Dunlop Aerogel 200 (16x19) swingweight

[claub]

Hi all,
I just switch from Dunlop Aerogel 500 TOUR to Aerogel 200 (16x19).
I know the 500 Tour has a TW spec swingweight of 325.
I am intrested about the exact swingweight of my new rackets
,the Aerogel 200 (16x19). Any response is appreciated.

The Aerogel 200 16x19 specs just appeared on TW but they can't be right. They are identical with 18x20 version on this site. They must have just copied the info.
I liked the Aerogel 200 (18x20) specs (weight, swingweight) very much but NOT the string pattern, so I opted for 16x19.

Also, can anyone tell me something about the physics of rackets that have lower swingweight than their static wieght? How is weight in this rackets distributed.
The aerogel 500 Tour has a weigh of 315g and a swingweight of 325, and in a swing the the wight feels in my hand as uniformly distributed throughout the lenght of the racket, whereas the aerogel 200 with a weight of 327g and a swingweight of ??? feels like it has more weight in the head, while swinging.

Thanks.

 

[Keifers]

There's quite a bit of confusion right now about the specs of the 18X20 and 16X19 versions of the AG200 (and the 16X19 and 16X18 versions of the AG300).

I demoed the AG200 18X20 from TW last October and subsequently bought an AG200 16X19 from England (TW wasn't selling them then), and I can confirm that the 16X19 weighs less and has a lower swingweight than the 18X20. Same mold, different weights and sws (and, according to Dunlop, a 1 unit difference in stiffness).

From Dunlop's tennis web site:

Technical Information 18X20
length 27"
headsize 95 sq inch
strung weight 337.5g / 11.9oz
unstrung weight 322.5g / 11.4oz
stiffness/ra 62
balance 320mm
beam width 20mm
string pattern 18x20
string tension 55-65lbs

Technical Information 16X19
length 27"
headsize 95sq inch
strung weight 327g / 11.53oz
unstrung weight 312g / 11.00oz
stiffness/ra 63
balance 320mm
beam width 20mm
string pattern 16x19
string tension 55-65lbs

Dunlop does not list swingweights, but I can tell you the 16X19 swings considerably easier. (I'm not good at estimating sw. If I had to guess, I'd say the 16X19's sw is at least 10 units lower than the 18X20's (TW: 331). That was the reason I went for the 16X19; I found the 18X20's sw too high.)

If you go over to the web site now (google "dunlop tennis"), you won't find the specs of the AG200s -- you'll see specs for the 4D versions of the AG200. Don't be concerned because they're exactly the same -- Dunlop has changed only the material composition of the frames.

Hope this helps. I'll shoot an e-mail with this information to TW.

 

[claub]

Thanks for your answer Keifers.
Yes you better send an email with those specs to TW, to update. Also let's hope they do test it themselves, or even write a review.

I hope you are right about the sw of 16x19. If it's around 320 it's ok for me. But I read in forums some found it to be even as low as 300.
I personally think, comparing with dunlop 500 tour, that it is around 310.

I would like to find it exactly though, so I know how much lead should I add to it at 67.


Racquettech has the specs of the most recent rackets, aswell for Dunlop 4D line, but no aerogel 200 4D 16x19 specs. You can access the database from racquettech without a password. I don't know if i'm allowed to post links so I won't post.
But If want to access the link with those specs from racquettech, just search for (racquettech "tennismag") in google and you will find html link, already in the first search result.

 

[Keifers]

Thanks for the racquettech suggestion.

The only other possibility I can think of is TW had Dunlop make a special order of AG200 16X19s using 18X20 frames but drilled for the 16X19 string pattern. In that case, the 16X19s that TW is currently selling would measure very close to the 18X20s.

 

[claub]

It could be, but personally I really doubt that.

You can take a look here at tenniswarehouse-europe (dot com.) It's TW's new tennis shop site for europe. You can find there the 16x19 vers of Aerogel 200. It will appear two list of specs wich are contradictory. Weight on left info is 327g which is normal, and on the right you will have 337g, but that's the info they copied from the 20 crosses version.

So that pretty much proves info on TW site is not right.

 

[Keifers]

I doubt it too..

I surfed over to tenniswarehouse-europe (dot com) but didn't see 327g anywhere. Maybe I looked in the wrong place.

Anyway, I'll let you know when I've heard back from TW. They've probably made an error -- very understandable given the circumstances. And very rare, in my experience of TW.

 

[claub]

I found and made empirical swingweight measurements on a few rackets as explained here twu.tenniswarehouse.com/learning_center/howto_swingweight.html,
and to my surprise they match almost perfectly with other specs found on internet for this rackets A200 16x19, A500 Tour, Wilson [K]Sting.

A200 16x19 sw = 312.
Same racket with 6g lead at 52cm from but sw = 322 (exactly as calculated with xls formula sheet that i had found in this forum). Right what I needed.

So my conclusion
Aerogel 200 (16x19) swingweight is, I am now sure, 312.

I bet TW when they'll be updating theirs specs will have found a 312-314 sw for this racket.

 

[Keifers]

Hmm.. that's very interesting. I've never tried that sw method -- must try it some time.

I can readily believe 312 -- it does swing very light. I'll have to compare with an AG100 (TW: 312) and my PS 6.0 95 (TW: 317).

Will let you know.

Btw, have you ever tried the AG100?

 

[claub]

No I haven't tried AG100, although it seems like a good control oriented racket, on my style.

I also managed to find the swingweight of a new AG200 4D 16x19, on an italian site, measured with babolat machine. Measurement is not official, it was posted by a contributor to the database of specs.
So ... it has a value of 314.

I really doubt that dunlop had changed the sw of the new line of rackets. Thus my measurements values should be as the real ones.

 

[radionise]

Hmm.. that's very interesting. I've never tried that sw method -- must try it some time.

I can readily believe 312 -- it does swing very light. I'll have to compare with an AG100 (TW: 312) and my PS 6.0 95 (TW: 317).

Will let you know.

Btw, have you ever tried the AG100?

Keifer,

Out of curiousity, do you find more control with the AG200 16x19 than the PS 6.0 95 albeit the latter's higher static weight?

Also, although they both have near-similar swing weight, it took me some time to get used with the Dunlop, may be because of the location of sweet spot in the Dunlop being slightly higher.

 

[Keifers]

Keifer,

Out of curiousity, do you find more control with the AG200 16x19 than the PS 6.0 95 albeit the latter's higher static weight?

Also, although they both have near-similar swing weight, it took me some time to get used with the Dunlop, may be because of the location of sweet spot in the Dunlop being slightly higher.

I'm afraid I haven't actually played enough with the AG200 16X19 to give you a firm assessment. I've been meaning to beef it up by adding some weight here and there, but haven't gotten around to it. I did increase the weight of my 6.0 95 a while back, so as it stands, the 6.0 is about 20 grams heavier than the 200 (358 vs. 339).

I do agree the sweetspot of the Dunlop is higher. I first noticed this in my AG100 and I attribute it to the Aerogel material that Dunlop has incorporated into the frame. Makes both the AG100 and AG200 outstanding serving racquets.

The 6.0 is old school in that the sweetspot is below the center of the hoop and the upper hoop is famous for being pretty dead.

Have you added any weight to your AG200?

 

[claub]

nice racket this AG200 16x19, nice feel.
got used to the original sw as well.
though I will try to lead it up for 10g more of sw.

 

[LeeD]

Exactly why I use an Mfil 200 18x20.
Everything else is too lightheaded, or just too light. The added strings, coupled with heavier strings, increases the "plowthru" effect.
Yes, it can be tiring after 3 hours, but it's correct against strong hitters.
That 100 is very nice. Wish I'd tried it before my Mfil 200's, but life is the way it is, and then you d.....