100in frame with the lowest power

AndreiR87

New User
Played with Phantom O3 since it first came out, now switched to the Gravity Pro.
I can confirm that Phantom O3 is very low powered, but very comfortable to hit with.
 

n8dawg6

Legend
Yes, Phantom 100 (one with ports) is indeed the lowest powered currently available in my opinion too. Very plush & soft though. Very good recovery frame.
still remember a particular singles match i played with that thing couple yrs back. every shot i hit was fluffy, but i could not miss. made him furious. never had much luck with it playing doubles, though
 

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
The Phantom 100X 18x20 is lower powered than the Phantom 100X O3. The O3 indeed is more comfortable but I need to string the 18x20 at ridiculous low tensions to get any oomph. But it's also ridiculously well controlled. I can put the ball on a dime with that frame.
 

flex

Rookie
Played with Phantom O3 since it first came out, now switched to the Gravity Pro.
I can confirm that Phantom O3 is very low powered, but very comfortable to hit with.
I used the Phantom Pro 18x20 and it indeed is very low powered. Considering the Gravity Pro. Does the GP have the same flex/comfort as the Phantom? And I'm assuming it have more power?
 

AndreiR87

New User
I used the Phantom Pro 18x20 and it indeed is very low powered. Considering the Gravity Pro. Does the GP have the same flex/comfort as the Phantom? And I'm assuming it have more power?
No, GP is a bit stiffer, thus generating more power. Also you don't get that buttery feel the Phantom has. I was looking for more power on serves and switched. After i got used to GP, also i could hit harder FH. Happy with the switch but loved and still love the Phantoms
 

Chezbeeno

Professional
Regular Clash 100? I mean it isn't as powerful as 2019 APD and it needs a little bit of weight in the hoop, but I wouldn't call it low powered by any means.
Honestly it really depends on the kind of hitting you're doing. I find it has decent power for feeding or low-key hitting with people who don't have much power. If you're up against heavy hitters, though, then I would say it's low-powered.
 

Hotpockets

Rookie
Honestly it really depends on the kind of hitting you're doing. I find it has decent power for feeding or low-key hitting with people who don't have much power. If you're up against heavy hitters, though, then I would say it's low-powered.
Very different experience than you. I'm a USTA 5.0 and play with a lot of college kids now and then who hit a big ball. Never felt that Clash 100 was low powered. I mean usually I'd say that certain racquets demand footwork for proper kinetic chain effect to get the power, and those racquets are indeed low powered, but I wouldn't rate Clash 100 as one of those. One of the big selling points of Clash 100 is that it is soft yet has the modern tweener power. But different strokes for different folk I guess.
 

Dartagnan64

G.O.A.T.
Honestly it really depends on the kind of hitting you're doing. I find it has decent power for feeding or low-key hitting with people who don't have much power. If you're up against heavy hitters, though, then I would say it's low-powered.
Then you are definitely going against Wilson's marketing force as they advertise the Clash as a unique blend of comfort and power.

I doubt you'd see the 8 billion 3.0-4.0 players out there switching from their Babolats to the Clash if they weren't getting some oomph from it. (hyperbole for effect).
 

tennistiger

Semi-Pro
The increased possible swing speed caused by the low SW of the Clash let many Players think that the racket has power. But TWU says with same swing speed it has not compared to other rackets. But that ist the new trend in general. The 280/285g versions of the 300g rackets are more and more popular. Now many of them were sold better than the heavier versions. The lack of power caused by the lower weight is translated into more Power due to Higher Swing speed.
 

Chezbeeno

Professional
Very different experience than you. I'm a USTA 5.0 and play with a lot of college kids now and then who hit a big ball. Never felt that Clash 100 was low powered. I mean usually I'd say that certain racquets demand footwork for proper kinetic chain effect to get the power, and those racquets are indeed low powered, but I wouldn't rate Clash 100 as one of those. One of the big selling points of Clash 100 is that it is soft yet has the modern tweener power. But different strokes for different folk I guess.
I guess maybe "low powered" isn't exactly right, but I find the power level not to quite match up with a proper tweener. I don't generally use tweeners, but I got in on the PD playtest a couple months ago and by comparison it made the Clash feel lower powered. I have no problem with less power, and I much prefer the Clash as a racquet, but I think saying it has "tweener power" isn't quite right.
 

Chezbeeno

Professional
Then you are definitely going against Wilson's marketing force as they advertise the Clash as a unique blend of comfort and power.

I doubt you'd see the 8 billion 3.0-4.0 players out there switching from their Babolats to the Clash if they weren't getting some oomph from it. (hyperbole for effect).
Lol Wilson's own marketing isn't even consistent - the Clash is listed as their "control" racquet on their website.
I'm also guessing 3.0-4.0 players aren't hitting against college level players and high ranked juniors, and that's really the kind of hitting where I'm saying the Clash might be a little lower powered.

Edit: All of this being said, I am, by no means, trying to count the Clash in the company of things like the Gravity Pro or Prince 03 100. Sorry to the OP for sidetracking this thread.
 
Last edited:

Hotpockets

Rookie
I guess maybe "low powered" isn't exactly right, but I find the power level not to quite match up with a proper tweener. I don't generally use tweeners, but I got in on the PD playtest a couple months ago and by comparison it made the Clash feel lower powered. I have no problem with less power, and I much prefer the Clash as a racquet, but I think saying it has "tweener power" isn't quite right.
Yes, agree that if you compare with 2021 Pure Drive which I have played with, it will feel less powered, relatively. That said Babolats (PD and PA) already are high powered in tweener realm. But comparing to other tweeners in the market, I don't think Clash 100 lacks in the power department at all.

Will agree to disagree with you re college and high level play seeing as I have started to see Clash more and more on college campuses now too and I personally have hit with it for some time as well. I don't even use the Clash 100 currently myself, just to clarify. I use the Extreme Tour. But honestly this is the first time I am hearing Clash 100 is low powered for a tweener. On a slight tangent, if that was the case, you wouldn't see club level guys switching out their Babolats for a racquet that doesn't provide somewhat close to similar power levels. Just my 0.02.
 

Faris

Professional
I've hit with @Hotpockets not too long ago (shared entire experience in diary of racquetholic thread) and I can assure you he's a high level player who was a ranked junior.. if he isn't having power issues with Clash there is no reason to think otherwise..

Also...Just leaving it out here for those who think Clash is low powered for high level hitting and play.. the guy actually switched to Clash 100 and will clean anyone's clock I'm sure..

 

es-335

New User
I've not played with them, but I'd guess the ProKennex Black Ace 300 and 315, with RA's of 55 and 56 respectively, and from TW's reviews of them, would be amongst the lowest powered as well.
 

JOSHL

Hall of Fame
I play tested the Gravity Pro and it is not low powered. Unless you can’t swing it, then maybe. Also used the Clash 100 for a few months and I wouldn’t consider it low powered either, hit some of my best serves with that frame....may need to revisit it. Thank you all for your replies!!!
 

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
It’s an older one that probably didn’t sell well called Asics BZ 100. It’s a control oriented tweener that felt stiffer than Pure Drives but comes with super low powered construction.
 

Dragy

Hall of Fame
I suggest looking at some below-300 SW frames seeking for lowest power. It's the most important parameter for inherent power. Yes, you can swing fast with lighter frame, and there may be particular shots were light frame delivers more to the ball, but if we consider full, well-prep shots, you never hit a bigger ball with something like Ultra 100UL.
Stiffness, meanwhile, although brought up so frequently as power-determining, is lesser factor. Volkl C10 Pro won't be low-powered for those who can swing it.
 

Yamin

Rookie
Interesting conversation here.... the Phantom 100 with O Ports was one of the few valid answers I saw. Hilariously low powered on flat first serves. So soft you can barely tell if you framed it when playing with poly. Strung it pretty high the first outing and I was hitting balls with no pace but high spin and amazing control... on the lines every time.

Lots of fun but not a racket that can be used seriously without adding lead at the tip.
 
Top