DJ-
Hall of Fame
I have tinkered with weights on the euro and i have a little at 3/9 and also 12oclock. Easy to work with when specs are bang on. Great QC
Dunlop 300 Lineage?
- Thread starter TripleB
- Start date
I have tinkered with weights on the euro and i have a little at 3/9 and also 12oclock. Easy to work with when specs are bang on. Great QC
SteveI
Legend
They are hard to come by these days. It was hailed as a very good frame when it was released. I found it under-powered, stiff and with a small sweet spot. I am guessing like all the 300 series frames.... it was a great frame for customization.
The one that I like the best was the AG 300 4D for feel and flex... the M3.0 was the best out of the box for me. It has a modern feel and decent power.
Tennisist
Professional
Both Dunlop 300 molds (16x19 and 18x20) continue to live on full and elitist lives as pro stock incarnations, under the Dunlop or other names. Of course, these incarnations are orders of magnitude better than the retail Dunlop's of yesteryear. So, there is nothing magic about the mold, it is how you use it. You can scan and 3D-print a Stradivarius, but it will not sound the same. It is only the people behind the mold that matter.
Last edited:
Tennisist
Professional
Out of this lineage, my favorite frame, by far, is Dunlop 4D 300 Lite. It responded wonderfully to customization. With silicone, lead and polarization, it's performance is far better than what I could obtain from the retail heavy versions. Not yet the same as Spanish pro-stocks, but approaching...
Surecatch
Semi-Pro
Agree. I had my two stolen, went and bought a new Dunlop Precision 100 and didn't like it. So I went to the second hand store that the dirt bag thief sold my HM's to and bought one of them back (as detailed in a previous thread).
The newer Precision 100, I just didn't like it....it felt "not solid," sort of like a racquet you'd buy for a pre-teen at Dick's Sporting Goods. Now that I'm back with my HM 300g, I want to get a couple more pre-Srixon Dunlops but find they are hard to come by. I'm open to the Aerogel 4D 300, M-Fil 300, Biomimetic 300 and of course the HM 300G.
Crocodile
G.O.A.T.
This is a good one though, very easy to customise.Maybe not the real Dunlop anymore, still one of the better looking sticks.
Songs For A Dead Pilot
Semi-Pro
Bio 300 Tour and the rest during some testing this summer. Some people stated that F300 Tour Classic is simply the same frame – but still haven't had enough time to test them side by side. However this is still great racket – easy to manoeuvre, precise and surprisingly stable at that low static weight. It could be a bit more flexible still.
I missed all of 300's due to my unconditional love to HEAD Prestige/Radical rackets when they were released, but I found M-Fil 300 as one of the best lightweight frames ever available.
Songs For A Dead Pilot
Semi-Pro
Do you add extra silicon? And extra lead? If so – how much and where?Welcome 2020!!! But I stayed on 2002..
Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
Leather grips and lead tape 3&9 to reach this weight strung, around 335gr with dampener...racquet weights 290gr unstrung...I've got 4 +- same weight but not pro job...around 5gr up or down and depending strings too
Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
Why though from a business or any reason did Dunlop stop producing the classic low weight, thin beam that have a loyal following? And instead invest in new research/ mold to make the 3.0 line?
Surely they must have had some reason? Compete with Babolat maybe?
SteveI
Legend
I am guessing you are correct about Babolat completion.. The Aerogel 4d 300 98...was one of the best frames Dunlop produced in the last 20 years. The one just before it was also nice but had more of a raw feeling which players also really enjoyed. They are both great platform frames and could be modified for really high end players..while a good but not physically strong junior or an aging skilled player could use it stock and play really well with it. Great feel..comfort and control and in the hands of the right player...power.
The Dunlop Bio M3.0 is also a nice frame...for a more modern player. Not the same feel..less feel but crisp and more power on demand.
Dunlop was bought by Srixon....the old designer Paul Angell made his own company...new models are not the same molds I think....I don't know if Kevin Anderson is playing with a Srixon Revo Cx 200 Tour customized or uses a Dunlop 200 Muscle Weave under the paint...but in specs seems similar....Old Dunlops until first Biomimetic line were decent frames...I didnt play with no Dunlop ahead that line
Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
SteveI
Legend
The early Dunlop / Srixon frames look very much like the AG 4D line.. I am sure there is a good chance Kevin Anderson is playing a PJ frame,,,
Songs For A Dead Pilot
Semi-Pro
Many people suggest that Aerogel line had more feedback than Aerogel 4D. I must admit I have MW, Hotmelt, M-Fil, Aerogel4D, Biomimetic and Classic line, but I missed Aerogel.
However I tested F2.0 Tour (which is quite a departure from 200 line – more like Wilson 6.1), M2.0, F3.0 and some other. I really liked F100, F300 and M200 classic line. Both Biomimetic, the next two lines and Classic lines had great paint-jobs!
The early Dunlop / Srixon frames look very much like the AG 4D line.. I am sure there is a good chance Kevin Anderson is playing a PJ frame,,,
Not sure you are talking about CX2.0 Tour – but I bought them and they feel better from 4AD but less stable. And of course I really love CX2.0 Tour both 18x20 and 16x19.
They are a bit siffer and much more powerful (which is good thing to see in Dunlop rackets) – but still manage to have great feel and to be so arm-friendly.
The specs seems like Hotmelt 300G...but I'd bet my old school ones have a better touch XD
Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
Juggernauts
Rookie
I am considering Dunlop Aerogel 300 due to its low RA (61), but concern about its low twistweight of 10.6 (compare to Pure drive lite 2015, 13.4). How will twistweight affect the playability?
Can anyone share experience using these racquets? How is the Aerogel 300 compared to the 4D 300 Lite version?
Can anyone share experience using these racquets? How is the Aerogel 300 compared to the 4D 300 Lite version?
Last edited:
Tennisist
Professional
If you have a choice, I would go with 4D 300 Lite + customization. I hit with regular 4D 300 -- and did not find anything special about it ( the feel, the power and the maneuverability were all very weak ). I went with 3D Lite, and am still using it to this day in doubles. It is very whippy / fast. I added silicone in the handle, and sorbothane strips at 3/9.
This really transformed it into a nearly ideal racquet for me. Still whippy/fast, but now with stability, feel, and penetration. I later tried Bio 300 with the same mods, but still preferred the 4D 300 Lite ( better feel ).
There also was an Aerogel 200 16x19. I liked that one a lot. It felt almost ideal for me. Still have it.
This really transformed it into a nearly ideal racquet for me. Still whippy/fast, but now with stability, feel, and penetration. I later tried Bio 300 with the same mods, but still preferred the 4D 300 Lite ( better feel ).
There also was an Aerogel 200 16x19. I liked that one a lot. It felt almost ideal for me. Still have it.
SteveI
Legend
The 4D 300 Lite is a great platform frame and yes has a nice feel and is very fast. All the 300 line needs mods if you are going to play big hitters. I loved the 4D 300 and did some mods to it.. in the end.. lots of work to create a heavy ball. You can pick up a Pure Drive and crush the ball..
J
joohan
Guest
The 300 line is definitely not a Pure Drive region...not even leaded up. Even the Aerogel tour version (16x18) played much more towards a control players frame than a power frame. Horses for courses.
Juggernauts
Rookie
How about their stiffness? An arm-friendly racquet is my top priority. I cant demo them. 300 is available for USD50, and 4D 300 lite is USD70. So it's not really costly if I don't like it.
Tennisist
Professional
I just looked it up in the TW database:
Aerogel 300 = 61,
4D 300 = 60,
4D 300 Lite = 66.
It is hard for me to compare them directly, because my 300 Lite has silicone + rubber strips on it, and is much heavier. With this much extra weight and dampening, it feels "OK" to me. In its lite/original form, it was not "arm-friendly". The regular 4D 300 when I was trying it also did not strike me as particularly "arm-friendly" either, even with its 60 RA flex.
I would say, only get the Lite one if you intend to "heavy it up". If you intend to play them stock, you need to look for some other racquets for arm-friendliness.
I would say the current 2021 red Dunlop CX 2.0 98 16x19 is more arm-friendly than any of those.
Aerogel 300 = 61,
4D 300 = 60,
4D 300 Lite = 66.
It is hard for me to compare them directly, because my 300 Lite has silicone + rubber strips on it, and is much heavier. With this much extra weight and dampening, it feels "OK" to me. In its lite/original form, it was not "arm-friendly". The regular 4D 300 when I was trying it also did not strike me as particularly "arm-friendly" either, even with its 60 RA flex.
I would say, only get the Lite one if you intend to "heavy it up". If you intend to play them stock, you need to look for some other racquets for arm-friendliness.
I would say the current 2021 red Dunlop CX 2.0 98 16x19 is more arm-friendly than any of those.
Last edited:
Juggernauts
Rookie
I am considering Aerogel 300 (61RA) and PK Kinetic Iionic 8 (290gr, 108 sq in, 16x19, 1HL, 70RA). Which one will be softer on arm (especially elbow)?
