Donnay X-Dual Gold 99 (2016)

C

charlesf

New User
I recently got a chance to demo the X-Dual Gold and the Pro One Pentacore 16x19 from Donnay. Unfortunately it was an apples to oranges comparison as the X-Dual had multifilament strings (or gut?), while the Pro One had poly, I think (I wasn't able to confirm this with Donnay). I really liked the feel of both, but was surprised that the X-Dual was hard to control (the 'trampoline' effect), whereas the Pro One produced very controlled shots. In terms of feel, the Pro One felt much stiffer, but its rating is 59, somewhat lower than the X-Dual (this disparity has been pointed out elsewhere, I'm pretty sure).

I was curious if the X-Dual has that characteristic or if possibly the strings (and tension) were the culprit. It almost has the feel of a wood racquet, which I like, but if the cost is less control...

Has anyone experienced good control with this particular X-Dual, and, if so, with which type of string / tension?

Thanks, in advance.
 
I just bought a quadcore Pro One, with the 25% discount it was less that $100, but I really don't need another racket as I'm committed to my Pure Aeros, I think I just couldn't pass up the price and I really loved my old Pro One (black and silver version Gen 1), geez I need help.
 
I've always found the Gold 99 and Platinum 99,s to be very soft and comfortable in comparison to the Pro One. This is due to its much more thinner beams they have and from memory the Gold has a very open string pattern.
 
Thanks. I like the feel of the Gold a bit more than the Pro One, but the springiness is a concern. I'm wondering if a higher tension would solve that (the SoBad asides notwithstanding). I have remnants of tennis elbow so the softer feel of the Gold seems to be better for me, but in hitting with the Pro One (albeit for an hour or so), I didn't have any aggravation.
 
Yes you are correct: X-Dual Gold is a "springy" racquet. I assume it is Gold 99. The Gold 94 is much less "springy", and much more precise. This is the reason I like it: it provides the extra power that other racquets do not. I can also see that it is not for everyone: hitting with it "flat-on" will not work: the power is too high, and the trajectory is too unpredictable due to the open string pattern. I would say that unless you crank strings all the way to 60 lbs, there is no way to achieve a predictable response with it with flat hitting. But it is an excellent racquet for hitting with spin. It has a very open stringbed, plus it is light and very maneuverable, it is easy to whip it, and the spin is fantastic. I use poly/syngut in mine, at 38 lbs, and I added weight to the handle to make 8 pt HL.

Dual One 16x19, to me, is an odd racquet. Its flat response is about just as unpredictable as X-Gold, but it is also much heavier, and much harder to whip around. So, hitting flat does not work too well, hitting with spin either. Maybe there are people strong enough to whip this thing, but not me...

Dual One 18x20 is another matter. Its response is very predictable and straight. Its an excellent racquet for pushing the ball flat. It has weight behind its head, and it has excellent feel. Spin can only occasionally be produced -- in those rare circumstances when you have the time to prepare a full backswing.

The way it stands for me, X-Dual Gold works excellently for doubles, or on very hot summer days, when my arm is just limp... Dual One 18x20 works excellently for flat-on baseline rallies, especially against the heavy hitters, as the extra weight and the softness absorb the energy of the incoming ball very well. I use full poly at 48 lbs here, and the response is very predictable.
 
My knowledge of the Donnay lines is out of date; I hit with them all in 2011-2012 and played with a variation of the Platinum 99 (more flexible than the version that eventually made it to production). At that time the Donnay stiffness ratings were notoriously weird, differing noticeably from TW's measured stiffness ratings. (After TW started carrying the original X-Series, Donnay even changed some of the stiffness ratings on its web site to more closely match TW's!) I don't know if they were adjusting stiffness listing for marketing purposes, or if Donnay's RDC machine was possessed by demons, or what, but I would look for playtest confirmation of how stiff/flexible they are.

First-gen Gold 99 and Silver 99 were stiffer than the Blue 99, but still not especially stiff. (Off-topic, the Blue and the Black were among the prettiest rackets I've seen in the past decade. Also off-topic, I wish they hadn't abandoned the X-Series so quickly.)

OP, the results you describe are exactly what you should expect from multi vs poly. As you note, it is apples vs oranges, and even if the Gold frame really is springier than the P1 (I did not find that to be the case with the first-gen versions), you won't know how much springier without similar strings.
 
X-Blue 99 feels (1) too soft and (2) too heavy in the head. I find it easy to play with X-Gold ( just enough weight for me, and just enough flex ).
I find it much harder to play with X-Blue 99: harder to swing, harder to control ( because of the flex ). I does provide a much softer feel on impact and is much better looking.
If you have the muscles to play with X-Blue 99, go for it.
 
Tennisist said:
X-Blue 99 feels (1) too soft and (2) too heavy in the head. I find it easy to play with X-Gold ( just enough weight for me, and just enough flex ).
I find it much harder to play with X-Blue 99: harder to swing, harder to control ( because of the flex ). I does provide a much softer feel on impact and is much better looking.
If you have the muscles to play with X-Blue 99, go for it.
Click to expand...
Which one has larger and higher sweet spot? Thinking of giving the gold/silver a try.
Thank you.
 
I have no means of measuring sweet spots. Besides, even on the same racquet the sweetspot will vary tremendously with different strings and tensions.
 
Thanks for resurrecting this thread. I appreciate the confirmation that the Gold is springy (at least the more recent versions). I tested the X-Dual Silver a little while after the Gold, but this time the strings appeared to be poly. A little less springy than the Gold with multifilament, but still springy. I have no idea what the tensions were.

I've tried many of the racquet brands out there over the past three years or so (a few models from each), save Technifibre and a couple of the smaller manufacturers. Would like to demo an Angell (but probably not possible). And now I have to research this Dunlop/Srixon collaboration...

I still very much like the feel of the Pro Staff 85 (TW's version...don't know what the 'Roger' one is like -- too $$$), as well as the K-88. It's hard giving that up for a more up-to-date, larger racquet.
 
charlesf said:
Thanks for resurrecting this thread. I appreciate the confirmation that the Gold is springy (at least the more recent versions). I tested the X-Dual Silver a little while after the Gold, but this time the strings appeared to be poly. A little less springy than the Gold with multifilament, but still springy. I have no idea what the tensions were.

I've tried many of the racquet brands out there over the past three years or so (a few models from each), save Technifibre and a couple of the smaller manufacturers. Would like to demo an Angell (but probably not possible). And now I have to research this Dunlop/Srixon collaboration...

I still very much like the feel of the Pro Staff 85 (TW's version...don't know what the 'Roger' one is like -- too $$$), as well as the K-88. It's hard giving that up for a more up-to-date, larger racquet.
Click to expand...
That's funny. Before KPS88, Blue 99 was my main stick. I've played with TC95 and TC100 70RA, My KPS88 feels like it has a larger spot than TC95. TC100 is just very forgiving, more forgiving than Donnay 99s since the head is wider. I am planning to try tc100 63RA next.
 
@Unchi Of the Angells I was thinking of the TC95, but that's interesting that the KPS88 seems to have a larger sweet spot. The only drawback of the 88 is its weight, but when I was testing out the Donnays, i preferred the KPS88 to them. Do the Angells have the same kind of solid feel as the WIlsons? (PS 85, KPS 88?)
 
Keep in mind the TC95 70RA I tried had an unusually low swing weight and isn't string with gut/poly at low tension like my KPS88 and I suspect I'll probably like the 63RA version more. Lots of people say they're similar but personally I don't think they're close at all. I mean, the flex of 70RA is probably close to the flex of ps85, but other than that I fail to see the resemblance. The balance and feel are way different, I'd look for ps95 2014 instead if I were you. Besides, I honestly prefer the feel of Donnay over Angell, it's just the TC100 is so easy to play with.
 
Thanks. The Donnay experiment was muddied by the different strings (and tensions?) the company has in their demo rackets, so kind of frustrating (but at least they offer demos). The Gold and Silver X-Duals are very maneuverable for their size, so probably good for net play. The TC95 at 63RA seemed to be the one people have been raving about. I have tennis elbow (in remission), but the PS85 and KPS88 seem to be ok for me (strung with gut).
 
@charlesf Angell makes high quality products but I don't find TC95/100 70RA strung with poly mid tension comfortable, may have to lower it or try softer ones. Just curious, what's your setup before TE?
Maybe it's just me but as long as the racket has sufficient weight strings play a bigger role when it comes to comfort.
My X-Blue plays well with gut/poly but too springy with full gut, and for Angell frames, I think they play best with poly at a lower tension. I might try the gold/silver if I can get them around $100 new or maybe TC100 63RA but for now I think I'll stick with my k88. I like serving with PS85/88 way more than any other sticks.
 
@Unchi The TE was strange: I can't point to any differences in set up that preceded the problem. The PS85 has been strung in the low 50s for as long as I've been playing with it (since 2013). I occasionally hit with different rackets, even trying (and enjoying) a Wilson Advantage (maybe the last wood frame Wilson made?). The K88, like a lot of other rackets I have, was found in a thrift store. The previous owner had a hybrid setup -- probably gut for the mains and poly for the crosses. I'd like to know what tension the strings are because the control is excellent even though the strings seem to be at a low tension. I think it has better control than the 85 (all gut, about 50 lbs tension), though it is heavy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lgbalfa
just switched to the donnay x-dual gold 94
Replies
2
Views
839
lgbalfa
lgbalfa
T
Donnay grommets for X-Dual Pro
Replies
0
Views
547
tee wrecks
T
E
Dunlop Aerogel 500 and Donnay x-dual gold 99
Replies
8
Views
2K
emmanuel
E
ac3111
Questions on Donnay Frames
Replies
3
Views
806
ac3111
ac3111
lgbalfa
donnay x-dual gold 94
Replies
12
Views
3K
lgbalfa
lgbalfa
Back
Top