Angell TC97 vs TC95

joohan

Hall of Fame
#1
Hello,

I know there are two separate threads regarding these frames but I would like to see a direct comparison between the two, or better, between the three of them: TC95 16x19, TC95 18x20 and TC97

I'm aware that opinions may differ because of personalized specs Mr. Angell kindly offers. I will specify my preferences/choices I'm pondering but feel free to share your experience even if your Angell frame is off spec-wise.

...

My dilemma:

I can't decide between a TC95(18x20 either RA 63) and a TC97. I have a Fischer Vacuum Pro 90 and a Donnay Pro One International Supermidsize(95sq.inch, 16x18 power+spin machine for my liking) and I was considering buying a Dunlop Biomimetic 300 Tour(97sq.inch, 18x20 control freak) that I would lead up.

I'm thinking going for an Angell instead(quality, curiosity, contingency as opposed to the Biomimetic 300 Tour) but I can't decide if I should go for a 63RA control freak TC95 18x20 to oppose my Donnay(18x20 Angell might be a bit redundant next to my Vacuum Pro Mid) or if I should consider the more versatile TC97 (with a potential of becoming my main frame for the foreseeable future). Both Angells would be 330g/305cm unstrung.

Thanks for any input.
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
#2
Exactly what I would like to know as well.

Can anyone tell what grip shape (A,B or C) is the closest to the Wilson grip? I read on the Angell website A = Volkl/Head B = Dunlop, Wilson, Babolat, etc. and C = Prince.
However some people here wrote that the B is more like Head TK82 and the C is a better choice for people who favour a Wilson grip shape. Can anyone confirm this?
 
#3
I had a TC 95 a while back and it had B grip. It was more rectangular than Wilson or Babolat, closer to Head/Volkl shape.
I can't comment on other grips since I have not tried.
 

AMGF

Professional
#4
@joohan I wish I could help better, but I haven't played with the TC95. However, I can tell you why I went with the TC97, hoping it can help with your decision. The main factor for me was the stiffness, I felt the 63 TC95 (about 59 strung) was too low. I played many years with a Radical Microgel MP that is about 59ra and it is very comfortable, but in the end, found it very soft, especially after a few years playing with them. But the TC95 at 70 was too stiff for what I'm looking for. So the TC97 at 66 (about 62 strung) was just perfect for me.

I think you have the precision covered with the Fischer and Donnay, the TC97 would be more powerful, have more spin and still be quite precise and comfortable. But given the current racquets you have, maybe the TC97 would be further away from what you like. It'd be more of a change. Not an easy decision for sure.

I played my usual opponent some time ago using my old Radical Microgel MP (18x20), and it was quite evident that he had less trouble returning my shots. He even mentionned how easy he was able to play me that day. Switched back to my regular polarized, more powerful GPP (didn't have the TC97 then) and that was the end of it.
 

joohan

Hall of Fame
#5
@joohan I wish I could help better, but I haven't played with the TC95. However, I can tell you why I went with the TC97, hoping it can help with your decision. The main factor for me was the stiffness, I felt the 63 TC95 (about 59 strung) was too low. I played many years with a Radical Microgel MP that is about 59ra and it is very comfortable, but in the end, found it very soft, especially after a few years playing with them. But the TC95 at 70 was too stiff for what I'm looking for. So the TC97 at 66 (about 62 strung) was just perfect for me.

I think you have the precision covered with the Fischer and Donnay, the TC97 would be more powerful, have more spin and still be quite precise and comfortable. But given the current racquets you have, maybe the TC97 would be further away from what you like. It'd be more of a change. Not an easy decision for sure.

I played my usual opponent some time ago using my old Radical Microgel MP (18x20), and it was quite evident that he had less trouble returning my shots. He even mentionned how easy he was able to play me that day. Switched back to my regular polarized, more powerful GPP (didn't have the TC97 then) and that was the end of it.
Thank You very much for Your input.

That's exactly what I have in mind. A change, albeit subtle one, but a change. Or better - sustainable change. I pretty much know what I like and I - pretty much - know the direction I'd like to go. I'm aware it does not get much better than Vacuum 90 in terms of feel and precision and it does not get much better (at least for me) in terms of offensive prowess compared to the Donnay Pro One (16x18, cca 360 strung - an all-attacking weapon). An APD has been suggested to me in terms of an all-round, versatile frame but I have an almost mint Fischer M Speed Pro 105 SL (and I can't imagine something plays better in terms of soft feel and modern, spin game).

I still am contemplating buying a Dunlop Biomimetic 300 Tour (my fourth all-time favorite frame) and leading it up to the specs I kicked a@@ with some four-five years ago but since it has been discontinued (and grommets are available only at TW USA...wonder for how long), in terms of continuity, I think an Angell (since I know my exact preferred specs) is in order.

I think a TC95 16x19 would be redundant as I am completely satisfied with my Donnay Pro One (plus it is available for half the price...still) and I think a TC95 18x20 (either RA 63 or 70) would end up in the realm of my all-conquering Vacuum 90 (that I'm planning to hold on to for a very long time). So...a TC97 seems (or I'd like to think so...) only logical as a frame to start my "dance with Angell" with.
 
Last edited:

AMGF

Professional
#6
I think a TC95 16x19 would be redundant as I am completely satisfied with my Donnay Pro One (plus it is available for half the price...still) and I think a TC95 18x20 (either RA 63 or 70) would end up in the realm of my all-conquering Vacuum 90 (that I'm planning to hold on to for a very long time). So...a TC97 seems (or I'd like to think so...) only logical as a frame to start my "dance with Angell" with.
I agree. Unless you really liked your Donnay or Fischer but wanted it lighter or more HH or longer or whatever, then yes a TC95 (or TC90) with the modified spec would make sense. But since you seem pretty happy with what they are at right now, I'd think trying something else that is still a very nice feeling, soft player's frame that could move your game to a new direction would be wise.

Plus, the TC97 is the hot frame from Angell right now and should you not like it for whatever reason, it'd be easy to sell in the classifieds (especially at 330g/305mm).
 

joohan

Hall of Fame
#7
I agree. Unless you really liked your Donnay or Fischer but wanted it lighter or more HH or longer or whatever, then yes a TC95 (or TC90) with the modified spec would make sense. But since you seem pretty happy with what they are at right now, I'd think trying something else that is still a very nice feeling, soft player's frame that could move your game to a new direction would be wise.

Plus, the TC97 is the hot frame from Angell right now and should you not like it for whatever reason, it'd be easy to sell in the classifieds (especially at 330g/305mm).
Yes. Another reason for a TC97. Thanks a lot.
 

Bogdan_TT

Professional
#8
Exactly what I would like to know as well.

Can anyone tell what grip shape (A,B or C) is the closest to the Wilson grip? I read on the Angell website A = Volkl/Head B = Dunlop, Wilson, Babolat, etc. and C = Prince.
However some people here wrote that the B is more like Head TK82 and the C is a better choice for people who favour a Wilson grip shape. Can anyone confirm this?
In my opinion, Wilson changed the shape in the last few years. It's a bit more sqared now, and appears one number larger.

Angell wise:
B is new Wilson, like RF97
C is old Wilson, like PS90 10 years ago

I first got B handles, and now I have only C ones. They're much better.
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
#9
In my opinion, Wilson changed the shape in the last few years. It's a bit more sqared now, and appears one number larger.

Angell wise:
B is new Wilson, like RF97
C is old Wilson, like PS90 10 years ago

I first got B handles, and now I have only C ones. They're much better.
Thanks Bogdan_TT,
Don't mean you more rectangular instead of squared?
 
#10
Thank You very much for Your input.

That's exactly what I have in mind. A change, albeit subtle one, but a change. Or better - sustainable change. I pretty much know what I like and I - pretty much - know the direction I'd like to go. I'm aware it does not get much better than Vacuum 90 in terms of feel and precision and it does not get much better (at least for me) in terms of offensive prowess compared to the Donnay Pro One (16x18, cca 360 strung - an all-attacking weapon). An APD has been suggested to me in terms of an all-round, versatile frame but I have an almost mint Fischer M Speed Pro 105 SL (and I can't imagine something plays better in terms of soft feel and modern, spin game).

I still am contemplating buying a Dunlop Biomimetic 300 Tour (my fourth all-time favorite frame) and leading it up to the specs I kicked a@@ with some four-five years ago but since it has been discontinued (and grommets are available only at TW USA...wonder for how long), in terms of continuity, I think an Angell (since I know my exact preferred specs) is in order.

I think a TC95 16x19 would be redundant as I am completely satisfied with my Donnay Pro One (plus it is available for half the price...still) and I think a TC95 18x20 (either RA 63 or 70) would end up in the realm of my all-conquering Vacuum 90 (that I'm planning to hold on to for a very long time). So...a TC97 seems (or I'd like to think so...) only logical as a frame to start my "dance with Angell" with.
Well to throw you a monkey wrench I think a 70RA TC95 18x20 might make a lot of sense... it wont have the same precision as the Vaccum 90 but will be good but with a lot more forgiveness and power. The argument for the TC97 is good though in that it is a real change. Im going for the TC95 RA63 16x19 because it is softer than my current Pacific X feel 95 and has more power on tap... I dont expect it to have the same absurd precision but it will be in a similar ballpark... basically Im not looking to change too much... you it seems are looking for something more than iterative change (which is what I want).

Another thing is the TC97 is box beam which night be more similar to the feel of the 90... whereas my XFP95 is not a box beam and so the transition to the TC95 might not be as "different". That said its all conjecture, of course... we all project onto our gear before we actually try it in match play. Something tells me you are going with the TC97.
 

joohan

Hall of Fame
#12
Well to throw you a monkey wrench I think a 70RA TC95 18x20 might make a lot of sense... it wont have the same precision as the Vaccum 90 but will be good but with a lot more forgiveness and power. The argument for the TC97 is good though in that it is a real change. Im going for the TC95 RA63 16x19 because it is softer than my current Pacific X feel 95 and has more power on tap... I dont expect it to have the same absurd precision but it will be in a similar ballpark... basically Im not looking to change too much... you it seems are looking for something more than iterative change (which is what I want).

Another thing is the TC97 is box beam which night be more similar to the feel of the 90... whereas my XFP95 is not a box beam and so the transition to the TC95 might not be as "different". That said its all conjecture, of course... we all project onto our gear before we actually try it in match play. Something tells me you are going with the TC97.
We'll see.

As You've correctly "observed out", I'm looking for a change in my racquet portfolio, as it were. I was thinking about an APD/PAT (but no...because of my M Speed Pro 105 and because I don't see myself playing with an APD as my main frame) and then about an Ai98/DR98 (but no...because considering its review/feedback I find it too similar to my M Speed Pros 98/VT98Pros/Pro 1s I still have plenty of). The most serious contender is/was a Biomimetic 300 Tour but, alas, continuity is a big issue here (plus I might be idealizing it quite a bit since it's been a good three years since I've played with it and my game has evolved significantly since then).

Plus this:

Another thing is the TC97 is box beam which night be more similar to the feel of the 90...
We'll see. I'll contact mr. Angell and I'm sure we'll figure something out. I'm not in a hurry so I'll try and enjoy the process...
 
#13
We'll see.

As You've correctly "observed out", I'm looking for a change in my racquet portfolio, as it were. I was thinking about an APD/PAT (but no...because of my M Speed Pro 105 and because I don't see myself playing with an APD as my main frame) and then about an Ai98/DR98 (but no...because considering its review/feedback I find it too similar to my M Speed Pros 98/VT98Pros/Pro 1s I still have plenty of). The most serious contender is/was a Biomimetic 300 Tour but, alas, continuity is a big issue here (plus I might be idealizing it quite a bit since it's been a good three years since I've played with it and my game has evolved significantly since then).

Plus this:



We'll see. I'll contact mr. Angell and I'm sure we'll figure something out. I'm not in a hurry so I'll try and enjoy the process...
I thought the Bio 300 tour was a serving monster with good power and control but also a tad harsh when I demoed one... dunlop has lost more than a bit of its character since Angell left.
 

joohan

Hall of Fame
#14
I thought the Bio 300 tour was a serving monster with good power and control but also a tad harsh when I demoed one... dunlop has lost more than a bit of its character since Angell left.
I leaded it quite a bit - about 365g strung(it's 305g unstrung stock), very polarized and quite comfortable. Serving monster even stock, yes. I liked 4D Aerogel Dunlops very much - 200, 100 but I did not have a chance to hit with the newer ones (after the first Biomimetic line)...and I'm not particularly tempted to be completely honest.
 
#15
Fwiw, I have both the B and C Angell grips. C is even on all sides B, 3 and 9 are longer. For me B feels slightly larger and it's a little easier to feel continental grip. neither feel just like an Apd, Pure Drive or Ps-97/Rf-97. All things considered, is closer to the mentioned racquets. Both are very confortable.
 
#16
Fwiw, I have both the B and C Angell grips. C is even on all sides B, 3 and 9 are longer. For me B feels slightly larger and it's a little easier to feel continental grip. neither feel just like an Apd, Pure Drive or Ps-97/Rf-97. All things considered, is closer to the mentioned racquets. Both are very confortable.
B is closer
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
#17
I really like the B grip being longer on 3 and 9 sides. I don’t favor the more roundish grips. Along with the leather grip, makes the feel easier and more pronounced on where your hand is on the grip.
 
#18
I have the C grip. It's a square, like modern Prince grips. Even with the synthetic grip, the bevels are pronounced. I like it because my serve, forehand, & backhand all have the same comfortable fit in my hand.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
#19
So while I really enjoyed the TC97 especially the comfort, power and feel. I made a decision to sell those frames and stick with my TC95s. The bit of control and precision I get from the TC95 is what I prefer for my game.
 
#20
So while I really enjoyed the TC97 especially the comfort, power and feel. I made a decision to sell those frames and stick with my TC95s. The bit of control and precision I get from the TC95 is what I prefer for my game.
Makes sense... really excited to try the TC95... Ill probably hit outside a bit and try to dial my serve in Friday then play an indoor match on Monday. Should be here tomorrow.
It took me November and December to figure out that the TC97's flex profile might appeal to those who like a part of the frame that distinctly flexes (Like the Pro No 1 or PS95) whereas the TC95 with its "D" beam cross section is more uniform flex than the box beam TC97... really smart of Angell to bring out a different design. It is nice to have options.

nervous that if this stick doesnt work I really have no other options at the moment... Even Volkl has gone stiff.
 
#22
Makes sense... really excited to try the TC95... Ill probably hit outside a bit and try to dial my serve in Friday then play an indoor match on Monday. Should be here tomorrow.
It took me November and December to figure out that the TC97's flex profile might appeal to those who like a part of the frame that distinctly flexes (Like the Pro No 1 or PS95) whereas the TC95 with its "D" beam cross section is more uniform flex than the box beam TC97... really smart of Angell to bring out a different design. It is nice to have options.

nervous that if this stick doesnt work I really have no other options at the moment... Even Volkl has gone stiff.
I wrote a similar thing in another thread earlier today. Everything now is just. So. Stiff. Even new frames that have lowish RA ratings feel stiff and hollow to me. The Textreme 95 and PS97S were better than anything else, but no contest compared to my dying YTPPs. I guess that's due to them using cheaper materials, but I dunno. So I'm kinda in the same boat. The Angell frame is my last ditch effort, too.
 
#23
I wrote a similar thing in another thread earlier today. Everything now is just. So. Stiff. Even new frames that have lowish RA ratings feel stiff and hollow to me. The Textreme 95 and PS97S were better than anything else, but no contest compared to my dying YTPPs. I guess that's due to them using cheaper materials, but I dunno. So I'm kinda in the same boat. The Angell frame is my last ditch effort, too.
yeah I went with the Pacific Xfeel pro 95 3 years ago because I couldnt buy an off the shef RA62 or below Presige MP with a 16x19 drill pattern... I had been using the IGPMP and justwanted a tad more spin but the pro was too stiff. Pacific and Volkl were my last options, now Pacific has some options but not the ones I want (plus otherdistro problems). Now Volkl is too stiff.

Seriously, perhaps TW should have Angell do a run of non custom frames that meet users needs that are 11.5 oz , strung RA of 61 and 6pts headlight 97 inches 16x20 string pattern, boxbeam and cheaper less deluxe paint? basically dont cheapen or compete with custom line but provide an option if the other firms wont?

Perhaps Angell should be considering more than one color finish for their custom line etc. (but it makes sense not to overextend, I do likethe Grey and the new black). Thing is maybe Head, Wilson or (improbably) Dunlop will do this but is unlikely. Just floating this out there and wouldnt be surprised if Angell and TW were already talking.
 
#24
yeah I went with the Pacific Xfeel pro 95 3 years ago because I couldnt buy an off the shef RA62 or below Presige MP with a 16x19 drill pattern... I had been using the IGPMP and justwanted a tad more spin but the pro was too stiff. Pacific and Volkl were my last options, now Pacific has some options but not the ones I want (plus otherdistro problems). Now Volkl is too stiff.

Seriously, perhaps TW should have Angell do a run of non custom frames that meet users needs that are 11.5 oz , strung RA of 61 and 6pts headlight 97 inches 16x20 string pattern, boxbeam and cheaper less deluxe paint? basically dont cheapen or compete with custom line but provide an option if the other firms wont?

Perhaps Angell should be considering more than one color finish for their custom line etc. (but it makes sense not to overextend, I do likethe Grey and the new black). Thing is maybe Head, Wilson or (improbably) Dunlop will do this but is unlikely. Just floating this out there and wouldnt be surprised if Angell and TW were already talking.
The Vantage frames were offered in 3 different colors (White, Red, Black). Perhaps it was too expensive to stock the different colors. Interesting idea for some standard frames at TW. That would also give users the option to demo rackets and be able to experience the "Angell feel".
 
#25
The Vantage frames were offered in 3 different colors (White, Red, Black). Perhaps it was too expensive to stock the different colors. Interesting idea for some standard frames at TW. That would also give users the option to demo rackets and be able to experience the "Angell feel".
I dont think it was too expensive per se but I could see maybe 1 other color... or a special color edition every two years for a limited run... marketing gold... do it around wimbledon time but Angell hasnt even switched to the black frames yet in all models sooo he doesnt really need to do that yet.

The main thing is to not lose sight of the core business yet expand... Paul does have some things afoot but I think it is smart to move cautiously, it is where most small businesses fail. Besides, the TC97 gives a lot of players what they were looking for and it is brand new. The rest of the TC line has been around awhile (longer than the Angell brand) but that's the attraction... ability to get exactly the same frame years apart.

What I see is the TC95 & 100 line were designed as an all round option. TC97 for the box beam crowd and Angell could likely add in a stiffer option and or a different string pattern options 16x20 or 18x19? really it depends a bit on demand. I also wonder if tennis is becoming more popular in England again with Murray's rise and Davis Cup? Angell could find a way to be part of that player development... it doesnt make sense for some big push for already established players.... but if Murray jumps from head and tries out a TC95, then wins another Wimbledon Id be very happy (I dont expect that but FEd, Wawrinka and Djoker have shown that a racquet revamp can be very positive developments... his second serve needs an upgrade if he is going to seriously contend for #1 ever).
 
Last edited:
#27
Quick one on head shapes for Angell fans. Would rather avoid the "main thread" as there is too much activity over there...

I have both TC95 & TC97 in 16x19. Head shape of 97 is slightly more 'elongated' (and less wide) than the 95. This fact combined with the slightly tighter 16x19 pattern of the 97 (95 is super open) explains why TC97 seem to more naturally play flat shots than TC95. Head shape has huge impact on the swing style of a frame, even if only slightly different.
 
Last edited:

joohan

Hall of Fame
#28
Quick one on head shapes for Angell fans. Would rather avoid the "main thread" as there is too much activity over there...

I have both TC95 & TC97 in 16x19. Head shape of 97 is slightly more 'elongated' (and less wide) than the 95. This fact combined with the slightly tighter 16x19 pattern of the 97 (95 is super open) explains why TC97 seem to more naturally play flat shots than TC95. Head shape has huge impact on the swing style of a frame, even if only slightly different.
Rather avoid because of too much activity? That's a first...
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
#29
Gahd, every time I see angell threads now, the urge to get an XL Angell grabs me. A 27.5" TC 97 would be.... Mmmhhhh

I have a problem ._.
 

Imago

Hall of Fame
#34
TC97 flexes too much in the hoop, TC95 is more stable vertically but sometimes twists horizontally and is virtually a Big Bertha. Both feel more flexy than reportedly flexier Wilson Bold. So far in my "comfortably numb & stable" department, the winner is Blade 18x20 CV.
 
Last edited:
#35
I don't have both with same string pattern, but here is my expirience
I have TC 95 16x19 and TC97 18x20, both same spec. I don't play at all with TC97. it isn't bad frame, but I can't let go TC95 16x19. With TC95 I dictate points in game, easy transition from defense to offence. I was struggling at start with flat shots but after few weeks I started to play even them very very good
 

Imago

Hall of Fame
#36
With stringsavers it seems to be not so flat, but still, paradoxically, low trajectories sail into the fence... :)

 
Last edited:
#37
Anyone else who noticed the "B handle shape" is slightly smaller and more rectangular on TC95 than on TC97 ? It's definitely the case for my frames (TC97 like a wilson PS shape and TC95 between PS and Prestige shape). Maybe i got the wrong handle shape order on one of those, who knows.
 
#38
Anyone else who noticed the "B handle shape" is slightly smaller and more rectangular on TC95 than on TC97 ? It's definitely the case for my frames (TC97 like a wilson PS shape and TC95 between PS and Prestige shape). Maybe i got the wrong handle shape order on one of those, who knows.
Shouldn't be any different the pallets are universal to Angell Custom frames.
 
Top