Very interesting observations.
Re- the FX 500 Tour, I had three of the previous 2020's, the predominantly black-colored PJ with the more firm 71RA layup, and ultimately couldn't get along with them. Too throat-dominant in their weight distribution and swinging behavior, and the upper string bed was just way too spaced out for me, being a flatter hitter, to get enough routine control/precision. And although they've softened the 2023's, I can't imagine they'd play that much different. I'm sure it would be a better fit for someone who is more of that Pure Drive type player, with more of a slappy motion and swipey stroke path (ex: Fognini, etc). And as a flatter hitter, I've also tended to gel better with boxier beam shapes, constant-width and singular, uniform "tree branch" style flex profile (more Prestige -like); all of that tend to give a more much predictable rebound response, at least for my mechanics.
As for the CX 400 Tour, what was your take on where/how it flexes, and how did that impact your game? I'm still keen to try it. As an Auxetic 1.0 Prestige MP-L player (the "snowshoe"-shaped 99" 16x19 w/ 8 throat mains and 21.5mm beam), I'd welcome more free power but also precision. If the 400 Tour could give that to me, then all the better. String pattern cell sizing appears in between a medium-dense 16-main 100 and an open 18x20 100, which would be a goldilocks zone if so. For unstrung spec, I'd be shooting for around 287-290sw, for enough stock whippy-ness and customization window. On that note, it appears that getting a properly on-spec or under-spec 400 Tour is key to having a good-enough experience with it for most players, and something I wish
@dr. godmode (Beckett) was able to confirm if he was close enough to with his sample unit, as based on his take-aways, it appeared like his was a healthy amount over-spec — any comment there, Beckett?
