Wilson Ultra Tour (Monfils)

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
Final weight of what you described depends on a stock basic grip weight, but it might be around 340 grams.

340 grams sounds perfect for me if I don't have to mess with lead tape. My target weight is 11.9 to 12oz. I'll probably string it up with Babolat Xcel 17 and if that's underpowered, then I'd use X-One Biphase 17 instead. String dampener wise, I use whatever the racket comes with and in this case it would be the little W dampener.

I'm flexible with the leather grip type. I'm avoiding thicker leather as that rounds off the bevels too much, so thin seems to be the choice. Of all the thin leather grips, which one is the heaviest? Then I'd wrap the leather with Wilson's white overgrip because it's reasonably tacky and not too thin. I like some cushioning over the leather.
 
Last edited:

Crie

Rookie
Im crossing my fingers that this stick has a low twistweight - otherwise - i just wasted alot of time. I didn't want to ask one to do it, but if u have an early version of the racquet - could you please measure the twistweight?
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
Im crossing my fingers that this stick has a low twistweight - otherwise - i just wasted alot of time. I didn't want to ask one to do it, but if u have an early version of the racquet - could you please measure the twistweight?

Low twist weight. Do you prefer polarized setups?
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
340 grams sounds perfect for me if I don't have to mess with lead tape. My target weight is 11.9 to 12oz. I'll probably string it up with Babolat Xcel 17 and if that's underpowered, then I'd use X-One Biphase 17 instead. String dampener wise, I use whatever the racket comes with and in this case it would be the little W dampener.

I'm flexible with the leather grip type. I'm avoiding thicker leather as that rounds off the bevels too much, so thin seems to be the choice. Of all the thin leather grips, which one is the heaviest? Then I'd wrap the leather with Wilson's white overgrip because it's reasonably tacky and not too thin. I like some cushioning over the leather.

I guess little dampener, just a ribbon tie or no dampener is what this racquet will ever need. But you will see whether you will lack some mass in the head, it's not just the weight, it's the distribution/balance too.
What racquet do you use otherwise and what are the specs?

I usually use the lightest basic grip around, then play with distributing the mass (lead tape, putty) at two spots, at the top of the handle and at the butt. It can get the same job done with least mass added. With heavy grip you sometimes get to situation when the effect is not desireable while with the light grip you can play with quantities and get what you want. Already present mass distribution dictates what you can do. I guess the easiest is to do what @vsbabolat does, to reproduce exact specs of your preferrence with which you play well (weight, SW, balance), because they should also define how racquet swings, so getting all three specs to a unit should give you a familiar racquet.
 
Last edited:

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Im crossing my fingers that this stick has a low twistweight - otherwise - i just wasted alot of time. I didn't want to ask one to do it, but if u have an early version of the racquet - could you please measure the twistweight?
Soft frames and low twistweight don't mesh particularly well IME...
 

AMGF

Hall of Fame
63ra? WTF?

SW is highly string sensitive, especially in 18x20. No biggie.

But that RA has to be a typo or a one off fluke or I'll just stick with my Angells.
 

Power Player

Bionic Poster
63 is good man. It feels great with the Angells. I think many of you guys will be happy with this frame. Regardless, a comparison to the Angell TC97 will deserve it's own thread I believe.
 

AMGF

Hall of Fame
63 is good man. It feels great with the Angells. I think many of you guys will be happy with this frame. Regardless, a comparison to the Angell TC97 will deserve it's own thread I believe.
Yes 63 is good. But we were told 58ra. I'm still hoping to see sub 60ra.
 

Jouke

Professional
Since TW takes averages the average Ra will be 63. Sucks. Layup will be different from the pro H19. Would have been very surprised to see this foam filled with a 310'ish strung SW.

Seems like sticking to the TC97 is the best thing to do.
 
S

Sirius Black

Guest
63 is good man. It feels great with the Angells. I think many of you guys will be happy with this frame. Regardless, a comparison to the Angell TC97 will deserve it's own thread I believe.
Isn't that unstrung though (on the Angell)?
 

Fa8io

Rookie
immagi12.jpg
 
S

Sirius Black

Guest
Beam looked very different though. And the string spacing is different too. Would say I'm interested, but I prefer controllable powerhouses now

I was excited about the RA in the 50s, since the six one I use now isn't exactly the most flexible

But with those specs, I'd rather get the green blade because it looks cooler, honestly. Or just another 6.1, because of the price.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
So MG Rad is softer than this?
But ok, if I'm not mistaken @dr325i said in his experience H19 pro stocks were closer to PT57E than to PT57A? Well, this is around PT57E flex, and it's PT57E beam width (21 mm) as well...
 

Simplicius

Semi-Pro
RA number lies anyway...if @vsbabolat said Angell TC97 18x20 feels exactly like the PT630, than this is it, this is a realistic flex, not the static flex.
So Angell has it, not Wilson. And it's custom and it's cheaper, too.

I haven't ever play with PT630, but the Angell TC97 18x20 was too harsh for my arm, similar to IG Prestige MP.
Btw, the comparison of PT630 with frames like Angell TC97 and TFight 315 LTD 18, save my money!
I'm gonna stick with my "honest" 58RA Redondo...

PS: Is there a possibility TW to be far from true RA value. And it wan't be the first time... Let's wait and see..
 
Last edited:
S

Sirius Black

Guest
I haven't ever play with PT630, but the Angell TC97 18x20 was too harsh for my arm, similar to IG Prestige MP.
Btw, the comparison of PT630 with frames like Angell TC97 and TFight 315 LTD 18, save my money!
I'm gonna stick with my "honest" 58RA Redondo...

PS: Is there a possibility TW to be far from true RA value. And it wan't be the first time... Let's wait and see..

TW usually measures it on their own and reports an average, so I don't think they'd be too far off
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
I haven't ever play with PT630, but the Angell TC97 18x20 was too harsh for my arm, similar to IG Prestige MP.
Btw, the comparison of PT630 with frames like Angell TC97 and TFight 315 LTD 18, save my money!
I'm gonna stick with my "honest" 58RA Redondo...

PS: Is there a possibility TW to be far from true RA value. And it wan't be the first time... Let's wait and see..

For Angell possibly your custom specs were messed up, resulting in a laggy racquet. Losing RHS because of this results in harsher sensation. The trouble with custom specs is that one is left on his own in picking them. This might sound harsh, but believe me, I speak from my customizing experience, I've seen how heavenly can it be and how scr*wed up as well with custom setups. I've managed both.
 
Last edited:

dgoran

Hall of Fame
Quick question to Wilson execs who might read this thread, why? Why stopping just short of perfect? You almost did it.

Wilson execs right now:
yo-dawg-they-taught-they-were-getting-an-h19-but-we-made-it-63ra.jpg
Lol that is hilarious meme

On a serious note why not give money to prince and their phantom?

I bought prince for demo should be here just in time to compare the to tc95 and his new wilson frame.
 

PeterFig

Professional
In this thread: a bunch of people who weren't going to buy a racquet anyway now claim they won't buy it because the RA (which isn't a particularly telling value on its own) doesn't match the arbitrary number they had decided would be right.

Soooooo true. RA is not usually listed on specs of racquets exactly because of it's inaccurate nature. The way RA is measured doesn't always reflect how it actually feels when holding and hitting with the racquet. Try the racquet. Actually play with it. No matter if it's the Ultra Tour or any other racquet and don't go by RA numbers.

Just in general the RA is measured by placing pressure at the tip (12 o'clock) position of the hoop. But that's NOT where the ball actually makes impact. So hence it's not accurate to the real feel / stiffness of the racquet.
 
Last edited:

dgoran

Hall of Fame
I haven't ever play with PT630, but the Angell TC97 18x20 was too harsh for my arm, similar to IG Prestige MP.
Btw, the comparison of PT630 with frames like Angell TC97 and TFight 315 LTD 18, save my money!
I'm gonna stick with my "honest" 58RA Redondo...

PS: Is there a possibility TW to be far from true RA value. And it wan't be the first time... Let's wait and see..
By now I know im not the only one that felt tc97 is not all that is cracked up to be but 315ltd is truly a great racquet.

I think the issue is that we all perceive thing slightly different and we are all splitting hairs here on tw as is, so margins are really small between "complete garbage" racquet and "groat" in our minds of course.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
We'll have to see what the reviews here and on TW say when the racquet is officially available... but so far apart from a 20g difference in overall weight, no reason to not just keep using my iPrestige, and the other MIA Head racquets (including the PT630)...
 

AMGF

Hall of Fame
In this thread: a bunch of people who weren't going to buy a racquet anyway now claim they won't buy it because the RA (which isn't a particularly telling value on its own) doesn't match the arbitrary number they had decided would be right.
I disagree, a bunch of people were excited to get a sub 60ra frame and Wilson dropped the ball. Sure 63ra is not "bad", but it just another racquet similar to many others while sub 60 would have been something special in this age of super stiff.

By the way I had reserved 2 frames but if the RA is indeed 63, I'm simply cancelling my order. Not a claim, I'm not buying it at 63ra as it I personnally wanted a softer frame than my Tc97s.

What about you? Are you gonna buy it even if it is now pretty much a Countervailess Blade? I'm still on the fence waiting for more RA readings but feeling this is not what I wanted/expected.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Soooooo true. RA is not usually listed on specs of racquets exactly because of it's inaccurate nature. The way RA is measured doesn't always reflect how it actually feels when holding and hitting with the racquet. Try the racquet. Actually play with it. No matter if it's the Ultra Tour or any other racquet and don't go by RA numbers.

Just in general the RA is measured by placing pressure at the tip (12 o'clock) position of the hoop. But that's NOT where the ball actually makes impact. So hence it's not accurate to the real feel / stiffness of the racquet.

Thanks @PeterFig, a great explanation... try it and see... always the best policy... My issue (if you can even call it that... first world problems... :rolleyes:) is that with quite a few racquets in the collection, unless it's far superior, there is no reason to add another that feels the same. But as you said... try it and decide... :)
 

AMGF

Hall of Fame
Soooooo true. RA is not usually listed on specs of racquets exactly because of it's inaccurate nature. The way RA is measured doesn't always reflect how it actually feels when holding and hitting with the racquet. Try the racquet. Actually play with it. No matter if it's the Ultra Tour or any other racquet and don't go by RA numbers.

Just in general the RA is measured by placing pressure at the tip (12 o'clock) position of the hoop. But that's NOT where the ball actually makes impact. So hence it's not accurate to the real feel / stiffness of the racquet.
I agree that some frames sometimes feel softer than their RA number, but usually it's because of the addition of muting material. I have a 70ra Tc95 that doesn't feel that stiff because of the foam filled frame. I haven't tried the new Countervail yet but read they really mute the feeling.

However, I won't order this one. Too similar to my Angells and nothing special, just another middle of the road frame. But at least with my Angell I know if I order another one it will have the sames exact specs and quality. I thought Wilson was really going for the fence with this one but I feel like they just played it safe. Still tip my hat to a foam filled offering from Wilson.
 
S

Sirius Black

Guest
I agree that some frames sometimes feel softer than their RA number, but usually it's because of the addition of muting material. I have a 70ra Tc95 that doesn't feel that stiff because of the foam filled frame. I haven't tried the new Countervail yet but read they really mute the feeling.

However, I won't order this one. Too similar to my Angells and nothing special, just another middle of the road frame. But at least with my Angell I know if I order another one it will have the sames exact specs and quality. I thought Wilson was really going for the fence with this one but I feel like they just played it safe. Still tip my hat to a foam filled offering from Wilson.

Too expensive, too. 250 dollars is kind of ridiculous
 

vsbabolat

G.O.A.T.
I haven't ever play with PT630, but the Angell TC97 18x20 was too harsh for my arm, similar to IG Prestige MP.
Btw, the comparison of PT630 with frames like Angell TC97 and TFight 315 LTD 18, save my money!
I'm gonna stick with my "honest" 58RA Redondo...

PS: Is there a possibility TW to be far from true RA value. And it wan't be the first time... Let's wait and see..
There's nothing harsh about the Angell TC97 18x20 and much more muted than the HEAD IG Prestige MP
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
If Wilson faked us out with the RA, then the Ultra Tour may not be foam filled either. What made this frame special was supposed to be the flex and now we know that it's nothing special except for the high price tag. I'm no longer interested and will save the $500 I was going to give TW for two frames.
 

dmcb101

Professional
Hello all,

I had a chance to hit this frame this morning. Frame looks and feels great in hand. The demo was strung up with NXT at mid tension. I was teaching a lesson while I demoed the frame, so I of course did not get a great hit in with it. The one thing I will comment on is the control. My shots were easily controlled with both direction and shape of shot. It had decent heft considering all the chat in this forum, but I would add a little weight to give it some heft. I play with a graphite/fiberglass racquet so I know about flex, and this one felt flexier than most sticks these days, but not as flexy as what I am using. I will probably switch to this frame when my wilson contract is updated at the beginning of 2018.

There is a lot of praise and talk about pro stock sticks on here, and after trying this frame, I think a fair amount of that talk is silly. This stick is great because you can customize it while still having a lower flex that most sticks like this do not have. Other than that, it's not like this stick is some magical wand that will help you hit more winners. That being said, give it a whirl as I think it's a great platform racquet!

-DMcB101-

P.S. My rep told me to look out for Grigor's stick in January at the AO: He will be sporting the new service Wilson will offer that customizes a paint job for consumers. He said there will be an upcharge for the service and consumers can expect to pay $300 for a stick and wait around 30 days after the order is placed. The service is similar to what Wilson offers with their baseball bats. He said that Grigor's stick for the AO was super ugly; camo + dual neon colorway. Sounds odd, but hey!

https://www.demarini.com/custom/
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
@rolli013 bought four frames from his Wilson rep a couple of days ago. I even think he had an RDC in his shop, but decided not to measure the RA as the rep told him it was an H19. I guess we all assumed incorrectly.
 

bkfinch

Semi-Pro
What I want to know is how this racket is going to affect the market/demand of PT630/PT57A/PT57E/H19 etc...

The mold and paintjob looks like such a deliberate imitation of the Pro Tour, I feel I want to believe it. Lol.

Thanks for the quick review @dmcb101 do you think you will have a chance to slap some weight on it and go wacking balls with it?
 

dmcb101

Professional
What I want to know is how this racket is going to affect the market/demand of PT630/PT57A/PT57E/H19 etc...

The mold and paintjob looks like such a deliberate imitation of the Pro Tour, I feel I want to believe it. Lol.

Thanks for the quick review @dmcb101 do you think you will have a chance to slap some weight on it and go wacking balls with it?
Your welcome. I had to give the demo back so no :(. I am basically going to modify it so it matches the specs of my current stick. I am not a "specs" kinda guy, I just go by feel.
 
In this thread: a bunch of people who weren't going to buy a racquet anyway now claim they won't buy it because the RA (which isn't a particularly telling value on its own) doesn't match the arbitrary number they had decided would be right.

I have hit with the Ultra Tour (only for a couple hours but...) it was strung with Alu Power at 49lbs and felt very plush. I am not good at guessing a RA but it was soft to me and softer than the Blades that I am playing with now. I even have the Blades strung with a hybrid (Technibre NRG 17 crosses / Revolve mains) and thought the Ultra Tour was softer. Maybe my mind was playing tricks on me for the short two hour honeymoon hit but I thought it was plush.
 

AMGF

Hall of Fame
If its a plush feeling frame, who cares if the RA number isnt under 60
Easy. Because if it's plush at 63, it would be plusherer at 58. And Plusherer is betterer.

Seriously look how many 60 to 66 frames are available on racquet finder then check how many there are under 60. Sub 60ra is really hard to find. Some said this was a retail offering of the H19 from Wilson, the H19 is usually 58. At 62 it is for sure not an H19 but more of a more head light Blade as someone suggested.

Still cool(ish). But not as cool as the rumour had it.
 
Top