Dunlop F 3.0 Tour

JackB1 · Dec 10, 2012

ccmtennis said:
Yeah I totally agree with you. I think this is a definite "game changer" for any like me who was not even a dunlop fan. Everything from a small sweet spot to the frame shape and feel was appealing even with their new line. This is a real sleeper and absolutely fantastic with some added weight in the upper hoop. Too bad it doesn't have the mass appeal of Babolats or wilson but I think this is a welcomed addition and won me over. I never thought I would even like a 18x20 pattern and I was coming from the BB london and occasionally APDGT

the London is similar to a 18x20 because the drill pattern is very tight in the center of the London.

So you like the smallish sweet spot on the F 3.0? That was something I didn't like. I felt it was too easy to miss and anything hit outside the sweetspot didn't go anywhere.

mike_l · Dec 10, 2012

looking at TWU data for F/M 3.0, sweet spot doesn't look that small, anyone share JackB1's experience?

Hominator · Dec 10, 2012

I think both ccmtennis and Jack found the sweetspot to be small, to be fair.

I personally do not find the sweetspot small at all, but - and I hope this doesn't come out the wrong way - from the looks of the fraying on my stringbed, I'm hitting pretty cleanly.

I bet string tension would also play a role as to whether the sweetspot feels small.

mike_l · Dec 10, 2012

the previous versions of 300/300t (4d,bio) had smaller sweet spots, this might influence some people's experiece, but i'm not judging, we feel what we feel, unfortunately blinded testing in tennis is very rarely a possibility

ccmtennis · Dec 10, 2012

Hominator said:
I think both ccmtennis and Jack found the sweetspot to be small, to be fair.

I personally do not find the sweetspot small at all, but - and I hope this doesn't come out the wrong way - from the looks of the fraying on my stringbed, I'm hitting pretty cleanly.

I bet string tension would also play a role as to whether the sweetspot feels small.

No sorry I meant to say that I always felt that their old lines had a much smaller sweet spot than this. I think this stick is awesome and unlike anything they have offered before. I did not like the PJ too much and had a suboptimal experience ownig the new max 200g...frankly did not think I would like it but bought it after my first match with it. Customizing to add a little weight is easy and make it sing

ccmtennis · Dec 10, 2012

JackB1 said:
the London is similar to a 18x20 because the drill pattern is very tight in the center of the London.

Agreed I never used to pay too much attention to that but I do now

Hominator · Dec 10, 2012

ccmtennis said:
No sorry I meant to say that I always felt that their old lines had a much smaller sweet spot than this. I think this stick is awesome and unlike anything they have offered before. I did not like the PJ too much and had a suboptimal experience ownig the new max 200g...frankly did not think I would like it but bought it after my first match with it. Customizing to add a little weight is easy and make it sing

Sorry, my bad!

tom4ny · Dec 11, 2012

in my opinion the F3.0 Tour has a bigger sweetspot than the Biomimetic 300 Tour, and it is also higher up on the racquet face. I'm still not convinced that it has more power than the prior version but the F3.0 definitely has a livelier stringbed and is "snappier". The older box beam shape feels nicer and more traditional but both frames hit a heavy ball and are very stable given their static weight and beam width.

I believe and understand other people's experiences and their feeling that the F3.0 has a small sweetspot. From the stringing error made with my F3.0 i can say that it is not as friendly or forgiving if strung close to 60 lbs. Once I had my setup of 55/52 it played awesome - the sweetspot was larger and the stringbed less jarring.

If a large sweetspot is desired than I believe that a rounder headshape is better. An oval shaped frame is better for flat ball strikers and aggressive all court players who place a premium on control. My game is not well suited for a powerful frame so I tend to like the oval head shape. The new F3.0 is trying to find a middle ground which I think Dunlop acheived. They also fixed the need for adding lead to the upper hoop, though I still did.

MrFlynntastic · Dec 16, 2012

Weighting

Has anyone modified the F 3.0 Tour for weighting?

tom4ny · Dec 18, 2012

MrFlynntastic said:
Has anyone modified the F 3.0 Tour for weighting?

I have added 4 grams to the top hoop spread over the "Dunlop" graphic. The F3.0 Tour was stable without lead but I like the added plow I get and now it serves as well as my modified Bio 300 Tours.

MrFlynntastic · Dec 25, 2012

tom4ny said:
I have added 4 grams to the top hoop spread over the "Dunlop" graphic. The F3.0 Tour was stable without lead but I like the added plow I get and now it serves as well as my modified Bio 300 Tours.

Thanks for the reply. I am the same, except I kept my 4g of tape at more of a 10 & 2 position, avoiding the label area at the top of the hoop.
Also, 7g in the handle and a leather grip. New mass is 339g, with a 327 SW.:shock:
Klip K boom mains @ 56, Klip gut crosses @ 54.

crosscourt · Dec 26, 2012

Can anyone compare the F3.0 Tour with the new APD? Many thanks.

JackB1 · Dec 26, 2012

do you guys think the new Dunlop's gripsize is the same as most others, or larger or smaller?

srvnvly · Dec 26, 2012

JackB1 said:
do you guys think the new Dunlop's gripsize is the same as most others, or larger or smaller?

Jack - I would say the grip runs true-to-size, to a skosh smaller than normal. The problem is, what is normal? Babolat and now Wilson are making their grips larger than normal, and Head has one handle shape for their Speed series, and another (rectangular) for the ret of their series. Definitely confusing.

Hominator · Dec 27, 2012

srvnvly said:
Jack - I would say the grip runs true-to-size, to a skosh smaller than normal. The problem is, what is normal? Babolat and now Wilson are making their grips larger than normal, and Head has one handle shape for their Speed series, and another (rectangular) for the ret of their series. Definitely confusing.

Agreed. The grip size seems pretty standard to me - I really like the shape and feel of the grip.

tlm · Dec 27, 2012

I had my first hit with this racket last night, I have to say it is really nice. Very unique feel it has a crisp feel but without much shock, love the way the ball feels coming off this stick.

It is a great serving racket, I was getting a lot more on my serves than with my regular racket. It had 16 gauge nxt in it so I will see how it plays with a full bed of 17 gauge poly.

The slice back hand was excellent and defensive shots as well. Plus I could really flatten out my forehand for aggressive shots. I hit a loopy top spin forehand most of the time with a lot of top spin and I was getting good spin from this stick even with the tight pattern.

The only problem I was having is some of my forehands were carrying long, but I am hoping the poly will change that. I am going to give this racket a good demo and may be changing to it.

As far as the older model I thought it was dead and nowhere near as nice as the f 3.0.

tlm · Dec 30, 2012

I have been using this racket for a week now and it is a very nice racket. Still experimenting with different strings to find what works best, but this is a very good stick.

With a little more demo time I think I will me changing to it shortly.

I can't believe that there is almost a 1000 posts on the wilson spin rocket launcher racket and very little interest in a great racket like this.

tom4ny · Dec 30, 2012

tlm said:
I have been using this racket for a week now and it is a very nice racket. Still experimenting with different strings to find what works best, but this is a very good stick.

With a little more demo time I think I will me changing to it shortly.

I can't believe that there is almost a 1000 posts on the wilson spin rocket launcher racket and very little interest in a great racket like this.

welcome to the club! i agree that this is one slipping in under the radar and that it is a great new frame from dunlop. it won't generate the spin of that wilson but for an 18x20 it is very spin friendly and you get a solid, snappy, frame with a quick stringbed.

i use 17g strings and have had a full bed of kirshbaum proline II which plays great at 52 lbs. the F3.0 is very arm friendly so i had no issues here but the racket did feel stiffer and had a noticeable "ping" when the ball was struck.

i now have a full bed of isospeed professional classic at 55 and i like it even better. the "ping" sound is gone and i still get decent spin but not as much as the kb proline II. this is also a 17g string.

the frame plays very solid stock but i have been tinkering with just a little lead at 3:9 and 10:2, then just covering the dunlop lettering. i think that i like the 3rd option best as the racket is pretty head light.

all that said i still go back and forth between my bio 300 tour and the new F3.0 tour

tom4ny · Dec 30, 2012

crosscourt said:
Can anyone compare the F3.0 Tour with the new APD? Many thanks.

very similar frames but the apd is more powerful, stiffer, and generates better spin.

the F3.0 tour generates decent spin but it more control oriented and feels more solid yet less stiff. it is an arm friendly control oriented apd. power is still there though.

they both have a snappy lively stringbed and this is where they are very similar. i could see apd storm people really liking this dunlop and even some apd gt people. both frames are also very fast through the air but the F3.0 feels even faster because it is more headlight.

tom4ny · Dec 30, 2012

JackB1 said:
do you guys think the new Dunlop's gripsize is the same as most others, or larger or smaller?

middle of the road grip size. it is not as square as head, volkl but feels a little bigger than more rounded grips.

tlm · Dec 30, 2012

tom4ny said:
welcome to the club! i agree that this is one slipping in under the radar and that it is a great new frame from dunlop. it won't generate the spin of that wilson but for an 18x20 it is very spin friendly and you get a solid, snappy, frame with a quick stringbed.

i use 17g strings and have had a full bed of kirshbaum proline II which plays great at 52 lbs. the F3.0 is very arm friendly so i had no issues here but the racket did feel stiffer and had a noticeable "ping" when the ball was struck.

i now have a full bed of isospeed professional classic at 55 and i like it even better. the "ping" sound is gone and i still get decent spin but not as much as the kb proline II. this is also a 17g string.

the frame plays very solid stock but i have been tinkering with just a little lead at 3:9 and 10:2, then just covering the dunlop lettering. i think that i like the 3rd option best as the racket is pretty head light.

all that said i still go back and forth between my bio 300 tour and the new F3.0 tour

I think your observations are pretty much what I have experienced. I have found like you that full 17 gauge poly around 52 lbs. plays pretty well.

ccmtennis · Dec 31, 2012

tlm said:
I think your observations are pretty much what I have experienced. I have found like you that full 17 gauge poly around 52 lbs. plays pretty well.

I agree with a lot of you here. I still can't believe how much better dunlop made this and is funny to me when everyone else is too obsessed with the new APD etc. I thought Black widow at 52 is pretty awesome here, soft, powerful for a poly and crazy spin

crosscourt · Dec 31, 2012

tom4ny said:
very similar frames but the apd is more powerful, stiffer, and generates better spin.

the F3.0 tour generates decent spin but it more control oriented and feels more solid yet less stiff. it is an arm friendly control oriented apd. power is still there though.

they both have a snappy lively stringbed and this is where they are very similar. i could see apd storm people really liking this dunlop and even some apd gt people. both frames are also very fast through the air but the F3.0 feels even faster because it is more headlight.

You make it sound very interesting. From the TW reviews of both rackets the main negative observation about the Dunlop is that a little more plough through would assist. That comment is not made about the APD. Is this difference something that you have noticed playing both rackets?

tom4ny · Dec 31, 2012

crosscourt said:
You make it sound very interesting. From the TW reviews of both rackets the main negative observation about the Dunlop is that a little more plough through would assist. That comment is not made about the APD. Is this difference something that you have noticed playing both rackets?

the apd does have more plow then the F3.0 tour. i have been tinkering with lead tape and like using 1/4" lead tape to cover the "dunlop" lettering on the upper hoop. it's like 3 grams i think. i dont think that the F3.0 needs tape for stability except on maybe the hardest of shots but just a little bit of lead tape gives some more oomph and drive to my shots. i also have lead on my bio 300 tours but there it is also needed to strengthen that upper hoop that is dead without it.

Irrelevant · Dec 31, 2012

Anyone players out there wanna give their views on how the F3.0 plays versus the old BLX Blades?

tom4ny · Dec 31, 2012

Irrelevant said:
Anyone players out there wanna give their views on how the F3.0 plays versus the old BLX Blades?

the blx blade feels closer to a traditional frame with more ball dwell time on the string bed. it also has more plow due to its higher swing weight. the F3.0 is a faster frame - the ball leaves the strings faster and you can generate more spin from the increased racket head speed. the F3.0 also has a longer handle if you have a 2hbh. the blx blade has more power but the F3.0 has good power and with a little lead you can get more plow through but still have enough spin to keep the ball in play.

tlm · Dec 31, 2012

crosscourt said:
You make it sound very interesting. From the TW reviews of both rackets the main negative observation about the Dunlop is that a little more plough through would assist. That comment is not made about the APD. Is this difference something that you have noticed playing both rackets?

I have not tried the new APD, but I have used the original model and demoed some of the updated models in the last few years. To me the APD + F 3.0 tour have nothing in common.

The APD is a stiff powerful rocket launcher compared to the dunlop. Were the F 3.0 although crisp has a nice comfy feel to it compared to the arm breaking APD. Plus the dunlop has very good control were the bab is much more powerful and erratic. Plus the F 3.0 swings very fast and easy were the APD feels like a clunker.

I did not think that these rackets were similar in any way, almost complete opposites.

Blitzball · Jan 1, 2013

tlm said:
I have not tried the new APD, but I have used the original model and demoed some of the updated models in the last few years. To me the APD + F 3.0 tour have nothing in common.

The APD is a stiff powerful rocket launcher compared to the dunlop. Were the F 3.0 although crisp has a nice comfy feel to it compared to the arm breaking APD. Plus the dunlop has very good control were the bab is much more powerful and erratic. Plus the F 3.0 swings very fast and easy were the APD feels like a clunker.

I did not think that these rackets were similar in any way, almost complete opposites.

Well, the new F 3.0 Tour is closer to the APD than the previous 300, the Biomimetic, which is very similar to Blade. The F 3.0 is indeed stiffer, snappier, and more maneuverable than its predecessor, so it is verging somewhere between the Blade and APD but on your spectrum maybe closer to the Blade. I'd say it sits right in the middle, which is nice because you get just about the best of both worlds: you get that nice modern feel that still retains good comfort, better spin than previous models yet solid control. The pop is also ample, but the plow through, especially when returning heavier shots, forced me to add a bunch of lead tape to the hoop. Luckily, the F 3.0 Tour is very open to customization.

But I have a question: does anyone know how much more weight the Dunlop leather grip would add if I took out the stock replacement grip for it?

tlm · Jan 1, 2013

Blitzball said:
Well, the new F 3.0 Tour is closer to the APD than the previous 300, the Biomimetic, which is very similar to Blade. The F 3.0 is indeed stiffer, snappier, and more maneuverable than its predecessor, so it is verging somewhere between the Blade and APD but on your spectrum maybe closer to the Blade. I'd say it sits right in the middle, which is nice because you get just about the best of both worlds: you get that nice modern feel that still retains good comfort, better spin than previous models yet solid control. The pop is also ample, but the plow through, especially when returning heavier shots, forced me to add a bunch of lead tape to the hoop. Luckily, the F 3.0 Tour is very open to customization.

But I have a question: does anyone know how much more weight the Dunlop leather grip would add if I took out the stock replacement grip for it?

I would agree with your assessment, pretty accurate.

MrFlynntastic · Jan 1, 2013

probably around 2 to 3 grams?

tom4ny · Jan 3, 2013

JackB1 said:
do you guys think the new Dunlop's gripsize is the same as most others, or larger or smaller?

I just noticed this last night Jack, I think that the grip on the new F3.0 tour is just slightly larger than the biomimetic 300 tour. I just replaced the original grip with a head hydrosorb tour grip that I have on my bio 300 tours and the F3.0 runs just a bit larger. I hadn't noticed with the original grip because it is much thinner then the head grip.

So Dunlop may have increased the grip size slighly on these new models. If that is what you were sensing, I think that you are correct!

tom4ny · Jan 3, 2013

Others may disagree with my assessment that is ok but I still feel that the F3.0 tour is like a babolat apd in that dunlop has created a 'modern" feeling racquet. In that I mean that is is crisp, with a fast and snappy stringbed that allows one to generate some monster shots with impressive spin. The F3.0 tour does not have the plow through of an apd but is is more maneuverable and much more arm friendly. The F3.0 tour is a stiff frame but it is a very comfortable hit. Power level is comparable to an apd but comes from racket head speed as opposed to mass in the head like the apd has. A little lead in the upper hoop of the F3.0 tour gives some more plow through and fire power on serves. imo the F3.0 is very stable and does not need lead for stability like the bio 300 tour did.

I have decided to switch to the F3.0 tour from my bio 300 tour.

Blitzball · Jan 3, 2013

tom4ny said:
Others may disagree with my assessment that is ok but I still feel that the F3.0 tour is like a babolat apd in that dunlop has created a 'modern" feeling racquet. In that I mean that is is crisp, with a fast and snappy stringbed that allows one to generate some monster shots with impressive spin. The F3.0 tour does not have the plow through of an apd but is is more maneuverable and much more arm friendly. The F3.0 tour is a stiff frame but it is a very comfortable hit. Power level is comparable to an apd but comes from racket head speed as opposed to mass in the head like the apd has. A little lead in the upper hoop of the F3.0 tour gives some more plow through and fire power on serves. imo the F3.0 is very stable and does not need lead for stability like the bio 300 tour did.

I have decided to switch to the F3.0 tour from my bio 300 tour.

Very agreeable review. I've switched as well after giving the F3.0 Tour some lead at the 10 and 2 for slightly more head-heaviness to help plow through defensive shots and the serve. I'm honestly liking it more and more than my Bio 300T every time I play with it.

tom4ny · Jan 3, 2013

Blitzball said:
Very agreeable review. I've switched as well after giving the F3.0 Tour some lead at the 10 and 2 for slightly more head-heaviness to help plow through defensive shots and the serve. I'm honestly liking it more and more than my Bio 300T every time I play with it.

Hey BB! I got my F3.0 tour back in October when it first came out and I hit with it for a bit but did not care for the feel so I put it back down. A few weeks later I came back to it and my hitting partner started to say that he thought I played better with the F3.0. I wouldnt accept that and went back to my Bio. Long story short I started playing with the F3.0 a lot this month which set my overall game back slightly (from switching back and forth) but it became clear to me that my shots were better, heavier, spinnier, etc. so now I am a true believer.

I liked the way the F3.0 played with lead at 10:2 also! I then ran the lead all along the upper hoop covering the "dunlop" lettering which is similar to my Bio 300 tour setup. Serving was great with this setup! I started to hit my groundies long by a bit though so I probably would go back to the 10:2 layup that you have but for now I am going stock.

I will be curious what you decide over the coming weeks. Good luck!

Blitzball · Jan 3, 2013

tom4ny said:
Hey BB! I got my F3.0 tour back in October when it first came out and I hit with it for a bit but did not care for the feel so I put it back down. A few weeks later I came back to it and my hitting partner started to say that he thought I played better with the F3.0. I wouldnt accept that and went back to my Bio. Long story short I started playing with the F3.0 a lot this month which set my overall game back slightly (from switching back and forth) but it became clear to me that my shots were better, heavier, spinnier, etc. so now I am a true believer.

I liked the way the F3.0 played with lead at 10:2 also! I then ran the lead all along the upper hoop covering the "dunlop" lettering which is similar to my Bio 300 tour setup. Serving was great with this setup! I started to hit my groundies long by a bit though so I probably would go back to the 10:2 layup that you have but for now I am going stock.

I will be curious what you decide over the coming weeks. Good luck!

Hey tom! Yeah it seems like my experience with the racquet is verging on your story with it! I hit with it again today and I'm really dialing in on my groundies, volleys, and serve. That lead tape really made a difference. I'm glad you already tried leading the upper hoop-- I was planning on doing that too but I'll probably just stick with the 10 & 2o'clock setup. It's really a sweet hitting stick like this. I still miss the solidity of the backhand when using the Bio 300 Tour, but the remarkable feel of the F3.0 Tour is slowly converting me. I guess we'll see how far this racquet takes us. From the look of it, it's gonna take us far!

tlm · Jan 4, 2013

tom4ny said:
Others may disagree with my assessment that is ok but I still feel that the F3.0 tour is like a babolat apd in that dunlop has created a 'modern" feeling racquet. In that I mean that is is crisp, with a fast and snappy stringbed that allows one to generate some monster shots with impressive spin. The F3.0 tour does not have the plow through of an apd but is is more maneuverable and much more arm friendly. The F3.0 tour is a stiff frame but it is a very comfortable hit. Power level is comparable to an apd but comes from racket head speed as opposed to mass in the head like the apd has. A little lead in the upper hoop of the F3.0 tour gives some more plow through and fire power on serves. imo the F3.0 is very stable and does not need lead for stability like the bio 300 tour did.

I have decided to switch to the F3.0 tour from my bio 300 tour.

I agree with most of what you are saying, it is definitely crisp with a fast snappy string bed. Also I agree this is the only dunlop that I have used that has a modern feel to it.

Is it really that stiff? Or is it just because of the crisp feel? I thought it has a 64 stiffness rating. I have been demoing a lot of rackets lately and this is the best one so far by a lot, getting ready to purchase a couple of them.

ccmtennis · Jan 4, 2013

I think you guys are spot on with your reviews here. I was not even a dunlop fan before switching to this so I think this is one of the best sticks around that is still flying nder the radar. I am not fan of the beam width and paint job but that's just personal. The stiffness rating does feel higher than listed but it is very comfortable. As a former donnay P1 user I thought it felt quite the same with their foam filled frames

tlm · Jan 4, 2013

ccmtennis said:
I think you guys are spot on with your reviews here. I was not even a dunlop fan before switching to this so I think this is one of the best sticks around that is still flying nder the radar. I am not fan of the beam width and paint job but that's just personal. The stiffness rating does feel higher than listed but it is very comfortable. As a former donnay P1 user I thought it felt quite the same with their foam filled frames

How does the power level of the P1 compare to the dunlop.

ccmtennis · Jan 5, 2013

tlm said:
How does the power level of the P1 compare to the dunlop.

Much higher and closer to the APD. It does however serve a lot better and more comfortable but at the expense of being much less maneurable which is why I gave it up. I never liked an 18x 20 pattern due to the lack of spin but the f tour is great and slices are phenomenal

tlm · Jan 5, 2013

ccmtennis said:
Much higher and closer to the APD. It does however serve a lot better and more comfortable but at the expense of being much less maneurable which is why I gave it up. I never liked an 18x 20 pattern due to the lack of spin but the f tour is great and slices are phenomenal

I agree good spin and great for slicing.

Blitzball · Jan 6, 2013

tlm said:
I agree good spin and great for slicing.

Yeah it's probably the most spin potential you'll find in a stick with 18x20 string pattern. Even the TW reviewers gave it something like 84 which is above average/good. Plus the maneuverability/whippiness of the racquet allows for some more access to wicked topspin. My kick serve has really been improving and causing trouble for my opponents. But I've been using 16g strings this whole time-- I'll probably go with 17g to see if that can take me even further in terms of spin and plow through because I still feel like I'm getting pushed around sometimes.

ccmtennis · Jan 7, 2013

Blitzball said:
Yeah it's probably the most spin potential you'll find in a stick with 18x20 string pattern. Even the TW reviewers gave it something like 84 which is above average/good. Plus the maneuverability/whippiness of the racquet allows for some more access to wicked topspin. My kick serve has really been improving and causing trouble for my opponents. But I've been using 16g strings this whole time-- I'll probably go with 17g to see if that can take me even further in terms of spin and plow through because I still feel like I'm getting pushed around sometimes.

Has anyone tried replacing the grip with leather? I am thinking bout trying this.

MrFlynntastic · Jan 7, 2013

Yes, I put a dunlop leather grip on mine. You have to stretch it out a bit further b/c the length of the handle is longer. I did this upon purchase and have no idea what it plays like in comparison to stock form. I put a thin over grip on it. The ridges from the leather are nice. Would recommend it.

Pneumated1 · Jan 8, 2013

MrFlynntastic said:
Yes, I put a dunlop leather grip on mine. You have to stretch it out a bit further b/c the length of the handle is longer. I did this upon purchase and have no idea what it plays like in comparison to stock form. I put a thin over grip on it. The ridges from the leather are nice. Would recommend it.

I just noticed the AG 300 in your signature. How/where do you customize that frame? I hit a customized 300G forever and almost upgraded to the AG 300 several times before going to Volkl/BB sticks. I busted the strings in both of my Londons last year in a league match and had to use a teammates AG 300, and it felt like I had played it forever. Although it was too light stock and a grip size too small, I sensed that it would be a great stick customized.

And not to totally hijack this thread, has anyone tried hitting this F 3.0 Tour with very low string tensions? The silk in my demo felt way too tight to do the racquet justice, imo.

tom4ny · Jan 8, 2013

I've had my F3.0 tour strung with a full bed of poly (KB proline2) at 52 and 50 and liked it. Currently I am at 55 with Isospeed Professional Classic.

For me this frame plays better at lower tensions. I did not like it at higher tensions. When I initially received my first F3.0 from TW it was strung above my requested tension and was around 60 lbs. I would not go higher than 57/56 but I prefer even a little lower. Under 50 lbs and it probably will be too powerful for my liking especially with lead added at 10:2

tom4ny · Jan 9, 2013

I have now tried the same string set up at various tensions (60, 57, 55, 52, 50) and can say that at 55 lbs and lower you get some ball pocketing though not the dwell time that i feel the biomimetic 300 tour has. Power and spin are ample as long as swing speed is fast otherwise balls will sail on me. At 50 lbs the strings are moving a bit on me. At 57 the string bed firms up and I no longer feel the ball pocket but control is very good. I am still settling in at 55 lbs. It just seems to do everything well for me. This is with Isospeed Professional Classic. I really am enjoying this set up.

I have 100% switched to the F3.0 tour and am officially in honeymoon period with everything going well with this frame for me. I am now staying with one setup.

Pneumated1 · Jan 10, 2013

tom4ny said:
I have now tried the same string set up at various tensions (60, 57, 55, 52, 50) and can say that at 55 lbs and lower you get some ball pocketing though not the dwell time that i feel the biomimetic 300 tour has. Power and spin are ample as long as swing speed is fast otherwise balls will sail on me. At 50 lbs the strings are moving a bit on me. At 57 the string bed firms up and I no longer feel the ball pocket but control is very good. I am still settling in at 55 lbs. It just seems to do everything well for me. This is with Isospeed Professional Classic. I really am enjoying this set up.

I have 100% switched to the F3.0 tour and am officially in honeymoon period with everything going well with this frame for me. I am now staying with one setup.

Thanks, Tom. Everything that you state here is confirmed by my brief experience with my demo a while back. I probably had about 6g of added weight in the upper hoop from 3-9. With the tighter tension of the demo, I'd need to strip at least half of that weight. However, at 53-55#, I could likely keep the weight, but the frame is so stable already, the added swing speed would be a great benefit at any weight. I'd likely hit it stock and find the lowest tension that I could accept.

This is one "modern" frame that I'll consider once my Londons wear out.

cold_frame · Jan 10, 2013

Anyone considered what the M3.0 16x19 would play like if was leaded up to match the specs of the F3.0
Just to have some more spin...
Or maybe if a 16x19 is what one needs, there are a lot of other frames to look at?

MrFlynntastic · Jan 10, 2013

Pneumated1 said:
I just noticed the AG 300 in your signature. How/where do you customize that frame? I hit a customized 300G forever and almost upgraded to the AG 300 several times before going to Volkl/BB sticks. I busted the strings in both of my Londons last year in a league match and had to use a teammates AG 300, and it felt like I had played it forever. Although it was too light stock and a grip size too small, I sensed that it would be a great stick customized.

And not to totally hijack this thread, has anyone tried hitting this F 3.0 Tour with very low string tensions? The silk in my demo felt way too tight to do the racquet justice, imo.

Pneumated,

here's my mod'd specs for my AG 300:

- 21g in the handle, 4g at 10 and 2 o'clock and 3g at 12 o'clock -

The AG 300 racquet is fantastic at this spec. It does not get pushed around and I can get much more plow thru on my strokes.

In the 3.0F, I use a poly/nat gut hybrid at 54lb poly main, 52 gut X

TennisCJC · Jan 11, 2013

tom4ny said:
Others may disagree with my assessment that is ok but I still feel that the F3.0 tour is like a babolat apd in that dunlop has created a 'modern" feeling racquet. In that I mean that is is crisp, with a fast and snappy stringbed that allows one to generate some monster shots with impressive spin. The F3.0 tour does not have the plow through of an apd but is is more maneuverable and much more arm friendly. The F3.0 tour is a stiff frame but it is a very comfortable hit. Power level is comparable to an apd but comes from racket head speed as opposed to mass in the head like the apd has. A little lead in the upper hoop of the F3.0 tour gives some more plow through and fire power on serves. imo the F3.0 is very stable and does not need lead for stability like the bio 300 tour did.

I have decided to switch to the F3.0 tour from my bio 300 tour.

I demo-ed the f3.0 and don't think it is like a bab apd. For me, apd is like a club while the f3.0 is softer than the apd but medium flex compared to all rackets. The f3.0 has much better feel than apd to me. APD is a unique racket to me in that it plays stiffer than rating and has very little feel. APD is perfect for mini-Nadal bashers while f3.0 could appeal to all court players.

Dunlop F 3.0 Tour

G.O.A.T.

New User

Hall of Fame

New User

Semi-Pro

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Professional

New User

Professional

New User

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Professional

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

Professional

Professional

Rookie

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Professional

G.O.A.T.

New User

Professional

Professional

Professional

Professional

Professional

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Semi-Pro

G.O.A.T.

Professional

Semi-Pro

New User

Hall of Fame

Professional

Professional

Hall of Fame

New User

New User

Legend

Similar threads