Indirect Mounting and direct mounting

[Shamgod]

Is direct mounting really that much better than indirect mounting?
According to the stringway site direct mounting prevents the racket from getting shorter but 6-point indirect mounting has direct mounting at at 6 and 12 o'clock to prevent the racket from shortening so doesn't it do the same thing? Is stringway's machine worth that much more money because it has direct mounting compared to the indirect mounting of every other machine?

 

[Deleted member 25923]

You have your terms mixed up. Indirect is a 6 point mounting system ala Alpha Revo 4000. Direct mounting is the mounting system on the SW machines.

 

[Shamgod]

You have your terms mixed up. Indirect is a 6 point mounting system ala Alpha Revo 4000. Direct mounting is the mounting system on the SW machines.

my bad thanks

 

[Shamgod]

anybody have an opinion?

 

[dgdawg]

anybody have an opinion?

6 point. Firmer hold on the entire frame.
Dude-Are you still researching machines? You will be an expert by the time you get one. Guess that's the objective. Good luck bro. Better pull the trigger soon or you will have spent all your $$$ on string jobs:razz:

 

[Shamgod]

6 point. Firmer hold on the entire frame.
Dude-Are you still researching machines? You will be an expert by the time you get one. Guess that's the objective. Good luck bro. Better pull the trigger soon or you will have spent all your $$$ on string jobs:razz:

i'll probably end up getting a stringway, but i wanna wait a little to see if laserfibre will start sending out their machines again cause they're like $300 cheaper than ML 100
Also if the Euro becomes lower than the stringway price would decrease

 

[diredesire]

IMHO, I like the "direct" systems more, simply because they stay out of the way when stringing. I don't really have a problem stringing with a 6 point outside, I just don't like it quite as much.

Yes, a 6 point has "direct" support at 6 and 12, but I'd like to see someone try stringing a frame with only those two points. I'd wear safety goggles and a full jump suit if anyone takes me up on that offer.

If it were me, I'd take a really well designed inside mount over a well designed 6 point outside mount due to preferece. If you have a good EITHER mount, IMHO it's really all up to preference at that point.

 

[Shamgod]

so the 6 point indirect mount isn't going to cause too much stress on the frame or anything right?

 

[diredesire]

so the 6 point indirect mount isn't going to cause too much stress on the frame or anything right?

Any good mount (in this case, 6 point outside) will support the frame, and reduce stress as much as possible. I wouldn't worry about it.

OTOH, any crappy or cheap mount can definitely be damaging (long term) to a frame.

In reality, though, most mounting systems are plenty sturdy to support a frame throughout the stringing process, even 2 point mounts. Besides preventing a frame from shattering/exploding, you're just looking at the level and "completeness" of support after that.

 

[1012007]

Hi Guys,

Diredesire is right when he says any good support is ok and it will try to support the racquet as good as possible.
But when it comes to choosing the best system between direct and indirect, it is quite easy to explain why a direct support is superior to the indirect:

The direct is called direct because it works direct on the frame where most of the main strings are. The strings pull the frame inwards where the supports push it outwards. This means that there is no length of racket material that has to “transfer” the force of the support to the position where the forces of the main strings work.

With an indirect system this is quite different:
The force of the outside supports work around 2.30 hr. while the main strings pull between 12 and 1 o’clock.
This means that the part of the racquet between 1 and 2.30 has to transfer the force of the support from 2.30 to 12. This means a bending force in the racquet material.
I.o.w. the main strings bend the frame inwards between the 12 o’clock and 2.30 position creating stress.

The higher the force on the outside supports, the bigger the bending stress in the racquet. Or the wider the head of the racquet the higher this stress because the force of the outside support works on a longer lever.

This bending force does not occur on a multipoint direct support, of course a 3 point is better than the 2 points (like the Neos) but both have no problem with the bending.

 

[dgdawg]

Hi Guys,

Diredesire is right when he says any good support is ok and it will try to support the racquet as good as possible.
But when it comes to choosing the best system between direct and indirect, it is quite easy to explain why a direct support is superior to the indirect:

The direct is called direct because it works direct on the frame where most of the main strings are. The strings pull the frame inwards where the supports push it outwards. This means that there is no length of racket material that has to “transfer” the force of the support to the position where the forces of the main strings work.

With an indirect system this is quite different:
The force of the outside supports work around 2.30 hr. while the main strings pull between 12 and 1 o’clock.
This means that the part of the racquet between 1 and 2.30 has to transfer the force of the support from 2.30 to 12. This means a bending force in the racquet material.
I.o.w. the main strings bend the frame inwards between the 12 o’clock and 2.30 position creating stress.

The higher the force on the outside supports, the bigger the bending stress in the racquet. Or the wider the head of the racquet the higher this stress because the force of the outside support works on a longer lever.

This bending force does not occur on a multipoint direct support, of course a 3 point is better than the 2 points (like the Neos) but both have no problem with the bending.

Well....this synopsis makes me ask: if a Neos type mounting system is "better", why then does virtually every high end, pro shop quality machine have a 6 point mounting system, including the new Prince 6000, Babolat, Tecnifibre, the list is endless. I've owned machine's with both types of mounting systems and I came to the conclusion that I prefer a 6 point system. This, of course, is only my opinion but I would think there's a reason the higher end machines use a 6 point.

 

[GPB]

The 6-pt systems are very quick to mount, I know that! My SP Swing (with an inside-pseudo-6-pt system) is a solid mount, but takes a little time to get it right... Enough that I'd pay extra for a quicker bang-bang-bang mount (like a Bab Star 5).

 

[1012007]

Dgdawg;
I think that your final question is a major question and it is very challenging to find an answer to this. I think we can try to find out by looking at this matter from different angles:
1) From the technical point of view.
2) From the view of the users
3) From the experiences with different systems, what went well and what went wrong.

1) From the technical view:
As explained above the stress in the racquet is lower on the direct system (inside) because there is no bending stress working on the material of the racquet. You can also look at it as follows: The best possible support would be to place an inside support at every position where a main string pulls the racquet inwards. This means that the force of every main string is directly working on the inside support on the racquet does not feel anything.
Because the shape of every racquet is different this is practically impossible.
A 3-point inside support with wide retainers like on the SW machines looks like the best possible approach.

2) From the users view:
The user has different angles to look at the matter.
* He must have a confident feeling about it, which means that most stringers will think that the stress in a racquet during stringing is minimal when it does not deform at all.
THIS IS A MAJOR MISTAKE which is easy to prove. When the racquet is kept in shape the forces on the supports are very high, which means:
- Very high stress points on certain areas of the racquet are obviously not good.
- The bending force in the racquet material caused by the support (see above) is very high.

* The system has to be user-friendly putting the racquet on the support must go easy and fast.
The Babolat system with the support arms that move simultaneously in combination with the V-shaped supports works easy and fast.
* The stringer will have confidence in a system that is used in pro-shops also.

3) The practical experience with both systems:
The easiest way to compare the direct and indirect system from this angle is to compare the complaints that are known about both.
* I have not read any complaints about damaged racquets on direct supports, even the experience with very simple 3 point systems like the Ektelon and Neos seem to work without problems. Even in the time that the oversize racquets were not as strong as nowadays and tensions were higher, these systems worked very well.
* Different problems are known with the indirect (6-p outside) supports):
- Racquets can get stuck in the support and the advise on a board has been to use a strap wrench on the central knob to loosen the supports.
* Drop shaped racquet cracks at 2 and 10 o’clock. Because the head of these racquets (like Prince Extenders) were very wide the force on the outside supports was huge.

Summarizing:
* Every system is a compromise between user-friendliness and quality to support the racquet.
* I think that the professional machines follow the leader in that market; Babolat, and many copy there system in one way or the other.
* Even simple inside supports can be very good.
* It is difficult to make a good quality but cheap copy of the Babolat system.

These are some of my thoughts about this major subject but it may be nice to hear the comments and experiences of others also on this subject.

 

[Shamgod]

It seems like SW reason is because direct mounting doesn't allow the racket to shorten but w/ 6 point mounting there is direct mounting at 6 and 12 o'clock which should prevent the racket to shorten anyways?

 

[Kevo]

It seems like SW reason is because direct mounting doesn't allow the racket to shorten but w/ 6 point mounting there is direct mounting at 6 and 12 o'clock which should prevent the racket to shorten anyways?

I have a 6 point machine, and it is possible to shorten a racquet slightly. These mounts work pretty well, but since pulling the mains on each side of the 12 support introduces a side loading, the frame can lengthen slightly by flexing and squeezing/sliding through the side supports. It's not uncommon for me to notice the frame loosen a bit on the 6 if the mains start at 12, or vice versa. This "frame slack" later gets taken up by the pulling of the mains back to the other side of the frame, and then the slack at the 12 or 6 mount is reduced. Later after more mains are strung then the tension on those 12 and 6 mounts increase and the frame actually gets a bit shorter. It's almost impossible except on a very high end machine with extremely tight tolerances for the 12 and 6 mounts not to give some slack during stringing due to the very high forces from the mains. This is generally very minimal and not that important if the frame is mounted well, but IMO it's pretty clear that direct inside support at the 12 and 6 positions is better at supporting the frame than the small posts at 12 and 6. The wider the base of support at these positions the better.

Don't get me wrong though, I really enjoy my 6 pt machine, it works well, and I am not worried at all about frame issues due to the mount. Just stating my opinion on which one is mechanically superior.

 

[Deleted member 25923]

Well....this synopsis makes me ask: if a Neos type mounting system is "better", why then does virtually every high end, pro shop quality machine have a 6 point mounting system, including the new Prince 6000, Babolat, Tecnifibre, the list is endless. I've owned machine's with both types of mounting systems and I came to the conclusion that I prefer a 6 point system. This, of course, is only my opinion but I would think there's a reason the higher end machines use a 6 point.

Self centering six point mounts are much faster to mount than a SW direct support system. That's the big factor.