"l'Enfant Prodige" Lorenzo Musetti's Racquet mystery (HEAD)

dr325i said:
That is an interesting question.
Gravity Pro was the first one I tried and was impressed. Did not need any customization, stable, right amount of power, spin, great layup, excellent feel, thin beam cuts through the air. The head shape and PJ was something I could not get used to. I tried Gravity Tour but was not impressed by it except excellent layup and feel
From the extreme line I only tried Extreme Tour and still have it in my bag. Such an easy to use layup and great combo of power, spin, control...
Radical pro was a bit underpowered for me. Radical MP way overpowered. Again, great feeling layups.
Prestige MP is a classic feel, buttery soft (a few I had all came at 56RA strung. However, the launch angle was to low for me and needed too much work (vs. my standard 16x19 95 sq in). But the feel was such an improvement over previous versions.
The speed MP I tried was too powerful for me.

So, if I had to rank them, Id go with Gravity Pro, Extreme Tour, Radical Pro, Prestige MP. All 4 are very different though.
Click to expand...

im getting in line as well to ask about the 360+ Prestige mid...I know you’re a classical prestige guy, was this one too stiff to make your top list?
 
I am in doubt. I don't know whether to change the pallet of my Radical Pro G360 for the TK82.
Is it a matter of sensation or in theory the TK57 / 82 help to open the wrist more?
 
@dr325i good night, taking advantage of that i asked you about the best head rackets in the 360+ version, if you can logically answer a question based on your great knowledge of the Head brand, for you which was the top 5 in order best rackets launched by the brand in all these years for the open public? And also taking advantage of which are the 5 best pro stocks of the brand? all this in your opinion, I thank you and a big hug!
 
BilyNovak said:
@dr325i good night, taking advantage of that i asked you about the best head rackets in the 360+ version, if you can logically answer a question based on your great knowledge of the Head brand, for you which was the top 5 in order best rackets launched by the brand in all these years for the open public? And also taking advantage of which are the 5 best pro stocks of the brand? all this in your opinion, I thank you and a big hug!
Click to expand...
Haha, I cannot do that. I have not tried many rackets or brands. I am sure there is some good stuff out there
 
dr325i said:
That is an interesting question.
Gravity Pro was the first one I tried and was impressed. Did not need any customization, stable, right amount of power, spin, great layup, excellent feel, thin beam cuts through the air. The head shape and PJ was something I could not get used to. I tried Gravity Tour but was not impressed by it except excellent layup and feel
From the extreme line I only tried Extreme Tour and still have it in my bag. Such an easy to use layup and great combo of power, spin, control...
Radical pro was a bit underpowered for me. Radical MP way overpowered. Again, great feeling layups.
Prestige MP is a classic feel, buttery soft (a few I had all came at 56RA strung. However, the launch angle was to low for me and needed too much work (vs. my standard 16x19 95 sq in). But the feel was such an improvement over previous versions.
The speed MP I tried was too powerful for me.

So, if I had to rank them, Id go with Gravity Pro, Extreme Tour, Radical Pro, Prestige MP. All 4 are very different though.
Click to expand...

As a one handed backhand always looking at moving away from a 95 inch frame to a 97 or 98
and really like racquets with thinner shaft than the hoop for that extra dwell/feel/sling effect.
However if Gravity Pro or Extreme Tour 95 in versions 16 x 19 were available this would convince
me to give up my Yonex SV95 and recent toy to move to Prince Textreme 95 (1st edition).
 
@dr325i my god tell me what you used, what you remember about Head, which ones did you like best, the top 5 and the pro stock too ?, you are a reference for us on the forum
 
BilyNovak said:
@dr325i my god tell me what you used, what you remember about Head, which ones did you like best, the top 5 and the pro stock too ?, you are a reference for us on the forum
Click to expand...
I’ve used a lot from Head and am using the PT57A 16x19, PT348.1, and TGT231.3 these days. PT57A is my main stick.
That does not mean any of those would fit your game. In fact, many players did not like those
 
dr325i said:
I’ve used a lot from Head and am using the PT57A 16x19, PT348.1, and TGT231.3 these days. PT57A is my main stick.
That does not mean any of those would fit your game. In fact, many players did not like those
Click to expand...
Tgt231.3 is microgel radical mp?
 
I read he strings his racquet with Hawk touch on the mains and Lynx Tour on the crosses. Unusual. You rarely hear of players stringing their racquets with two different Polys. Usually all poly or a poly/gut combo.
 
Wilander17 said:
I read he strings his racquet with Hawk touch on the mains and Lynx Tour on the crosses. Unusual. You rarely hear of players stringing their racquets with two different Polys. Usually all poly or a poly/gut combo.
Click to expand...

It's becoming more prevalent these days. Might find a really good combo that brings the best characteristics out of two strings versus one.
 
Wilander17 said:
I read he strings his racquet with Hawk touch on the mains and Lynx Tour on the crosses. Unusual. You rarely hear of players stringing their racquets with two different Polys. Usually all poly or a poly/gut combo.
Click to expand...

Both are great strings. The best of HEAD strings, along with Velocity.
 
Dan007 said:
It's becoming more prevalent these days. Might find a really good combo that brings the best characteristics out of two strings versus one.
Click to expand...
My son just tried this setting on his Extreme Tour. The first two hours was just unreal. Very very good power spin and control. The issue is that the performance drops dramatically after two hours.

This setting might be a good tournament selection, but not in regular training.
 
Musetti with new Boom stick or just Boom PJ over Extreme?

13205d5b546782aaea8536aa398e9ba4_1200x675.jpg
 
Maybe by going back to the previous iteration he's actually suggesting that, in reality, he really is using two different racquets, instead of just paint jobs - those evil geniuses! :unsure:o_O

#q@non #flatearther

Disclaimer: author is notoriously facetious; rebuttals are unnecessary
 
SinneGOAT said:
Probably went back due to familiarity and will test the boom on the off season.
Click to expand...


I was thinking, wow, this frame might be something great if a pro like Musetti is willing to switch over just like that.

Now, slightly disappointed. Just another normal frame.
 
I've been playing around with lead since the SW is pretty low as we all know and I settled with 4g @12 (as suggested by @dr325i ) + 3g @3&9... I had to counterbalance with a leather grip and 2 overgrips and it plays amazing at ~342g! So good that I had to retire my VCore95Ds after almost a decade... Same strings and string tension as Musetti https://www.supertennis.tv/Rubriche...errettini-uguali-da-lontano-diverse-da-vicino but I get a sore wrist after more than 2-3 hours on the court... Any soft poly suggestions to replace the Hawk Rough in the mains? Did anyone of you guys try the new Lynx Touch on the ET?
 
Well, well, well, he won the Hamburg European Open... The Boom Pro PJ makes a difference! :-D I believe by now that there are better Head sticks out there with improved directional control like the Speed Pro. Still curious to see what the Auxetic technology will do to the ET in 2022.
 
it is an Extreme Tour. I do think that it’s cool that head does cross model marketing, and others should *cough cough wilson *cough cough
 
dr325i said:
He moved to PT348.1 which is out of KB.
So, not exactly the same as the TGT348.1
Click to expand...
I think new Head pro stock codes are new molds with old layaps for example i think the PT346.1 is a Ti Radical mold with different head geometry resulting in different string chanell endings this difference make HEAD categorize it as a different mold but the throat area is the same mold and i am pretty shure the PT346.1 has the Flexpoint Radical Mp layap with Twin Tube technology...For example Coco Gauf is using a Speed mold with Pro tour 630 layap and it is called PT233.2 OR something
 
SLE said:
I think new Head pro stock codes are new molds with old layaps for example i think the PT346.1 is a Ti Radical mold with different head geometry resulting in different string chanell endings this difference make HEAD categorize it as a different mold but the throat area is the same mold and i am pretty shure the PT346.1 has the Flexpoint Radical Mp layap with Twin Tube technology...For example Coco Gauf is using a Speed mold with Pro tour 630 layap and it is called PT233.2 OR something
Click to expand...
So much wrong in one post.
1) TK346 is not an old Ti Radical mold. Similar, yes. The head is exactly the same therefore interchangeable grommets for the 18x20 patterns.
2) The PT346.1 layup is NOT the Flexpoint MP layup. It is a TT though.
3) Coco is using the PT339.2, TK339 mold (Speed MP/Pro) with the PT57A2 layup.
 
dr325i said:
So much wrong in one post.
1) TK346 is not an old Ti Radical mold. Similar, yes. The head is exactly the same therefore interchangeable grommets for the 18x20 patterns.
2) The PT346.1 layup is NOT the Flexpoint MP layup. It is a TT though.
3) Coco is using the PT339.2, TK339 mold (Speed MP/Pro) with the PT57A2 layup.
Click to expand...
You have played with both PT113B1 and FXP Radical MP and you mentioned they feel the same they just flex different.If you say the layap is different though can you elaborate what the difference is ? since both rackets share twin tube and both have the same soft flexy response at 61 strung and if the FXP Radical is indeed 21mm then another PT113B1 is thicker beam 22mm...for shure the TK113 and TK167 molds has different string chanell endings
 
1) Nowhere you said "the mold is 95% the same"...
2) you are mixing up the molds (TK designator) and layups (the TGK/TGT/PT designator).
3) yes, the PT113B1 is a different layup from PT113B2, from PT113B3, PT113C1, PT113C2, from PT346.1, and from PT346.2. All different layups, none of them is the same as the FXP Radical MP layup, PT167.x.
4) Yes, head made the PT113B1 and B2 specifically for ND, then latter allowed others to use it (FV, MZ, RS and so on). They also created the PT346.1 (a small variation from the PT113B2) for ND specifically. They have also created the PT113Cx layups for various players and the PT346.2 layup that is very different from the PT346.1 for a specific player. Creating a new layup is super easy and not costly at all. Creating a new mold is expensive.

So, all the above that you posted is purely your opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dr325i said:
1) Nowhere you said "the mold is 95% the same"...
2) you are mixing up the molds (TK designator) and layups (the TGK/TGT/PT designator).
3) yes, the PT113B1 is a different layup from PT113B2, from PT113B3, PT113C1, PT113C2, from PT346.1, and from PT346.2. All different layups, none of them is the same as the FXP Radical MP layup, PT167.x.
4) Yes, head made the PT113B1 and B2 specifically for ND, then latter allowed others to use it (FV, MZ, RS and so on). They also created the PT346.1 (a small variation from the PT113B2) for ND specifically. They have also created the PT113Cx layups for various players and the PT346.2 layup that is very different from the PT346.1 for a specific player. Creating a new layup is super easy and not costly at all. Creating a new mold is expensive.

So, all the that you posted is purely your opinion.
Click to expand...
I said clearly in both post the molds (PT113A-PT167A1) have different string chanell endings so i never said they are 100% the same if you can not understand what different string chanell endings is it is not my fault, for you different string chanell endings with identical throat is same mold but for HEAD company it is NOT it is a different mold that is why it gives different codes to each mold, TK113,TK167,TK346.All 3 of them have identical throat but different Head geometry resulting in different string chanell endings maybe a few inches maybe more.So this small difference is enoupgh for HEAD to consider them a different mold.YES maybe i am wrong about the layap of PT346.1 and i did not know that producing new layaps is more cost effective than producing new molds but as i said i never played with a PT346.1 so i can not know the difference with PT113B1...I own a PT113B1 and i also own an Austrian FXP Radical MP they feel simillar for me and i customize them with same specs both at 350 SW with silicone in handle and same strings
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SLE said:
I said clearly in both post the molds (PT113A-PT167A1) have different string chanell endings so i never said they are 100% the same if you can not understand what different string chanell endings is it is not my fault so you should stop spreading nonsense and act like you know everything,for you different string chanell endings with identical throat is same mold but for HEAD company it is NOT it is a different mold that is why it gives different codes to each mold, TK113,TK167,TK346.All 3 of them have identical throat but different Head geometry resulting in different string chanell endings maybe a few inches maybe more.So this small difference is enoupgh for HEAD to consider them a different mold.YES maybe i am wrong about the layap of PT346.1 and i did not know that producing new layaps is more cost effective than producing new molds but as i said i never played with a PT346.1 so i can not know the difference with PT113B1...I own a PT113B1 and i also own an Austrian FXP Radical MP they feel simillar for me and i customize them with same specs both at 350 SW with silicone in handle and same strings
Click to expand...

Hawks9451 said:
No, the thread got revived by @SLE after 2 years for seemingly no reason.
Click to expand...

Please do your business somewhere else - this stupid Djokovic discussion is just nerve wrecking to most of us.
And besides that, @dr325i knows more about these things, to why even bother...
 
SLE said:
I said clearly in both post the molds (PT113A-PT167A1) have different string chanell endings so i never said they are 100% the same if you can not understand what different string chanell endings is it is not my fault,f or you different string chanell endings with identical throat is same mold but for HEAD company it is NOT it is a different mold that is why it gives different codes to each mold, TK113,TK167,TK346.All 3 of them have identical throat but different Head geometry resulting in different string chanell endings maybe a few inches maybe more.So this small difference is enoupgh for HEAD to consider them a different mold.YES maybe i am wrong about the layap of PT346.1 and i did not know that producing new layaps is more cost effective than producing new molds but as i said i never played with a PT346.1 so i can not know the difference with PT113B1...I own a PT113B1 and i also own an Austrian FXP Radical MP they feel simillar for me and i customize them with same specs both at 350 SW with silicone in handle and same strings
Click to expand...
Let me try one more time.
ANY difference, no matter how big or small requires a new mold production. Search term “mold” or “mould”. You cannot use the same mold and have differences that you describe in production frames. Molds are very heavy, very precise, have to sustain high temps for millions of rackets and for many years. Yes, they are very expensive. Numbering/naming of the molds is irrelevant.
The TK113A mold (Ti Radical MP) is different from the TK113B mold - yes the string channel ending and a few other minor things.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dr325i said:
Let me try one more time!
ANY difference, no matter how big or small requires a new mold production. Search term “mold” or “mould”. You cannot use the same mold and have differences that you describe in production frames. Molds are very heavy, very precise, have to sustain high temps for millions of rackets and for many years. Yes, they are very expensive. Numbering/naming of the molds is irrelevant.
The TK113A mold (Ti Radical MP) is different from the TK113B mold - yes the string channel ending and a few other minor things.
Click to expand...
When you say the moulds are different you need to specify where is the difference exactly.The TK113A and TK113B moulds are identical they share identical throat and head geometry that is reason HEAD give them identical code since 113= mould.The difference betwwen <<A.>> and <<B>> is the layap and beam thickness.TK113A is 21mm and TK113B is 22mm.Maybe for you the mould is different because PT113B is thicker but for HEAD it is the same mould so it gave them same numer (113).On the other hand the TK113(Ti Radical) and TK167(FXP Radical) share propalby the same throat but light difference in Head geometry so for HEAD company it is a diferent mould that is why it gave them different pro stock number (113-167) respectively.To the naked eye the head geometry of Ti Radical looks rounder than FXP Radical yet you say they share identical moulds.Same applies for PT346 the head geometry is different than TK113 mould even though throat is identical.Again same stands for TK57A and TK57E MOULDS are IDENTICAL with difference the TK57E has thicker 22mm beam width and of course different layap..There is a bifg difference calling 2 moulds identical and 95% the same and you say all 3 moulds (TK113-TK167-TK346) are 100% the same without even questioning yourself why HEAD company gave them different numbers..You have general information about layaps maybebecause you have somoene inside Kenneblach factory or Head i do not know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SLE said:
When you say the moulds are different you need to specify where is the difference exactly.The TK113A and TK113B moulds are identical they share identical throat and head geometry that is reason HEAD give them identical code since 113= mould.The difference betwwen <<A.>> and <<B>> is the layap and beam thickness.TK113A is 21mm and TK113B is 22mm.Maybe for you the mould is different because PT113B is thicker but for HEAD it is the same mould so it gave them same numer (113).On the other hand the TK113(Ti Radical) and TK167(FXP Radical) share propalby the same throat but light difference in Head geometry so for HEAD company it is a diferent mould that is why it gave them different pro stock number (113-167) respectively.To the naked eye the head geometry of Ti Radical looks rounder than FXP Radical yet you say they share identical moulds.Same applies for PT346 the head geometry is different than TK113 mould even though throat is identical.Again same stands for TK57A and TK57E MOULDS are IDENTICAL with difference the TK57E has thicker 22mm beam width and of course different layap..There is a bifg difference calling 2 moulds identical and 95% the same and you say all 3 moulds (TK113-TK167-TK346) are 100% the same without even questioning yourself why HEAD company gave them different numbers..You have general information about layaps maybebecause you have somoene inside Kenneblach factory or Head i do not know.
Click to expand...
1) TK113A mold has completely different string channel ending than the TK113B. Mold. TK113B mold was not introduced until ND rejoined Head. Both, TK113A and 113B are 21.5mm beam. The “A” and “B” in the mold designation has absolutely NOTHING to do with the layup.

2) can you please show me where I EVER said that FXP Radical MP and Ti Radical MP have identical molds????? They are completely different molds with FXP Radical string channel ending like TK113B mold vs very different ending for the TK113A.
Additionally, one has ridges and FXP holes that is a part of the mold.

3) PT57A (PT630) is a completely different mold from the PT57E (IPrestige MP). The PT57A is a 20mm beam, PT57E is a 21mm beam. They have completely different throat dimple areas, very visible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Ferrero Head pro stock racquet !!!
Replies
19
Views
5K
bleno567
bleno567
M
  • Poll Poll
Cant find a good racquet.
Replies
43
Views
3K
esm
E
M
Perfect Racquet for me?
Replies
4
Views
684
TennisHound
TennisHound
Back
Top