Dunlop IMF Frames bandend from production 1992?

[MT Dunlop]

I read that the first IMF frames came in 1980 from Dunlop, it was the Max 150g if I remember right. Than were also Slazenger who produced IMF frames.
But when were production shot down for the IMF frames?? I understood that the production was to expensive and Dunlop/Slazenger went with the mainstream and started to produce hotmelt frames instead.

Some more informations anyone ???

 

[vsbabolat]

I read that the first IMF frames came in 1980 from Dunlop, it was the Max 150g if I remember right. Than were also Slazenger who produced IMF frames.
But when were production shot down for the IMF frames?? I understood that the production was to expensive and Dunlop/Slazenger went with the mainstream and started to produce hotmelt frames instead.

Some more informations anyone ???

Yes, the Max 150G came out in 1980, then the Max 200G came out in 1982. Slazenger had the Phantom IMF that came out in 1988 if I remember correctly. Yes, I miss IMF.

 

[MT Dunlop]

Yes, the Max 150G came out in 1980, then the Max 200G came out in 1982. Slazenger had the Phantom IMF that came out in 1988 if I remember correctly. Yes, I miss IMF.

Oh yes the IMF frames are outstanding, it's a shame they no longer are produced. I own a Max 200g and a Max 150g, I love the feeling of these. So soft and what a plow through in my strokes. At the same time it is usefull to play with smaller heads, you are forced to use accurate technics to get a great shot out of it.

 

[vsbabolat]

Oh yes the IMF frames are outstanding, it's a shame they no longer are produced. I own a Max 200g and a Max 150g, I love the feeling of these. So soft and what a plow through in my strokes. At the same time it is usefull to play with smaller heads, you are forced to use accurate technics to get a great shot out of it.

There are also two 95sq.inch versions called the Max 500i and Max 800i.

 

[MT Dunlop]

There are also two 95sq.inch versions called the Max 500i and Max 800i.

Are these two other versions Max 500i and 800i play the same way like the 200g did, or are they more stiffer like modern racquets ?

 

[vsbabolat]

Are these two other versions Max 500i and 800i play the same way like the 200g did, or are they more stiffer like modern racquets ?

They are IMF racquets and as such play like IMF racquets.

 

[yonexRx32]

They are IMF racquets and as such play like IMF racquets.

yes and no.. the 500i are about the same weight as the 200g. I own two of them. They have a 95 sq in head and wider body. This makes them a lot harder to swing and feel stiffer, though not in an uncomfortable way. However, if you manage to get them around, they deliver a very heavy ball, which my opponents struggled to return. I heard the 800i are a bit lighter, but more fragile.

 

[yonexRx32]

I read that the first IMF frames came in 1980 from Dunlop, it was the Max 150g if I remember right. Than were also Slazenger who produced IMF frames.
But when were production shot down for the IMF frames?? I understood that the production was to expensive and Dunlop/Slazenger went with the mainstream and started to produce hotmelt frames instead.

Some more informations anyone ???

Last player to use them in tournament play was Omar Camporese, in the early 90's, reportedly.

 

[vsbabolat]

yes and no.. the 500i are about the same weight as the 200g. I own two of them. They have a 95 sq in head and wider body. This makes them a lot harder to swing and feel stiffer, though not in an uncomfortable way. However, if you manage to get them around, they deliver a very heavy ball, which my opponents struggled to return. I heard the 800i are a bit lighter, but more fragile.

I own every IMF racquet including the 500i and 800i and they both have the unique IMF charteristics and play nothing like a modern compression molded tennis racquet.

 

[Ronaldo]

I own every IMF racquet including the 500i and 800i and they both have the unique IMF charteristics and play nothing like a modern compression molded tennis racquet.

Know a player with TE that could only use those racquets. Did Bridgestone still produce an injection molded racquet for the Japanese market?

 

[yonexRx32]

Know a player with TE that could only use those racquets. Did Bridgestone still produce an injection molded racquet for the Japanese market?

Tennis elbow is what brought me to the Max 200g. Another comfortable racket is the Vortex from Prince. The string bed can be quite erratic though.

 

[yonexRx32]

I own every IMF racquet including the 500i and 800i and they both have the unique IMF charteristics and play nothing like a modern compression molded tennis racquet.

yes, they're different from thermoset rackets. However, the 500i doesn't play like a 200g. It has its own character..for lack of better words.

 

[vsbabolat]

yes, they're different from thermoset rackets. However, the 500i doesn't play like a 200g. It has its own character..for lack of better words.

Every racquet in the IMF family has its own charter. The Max 400i doesn't play like a 200G with its open string pattern, thinner beam, and stuffer material.

 

[Grafil Injection]

Yes, when Dunlop began designing the IMF process in 1978, one of the benefits identified was that an injection molding process would be cheaper than the relatively new pre-preg compression molding process, because it would require less human time per frame and pre-preg carbon fibre was actually quite expensive in the 1970s. Although the time per racket advantage was probably still there in the early 90s, the pre-preg processes' raw materials costs had fallen considerably and labour processes were certainly more efficient. Moreover, the pre-preg process was far easier to design different head-sizes, beam widths etc.

 

[arsen]

Yes, when Dunlop began designing the IMF process in 1978, one of the benefits identified was that an injection molding process would be cheaper than the relatively new pre-preg compression molding process, because it would require less human time per frame and pre-preg carbon fibre was actually quite expensive in the 1970s. Although the time per racket advantage was probably still there in the early 90s, the pre-preg processes' raw materials costs had fallen considerably and labour processes were certainly more efficient. Moreover, the pre-preg process was far easier to design different head-sizes, beam widths etc.

IMF hollow inside??

 

[Grafil Injection]

IMF hollow inside??

Impossible to say for each individual model without slicing them in half around the hoop, but strategic foam filling was part of the expected process in the patent, and nearly all serious rackets were foam filled at that time. So, in summary:

MAX 150G - probably no, because the tooling was set-up to use foam filling, and that was the norm in the early 1980s. Hollow rackets were a 'novelty'.
MAX 200G pre-1985 - probably no for heavier models, which certainly feel 'smoother', and the same reasons as the 150G. Most original 'Graphite' versions are in the 375-395g strung range.
MAX 200G (and other IMFs) post 1985 (when they moved the IMF process from Horbury down the road to the new factory in Wakefield) - mostly yes, since L, LM were majority of weight categories, and the 'hollow' model had been proven to still be very comfortable. Most later versions are in the 360-375g strung range.