Does Thin Beam = Harder to use?

I have a list of racquets I am considering and they range in beam size from 20-23. I am an intermediate player (3.5) and like a slightly heavier racquet (SW 325) but I need a flexible frame that is headlight and easy on the joints.
It seems like racquets that fit these specs are mostly thin beamed. Do thin beams make a racquet tougher to use for a 3.5 level player? I would guess they would be less stable on hits outside the sweetspot? If a racquet has all the specs I desire but has a thin beam (20-21) should I get it or steer away? Thanks

p.s. here are the one's I am considering:

pure storm tour (21)
ozone tour (18-20-18)
aerogel 4D 300 (21)
RQiS 1 Tour (21-25)
Youtek Speed mp (20)

Not necessarily, i started playing tennis with an aerostorm 2008, go figure ahaa the salesmen got me there but a thin beam just makes it a little less powerful, i believe the bigger the beam=more power, thinner=less power, or something along the lines of that. So basically with a thinner beam you you get less power, so you must supply your own. I have heard only good comments from the aerogel 4D 300 and the Purestorm Tour they are also quite similar racquets. The speed MP has an incredibly thin beam and I would have to supply ample power for that tow work. Depends on if you can supply your own power thus any of the racquets would work

tennismonster said:

Not necessarily, i started playing tennis with an aerostorm 2008, go figure ahaa the salesmen got me there but a thin beam just makes it a little less powerful, i believe the bigger the beam=more power, thinner=less power, or something along the lines of that. So basically with a thinner beam you you get less power, so you must supply your own. I have heard only good comments from the aerogel 4D 300 and the Purestorm Tour they are also quite similar racquets. The speed MP has an incredibly thin beam and I would have to supply ample power for that tow work. Depends on if you can supply your own power thus any of the racquets would work

Click to expand...

so if the power level is OK, then I shouldn't worry about the beam size?

What the poster above said is true- GENERALLY, the thinner the beam, the less power. However, there are some very powerful thin beamed racquets. The other advantage to thin beamed racquets is that it's slightly easier to slice with them (for the reason that you're not going to hit the side of the frame).

Beam width is more something that people consider when trying to deside based on specs alone. If you're able to demo, then forget about beam width.

JackB1 said:

so if the power level is OK, then I shouldn't worry about the beam size?

Click to expand...

beam size has a correlation with power level a great demo would probably be the storm or the 4d 300 but its all preference still. What racquet are you currently using?

EDIT: It has a correlation with power SOMETIMES, thanks meowmix

If you could demo, i would suggest getting out there and play testing

thinner beams usually mean less power, thus more control.

Also, I'd suggest you to think about the AG 4D 300 Tour instead of the 4D 300 16x19, since the 300T is closer in specs than the other racquets you've posted.

Have you had trouble generating pace on your shots before? I know in your other thread you mentioned you used a Dunlop AG 500, but have you ever tried a less "powerful" racquet before? I haven't particularly found a huge drop off since I've switched to the Fischer M Comp (20 mm beam) from the Wilson K Surge. If anything, I do have to swing harder to generate that power since it's not as inherent in the racquet, but it's definitely still there and a lot more controllable than the K Surge. Not to be critical but maybe you're digging a little too deep into the specs of your next racquet?

tennismonster said:

beam size has a correlation with power level a great demo would probably be the storm or the 4d 300 but its all preference still. What racquet are you currently using?

EDIT: It has a correlation with power SOMETIMES, thanks meowmix

Click to expand...

I am currently using a AG 4D 5oo Tour, but it's too stiff for me. It's a very powerful racquet (like a Pure Drive or Extreme) so I know whatever more flexible frame I go to will be considerably less in power. I am just hoping I will adapt to it in time. I need something that won't give me TE!

definitely give the rqis1 tour a demo. its a softer frame with some good flex and definitely provides enough power to play the baseline game.

I settled on the Prince Ozone Tour. Has all the specs I want and a nice cushy feel. Too bad I hear they aren't going to make them anymore!

well if you're looking for something softer than i suggest you hit up the Donnays. For a relatively cheap price, you can get a thin beamed, low powered racket (the MP) or you can still keep the thin beam, but more power with the OS. There are threads all over the forums with good information.

JackB1 said:

I have a list of racquets I am considering and they range in beam size from 20-23. I am an intermediate player (3.5) and like a slightly heavier racquet (SW 325) but I need a flexible frame that is headlight and easy on the joints.
It seems like racquets that fit these specs are mostly thin beamed. Do thin beams make a racquet tougher to use for a 3.5 level player? I would guess they would be less stable on hits outside the sweetspot? If a racquet has all the specs I desire but has a thin beam (20-21) should I get it or steer away? Thanks

p.s. here are the one's I am considering:

pure storm tour (21)
ozone tour (18-20-18)
aerogel 4D 300 (21)
RQiS 1 Tour (21-25)
Youtek Speed mp (20)

Click to expand...

I think of thinner beams as an advantage, because the racquet cuts though the air easier. MY POG OS is 19mm wide and moves through the air very nicely even though its head size is large (107").

Thin beams are usually associated with racquets for better intermediate to advanced players. They're usually heavier and less stiff. That doesn't mean that they have no power, though -- other design features can be incorporated to make a racquet thin-beamed and relatively powerful.

So I agree with your statement below. And, if you can, I highly recommend demoing. That's the best test always.

JackB1 said:

so if the power level is OK, then I shouldn't worry about the beam size?

Click to expand...

Geez how many racquets have you bought by now???
Just stick with one and keep practising.... *sigh*
If you want something thin beamed, stable, flexible, easy on the joints....
You want a racquet with a flex rating in the low 60s or less.
You want a racquet that weighs around 12 ounces.
If you really feel the urge to buy another racquet, just get the Donnay Pro One International or the Pro Kennex Redondo...

Oh and to answer the question. Thin Beam, hard to use?
NO.

Besides the Donnay Pro One you should also give the PK Black Ace a try.

Thinner beams for me cut thro the air quicker so I swing faster therfore creating a more powerful shot and also helping me with heavy topspin. Some thicker frames i struggle with ie Babolats PDR.
The ozone tour is a great racket as is the pure storm tour but i would probably plumb for the RDis 100 MP and not the RQis tour. It has more power and is very stable and will help you at your level and as you get better. I would leave out the speed MP, its ok but I see lots of my friends games have deteriorated since moving to it.
If i could recommend anything else, I think the fischer M pro 98 is a must demo.
The AG i have not hit with.
Also its a slightly thicker beam but I had little problems with the speedport Pro White an excellent all round racket that is stable control orientated with loads of spin and an easier hit than the ozone tour.

Howdy Jack,

If you're dealing with a real case of tennis elbow, it's important that you cool that inflammation out before you continue with a heavy tennis schedule. Ice, massage, therapy, rest, anti-inflammatories, etc. Hope you can make a speedy recovery.

If the condition progressively set in as you used this Dunlop, you probably ought to move away from it, but there are two potential issues here. First, trying different racquets can be aggravating to an unhappy elbow because you'll be mis-hitting when you try unfamiliar frames. I've never had TE, but I've had a few twinges when I've tried a bundle of demos. Try to go slow in that respect.

Second, if you're using any harsh strings in your Dunlop - poly or kevlar - get rid of that stuff today. Don't use it for another second - most of us mere mortals just don't need it. If you haven't sampled a softer string yet like a multifiber or even natural gut, now is the time, especially if you need to keep playing. (Stop for a while if you can, though)

Thinner beams are usually found in heavier, more flexible racquets. Some of these can require a more developed swing to hit the ball well, but they can also be rather comfortable. Wider beams are usually associated with higher stiffness, while more weight in a racquet lends it more stability. Already some good advice here on different racquets to try and I think you might like that Prince a lot.

Hey, the good news on discontinued frames is that you can often stock up on a couple that you like for a lot less cabbage, right?

Thanks to all! I have the Ozone Tour and love it! Easy on the arm and VERY comfortable.

Thinner beam < 20mm - very manuverable. Easier to whip racquet around. perfect for 1hbh.

Don't see it harder to use at all. Once you got used to it, you have alot more harder time playing a harder beam racquets. Larger beam is visually heavier and found it to be harder to swing.

In D Zone said:

Thinner beam < 20mm - very manuverable. Easier to whip racquet around. perfect for 1hbh.

Don't see it harder to use at all. Once you got used to it, you have alot more harder time playing a harder beam racquets. Larger beam is visually heavier and found it to be harder to swing.

Click to expand...

I agree. I used my Ozone for 3 hours yeaterday and didn't think about that beam once. I never felt like I was struggling with this racquet. Now when I look at the beam on a Pure Drive, it looks huge!