Dunlop Bio 2.0F tour

rlau

Hall of Fame
Do you really have to start two threads, because you need people to speak to you?! ;-)
 

Tim

Rookie
I demoed this one last year, feels exactly like its specs suggest stiff, but not harsh, heavy and controlled. I think it reminded most of a k 6.1 95, kinda like a board you can bludgeon things with :)
 
Thanks Tim

I used to use (and love) the bio 200 (non tour) but I had trouble generating any power on serve with them.

I am loving the Bio 400Ts for doubles, but I find myself using the old prince for singles a lot for the brutal plow it gets.

nearest thing out there looks like the 2.0F Tour..
 

Tim

Rookie
Definitely has nice plow, and feels very solid. Other rackets you could try would be the tech 315 18x20 which felt similar but obviously more flexy and maybe that new Yonex Tour G. I'm using the yonex 89t which would be worth a try too, for singles. You can really smack the crap outa the ball on serves with it.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Add some lead to the 10-2 position of Bio400T's, it's much too light, even for a weak skinny old guy like me. SW's around 330 is minimum vs a hard incoming ball.
 
Add some lead to the 10-2 position of Bio400T's, it's much too light, even for a weak skinny old guy like me. SW's around 330 is minimum vs a hard incoming ball.
ye, I know, and you're right.

except it's really nice the way it is for about 80% of the tennis I play.

just doesn't hold up when I'm playing a serious match. (although, that isn't really true, they were fine in an open tournament last weekend against some ext ATP guys, I just like the feel of the heavier frame)

conversely, a heavier frame is just annoying when I'm coaching or playing social doubles
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Pose value counts.
When I was teaching, and my playing skills eroding, I had 6 of the same YonnexGreenOPS's, varying strings and tensions, with the thinnest gauge strings at the softest tension just for feeding little old ladies.
 
The Bio F2.0 is one of the best sticks out there and seriously underrated on this board. I think it blows away most of the 12+oz players racquets. The stability and control are excellent but it also allows you to swing faster than other racquets this heavy. I use a full bed of Beast XP at 55lbs with it and love the set-up.
 

Candide

Hall of Fame
Thanks Tim

I used to use (and love) the bio 200 (non tour) but I had trouble generating any power on serve with them.

I am loving the Bio 400Ts for doubles, but I find myself using the old prince for singles a lot for the brutal plow it gets.

nearest thing out there looks like the 2.0F Tour..
What Prince you talking about? I also use a Bio 400T but both for singles and doubles now. Love the comfort and pop despite launching the odd ball into the back fence. I tried the old 200 and although if felt nice I couldn't get depth for buggery out of it. Surely the new 300T, or whatever they're calling it, would be closer to your current racquet.
 

vegasgt3

Rookie
I played the Bio 200 successfully for 2.5 yrs and switched to the PST for bigger sweet spot for more defense (a weakness of the Bio 200).

I got tons of power out of the Bio 200, but feel the F2.0 is far less and stiffer.
Its for huge hitters that need more control. I didn't think it was a good substitute or a good upgrade, totally different. Not a bad racquet at all, but for a different player IMHO.
 

Minion

Hall of Fame
I've been playing with the F2 tours for over a year now. Very similar to the IG Prestige MP, but just a bit better in every sense.
 
What Prince you talking about? I also use a Bio 400T but both for singles and doubles now. Love the comfort and pop despite launching the odd ball into the back fence. I tried the old 200 and although if felt nice I couldn't get depth for buggery out of it. Surely the new 300T, or whatever they're calling it, would be closer to your current racquet.
see my sig..

The Prince is a mid size 12oz 24mm beam beast from 1989.

it's not as flexy as you might expect, is very HL and plays like a stiffer bio 200.

belts the snot out of the ball, actually.

but it's near impossible to replace and I only have the one...
 
Last edited:
I played the Bio 200 successfully for 2.5 yrs and switched to the PST for bigger sweet spot for more defense (a weakness of the Bio 200).

I got tons of power out of the Bio 200, but feel the F2.0 is far less and stiffer.
Its for huge hitters that need more control. I didn't think it was a good substitute or a good upgrade, totally different. Not a bad racquet at all, but for a different player IMHO.
thanks for your input.

I must say you are the first person who has suggested the F2.0 has LESS power than the bio 200.

given the mass is similar but the flex and beam are slightly different (stiffer and wider), that seems borderline impossible unless you string it with fencing wire at 90 lbs..

however, that's what's cool about racquets, everyone likes and feels different things.

I have a couple of regular 300s, sweet, but totally and completely without power of any kind..
 
Last edited:

tom4ny

Professional
In my opinion the F2.0 slots in between an IG Prestige MP and Wilson 6.1 95. It is a control frame with feel that has some pop. The previous version was flexier but it was also slightly heavier. Still I would say that the F2.0 has more power and spin than the Bio 200.

I was looking to make a change from my F3.0's which I still have and love but I needed a tad more solidness in order to combat very heavy ball play. I demoed the IG Prestige, Wilson 6.1, Dunlop F2.0 and M2.0. I enjoyed them all but the Dunlops gave me the best combination of power, control, and stability with decent feel. I thought that I would go with the F2.0 but in the end I went with the stiffer more powerful M2.0 because it has even more pop but better spin and still retains great control. The F2.0 was runner up and I still keep it.

I believe that Dunlop did a great job transitioning their classic frames to more modern versions. You still get good ball feel even if you do not have that deep ball pocketing and flex. The balls come of the strings faster, with more pop and spin. On my Bio versions I needed lead across the upper hoop. Here I would only add a little at 10:00 and 2:00 and even that is not needed on my M2.0. I added a heavy over grip to make the balance a bit more HL and voila! The F2.0 is fine stock. A super frame imho. Good luck!
 
Thanks!

I have never had a bad Dunlop.

In fact, i was even toying with buying my old 200s back off Fuji because I loved them so much..

But that won't solve anything, I still won't be able to serve!

So I am pretty sure this is the path I will go down.
 
Top