Differences among PS 85 versions

[goosala]

I own a 1994 Taiwan version of the Pro Staff 85. I hit with a friend's Chinese made Pro Staffs, one with the white butt cap and the other with the black and red butt cap. My Taiwanese frame feels like lead compared to the Chinese frames. I would say it is close to half an ounce heavier. Between the two Chinese made frames the white butt cap frame felt slightly heavier than the black and red butt cap frame. I noticed this is the same difference between the white butt cap 6.1 Classic 95 and the ones with the black butt cap. I have owned two 6.1 Classics one with the white and the other with the black. How come Wilson started with heavier frames and gradually took the weight out?

 

[Michelangelo]

Not quite sure about the weight difference among all those versions. However, I've hit with all 4 versions (Chicago, St. Vincent, Taiwan and China, and except St. Vincent, I've had all of the rest, but I did play with my friend's St. Vincent). I like Chicago one because, somehow I feel it's closer to St. Vincent yet it's just 1/3 the price (if you try to get one nowadays). Stiffer than others, even though Wilson claimed that Taiwan version should be the one closest to St. Vincent. But Taiwan one gives a bit more crisp and pop feeling upon ball contact. China one... er... nothing quite special to me.

 

[NoBadMojo]

Even St Vincents had big variations in specs over time and therefore playabilty and then there is a function as to how fatigued the particular St Vincents frame is you played <which can significantly affect playabilty>. Over time, the beam width of the St Vincents frame became thicker when the tooling was wearing out. So you've tons of variations here on this one frame..how old the frame is, spec changes within the frame over time, manufacturing locations, and really questionable QC at times. If you hit with one St Vincent it wouldnt be accurate to assume they all play the same.

 

[legolas]

i have only played with the st. vincent 85s

 

[djones]

How would you determine where it's made?
Today I hit for the first time with a Wilson Pro Staff 6.0 Original 85, it had a white butcap with a red W.

 

[Michelangelo]

Even St Vincents had big variations in specs over time and therefore playabilty and then there is a function as to how fatigued the particular St Vincents frame is you played <which can significantly affect playabilty>. Over time, the beam width of the St Vincents frame became thicker when the tooling was wearing out. So you've tons of variations here on this one frame..how old the frame is, spec changes within the frame over time, manufacturing locations, and really questionable QC at times. If you hit with one St Vincent it wouldnt be accurate to assume they all play the same.

I know that. Anyway, I would like to know if there's anyone has St. Vincent that's 18mm beam width instead of 17mm, as the rumor said, the mold wore out and thus the beam width of the racket became 18mm. A pic would be great! Thanks a lot!

 

[Thaychua]

here are some pics i took, i know it's not the best..

This is from an early batch of st. Vincent so it's bumperless

This is from another sv with bumpergaurd..

And this is a taiwan version...

 

[Thaychua]

But when i compared the Bumperless SV with a China, i did see some difference in beam width..

the SV tends to be a little thicker...maybe 18mm like some claimed.

 

[armand]

i have only played with the st. vincent 85s

Great post

Not quite sure about the weight difference among all those versions. However, I've hit with all 4 versions (Chicago, St. Vincent, Taiwan and China, and except St. Vincent, I've had all of the rest, but I did play with my friend's St. Vincent). I like Chicago one because, somehow I feel it's closer to St. Vincent yet it's just 1/3 the price (if you try to get one nowadays). Stiffer than others, even though Wilson claimed that Taiwan version should be the one closest to St. Vincent. But Taiwan one gives a bit more crisp and pop feeling upon ball contact. China one... er... nothing quite special to me.

Really? I've tried both the China White(buttcap) and the Chicago versions. They were both in pristine condition and even though the Chicago had new NXTs and the China White had some really cheap synthetic, I could tell that pretty quickly that the China White version was much better. It was easier to swing, had more spin and much more feel. A guy at my club was giving up on the racquets and said I could keep one and told to me try each and decide. It was no contest.
Moral of the story: Different strokes for different folks.

Oops, it was a Taiwan version, not a Chicago. And look: Someone deleted Legolas' useless post! Bahahaha!

 

[vantagepoint]

I bought a 'Taiwan' PS from an E*ay auction. Had heard that it was 'significantly heavier' than a Chinese PS; and it was, at first - 13 ounces. I took it for restringing and the tennis shop owner pointed out that a sleeve had been added to the handle. Removed the shrinksleeve, re-added a (leather) grip, and the racquet weighed 12.6 ounces, which as far as I can tell is the same as the Chinese-made frames. So there seems to be a lot of myths about simple differences, or consistent differences, between these racquets by source of manufacture.

 

[armand]

I have an older China model(I think it's from about 1994 and it's officially called 6.0 si and weighs 354gr with a synthetic grip) and the other day I tried a little bit newer one from about 2000 that says Pro Staff 6.0 on it(still had a white butt cap though).

My 6.0si seems like it has more evenly distributed weight, is more solid on impact, is better slicing and has a bit sweeter feel. The newer PS 6.0 seems to be more headlight, easier to swing, more flexible and can generate much more topspin. It also has a glossier finish and has a tiny bit thicker beam.

Also, here are some more specs from Greg Ravens site(http://webpages.charter.net/gregraven/grs/pro_racquet_specs.html)

Pete's St. Vincent - Mass:384 Bal cm:32.1 RDC Flex:62 SW:367
ProStaff MS(not StV) - Mass:343 Bal cm:33.2 RDC Flex:66 SW:334
ProStaff 6.0 Midsize 85 - Mass:357 Bal cm:31 RDC Flex:64 SW:314

I also tried another one that was built around 1994 that felt very harsh and didn't have that great feel, had a smaller sweetspot and less usuable stringbed(I'm pretty sure this was the unibody construction they abandoned very quickly that was made in Taiwan for a bit).

After the St. Vincent factory closed, Wilson tried to make the rackets in Taiwan using an all uni-directional layup. However, the racquets didn't have the same feel as braided construction and they are now producing frames with braided product.

I had made another thread because I didn't find this one during my search so I've added here.

 

[tandayu]

If you never play with the Ps 6.0, try the China version first, and most likely you will like it, and on top of it you save money.

Later if you have a chance to try the St Vincent version and like it better, you will have to spend more money.....

I started played with the China version for 3 years was good experience, until I try the St Vincent...and after several St Vincent later.. I m hooked and can't go back to the softer China version.

 

[armand]

If you never play with the Ps 6.0, try the China version first, and most likely you will like it, and on top of it you save money.

Later if you have a chance to try the St Vincent version and like it better, you will have to spend more money.....

I started played with the China version for 3 years was good experience, until I try the St Vincent...and after several St Vincent later.. I m hooked and can't go back to the softer China version.

I have an old China version(1994, white buttcap) and it's much stiffer than the current 6.0's(somewhat heavier too). But the flexibility affords much easier topspin and if I were to use the racquet for singles, I'd rather the more flexible version.

I wonder if this is a conscious effort by Wilson?