Head Pro Tour 280/630 versus Head I Prestige mp.

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by djones, Feb 2, 2006.

  1. djones

    djones Hall of Fame

    May 19, 2004
    Yep another boring comparishment!
    Although it will probably be without any reply, I would still like to give it a shot:)

    Would you think the Head I Prestige mp could replace the Head Pro Tour?
  2. Loud

    Loud Rookie

    Feb 19, 2004
    I don't personally think so. I've had both and the iPrestige MP is long gone yet my 5 PT 280's still have "not for sale" status. The PT 280 is the ultimate in comfort and control from the baseline. I don't think any of the i series is going to make it to "legendary status."
  3. kreative

    kreative Professional

    Feb 18, 2004
    the i.prestige mp was much more muted than the pt630/280, and stiffer/crisper. they didn't have that flex that is so highly praised of the pt's. pt's are awesome for baseline, just felt a little sluggish on serves and at the net. i.prestige mp felt slightly more manueverable in these respects.
  4. Ronaldo

    Ronaldo Talk Tennis Guru

    Feb 18, 2004
    If you can find a PT 630, gotta go there. It actually feels as great as a PC600.
  5. kreative

    kreative Professional

    Feb 18, 2004
    aye, pt630 = nirvana from baseline, but for me, sadly, crappy everywhere else. maybe i should have tried the regular grommets.
  6. Pro_Tour_630

    Pro_Tour_630 Legend

    Feb 11, 2004

    read the bottom section and read below:


    1- iprestige MidPlus 3/8 gamma high tech strung with Hammertech 18g at 55lbs with Wilson dampener weighed in at 349 grams and balanced at 32.5cmm.

    2- LiquidMetal Prestige Midplus with exact set up weighed in at 339 grams and balanced at 31.5cmm.

    3- Pro Tour 630 with exact set up weighed in at 345 grams and balanced at 32cm.


    I did not include the Head Pro Tour 280 in this review because I did not have one around and more important, it would have weighed in more than 350 grams and balanced at 33cm+ without CAPS. I will not go into detail in every category but will highlight significant characteristics of all three after few hours of playtime. I will update the review after playing few full sets with the LM prestige MidPlus along with other types of strings.

    TW states 63 RDC for the flex on both the LM Prestige Midplus and iprestige Midplus. The LM prestige MidPlus is more flexible than the iprestige MidPlus, even though both have intellifibers The iprestige MidPlus has a crisp clean response while the LM Prestige has a bit mushier feel. Giving the LM prestige Midplus a 63 might be on the high side IMO. It felt more like 60 during playtest.

    Mis-hit balls were jarring on the LM prestige Midplus On the other hand, the iprestige Midplus was tight and more stable, so much for TSC Even though the Head Pro Tour 630 flex’s (around 56) more than the LM prestige Midplus, it did not have that jarring feeling on mis-hits, it was just as solid as the iprestige Midplus with the added feel I believe Head tried very hard to bring back the PT630, replacing the ¾ CAP on the iprestige MidPlus with a full CAP found on the PT630 (does that mean the caps on the iprestige are inferior now : ) Head also replaced the iprestige butt cap with one similar in shape to the PT630. Surprisingly, they went even further with flattening out the shoulders at the throat ala prestige mids giving it a retro look, and brought back the twin tube technology supposedly for added feel. Which brings me to Technologies. Head missed the boat with the LiquidMetal Prestige MidPlus, they went overboard They introduced LiquidMetal and Total SweetSpot Construction. Two unproven technologies, which I feel are just as questionable as intellifibers, found on both iprestige Midplus and LM Prestige MidPlus; and the discontinued triple threat stickers found on Prince brooms. Just a side note TW forgot to add the TSC description in the technology section of the LM Prestige. The LM prestiges do not show the ridges/bulges on the outer frame like the LM radicals but they are noticeable around the inner hoop. I did not feel an increase in sweetspot nor added torsional stability, I think lead at 3/9 does the trick just fine. Anyway, in short, what Head really should do is reintroduce TWARON, a proven material found on the Pro Tour 630 and Prestige classic 600, along with High Modulus Graphite

    I agree that the feel from the baseline was that stock LM prestige MidPlus played very light. But, I liked hitting my slice backhands with this racquet much better than the Iprestige midplus, and I agree with TW’s playtesters and was very impressed with the amount of spin I can generate on slice and topspin serves. I liked first serves with the iprestige Midplus (more consistent bombs) and seconds with the LM prestige Midplus (more kick). I agree with Uk_skippy:“In comparison with the iPres MP, the LM MP is too light, not powerful enough, not as stiff. Initially the weight of the LM is too light and needed about 10g of lead. It also seems to have less pop than the iPres, although it did seem to 'cup' and control the ball better. But this could be down to the lower ball speed. I feel the iPres is more of a solid hit than the LM, and def has what I would call 'instant power' To try and get any real power off the LM I really had to muscle the ball” When I tried to muscle the ball I ended up hitting out supposedly the LiquidMetal was kicking in, making my shots go long. I also added 10 grams of lead at 3/9 to the LM Prestige MidPlus, which bumped up the weight to 349g and balanced at 32cm. It was a big improvement over stock specs but it still felt a little hollow, tweener like, ala LM Instinct or LM radical MidPlus at the handle. I might consider filling the handle with foam

    In conclusion, to achieve “CONTROL” some fancy a mushy/flexible stick while others like a more clean response, one is not necessarily better than the other, they are just different. But then again, there is that happy medium, the Head Pro Tour 630, it does everything right…

Share This Page