Half a pot of coffee down the hatch... rainy day... and nothing to do, but write about my Volkls
I've played the C10 for a LOT of years and I've also owned or tried a few other Volkls along the way. The other more semi-current Volkls I have in my bag are their Organix 10 325g (x2), which I've tuned with some lead tape to give them better stability along with a comfortable degree of head-light balance.
The C10's I play with are about as old as my O10's - the generation that's mostly black with some bright yellow around the top of the hoop. I also have several older C10's going all the way back to the "fish-scale" model that I think was among the first in line of these 98" C10's (I think there was also a 95"). That fish-scale is a little heavier and it absolutely plays like butter.
My pair of more current players (C10's) have lead added to their handles. This gives me a static weight of about 12.5 oz., but the balance is much more comfortable/familiar for me at 10-11 pts. HL. If you play the C10 in the future, I strongly recommend trying it with some weight added to the handle. The hoop has enough heft in its stock form to feel nicely stable through the ball for me.
A pal of mine tried the PB 10 mid a few years ago, so I felt obligated to have a try with another member of the family. I have a soft spot for a couple different mids in my collection (Prince NXG mid, Head LM Prestige mid, etc.) and I dust them off for occasional hits. I definitely appreciate how those mids don't let me get away with lazy footwork or late stroke preparation. They only produce decent shots when I do everything right.
My 8-10 minute sampling of the PB 10 mid was bizarre - I couldn't relate to it at all. Absolutely no evidence that the racquet had a sweet spot anywhere on the string bed and it seemed to have significantly less juice than any of the other mids I've ever played. I was using the 95" Wilson 6.1 Classics before switching to the C10, so that's my reference in terms of 95" frames. The PB 10 mid was an absolute nothing-burger for me. Different string may have helped it a little bit, but I was completely turned off by that demo.
No secret that my C10's are my holy grail frames in relative terms, but I can also say that it has taken my game several years to evolve into a place where I can work the ball with the combos of power and spin that I want when using them. They've always been fantastic for me in terms of power potential and directional control, especially in contrast with my old 6.1 Classics. But for a long time my C10's made me work very hard to churn out big spin. I added the O10's to my bag (after I leaded them for a better fit for me) because I could generate gobs of spin with the O10's without extra effort and they only gave me mildly less top end power.
I've also tried other 98" racquets, including some with traditional oval-shaped heads and a couple Yonex models having that square-ish design. The Yonex frames seem to play bigger than traditional shaped heads. Their sweet-spot can seem quite generous around the baseline, but they can also be more lively and tougher for me to control. If I shop for a Yonex in the future, I'll try a 95" model first.
I think that the C10 actually gives me some of the impression of a 95" frame, probably because of its precision. But it also gives me what feels like unlimited power potential and also great arm comfort I might expect with a 98"+ frame - I string mine with syn. gut. Mids can be something of a novelty and it's important for us to have fun on the courts. But my C10's have enough old-school flavor to make me happy while also delivering enough performance of a more modern frame to be more useful for every setting (playing, teaching, coaching high school teams).