige Mid – but I agree that raw feeling it is something all Dunlop frames from 200 and 300 Tour lines share. It could be very true that it can be close to ProStaff 90 a bit stiff and wooden raw feel.

CX200 Tour 16x19 is only 310g and very low SW, so one can easily add some weight. However in stock form it is one of the easiest 95" to swing. Great frame to work on attacking one-bandhand.

Also worried about last copies of these frames in Europe tennis shops. Is the new edition coming soon or we all should be again worried about Dunlop's future?
 
Strayfire

Strayfire

Rookie
Songs For A Dead Pilot said:
I never played too much with ProStaff 90 – preferred Prestige Tour 60 or IG Prestige Mid – but I agree that raw feeling it is something all Dunlop frames from 200 and 300 Tour lines share. It could be very true that it can be close to ProStaff 90 a bit stiff and wooden raw feel.

CX200 Tour 16x19 is only 310g and very low SW, so one can easily add some weight. However in stock form it is one of the easiest 95" to swing. Great frame to work on attacking one-bandhand.

Also worried about last copies of these frames in Europe tennis shops. Is the new edition coming soon or we all should be again worried about Dunlop's future?
Click to expand...

Well Srixon is a pretty big Japanese company. Should be fine.

I'd be more worried about Dunlop's ball supply. Apparently a tournament organiser said that the factory that makes Dunlop/Slazenger balls has gone into receivership from Corona.
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
Songs For A Dead Pilot said:
Also worried about last copies of these frames in Europe tennis shops. Is the new edition coming soon or we all should be again worried about Dunlop's future?
Click to expand...

Don't worry, there's a new CX line on the way in 2021. And hopefully (read presumably) they'll release some of the racquets already in 2020, just like they did with this current 2019 line. If my memory serves me right I bought my CX200 Tour 18x20 in the fall of 2018, while the 16x19 version was released later in Feb 2019, which I ended up securing as well. Srixon has enough muscles to keep Dunlop floating especially as they are making better and better racquets all the time and their popularity is on the rise again. The brand (Dunlop) itself is so strong it'll live forever. :)
 
Last edited:
G

golfdude98765

New User
Notorious_Junkballer said:
Don't worry, there's a new CX line on the way in 2021. And hopefully (read presumably) they'll release some of the racquets already in 2020, just like they did with this current 2019 line. If my memory serves me right I bought my CX200 Tour 18x20 in the fall of 2018, while the 16x19 version was released later in Feb 2019, which I ended up securing as well. Srixon has enough muscles to keep Dunlop floating especially as they are making better and better racquets all the time and their popularity is on the rise again. The brand (Dunlop) itself is so strong it'll live forever. :)
Click to expand...

I really like your optimism about the future of the Dunlop/Srixon line. I was quite concerned a few years ago when Dunlop came out with the Idapt line. That seemed to signal desperation. Love your tag - re: Angels of Babylon.
 
C

cortado

Professional
Anybody here used the CX200 Tour 18x20 (and/or 16x19)?
I currently play with a Yonex Duel G 97 that weighs 330g strung, and an old PS90 that weighs 340g strung. I like both for different reasons. I love the precision of the 90, no issues with shanking, but sometimes I do notice that hitting the ball is more uncomfortable than with the 97.
Just wondering how much the Tour feels like a 90 at impact vs a bigger head size.
 
M

mental midget

Hall of Fame
just weighing in here as a longtime member. first dunlop was the 200g revelation which was a great racket. played aerogel 100 for many years, bunch of weight in the handle, probably best serving racket i've ever used. wanted to make a switch looking for a slightly bigger headsize, mostly for margin on returns...found the srixon revo 2.0 tour and been using that for a while, absurdly light frame but all good, i've got long strokes and a 1hbh and it just lets me play my game, perfectly versatile, great touch, just a simple, great all-around frame.

dunlops are great man, they've just got the racket geometry down pat.
 
Notorious_Junkballer

Notorious_Junkballer

Hall of Fame
cortado said:
How do they play? Comfort?
Click to expand...
They play great but need, according to me and many others, a bit extra weight at 9&3 to make 'em more stable. The comfort is top notch. The 18x20 version, which weighs 5 g more in stock form due to its leather grip, is even more control oriented and has clearly a lower launch angle.
 
Songs For A Dead Pilot

Songs For A Dead Pilot

Semi-Pro
Notorious_Junkballer said:
They play great but need, according to me and many others, a bit extra weight at 9&3 to make 'em more stable. The comfort is top notch. The 18x20 version, which weighs 5 g more in stock form due to its leather grip, is even more control oriented and has clearly a lower launch angle.
Click to expand...
As some people stated in this forum – Dunlop has great raw feel – you really have maximum control on what you are doing. As all Dunlop 200 line was quite flexible they are rather comfortable, but not as much as easier frames like Yonex DR98 or Blade v7.
 
G

golfdude98765

New User
Songs For A Dead Pilot said:
What are your three favorite rackets from these collection?

Have you played with PT924 maybe?


Wysłane z iPhone za pomocą Tapatalk
Click to expand...
That's a good question. I must confess that I am quite fickle; I find myself warming up to a frame for a day or two, and even if I am playing well with it, I will suddenly just decide to change to a different racquet for no apparent reason except to see if I can maintain my level of play with a different racquet with slightly different specs. Over the years, I would have to say that I often return to one of the three following frames - the M-fil 300, M-fil 200 Plus and the Aerogel 300. I will add the the Slazenger Pro-Braided frame is a wonderful frame. Tim Henman used this frame during his career, although I'm certain that the version he played with would have been modified.
Yes I actually have a PT 924. I bought it used and it was in rough shape. I gave it a black paint job. Those hotmelts had a strange paint surface that often rubbed off or deteriorated in a strange way but hitting a ball with that frame was like slicing butter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top