Have the m-fil 200, curious about the 300 and 200+ (2006)

[knasty131]

I have the m-fil 200, and it is not my primary racket but I was considering the m-fil 300 and the m-fil 200 2006 edition. My reasons are as follows...

#1. The m-fil 200 just doesnt give me the spin I get from other rackets. Mainly due to the 18x20 pattern but I think the swingweight is just to high for what I'm used to when I "whip" the racket. So the open string pattern of the other m-fil's has me thinking.

#2. The weight/swingweight is just too much for my comfort zone. I have played a whole match with it without feeling pain in my arm or shoulder, but it just wasnt working for me. That's another reason why I feel that the other m-fil's would best suit my game.

Now the thing is to pick between the two. My current racket (HPS 7.1 w/ lead) is very flexy, so on that aspect the 300 seems to have a little more edge. On the other hand though, the 200+ 2006 has a little more weight to it which I do like. Now, I have to think of swingweight, The 300's SW is 317 and the 200+ 2006 is 309. Both of those are alot better in my book than my current m-fil (SW 337). So now I must weight the differences...

Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I would like to hear feedback for people who have played the HPS 7.1, m-fil 300, m-fill 200+ 2000 edition, and/or the m-fil 200. If anyone has played several of these frames and could compare, that would be great. Or just anyone who has a general opinion on which would be the best way to go would help. Thanks

 

[knasty131]

anyone????

 

[Exia]

the mfil200 might seem a tad heavy at first.

stick with it it is one of the most rewarding rackets on the market today!

 

[louis netman]

Experiences: earlier than Mfil 200gs, weighted 300g, (265 12pts HL)...

Demoed a 27" 2006 weighted to 365g 12pts HL. Better than custom 300g, less "wobbly" flex at 3 & 9.... Good pop, better/firmer volleys, very comfortable/dampened hit and less jarring than 300g on off center shots....spinnier w/ more pop than 200gs....if your not afraid of lead, lots of margin for modding!!!

 

[tennis-skater]

the 300 i used for about 2 weeks then relized it was too light for me [i like the 13oz feel] but it was great very solid racquet great pop on groundstrokes volleys were great serve though i could serve as hard but if you have a kick serve its pretty good i suggest demoing it
i still have mine if you like the demo ands interested dyinginadr3am@gmail.com

 

[knasty131]

what do you think of the racket as far as possibility of customization (w/ lead) goes?

 

[DragonFly]

the 300 series might be perfect for you, if you make it a little more headlight. for me, the mfil 300 was way too light, but a solid stick. I added 35 grams to the handle, and 16 to 3 and 9, that should bring you up to 13 ozs, and keep it at a nive 7 pts HL.

 

[c_zimma]

I play with a stock 200+ 2006 and the spin is good. I'm sure it would be great at a lover tension. I string at 65 lbs. But nice pop, and very easy to swing.

 

[ace of spades]

the 200 2006 looks like one of the best customization platforms on the market...

 

[knasty131]

the 200 2006 looks like one of the best customization platforms on the market...

yeah, I believe both seem very customizable...the 200 2006 moreso because the swingweight is a little lower, leaves room for lead at 3&9

 

[proracketeer]

 

[Caswell]

I'd give the nod to the 300 over the 200+ if you're looking for customization, based on the flexibility. If you're adding weight to either one, you can get the swingweights close if not identical. The 200+ is going to leave you with a relatively stiff frame no matter what.

 

[Redflea]

I hit w/the M-Fil 200g Plus 2006 (standard length) and the M-Fil 300g tonight. I played the first set w/the 200g, the second w/the 300g.

I initially liked the 200g, but it began to feel a bit heavy/sluggish after a while. I'm suspicous that the 309 swingweight listed for the 200g isn't accurate. It felt heavier than my RDX Mid, which has a 318 SW, and is 1/2 ounce heavier than the 200g. The RDX feels fine three sets in, the 200g felt heavy after just four or five games. I lost 6-2 (not all the racquet, my buddy was serving like a maniac).

I switched to the M-Fil 300g for the second set, and though it initially felt "too light" it was excellent on court - serves, volleys, and groundies (the most surprising) were strong and the racquet provided great control and more power than the old 300g. Returns were the main area where it may lack a bit, but it was hard to tell how much was the racquet and how much was me, as I was having a bad night on returns in general for some reason. I won the second 6-3 (again, not all the racquet, my buddy's serving fell off a bit). But I definitely played better w/the 300g, and it certainly wasn't sluggish.

The lightness of the 300g leaves a ton of room for modding (Dunlop provides a butt cap bottom that snaps off, conveniently, to simplify adding weight there to balance any added to the head, which is nice).

Of the racquets I've demo'd recently, I'd have to say the biggest positive surprise is the M-Fil 300g. Quite nice, really, and they appear to have fixed the harshness I found in the old 300g frame.

 

[westy]

i think theyr must be a lot of people in the same situation as me. ive played with th 200 for about 6 months but have always struglled with the high weight and swingweight, in matches i often find my self mistiming th odd shot ,due to th swingweight, that could have decided th outcome of th match. also due to th swingweight, spin isnt easy to come by, as its very difficult to create that "whip" that gets you heavy topspin.

for a while now i have been looking at the 300, its lighter, has a low swingweight in comparisom and has a 16x19 string pattern. The 10.9 ounce weight is a little light adding a bit of lead in the handle would make it more headlight, and a bit at 3 and 9 would increase swingweight a bit aswell as increase th sweetspot. it seems perfect.

i plan to buy a 300 and compare it to the 200

any1 else find themselves thinkin this??

 

[monologuist]

I hit w/the M-Fil 200g Plus 2006 (standard length) and the M-Fil 300g tonight. I played the first set w/the 200g, the second w/the 300g.

I initially liked the 200g, but it began to feel a bit heavy/sluggish after a while. I'm suspicous that the 309 swingweight listed for the 200g isn't accurate. It felt heavier than my RDX Mid, which has a 318 SW, and is 1/2 ounce heavier than the 200g. The RDX feels fine three sets in, the 200g felt heavy after just four or five games. I lost 6-2 (not all the racquet, my buddy was serving like a maniac).

I switched to the M-Fil 300g for the second set, and though it initially felt "too light" it was excellent on court - serves, volleys, and groundies (the most surprising) were strong and the racquet provided great control and more power than the old 300g. Returns were the main area where it may lack a bit, but it was hard to tell how much was the racquet and how much was me, as I was having a bad night on returns in general for some reason. I won the second 6-3 (again, not all the racquet, my buddy's serving fell off a bit). But I definitely played better w/the 300g, and it certainly wasn't sluggish.

The lightness of the 300g leaves a ton of room for modding (Dunlop provides a butt cap bottom that snaps off, conveniently, to simplify adding weight there to balance any added to the head, which is nice).

Of the racquets I've demo'd recently, I'd have to say the biggest positive surprise is the M-Fil 300g. Quite nice, really, and they appear to have fixed the harshness I found in the old 300g frame.

redflea, can you compare the mfil 300 to the 300g HM? Also, did you try either the Mfil 200 + 2005 (27.5") or the 200g xl? I found the 200g XL to be a very promising racquet with some lead tape....never tried the mfil 200 + 2006 though.

 

[topper#1]

With modest customization the M-Fil 300

plays very nice. See today's post on what I did with it - at 11.4 oz and 5 pts HL it is a sweet playing frame. Serves great and much more solid on groundies, nice combo of being stable "enough" and still light enough for those of us who have trouble with a 12 oz players frame.

 

[Caswell]

Leading up the M-Fil 300 to the mid 11 ounce range while making it more headlight seems to be common around here. Most on the handle, a bit at three and nine.

That's where mine ended up. I kept one stock while I played around with lead on the other one, and that weight and balance made the racquet feel much more solid without sacrificing too much mobility.

 

[topper#1]

Yes, plays sweet around 11.5 oz plus or minums a tad. Easy way for me was to buy it a grip size smaller (4 1/4), add a leather grip w/overgrip and weight up the 3 and 9. Very easy, really impressed with how much better it serves at that weight. Great pace and placement, reminds me of the Laver Type S for the serve.

 

[monologuist]

Yes, plays sweet around 11.5 oz plus or minums a tad. Easy way for me was to buy it a grip size smaller (4 1/4), add a leather grip w/overgrip and weight up the 3 and 9. Very easy, really impressed with how much better it serves at that weight. Great pace and placement, reminds me of the Laver Type S for the serve.

I am familiar with the Laver Type S. Could you compare the modded mfil300 to it in terms of power, swingweight, flex, and overall play?

 

[topper#1]

Laver S was racket a served and volleyed very well with but coulod never get comfortable with my groundstrokes. Serving was effortless, with power and placement. The M-fil 300 does not serve as well (few do for me) but serves very well, but my groundstrokes and return are very good with it, modified to 11.4 oz and 5 pts HL. I have nuch better control on the groundies, frame has less inherent power - but still plenty. Simply a better all around frame for me.

 

[monologuist]

Laver S was racket a served and volleyed very well with but coulod never get comfortable with my groundstrokes. Serving was effortless, with power and placement. The M-fil 300 does not serve as well (few do for me) but serves very well, but my groundstrokes and return are very good with it, modified to 11.4 oz and 5 pts HL. I have nuch better control on the groundies, frame has less inherent power - but still plenty. Simply a better all around frame for me.

what deficiencies did you find the Type S to have off the ground?

 

[topper#1]

Too much power and this was not a racket I would ever play with a Poly, as it is too stiff. I had a helluva time hitting a one handed backhand with it, and that is my best shot. It sliced okay but could not hit a consistent topspin. Frankly had trouble generating consistent top off either side, balls flew long too often.

I am a 4.5 all court player who has been at this game for 35 years.

 

[monologuist]

Too much power and this was not a racket I would ever play with a Poly, as it is too stiff. I had a helluva time hitting a one handed backhand with it, and that is my best shot. It sliced okay but could not hit a consistent topspin. Frankly had trouble generating consistent top off either side, balls flew long too often.

I am a 4.5 all court player who has been at this game for 35 years.

yeah...that racquet needs a poly to tap its potential...either that or very high tensions. I had success with a hybrid of Signum Poly Plasma (a relatively soft yet low-powered co-poly) mains/gut crosses.

Why was your 1hhbh hard to hit with it? just too powerful?

 

[topper#1]

Mono, the backhand problem is hard to describe, maybe it has something to fo with the very thin beam at the throat, I really do not know. But I simply could never adjust (after weeks of trying) and get my backhand to a point where I was at least satisfied with it. Sorry, best I can do on that one.

 

[AndrewD]

topper#1,

I've always found that the backhand (especially the topspin backhand), like volleys (especially low volleys and half-volleys), requires you to have good feel for your shot and a lot of stiff racquets just dont seem to allow you the time (dwell time) to do that. Do you think it was a lack of feel that caused your backhand problems with the Laver S ?

 

[topper#1]

Could be, and frankly the frame just "felt' awkard on the backhand and groundies in general, the opposite of how great it felt on the serve and good on volleys. Over the years I would rate it as one of the "strangest" frames I have ever used. I real love/hate thing, like some women I have known. LOL