How Does the Volkl PB10 Mid Play?

2kay

Rookie
Hi all,

I recently saw that the Volkl Power Bridge 10 Mid was re-released on their website, and I was wondering whether anybody had experience with this frame? Most of the specs are in my range (high static weight but 320s swingweight, nice RA etc.) but I'm a bit leery of the 93 in2 head size.

I've recently tried out the Volkl C10 Pro, which I absolutely adore, save for the high swingweight (330). So I've been looking for other Volkl racquets that are supposed to play similarly, and I came across the PB 10 Mid.

As I've played with 95 in2 before with little issue, I was wondering whether this racquet plays more like a 95 than a 93. Similarly, are the sweet spot and power level unexpectedly small or large for this type of racquet? As far as I've seen, this racquet isn't available anywhere for demo, so if I buy it I'm committed.

Thanks!
 

Dishiki

Rookie
I played with this racquet for over 10 years. It plays like a 95. It is a completely surgical racquet out on the court. However, it has a small sweetspot and is super low-powered. As I have gotten older, and my eyes and hand-eye aren't what they used to be, I found myself framing more than I wanted. I also struggled in baseline rallies against really heavy hitters. I still own three of them and pull them out from time to time, but have moved onto a more forgiving racquet.
 

408tennisguy

Semi-Pro
I have owned 3 PB10 mids over my lifetime, sold 2 and have 1 that is in pristine condition. I ended up buying the last one because I loved playing with this in my younger years and have brought it out from time to time. I am also getting older and have the same experiences as Dishiki (framing and sluggish due to small head size and high SW), but the feel is definitely something that cant be replicated. I haven't had experiences with the reissues (stealth black or neon yellow), I just have the older black and banana yellow one. I concur that it does play like a 95 just because of the headshape, how its more elongated like an oval, but I have gotten used to a 100 sq in head and find myself framing quite often.
 

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
It is a great racket, but it plays like a 93” frame. The feel is great, as well as the power and accuracy it provides, but I think the Phantom 93P tops it in just about every category. The 93P felt more like a 95” racket with its round head compared to the narrow and elongated head of the PB10.
 

2kay

Rookie
It is a great racket, but it plays like a 93” frame. The feel is great, as well as the power and accuracy it provides, but I think the Phantom 93P tops it in just about every category. The 93P felt more like a 95” racket with its round head compared to the narrow and elongated head of the PB10.
Do you think it's significantly different from a frame like the CX 200 Tour (95), especially if I string the Volkl with thin strings at low tension?
 

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
Do you think it's significantly different from a frame like the CX 200 Tour (95), especially if I string the Volkl with thin strings at low tension?

I don’t think it would be significantly different. I’d think the PB10 might have a softer feel.
 
Last edited:

Kemitak

Professional
Effectively no difference between a 93 and a 95. There’s also not much difference between a 95 and a 98, but there’s a noticeable difference between a 93 and a 98. If you like the C10 Pro, you’ll love the PB10 Mid. It’s not as powerful as the C10, but it’s not low powered either. I have both latest versions strung at 45lbs with Tecnifibre 4S. PB10 seems to have a lower launch angle. Sweet spots are comparable. 45lbs is too loose for the C10, I’m having trouble keeping the ball in the court, but it’s a perfect tension for the PB10. I can’t see anyone having regrets buying the PB10 Mid, even if you just use it to tune up before an important match with a larger frame.
 

2kay

Rookie
Effectively no difference between a 93 and a 95. There’s also not much difference between a 95 and a 98, but there’s a noticeable difference between a 93 and a 98. If you like the C10 Pro, you’ll love the PB10 Mid. It’s not as powerful as the C10, but it’s not low powered either. I have both latest versions strung at 45lbs with Tecnifibre 4S. PB10 seems to have a lower launch angle. Sweet spots are comparable. 45lbs is too loose for the C10, I’m having trouble keeping the ball in the court, but it’s a perfect tension for the PB10. I can’t see anyone having regrets buying the PB10 Mid, even if you just use it to tune up before an important match with a larger frame.
I absolutely loved the C10 Pro when I demoed it and would've bought it in a heartbeat if the swing weight were lower, like the earlier iteration. Really great feel--flexible but with pop. If I got the PB10, I would use a lower tension definitely to make it more forgiving.
 

Kemitak

Professional
I absolutely loved the C10 Pro when I demoed it and would've bought it in a heartbeat if the swing weight were lower, like the earlier iteration. Really great feel--flexible but with pop. If I got the PB10, I would use a lower tension definitely to make it more forgiving.
PB10 is a very forgiving racket. You can’t cheat your swing or footwork with it like you can with a tweener, but it’s a very friendly frame. It’s much friendlier than a Prestige Mid, a PS85, or a Fed 90. I’d say it’s on par with a Phantom 93, but more predictable, if you have any experience with that frame. I usually add the thickest, broadest TW leather grip to my rackets, as I have with both these frames, and although that brings the static weight up, it drops the swing weight without losing stability or plow-through. I didn’t think the head came through fast enough on the C10 Pro until I put on the leather. That might be the difference you’re looking for.
 

basil J

Hall of Fame
I bought one of these new last year. Great S&V frame, pretty good from the baseline as well. I wnt back and forth all summer between my Melbourne's (98") and the PB 10 (93"). Enjoyed both of them equally well for just hitting, but for match play, the Melbourne has more pop and is more forgiving, so I eventually traded it for a new Melbourne with a buddy of mine that took to the PB10.
 

PrinceMoron

Legend
Had to add a ton of lead to get rid of the wobble
Swings super fast
Can swap to a different pallet size easily which helps as the grip is very flat

A big favourite but the I like the 93P and PS 85
 
Plays a lot more flexible than the latest c10 pro, but simply is not powerful enough for the modern game. Especially lacking power for serve !
 

2kay

Rookie
Plays a lot more flexible than the latest c10 pro, but simply is not powerful enough for the modern game. Especially lacking power for serve !
I think this is a valid concern, but I string at really low tensions and use multifilament main strings, so I think that would mitigate the low-power issue somewhat.
 

2kay

Rookie
Had to add a ton of lead to get rid of the wobble
Swings super fast
Can swap to a different pallet size easily which helps as the grip is very flat

A big favourite but the I like the 93P and PS 85
I liked the 93p, but I found it too taxing. I've never tried the PS85, but I think it would be vain of me to attempt to use a racquet with a head size that small.
 
It is a fine racket and if you play a weaker opponent it plays great. But if you face a Strong opponent you tend to get in trouble. It is hard to get power into the shots and tough to defend with against pace and spin. There is a reason hardly any pro plays a 93 inch racket.
 

2kay

Rookie
It is a fine racket and if you play a weaker opponent it plays great. But if you face a Strong opponent you tend to get in trouble. It is hard to get power into the shots and tough to defend with against pace and spin. There is a reason hardly any pro plays a 93 inch racket.
This is a fair assessment. The main reason I'm considering it is that its forgiveness rivals that of a 95 sq in racquet (mitigates the effect of the small head size), most reviews emphasize how stable it is for a racquet of its specs (helps with defense) and I string at pretty low tensions (helps with power, and also makes the racquet marginally more forgiving).

Plus, if you look at the pros who use, or have recently used, 93 sq in racquets, these racquets are supposed to be less forgiving compared to the Volkl. Dimitrov's Blade 93 and Cilic's Revo Prestige Mid are supposed to play noticeably smaller than 95 sq in racquets. Besides these, plenty of pros use true 95 sq in racquets, and if the Volkl is truly comparably forgiving to a 95, then I'd feel confident using it.
 
See your point. The thing with the völkl is that is 93 Inch ( that’s a fact, is is not 95..) and also is very flexible and has a very thin beam. The consequence is a very fast sweet racket, but no power. Of course you can make up for this with super technique and RHS , but if that’s not the case, you simply have a huge disadvantage. I played it myself, and I enjoy using it, but I win more matches with a slightly more powerful frame such as c10pro or Wilson blade.
 

2kay

Rookie
See your point. The thing with the völkl is that is 93 Inch ( that’s a fact, is is not 95..) and also is very flexible and has a very thin beam. The consequence is a very fast sweet racket, but no power. Of course you can make up for this with super technique and RHS , but if that’s not the case, you simply have a huge disadvantage. I played it myself, and I enjoy using it, but I win more matches with a slightly more powerful frame such as c10pro or Wilson blade.
I think you're definitely right about the Volkl. Regarding the power, I've played with the Dunlop CX 200 Tour, which is flexible and similarly thin-beamed and has a lower swing weight, all of which contribute to low power; yet I believed that with appropriate string tension and added weight, this low-power issue would be largely resolved.

Regarding the forgiveness, you're also right--it's ultimately a 93 sq in racquet. Yet I've tried 95 sq in racquets like the Dunlop alongside the Prince 93p, and I detected no meaningful playability difference (at least insofar as my game was concerned); in other words, were I given the two to use individually and not informed about the difference in head size, I don't think I'd have been able to discern the difference. This realization motivated my initial question regarding the Volkl's forgiveness: If most people felt that the racquet was especially forgiving for a 93, I'd feel comfortable purchasing it.

I think this ultimately boils down to the fact that while head size may be the principal factor affecting racquet forgiveness, it certainly isn't the sole factor.
 
Sure for a 93 it is very forgiving. But if you face good player 5.0 or up , then it is not good enough unless you have great footwork and technique . I am an advanced player i would say and since i made the Switch to a slightly stiffer and more powerful racket, i win more matches. That’s it for me. If you live in Europe I can sell you my 2 völkls
 

2kay

Rookie
Sure for a 93 it is very forgiving. But if you face good player 5.0 or up , then it is not good enough unless you have great footwork and technique . I am an advanced player i would say and since i made the Switch to a slightly stiffer and more powerful racket, i win more matches. That’s it for me. If you live in Europe I can sell you my 2 völkls
Do you think that a 95 is too small for the modern game (for yourself, or in general)?
 
Although I like 93-95 myself, Still borderline. I would go with 97 least. For Volkl also be aware it has a low twistweight, so each time you don’t hit the Ball cleanly , you will def loose power. Even loose strings will not Not help much, you can a better feel and higher trajectory, but not more power. And I think the Volkl is not meant to be a powerstick, it is made for Touch shots. If that’s your style, it might be great. But I will not get you very far. They used to play with this stick some time ago when the game was different . But of course any pro could still shoot us off the court even with the Volkl, cos they are simply so much better players.
 

PT280 Fan

Semi-Pro
I see that that frame got stellar reviews from TW with an overall of 85 and two play testers going to it after the play test. That says a lot. I've never played that stick but did recently come in to the possession of two Super G 10 330 mids after never before playing Volkl and count me impressed. These are slightly stiffer (64), thicker beamed and bigger headed rackets (96 as opposed to 93). This frame is quite forgiving (ample sweetspot) hits a huge ball with absolutely no arm shock. Presently my main frames are Donnay Pro One 97s and bought these Super G 10s (slightly used) only because they were sexy, the power quotient intrigued me and the deal was just too good to pass up. I play well with them and they could become my main weapons. I should mention that I'm 66 and use frames that are 96", 97" and 98" (have some larger but don't like them), so at your age, if you like the feel of the smaller head size, I'd say don't be afraid to go with it.
 

mcs1970

Hall of Fame
I still have my two black matte ones. Everyone who has played with it will agree it has a truly unique feel. I lose more matches than win with it but still find myself going back to it. Almost like an addiction because when you get it right with that racquet there is no better feeling.

Your choice. You want a flexible comfy racquet that is fun to play with but are willing to get pushed around as the quality of your opponents go up? It is the racquet for you. If winning is a premium for you look at other racquets.
 

2kay

Rookie
I still have my two black matte ones. Everyone who has played with it will agree it has a truly unique feel. I lose more matches than win with it but still find myself going back to it. Almost like an addiction because when you get it right with that racquet there is no better feeling.

Your choice. You want a flexible comfy racquet that is fun to play with but are willing to get pushed around as the quality of your opponents go up? It is the racquet for you. If winning is a premium for you look at other racquets.
You're the second person I've heard describe it as addictive, haha. Must be good.

Do you find it plays comparably to a standard 95 sq in racquet? I know that racquets like the Redondo Mid and the Prestige Mid play noticeably smaller than 95'' frames (or so I've heard). On the other hand, I've played with the Prince Phantom 93p and found that it felt no meaningfully smaller than an average 95'' frame.
 

mcs1970

Hall of Fame
You're the second person I've heard describe it as addictive, haha. Must be good.

Do you find it plays comparably to a standard 95 sq in racquet? I know that racquets like the Redondo Mid and the Prestige Mid play noticeably smaller than 95'' frames (or so I've heard). On the other hand, I've played with the Prince Phantom 93p and found that it felt no meaningfully smaller than an average 95'' frame.

I am not a high level player and my comments about finding a racquet addictive enough to play with it even at the cost of losing matches should tell you how seriously I take tennis. Try it if you can. It has a unique feel but is more suited for old school linear strokes than whippy modern strokes.

I have played with the KPS88, PS 85, Diabolo Mid, Pog Mid. Of the mids POG was the most forgiving. Courier was hitting whippy strokes with a PS 85. Fed also played with it. I am just saying though that for most rec adults if your strokes are more modern go with a bigger frame.

As for 95 vs 93 you have other advanced players telling you the same thing on this thread. It is a fabulous control racquet but you will have to build up your points. No easy defense to offense or getting winners off mishits like a Pure Drive. Try it if you can. Sell it if you don’t like it. Btw you do get a lot more spin with the PB10 mid than you would think just looking at the specs. But it is still a control racquet.
 

basil J

Hall of Fame
I thought it was a great serving stick. I had mine strung with 17G Vs gut at 55# and the serve was not lacking at all.
 

fuzz nation

G.O.A.T.
Hi all,

I recently saw that the Volkl Power Bridge 10 Mid was re-released on their website, and I was wondering whether anybody had experience with this frame? Most of the specs are in my range (high static weight but 320s swingweight, nice RA etc.) but I'm a bit leery of the 93 in2 head size.

I've recently tried out the Volkl C10 Pro, which I absolutely adore, save for the high swingweight (330). So I've been looking for other Volkl racquets that are supposed to play similarly, and I came across the PB 10 Mid.

As I've played with 95 in2 before with little issue, I was wondering whether this racquet plays more like a 95 than a 93. Similarly, are the sweet spot and power level unexpectedly small or large for this type of racquet? As far as I've seen, this racquet isn't available anywhere for demo, so if I buy it I'm committed.

Thanks!

Half a pot of coffee down the hatch... rainy day... and nothing to do, but write about my Volkls 8-B

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).
 

2kay

Rookie
Half a pot of coffee down the hatch... rainy day... and nothing to do, but write about my Volkls 8-B

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).
I agree with your points about the C10, but I think you may be referring to one of the several older editions of the frame with a more manageable swing weight (low 320s). The only edition available currently--the 2019 edition--has a beefier swing weight of 330, which, coupled with the already high static weight, is too much for my shoulder to bear. And adding weight to the handle won't diminish how much work my shoulder must do to swing the racquet.

I also considered simply installing thin multifilament strings on the C10 to lower the swing weight, but this would prevent me from ever experimenting with strings.

It has a wonderful feel, however, as you said--a unique blend of old and new. If they were still selling a version of this racquet with a lower swing weight, I would buy it.
 

PT280 Fan

Semi-Pro
After re-reading your post, it sounds like the Super G 10 mid 320 would fall right in your wheelhouse https://www.tennis-warehouse.com/reviews/S10320/S10320review.html. Probably need to go auction site or classified though. As I said earlier, I picked up a couple of the slightly used 330s a short time ago and really love them. It's weird but as a Double's specialist with a one hander, I really prefer the 96" & 97" offerings to the 98" and above as I can control the net clearance and hit a more punishing backhand. These frames won some kind of engineering award over in Germany but it looks like the response has been tepid. Seems like Rec players have this misconception that you can't play the modern game on sub 98" frames.
 
Last edited:
Interesting reading this thread and it’s prob a bit late to pitch in but here goes. I play to a high club standard and am mid 30s and so still move ok, although it’s costing me more and more.

Over my years I’ve played with a number of sticks Yonex RD7 (95 sq inch) Wilson K Six One Tour (90sq inch) and Wilson Autograph (97sq inch) and so am a fan of the Agassi/Rios/Moya era of baseliners.

I tried the PB10 mid a couple of years ago and my god, absolutely fell in love. When testing, I had done the rounds with a number of newer rackets (from the bigger manufactures) but I never thought I would like Volkl but in terms of comfort, feel and control I’ve not played with a better frame…I actually find it generates more power and spin than all of the above because of the wand like head that allows for more RHS. In terms of sweet spot it’s definitely comparable to a 95sq inch. I also own the old school Head series, Pro Tour 660, Radical Tour 660 and Prestige Tour 600 and its favoured to those greats for match play…PB10 is truly the most underrated racket of it’s generation if you’re after a classic 1990s feel.
 
Last edited:

ppmishra

Rookie
Plays a lot more flexible than the latest c10 pro, but simply is not powerful enough for the modern game. Especially lacking power for serve !
In that sense, the Becker 11 mid is fantastic for serves, definitely has more pop but a tad less control, more SW and less HL (minor but becomes noticeable the longer one plays). Still the PB10 mid is an excellent if demanding frame. Still pull mine out from time to time and have lowered the tension.
 

Crocodile

G.O.A.T.
The PB 10 Mid is probably in many traditional Volkl fans top 3 ever Volkl frames released,
It’s an excellent S & V racquet and it has great precision and feel and for its 330g unstrung weight, it’s very mobile.
I was using this frame until the extended lockdown we had here and since then found it a little easier to play with a Pk Q Tour 315, especially for doubles play and some easier comfort. Also very impressed with the Angell K7 red and lime.
A lot of younger players growing up with more modern frames will find the PB 10 Mid unforgiving especially now with so many wider 100sq inch frames available.
I would say that one of the closest and easier frames to use that has a smaller 95 head was the 2018 Yonex V Core 95 or Dunlop CX 200 Tour. A more modern and powerful a Volkl Mid that many people have overlooked was the Super G 10 Mid 96 with its 22mm beam, v engine throat and 64 RA, the bright yellow one. I think people at the time sort of missed this frame as a contender but I think it’s quite sort after in the used classifieds,
 

basil J

Hall of Fame
Interesting reading this thread and it’s prob a bit late to pitch in but here goes. I play to a high club standard and am mid 30s and so still move ok, although it’s costing me more and more.

Over my years I’ve played with a number of sticks Yonex RD7 (95 sq inch) Wilson K Six One Tour (90sq inch) and Wilson Autograph (97sq inch) and so am a fan of the Agassi/Rios/Moya era of baseliners.

I tried the PB10 mid a couple of years ago and my god, absolutely fell in love. When testing, I had done the rounds with a number of newer rackets (from the bigger manufactures) but I never thought I would like Volkl but in terms of comfort, feel and control I’ve not played with a better frame…I actually find it generates more power and spin than all of the above because of the wand like head that allows for more RHS. In terms of sweet spot it’s definitely comparable to a 95sq inch. I also own the old school Head series, Pro Tour 660, Radical Tour 660 and Prestige Tour 600 and its favoured to those greats for match play…PB10 is truly the most underrated racket of it’s generation if you’re after a classic 1990s feel.
You can still get new PB10 mids off the Volkl website if anyone is interested.
 
Old thread, but playing at a 4.0-4.5 level, no one is running into people who can hit hard enough to overpower you if you're playing with a 93. I can believe that at the 5.0+ level it may be a handicap, but as I do not live there, it's not a concern. I own and play with frames from 73-100 square inches, and the frames I tend to play best with are 90 and 93. The 93 are Becker London Tours, basically a flexier, 18x20 version of the PB10 Mid. If anyone is looking at this thread and thinking of getting the PB10 from the Volkl site, I say, "go for it." The feel of Volkl 93 frames is addictive.
 
Top