Balancing 2 Rackets with different SW

[Aretium]

Hi guys, I have 2 6.1 95 16X18 rackets. I have balanced them to be the same weight and balance. However, one is a lot more clubby feeling and the other is much quicker, it has a slightly bigger grip too if that makes any difference. I'm guessing the weight distribution is different in the frame.

Interestingly, I'm not sure which racket I prefer. The "quicker" racket has a little more spin and speed which is great for certain shots like the serve. The other racket has a flatter trajectory which helps for depth and control but is a bit clunky on second serves. Also it seems my serving is affected when i switch frames.

I can only think of options:
1. Take out weight from the handle and change the balance to make it more hh but lighter
2. Add more weight to the handle to make it more HL and whipper.
3. Alter the whippy racket and make it less hl than the other?

 

[Lukhas]

If you don't know the exact specs of your frame, there's little point in blindly altering them.

 

[lidoazndiabloboi]

Hi guys, I have 2 6.1 95 16X18 rackets. I have balanced them to be the same weight and balance. However, one is a lot more clubby feeling and the other is much quicker, it has a slightly bigger grip too if that makes any difference. I'm guessing the weight distribution is different in the frame.

Interestingly, I'm not sure which racket I prefer. The "quicker" racket has a little more spin and speed which is great for certain shots like the serve. The other racket has a flatter trajectory which helps for depth and control but is a bit clunky on second serves. Also it seems my serving is affected when i switch frames.

I can only think of options:
1. Take out weight from the handle and change the balance to make it more hh but lighter
2. Add more weight to the handle to make it more HL and whipper.
3. Alter the whippy racket and make it less hl than the other?

The first thing when it comes to customizing is knowing the result you want. Then you want to match the SW first, then balance it out accordingly. The weight can be a few grams off without you feeling the difference. If the weight is off by a lot, then the base racket is already way off, and it might be better to find rackets that were closer together in spec to customize.

 

[Aretium]

The first thing when it comes to customizing is knowing the result you want. Then you want to match the SW first, then balance it out accordingly. The weight can be a few grams off without you feeling the difference. If the weight is off by a lot, then the base racket is already way off, and it might be better to find rackets that were closer together in spec to customize.

Good point. The clubbier one seems to have better control, probably because it is heavier, OR maybe there is some truth to all the polarized stuff people talk about. So the clubbier one is depolarized. See, I have no idea how to measure SW. I'm guessing you need a special machine. Here is an interesting thing, the first racket I got had foam in it. The second(clubbier) had silicone in the handle.

I like both rackets but they play really differently. Just that the clubbier one is not as good for serves.

Would taking the weight out of the handle of the clubbier one help in any way?

 

[Aretium]

If you don't know the exact specs of your frame, there's little point in blindly altering them.

I know the exact weight and balance. Don't have anyone that can measure the sw near me...

 

[Lukhas]

I know the exact weight and balance. Don't have anyone that can measure the sw near me...

If you have a iDevice, I think the guys behind Racquet Tune have an app for that. Else, try to get an approximate with this.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/howto_swingweight.php

 

[lidoazndiabloboi]

Good point. The clubbier one seems to have better control, probably because it is heavier, OR maybe there is some truth to all the polarized stuff people talk about. So the clubbier one is depolarized. See, I have no idea how to measure SW. I'm guessing you need a special machine. Here is an interesting thing, the first racket I got had foam in it. The second(clubbier) had silicone in the handle.

I like both rackets but they play really differently. Just that the clubbier one is not as good for serves.

Would taking the weight out of the handle of the clubbier one help in any way?

Taking the weight out of the handle would make it more Head Heavy, more clubbier.
Since you can't lower swingweight, and since you dont have a machine, there is an app you can download that can calculate the swingweight using the phones camera. If you don't want to use that, then your next bet is to slowly add lead tape at the 12 position until it feels close enough to each other. Then just add weight in the handle to balance it out.

 

[fuzz nation]

My first thought is to simply add a little weight to the handle of the clubby-feeling racquet. If you do that with maybe some 1/2" lead tape on the handle and it doesn't help (or makes things worse), it's no biggie to remove it.

I have several different rigs in my collection and through my experiments over recent years, I've never been a fan of that clubby feel myself. I effectively chased that issue out of a couple of different racquets by leading their handles. Even though the static weight increased (one pair of mids ended up at 13.4 oz), the extra HL balance brought a welcome improvement in their handling and "swing behavior".

Just my experience. With the different grip sizes, it may be tricky to get the feel of those two racquets exactly matched up. If you get them both feeling rather comfortable though, that might be the best you can do. It might even be nice having the two slightly different personalities in your bag.

 

[Aretium]

Ok. Thanks for the replies.

What seemed to work was taking weight out of the handle of the clubbier racket. strangely seemed to make the racket quicker. I guess the SW must have been quite high and the extra weight in the handle just made it even higher or something. It is still a little slower but barely noticeable.

 

[Irvin]

Ok. Thanks for the replies.

What seemed to work was taking weight out of the handle of the clubbier racket. strangely seemed to make the racket quicker. I guess the SW must have been quite high and the extra weight in the handle just made it even higher or something. It is still a little slower but barely noticeable.

You are going to end up chasing your tail all over the place. Taking mass out of the handle will lower the rackets Inertia but at the same time raise the balance. SW is directly proportional to the Inertia and indirectly proportional to the balance. If the balance is the same removing mass from anywhere lowers the SW, while adding mass raises the SW. If the inertia is the same lowering the balance lowers the SW and raising the balance raises SW, but the only way to do that is to redistribute mass.

You must find a way to measure the specs in your frame whether you use SwingTool, the TWU SW Calculator, or and RDC like device which you say you don't have access to.

EDIT: I also would never add mass to a frame to raise or lower any spec. First you want to do it on paper. Because once you match the SW you're going to change it adding mass somewhere else to change the balance, Inertia, or TW. Match your frames on paper first (or even better and excel worksheet) then apply it to the frame.

 

[Aretium]

Ok. So I had a good hit with different specs this last week. I suspect that one racket is polarized and the other depolarized. The polarized one is quick, great for serves, the depolarized one is more penetrating because it is slightly flatter, it almost feels like a dense pattern.

Now maybe polarized rackets work for more control sticks, but this frame is already so powerful. So I just added a little lead in the throat of the polarized one and it seemed to tame it. They both swing identically now, the weight is 5 grams off but I really feel the characteristics are very similar now. No way of me checking SW but I play a lot and all I can say is that they seem almost identical. I shall see what happens in a month. Wilson quality control is dreadful...

 

[movdqa]

I went through this process with a set of three frames many years ago and it just got me very frustrated. My approach today is to have it professionally done. There are certainly individuals and companies that provide these services and they have the equipment to do a more accurate job.

 

[Irvin]

I went through this process with a set of three frames many years ago and it just got me very frustrated. My approach today is to have it professionally done. There are certainly individuals and companies that provide these services and they have the equipment to do a more accurate job.

I don't think equipment is as important as knowledge. Matching the mass is pretty much simple, in one racket is 6 g lighter add 6 g. Matching the balance is not to hard either if you want to make a more HL add your 6 g below the COM (or the majority of the mass farther below the COM.) If I want to increase the inertia I want to add the 6 g away from the axis, the farther the mass is added from the axis the greater the inertia increase. The knowledge of knowing where to add how much for all rackets to be matched is the most important.

When you're done if the mass is, the balance, and the period of all rackets are all the same there matched perfectly. All you need for equipment is a scale, a dowel, and a stopwatch.

 

[movdqa]

I don't think equipment is as important as knowledge. Matching the mass is pretty much simple, in one racket is 6 g lighter add 6 g. Matching the balance is not to hard either if you want to make a more HL add your 6 g below the COM (or the majority of the mass farther below the COM.) If I want to increase the inertia I want to add the 6 g away from the axis, the farther the mass is added from the axis the greater the inertia increase. The knowledge of knowing where to add how much for all rackets to be matched is the most important.

When you're done if the mass is, the balance, and the period of all rackets are all the same there matched perfectly. All you need for equipment is a scale, a dowel, and a stopwatch.

Yeah, spent a couple of months trying to do that with various tools. It was a lot easier just to buy a set of customized and matched racquets.

One fewer thing to think about. If I need a racquet, I just grab one out of my bag and don't have to worry that it's the one that I don't like.

 

[Irvin]

@movdqa I could not agree more. All one has to do is research a little and they will know how to adjust SW, TW, balance, etc... Doing it to multiple rackets is a completely new ball game. Most people start by adding mass to some point on a frame not considering how that is going to change all your other parameters. I have been thinking of matching 2 Tecnifibre 320s, 2 Tecnifibre 315 Ltds, 1 Tecnifibre 315 Dynacore, and 1 Tecnuifibre 315 DC. I just can't build up the courage to start. LOL I think it would be a great learning experience.

 

[Aretium]

Read the original post. They were both the exact same weight and balance. I used a diy balance board and scales to check that.

 

[Irvin]

Read the original post. They were both the exact same weight and balance. I used a diy balance board and scales to check that.

Not sure what you're referring to by your comment. Assuming the weight and balance is the same either your TW, SW, or both is different. Assuming you can tell the difference I would think there is a fairly large difference. That would be easy to check. The period of a physical pendulum is determined by the distance from the axis to the center of mass and the inertia around the axis of each racket. You could swing each racket from the top cross and measure the time for 10 swings. Dollars to doughnuts the time it takes for 10 swings on the clubby racket is longer than the faster racket.

EDIT: It feels clubby because it is harder to swing. Harder to swing means it will not swing as fast under a constant force like gravity. That us something the can be measured. Make sure when you allow the racket to swing that the string bed is perpendicular to the direction it the swing and not parallel.

EDIT: If you plug your findings into TWU's SW calculator you will see what the difference is between the two SWs of the two rackets. http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/swingweight_calc.php

 

[Irvin]

@Aretium it may sound hard to believe but every gram, or mm you're off in any measurement can make a 1 or 2 point difference in SW. When it comes to timing every 1/100 second you're off could make a 1 point difference in SW. So the more accurate your timeline and the fewer measurements you use the more accurate your final result will be. Get the total mass as close as you can and be very careful to with your balance and hang point measurements. Then I'd suggest you use SwingTool to measure the periods as it can be very accurate. If you can match the timing the same (along with mass and balance) you won't feel the difference.

 

[Irvin]

I've been rethinking the placement of mass at 7" or the butt of the racket this morning and I think they are about the same. 7" is 17.78 cm from the butt of the racket. So let assume you're tuning your MgR/I value adding mass at the top of the grip or about 7" from the butt of the racket. You add just the right amount of mass so that you think your MgR/I is perfect and then your assume there is sound reasoning behind the MgR/I concept. But are you tuning something else at the same time?

When you grip your racket you index finger knuckle is on the grip at about the 10 cm point (reason that ~10 cm is the industry standard for SW.) and you're tuning your MgR/I by increasing you inertia around the 10 cm axis. Adding mass at 0 cm will have almost the same change in Inertia around the 10 cm axis because both point are about the same distance away from the axis. But at the same time your adjusting the Center Of Percussion on the racket. COP = I/md and when you start adding weight on the racket your increasing the Inertia (if it is not added on the axis,) mass, and d (distance from axis to COM. If the mass is not added at the COM.)

Which bring me back to the timing for the racket's period. For any given mass, balance, and period; the COP, SW, MgR/I, and inertia will all be the same.

Timing for a period formula is T = 2pi * sqrt(I / mgd)

Gravity and pi values are constant so the period of a physical pendulum is directly proportional to I/md. Anytime you add mass you going to increase mass, and/or I and d.