History of the Wilson Pro Staff 6.1

Hankenstein

Hankenstein

Hall of Fame
What is the history of the Wilson Pro Staff 6.1?

Am i correct in the following order of the 6.1 (I mean the 6.1 95 only)

Pro Staff Classic 6.1
Hyper Pro Staff 6.1
N-Code 6.1
K-Factor 6.1
BLX 6.1
BLX2 Amplifeel 6.1

Or do i miss some model or/and have them in wrong order?
 
If you want to get technical:

The Classic had a "Tour Edition" which was 18 x 20, as well as a Stretch version which was 28" and 18 x 20.
The HPS had a Stretch version which was 27.5 and 18 x 20.
Every model from the nCode on had a standard length 18 x 20 option.

Your order is correct, regardless.
 
Hankenstein said:
What is the history of the Wilson Pro Staff 6.1?

Am i correct in the following order of the 6.1 (I mean the 6.1 95 only)

Pro Staff Classic 6.1
Hyper Pro Staff 6.1
N-Code 6.1
K-Factor 6.1
BLX 6.1
BLX2 Amplifeel 6.1

Or do i miss some model or/and have them in wrong order?
Click to expand...

Before the hyper pro staff 6.1 was the hyper pro staff 5.0. When ultra stiff graphite first came out, Wilson named it the 5.0 and all the 6.1 95 professionals switched to it (the 5.0). Then Wilson realized their mistake in naming it 5.0, so they came out with another one...the hyper pro staff 6.1 95.
 
Pro Staff Classic 6.1 - Beautiful stick. Just a tad heavy for me.
Hyper Pro Staff 6.1 - Too stiff and destroyed my elbow when i was still developing form
N-Code 6.1- Great stick. Very lively, but it wasn't right for my level.
K-Factor 6.1 - Stiff the first time i used it, perfect the other times. The only reason I don't have any is shortage of people willing to sell for low prices lol.
BLX 6.1 - a tad too muted for me, but plays well like its predecessors.
BLX2 Amplifeel 6.1 - Haven't tried.

All in all. Probably one of, if not the greatest and longest lasting performance series out there.
 
2 versions

Weren't there two string pattern versions of the PSC 6.1? IIRC there was one 16x18 and a 18x20
 
I actually really like the muted feel of the BLX 2010, no need for a dampener.
I have the Ncode version, thinking that I'd like the lower flex but I have found that I prefer the BLX feel.
The Ncode buzzes a bit in comparison.
 
flume said:
I actually really like the muted feel of the BLX 2010, no need for a dampener.
I have the Ncode version, thinking that I'd like the lower flex but I have found that I prefer the BLX feel.
The Ncode buzzes a bit in comparison.
Click to expand...

2 inches of lead tape fixed that problem ASAP. 10 and 2. Winner winner chicken dinner.

BLX feels great with full poly though. All the wilson pro staffs IMO play the best with synthetic gut. Even if it only lasts 30 minutes for you guys lol.
 
sansaephanh said:
2 inches of lead tape fixed that problem ASAP. 10 and 2. Winner winner chicken dinner.

BLX feels great with full poly though. All the wilson pro staffs IMO play the best with synthetic gut. Even if it only lasts 30 minutes for you guys lol.
Click to expand...

Great point. I use 17g synthetic gut in my HPS 6.1 Stretches. Excellent feel.
 
sansaephanh said:
2 inches of lead tape fixed that problem ASAP. 10 and 2. Winner winner chicken dinner.
Click to expand...
I hadn't considered lead, these sticks aren't light to start with!

I'm not sure I could tell the difference between an hps and an ncode in a blind taste test.
 
Wow, you guys are the best in terms of racket knowledge! :)
BTW, how does the PSC 6.1 stretch play compared with the regular version? I had a very brief hit with one about 3 weeks ago and thought is was excellent; I was not affected by the extended length at all (to my surprise).
 
roundiesee said:
Wow, you guys are the best in terms of racket knowledge! :)
BTW, how does the PSC 6.1 stretch play compared with the regular version? I had a very brief hit with one about 3 weeks ago and thought is was excellent; I was not affected by the extended length at all (to my surprise).
Click to expand...

I actually used 1 inch on the ncode and it took away all signs of instability. Great stick.

Its beautiful if you like closed string patterns. The directional control is insane as the normal PSC, but instead of putting it on a quarter you can put it on a dime. The extended length added a teeeeeeny bit more pop to my 2 hander as well.

Also, I've played well with most of the 95's. I don't get all the bad reviews from most players, but they probably know the pedigree of the racket line better then myself. Deriving from the classic 85, the 90 is probably as close as you can get with more comfort and a bigger sweet spot.
 
Captain Haddock said:
In terms of flex, the HPS 6.1 felt much softer than the board-like (70 RA) Classic. To me, it was the best of the bunch and the only one that did not bother my elbow.
Click to expand...

I find the PSC works best strung at 57 lbs with a multi (I use Gamma Live Wire XP 17 gauge). Then it plays great with no tennis elbow problems. In the past I found that at 60 lbs with a synthetic like Prince Synthetic Gut with duraflex was too hard. Also, always use 17 gauge strings. Under my setup I never have had any elbow problems.
 
Don't forget that when the manufactures started doing the extended racs they made long versions of the classic 6.1 as well, the 6.1 stretch, they came out along with the Hammer systems, I wanna say 1995-1996, they had that rusty red color around the throat of the racquet.
 
I think the original Pro Staff dates back to the 85 si model with a flat beam. They made it specifically for Jimmy Connors so they wouldn't have keep making T-2000's for him. They knew it had to be flexible so they added Kevlar. Connors used it for a while, but he eventually switched back to his old T-2000's until there were no more of them, and he ended up getting a Slazenger. It's ironic that the racquet wasn't a success for the guy is was designed for, but it became a big success with other pro players and the general public.
 
Getting back to the original topic, the history of the 6.1 95, I find the longevity of this mold astounding. Wilson has been selling the same frame with different PJs jobs and slightly different composite compositions, for over two decades. I think only the John Kramer Autograph can boast that long a life.
 
Say Chi Sin Lo said:
... Didn't the Pro Staff 6.1 eventually evolved onto the 6.1 95?

And the current 90's have more in common with the original 6.0
Click to expand...
Yes, but the ProStaff 6.1 Classic never had anything in common with the ProStaff 6.0 Original from its inception, and all the Tour 90's are descendants of the ProStaff 6.0 Original.
 
Baxter said:
Getting back to the original topic, the history of the 6.1 95, I find the longevity of this mold astounding. Wilson has been selling the same frame with different PJs jobs and slightly different composite compositions, for over two decades. I think only the John Kramer Autograph can boast that long a life.
Click to expand...

The HEAD Prestige Mid mold was from 1986-2014........ While the Wilson 6.1 95 has been used since 1991.
 
Which version is everyone's favorite? I currently
play with the ncode 16x18 that I picked up cheap
after not playing for 15 years. I feel this model has
too much power for me though.
 
KaiserW said:
Which version is everyone's favorite? I currently
play with the ncode 16x18 that I picked up cheap
after not playing for 15 years. I feel this model has
too much power for me though.
Click to expand...

I have just played the PSC 6.1 95 today , due to a failled test with new hybrid string i've tested on my Head Ig Speed 18x20.
Can't believe how good that racket is even after more than 15 years i have it.
 
Hankenstein said:
What is the history of the Wilson Pro Staff 6.1?

Am I correct in the following order of the 6.1 (I mean the 6.1 95 only)

Pro Staff Classic 6.1
Hyper Pro Staff 6.1
N-Code 6.1
K-Factor 6.1
BLX 6.1
BLX2 Amplifeel 6.1

Or do I miss some model or/and have them in the wrong order?
Click to expand...

As the HEAD and Dunlop fan – I always struggled with Wilson's offer. I've tested all of Blades and sold all of them eventually. Never liked the new Pro Staffs (way too stiff). Maybe the new one will change something. Finally plusher (for a longer period of time Blades used to be rather stiff frames), stable and with lower SW. But I do miss 95" Six.One rackets. Never managed to test them properly. I guess 331g unstrung weight was a bit too much for me.
I bought BLX 6.1 a few months ago but still didn't manage to test it. Which edition do you find the most plusher and comfortable?

A few years ago I sold BLX2 Amplifeel 6.1 309g 16x19 and I really regret it. Were 16x19 string patterns offered the way they are in Blades – so you could pick up the one you prefer?

Do you remember years when each line appeared on the market?

And one more thing – do you know something more about the below offer from Pro Labs? Which edition is it?

ProStaff%20Six%20One%2095%20v12%20%28Pro%20Lab%29.jpeg


PS. But to be fair to Wilson – I do like H19 (Ultra Tour as well) and of course I love H22 and Blades Pro. Both feel great, but do have higher SW from my preferrings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hidious
Best 6.1 or six-one model.
Replies
13
Views
1K
Rafa freak
Rafa freak
Cerps
Hyper Pro Staff 6.1 grommet
Replies
2
Views
734
Cerps
Cerps
caugas
Wilson Pro Staff Hyper 6.1 95, is this a rare stick, thrift store finds
Replies
11
Views
2K
Ronaldo
Ronaldo
N
similar racket to pro staff classic 6.1?
Replies
9
Views
2K
Hidious
Hidious
S
Will the Wilson Pro Staff Classic 6.1 Stretch grommets fit the 18x20 euro version
Replies
0
Views
968
sunmin77
S
Back
Top