cut a SB from 27.5" - 27". will it play the same as a SB that was 27" to begin with?

[carolyn73]

If I cut a Speedport Black Longbody down from 27.5 inches to 27 inches will it play the same as a Speedport Black that was 27 inches to begin with?

 

[carolyn73]

Okay, didn't mean to press enter.

Im interested in trying the Speedport Black Longbody (can't demo - living outside the States at present) but thought that if I didn't like the extra length I might be able to cut it back and get something similar to the standard Speedport Black. But i wasn't sure if that was merely wishful thinking and reducing the length would ruin the racquet completely. We had a friend who cut the 03 Tour OS back to 27 and he ended up with a racquet that was comfortable but insipid.

Has anyone cut the SB Longbody back in length or have an idea what might happen if I do so?

Thanks.

 

[Kevo]

Well it won't be exactly the same since they are the same weight if I'm not mistaken. That means that cutting the longbody back would probably mean a lower swingweight than the regular length frame has to start with.

I doubt it would turn out "insipid", but it won't be the same.

 

[AndrewD]

Well it won't be exactly the same since they are the same weight if I'm not mistaken. That means that cutting the longbody back would probably mean a lower swingweight than the regular length frame has to start with.

Obviously the swingweight of the Longbody will drop but, because it's 345 to begin with, removing just an extra 0.5 inch won't make it drop below 327 (swingweight of the regular length Speedport Black) ?

I think that the key difference will be in the balance. Cutting it down might drop the balance back to even but you could easily fix that by returning the weight you'd removed and putting it around the handle). I realise that the stiffness is listed as being lower but I think that's got more to do with how they take a reading on an extra length racquet as opposed to a regular length (not sure, just a hunch).

End of the day, I think they'd be quite similar.

(Having hit with an O3 Tour OS I know what the OP means by 'insipid' - it was utter rubbish, but very comfortable).

 

[Kevo]

Obviously the swingweight of the Longbody will drop but, because it's 345 to begin with, removing just an extra 0.5 inch won't make it drop below 327 (swingweight of the regular length Speedport Black) ?

On this particular frame, it's not obvious at all. Looking at the unstrung specs on Prince's site, the longbody is 10 more swingweight units, and balance is the same. Since we don't know how they changed the weight distribution to maintain the balance point we can't say for sure what would happen. I have a guess, but in any case, I think it will take a bit of customization to match a long body to the regular version, and I doubt they would play the same afterwards. Might be pretty close, but not the same.

 

[AndrewD]

On this particular frame, it's not obvious at all. Looking at the unstrung specs on Prince's site, the longbody is 10 more swingweight units, and balance is the same. Since we don't know how they changed the weight distribution to maintain the balance point we can't say for sure what would happen. I have a guess, but in any case, I think it will take a bit of customization to match a long body to the regular version, and I doubt they would play the same afterwards. Might be pretty close, but not the same.

Yes, it is obvious because on any frame when you remove weight you reduce the swingweight. That is even more so when you reduce the length of a racquet. The amount to swing has become less so the weight to swing will become lower. The only question is how much it will change. My mate cut back a TT Warrior OS and the static weight only changed by 5 grams. I would expect this would be similar.

As to the weight distribution, TW has them listed as being the same weight and balance but the USRSA has the Speedport Black (with ports) at 32.8cm (roughly 5pts HL) , 321grams and 328 swingweight while the Longbody (with ports) is 33.5cm (roughly 2pts HL), 317grams and 335 swingweight.

So, if you removed 1/2 an inch from the Longbody you'd drop the swingweight, make it more head light (probably back to 5pts HL) but you'd also have to add weight to bring it back up to the standard length version.

The strange thing is the stiffness. Although the dimensions of the head are exactly the same the Longbody is more flexible. I wonder if that would change when you cut it back (in the same way that a strung racquet can give a different flex reading to an unstrung one).

All up, if weight and swingweight were the only difference (although they would probably be close) but flex remained the same you could just add some lead tape. It should be close enough to not be a major concern.

 

[corners]

Yes, it is obvious because on any frame when you remove weight you reduce the swingweight. That is even more so when you reduce the length of a racquet. The amount to swing has become less so the weight to swing will become lower. The only question is how much it will change. My mate cut back a TT Warrior OS and the static weight only changed by 5 grams. I would expect this would be similar.

As to the weight distribution, TW has them listed as being the same weight and balance but the USRSA has the Speedport Black (with ports) at 32.8cm (roughly 5pts HL) , 321grams and 328 swingweight while the Longbody (with ports) is 33.5cm (roughly 2pts HL), 317grams and 335 swingweight.

So, if you removed 1/2 an inch from the Longbody you'd drop the swingweight, make it more head light (probably back to 5pts HL) but you'd also have to add weight to bring it back up to the standard length version.

The strange thing is the stiffness. Although the dimensions of the head are exactly the same the Longbody is more flexible. I wonder if that would change when you cut it back (in the same way that a strung racquet can give a different flex reading to an unstrung one).

All up, if weight and swingweight were the only difference (although they would probably be close) but flex remained the same you could just add some lead tape. It should be close enough to not be a major concern.

Like you said, it's hard to predict, but I would guess removing 1/2" from the SB Long will knock ~20 swingweight units off of it. So if it started at ~335, you'd end up with ~315. If that's too insipid, simply add lead at twelve to bump up the swingweight. ~2.5 grams at 12 would bring it to 325.

Shortening a racquet will usually shorten the balance, even though the weight removed is from the butt end. But you might have to add a little weight to the butt to get it right where you want it.

I think the flex in this case is purely a function of length - a longer bar of the same inherent stiffness will bend more easily than a shorter one. So I would bet the stiffness of the cut version would be pretty close to the standard version.

If you compare extended and regular versions of frames, the extended version almost always is listed as having flex 1-3 RDC units less.

 

[counterpuncher]

I believe they will be fairly close judging from the specs of the Std vs the LB. I would hesitate to guess that they'll be as close two different standard versions, given the poor qc of some the racquet companies.

I'd try it first as a LB, if you don't like it, choke up on the handle to gain a feel of what it might be like as a standard length. If that feels good, first cut a 1/4 inch and if that feels like you're heading in the right direction, cut off another 1/4 inch. I have done this with a Prince Michael Chang LB, Tour 8 V-engine, RDX300, V-Con 17, PST + and a N6.1x, all with no problems.

 

[AndrewD]

Like you said, it's hard to predict, but I would guess removing 1/2" from the SB Long will knock ~20 swingweight units off of it. So if it started at ~335, you'd end up with ~315. If that's too insipid, simply add lead at twelve to bump up the swingweight. ~2.5 grams at 12 would bring it to 325.

I think the flex in this case is purely a function of length - a longer bar of the same inherent stiffness will bend more easily than a shorter one. So I would bet the stiffness of the cut version would be pretty close to the standard version.

That's what I was thinking, although wasn't able to articulate it quite that well. It's also making me think that I might be interested in giving the SB Longbody a test run myself.

I think what the OP meant by 'insipid' is that without the extra length the 03 Tour OS had no grunt (I know a few pros who found it to be a comfortable but 'nothing' kind of frame).

 

[carolyn73]

I believe they will be fairly close judging from the specs of the Std vs the LB. I would hesitate to guess that they'll be as close two different standard versions, given the poor qc of some the racquet companies.

I'd try it first as a LB, if you don't like it, choke up on the handle to gain a feel of what it might be like as a standard length. If that feels good, first cut a 1/4 inch and if that feels like you're heading in the right direction, cut off another 1/4 inch. I have done this with a Prince Michael Chang LB, Tour 8 V-engine, RDX300, V-Con 17, PST + and a N6.1x, all with no problems.

Thanks for all the replies.

I am going to try it as a longbody but I just wanted to get some idea what might happen if I would prefer to go back to standard length. Like I mentioned, the 03 Tour OS just didn't work when it was cut back. But, I do know a couple of folk who've cut back the Pure Drive + and found that, once they reweighted it, it played not too differently to the Pure Drive Standard. I think it's because the 03 Tour OS was from a unique mold whereas the Speedport Black Longbody probably comes from the same one as the Speedport Black regular.

 

[Kevo]

Yes, it is obvious because on any frame when you remove weight you reduce the swingweight. That is even more so when you reduce the length of a racquet. The amount to swing has become less so the weight to swing will become lower.

It's odd this thread. I think I confused you enough that you ended up agreeing with me. LOL

Anyway, my vote is to try go ahead and try it. I've hit with the regular length version, a couple of my friends both really like that frame. It's one of the better Prince "port" frames IMO.

As long as you are OK with doing a bit of fiddling with lead tape and such you'll probably be fine. One thing to remember though is the ports do make it a little less simple to just slap a strip of lead on the frame. Nothing that can't be overcome, but I don't find them to be the most lead tape friendly frames.