n(k)Six-One Tour 90 - Are you kidding me?

Sakumo-

I completely agree with you, on higher level of play, the victories are in the details!:) I guess my thoughts in my previous posts were directed more towards people staring out or occasional weekend warriors who are getting swayed violently by abrasive posters.

By the way, just for a little background, the racquet i am using exclusively for both recreational and competitive play is the k90 stock with gamma professional 16g at 57 pounds. Im lovin the ride!!!:D
 
chowdhurynaveen said:
Sakumo-

I completely agree with you, on higher level of play, the victories are in the details!:) I guess my thoughts in my previous posts were directed more towards people staring out or occasional *weekend warriors who are getting swayed violently by abrasive posters.

By the way, just for a little background, the racquet i am using exclusively for both recreational and competitive play is the k90 stock with gamma professional 16g at 57 pounds. Im lovin the ride!!!:D
Click to expand...

Yea it's a sweet racket, btw *that's an awesome song. :grin:
 
"You must have tremendous strength, use every single muscle in your body, and have flawless timing to play effective and consistant tennis with this racket. "

Roger Federer?
 
I play guitar and find the guitar forums to be a mirror image to the tennis forums, simply different equipment. Instead of the brand of racquet, it’s the brand of guitar, or strings, or amplifier. Just as much differing opinion and just as many pro or negative threads about the most popular equipment.

I play with the nsix-one 95 and I love it. I tried the n90 but it was strung with Luxilon strings and it felt like I was hitting with a waffle iron in the beginning. Having said that, it wasn’t that bad of a racquet and although not for me, I can see why some like it. My serve is a big part of my game and I thought that part of my game would suffer with the n90, but I did not see a significant difference and found I was quickly serving just as effectively as with my 95. Although similar balance, I thought the 95 was more nimble at the net. Overall, both were very solid for my ground game, I just felt more comfortable with the 95. I also thought that my serves had just a bit more pop, but that certainly could be the strings.

Players should demo a lot of racquets. The 95 was one of the last racquets I tried and if I purchased the earlier racquets, I would have spent a ton of time and money on racquets that were “recommended” by others.
 
Bartelby said:
Given that Wilson once made a 6.0 original 95" with a 20mm beam, if I'm correct, it would be nice if we could lobby them to make a k 6.1 tour 95 at 325 grams and 10 points headlight unstrung. It would be cheap for them to make and it would sell well.
Click to expand...
Wilson essentially already makes this racquet. They just refuse to sell it to the rest of the world outside of Asia. It's the Asian K90. It's 320g, 9 pts. HL unstrung, and has a 90 sq.in. head. It's the same racquet as the US K90 but just a bit lighter and easier to swing. That 5 sq. in. difference won't matter when you can swing it so easily.
 
Bottle Rocket said:
The Tour 90 is not a miracle stick for everyone.
Click to expand...
Of course, it isn't and that's why I haven't seen anyone here claim that it is. In fact, I think it's the opposite as just about everyone here has gone out of their way to make sure that people understand that this racquet is for advanced players only.
 
BreakPoint said:
Of course, it isn't and that's why I haven't seen anyone here claim that it is. In fact, I think it's the opposite as just about everyone here has gone out of their way to make sure that people understand that this racquet is for advanced players only.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Although I would like to say it is my miracle stick :grin: :p
 
Spinnage said:
This thread has no purpose. You dont have to be a pro to enjoy the tour 90s. As i have 3 students using them and one of them has been playing for only 8 months, He is accelerating at a rapid pace and playing at almost club level. Yes, these racquet are demanding, But they govern your strokes and keep your footwork clean. I notice as a tennis instructor over many years students with smaller headed racquets have a harder time at the beginning, But in the long run they will have better strokes and footwork than those who learn their strokes on a larger racquet which lets then get away with murder without a decent technique. Tennis has gone mad with the sizes of the new racquets. Come on people if you dont like, you must have learned on a granny racquet. As for me I play with the K90 and have a long fast swing, breathtaking ohbh and 135 MPH serve. As advice to all the smaller racquet haters out there continue to hate because it just makes it easier to embarrass you in a match with your poor footwork, small compact swings, and no placement of the ball.
Click to expand...

THIS IS THE BEST DAMN QUOTE I HAVE EVER READ!!!!!!!!
 
OK, it's not impossibly hard to play with these frames. It just depends if the frame suits your game or not.

I didn't really like the n tour 90, but give me a POG mid and I can play just fine (and IMHO, both frames are "demanding").

So, it's not that the n90 is impossible to play with, it just doesn't suit many peoples' games.
 
Richie Rich said:
with a serve like that he should be making money on the pro tour. maybe the rest of his game is complete crap
Click to expand...

True. But he did say his backhand was "breathtaking". That could be in a bad way. Like when some people gasp when they see a hideous person in line at store or something. So, your probably right.:D
 
Maybe when it warms up some, the racquet will perform better for you. My sticks feel like the strings are wood at low temperatures and the ball just.... won't... go.... very.... fast. Seriously, give it a try under warmer conditions.
 
IMHO any adult male (and most females), have the strength to swing any tennis racket.I have owned perhaps three dozen sticks in my quest for one that I can commit to, ( yes I am a racket ****)I have learned this: Higher weight can serve to slightly slow down ones swing. This is what I needed with the PD and the POGOS. Both were too powerful and with the lower weight and the trampoline effect of the larger string bed, it was less than optimal, especially in tourament play against same/better level opponents. Therefore I currently use the POG MID. A little more demanding, yes, but it gives you something back, ie control in a brute force way, it keeps your animal instincts at bay.I know what some of you are thinking, "why cant your keep your own stroke at bay?) At first blush this seems correct, but even pros will shank a ball on occasion. IMHO the real players sticks keep you honest and provide a more predictable string bed response.So to sum up, I dont think any of us are too weak to use a K90 sucessfully, it may turn out to be that those who reject a small-head-heavier recket are being just as emotional in their judgement as those who play with a FEDDIESTICK for the ego satisfaction. In the three years I have been experimenting with rackets and strings I have come to these conclusions:
1) Your impression of any given new racket is based mostly upon comparison with your usual racket, by virtue of the muscle memory effect.
2) It takes MONTHS of frequent play with any given stick to decide which stick is most effective in the greater majority of situations.
3) The stick that impresses you most during casual play might not be the one that wins you the big match.
4) rackets really DO influence match outcome.
5)There are days when stick B will work better for you than your supposed .
best.
Ive rambled too much, but after Ive received the K90 that I bought last night, Ill post comparisons with both sizes of POG, RDS 001 and 002 tour, etc.
 
Bottle Rocket said:
This message board surely doesn't represent the rest of the tennis playing population. I just can't believe there are actually this many people putting themselves at such a huge disadvantage with these rackets. I don't understand it. Why is everyone giving into this?

You guys are all serious?

I can't believe it.
Click to expand...

I guess I wouldn't be kidding you if I say that 20 years ago many started playing tennis with much more demanding frames than PS 90, n6.1 Tour 90 or K90.

Just because many recreational players prefer lightweight and powerful rackets, there is no reason to bash heavy and demanding frames. If you are good playing with your OS, 10oz frame why bother trying to be like Fed?
 
tennis man,
20 years ago as well as 30 years ago (i should know - i'm getting 43) you started playing tennis with heavier frames! heavier frames like 370-400g do not have to be also more demanding! it will be more difficult to swing them around but it would be easier to control them in the sense that you need quite a good technique not to hit the fence with a pure drive. with a wooden frame a beginner had quite a hard time to get the balls sailing past the baseline.
 
fgs said:
tennis man,
20 years ago as well as 30 years ago (i should know - i'm getting 43) you started playing tennis with heavier frames! heavier frames like 370-400g do not have to be also more demanding! it will be more difficult to swing them around but it would be easier to control them in the sense that you need quite a good technique not to hit the fence with a pure drive. with a wooden frame a beginner had quite a hard time to get the balls sailing past the baseline.
Click to expand...

I don't quite get your point, sorry.
 
I just came back from the tennis court and I was playing with a K Factor 95 for about 4 hours. It does have very good control but it seems to be a lot stiffer than my PS 6.0 95.

After having played with a K Factor 95, I came to the conclusion that those who people who say they could play well with a K90, they all must be very accomplished players.
 
Mick said:
I came to the conclusion that those who people who say they could play well with a K90, they all must be very accomplished players.
Click to expand...

They don't have to be accomplished. It can be an acquired taste. If you want to play with particular frame, you can always learn how if you see benefits in it.

I don't see any benefits for myself to play with lighter and bigger frames and that's my answer to this thread's question.
 
tennis man,
the point is that 20 years ago noone started to play with more demanding racquets than a k90! they started with heavier racquets - but heavier does not have to be more demanding. have i made myself clear now? a 400g slazenger challenge no.1 is NOT more demanding than a 350g k90.
 
fgs said:
tennis man,
the point is that 20 years ago noone started to play with more demanding racquets than a k90! they started with heavier racquets - but heavier does not have to be more demanding. have i made myself clear now? a 400g slazenger challenge no.1 is NOT more demanding than a 350g k90.
Click to expand...

So, what do you tink makes k90 so demanding then, the head size? :)
 
sometimes i really get the feeling that either you have no idea about real tennis, i mean playing yourself on a tennis court, not only watching the game on tv, or you generically are set out to start an argument with anyone not willing to retract any opinions upon your first appearance. since the first assumption is not applicable, the latter one seems to be the only one remaining.
so mr.drakulie - you would say that a slazenger challenge no.1, small headsize, 420g is a more demanding racquet overall than a wilson k-tour 90, with some 350g and 90sq.inches. if you simply go by weight and headsize, i do absolutely agree with you - the k90 would be easier to swing and you're more likely to hit with the strings than with that wooden stick. but then there is the power level, where the modern frame is just like a "rocket launcher" compared to the old woodstick. this acceleration has to be controlled somehow - western grips or whatever, and this acceleration is like a magnifying lens - every small mistake you're doing will be exagerated in the result, that is a slight mishit with the slazenger would not have made the ball to long, but a slight mishit with the k90 will have it sailing. so, today, the game is faster due to these material advances which made it possible to have larger sized racquets and also lighter ones that can be easier accelerated and will enable the average player, not only the professional, to play a faster ball. so, in my opinion, given also the fact that even 10 year old girls could swing heavier racquets (which is true in the vast majority of cases:D ), a modern day frame like the k90 is overall more demanding than a "playerframe" of 30 years ago.
 
Bottle Rocket you have to remember there is a huge PS85 following. So many tennis players are used to the stiffness , weight , balance of the K90 and N90 since they are similar to the PS85. All 3 have a different feel that's all.
 
personally, the weight isn't the problem on the k90, it's the small small sweet spot. just my thoughts though...
 
rosenstar said:
personally, the weight isn't the problem on the k90, it's the small small sweet spot. just my thoughts though...
Click to expand...
Funny, as I have exactly the opposite opinion. It's not the small sweetspot that's the problem for me with the K90 (as I grew up using wood racquets), it's the weight. Yes, I know wood racquets were also heavy, but with the smaller head, I didn't notice it as much. A racquet of similar weight but a much bigger head (90 vs. 65) just feels much less maneuverable to me. Also, I'm much older now than when I used wood racquets, so that's also why I notice the weight more.
 
breakpoint,
it's not the weight, it's your/our age.:D
i played the n6.1 95 for a year and have "downscaled" to the nblade because when playing youngguns i started to be chronically late.
 
OK guys, I completely changed my mind about the K95 on the second day of using it. It's not too stiff and it's amazing. Everything I hit would go in, (from backcourt, at net). I am going to make it my main playing racquet from today on.
 
I've been playing for about two and a half to three years now and just recently switched to a 95 inch (I know it's not 90 inch) head -- more specifically, a Dunlop 200G Muscle Weave. That very day, I felt like I just opened the door to a higher level of my tennis game. Before that I had been using a 110 inch 6.0 ProStaff and a 100 inch Hyper Hammer 5.3. I initially thought that I would lose power because of the smaller head size, but this was not so. I've even gotten more pace on my shots and serve and tremendous accuracy.

Now I'm not saying that I know all, but I do know that my game has since improved after moving to a smaller head, heavier (concerning the Hammer) and more head-light frame. I know this thread started out regarding the nCode Tour 90, but I think there is also some discussion about whether or not "beginners" should use small headed, heavy frames, and I would have to agree with those who have said that it is a combination of the players personal style as well as their natural abilities as opposed to whether they've been playing for ten years or are considered "accomplished".

Again, I'm not overly experienced in the realm of racquets, but I think those who are pinning such unwieldy characteristics of the racquet on the fact that the frame is heavy and has a small head and thus is only a weapon in the hands of the advanced player is simply not true.
 
Last edited:
Bottle Rocket said:
I bought an nSix-One Tour of this board a few weeks ago. This was right before everyone went nuts about the K90. I just had to see what it was all about. People around here had to be on to something, right? The TW reviewers that deemed it incredibly demanding had to be wrong.

I've gotten about 10 hours of hitting time on it since getting it, which is pretty good considering we had to shovel the snow off the courts to play.

There is absolutely NO WAY there are so many people on this board that actually benefit from this frame. There is no way I am the only one that feels this way. This K90 and N90 stuff is insane, surely influenced a lot more by Roger Federer than anyone is willing to admit. This is nuts!

The racket is incredibly demanding. I am not a bad player. I am surely better than a lot of the poeple around here that have switched to the K90. I can't even see how a 5.0 can benefit from this thing... How can anyone benefit from this frame? You guys really think a 5 square inch difference gives some sort of spectacular control that can't be found with a frame slightly bigger? If I end up with an opponent in a tournament who pulls out a K90, I'll be the happiest person in the world.

The racket lacks power unles you can somehow get decent racket-head speed and I have never had such trouble doing that (I played with a POG OS for months and never felt this way). I have never had such a hard time keeping balls in the court. If they stayed in the court, they were landing short with no spin of any kind. There is no bite. There is no forgiveness. Pinpoint control? Yeah, right.

You must have tremendous strength, use every single muscle in your body, and have flawless timing to play effective and consistant tennis with this racket.

How about a club for people that play with practical rackets?

Someone needs to tell the other 999 players in the top 1000 about this thing so they quit losing to Fed.

This message board surely doesn't represent the rest of the tennis playing population. I just can't believe there are actually this many people putting themselves at such a huge disadvantage with these rackets. I don't understand it. Why is everyone giving into this?

You guys are all serious?

I can't believe it.
Click to expand...

Bottle Rocket,

I am certainly sorry to hear that you are unhappy with your K90. As I've posted EXTENSIVELY, it is NOT FOR EVERYONE, in fact, it is probably not for MOST people.

This having been said (again) I have to take exception to your making judgements about how the frame may work for other players. I also think you might want to consider the conditions under which you play-tested if, as you indicate, you 'had to scrape the snow off the courts'. ;) Those are some pretty slow conditions my friend, and I doubt you are going to be generating too much pace with a Pure Drive Plus once those balls cool off to a nice 35 degrees or so! :)

And for the record, I just played the last three days with mine and I am playing as well or better than I ever have, especially on the serve and volleys.

Again, I am sorry it did not work out for you. If you would like to tell me your playing level and style, I can try to recommend something you might like better. I've hit umpteen different frames over the last 2-3 years. :D

Best,

CC
 
fgs said:
sometimes i really get the feeling that either you have no idea about real tennis, i mean playing yourself on a tennis court, not only watching the game on tv, or you generically are set out to start an argument with anyone not willing to retract any opinions upon your first appearance. since the first assumption is not applicable, the latter one seems to be the only one remaining.
Click to expand...

Amazing how you single me out even though the poster before me questioned you as well. Regardless, you seem to be the one that enjoys the arguing.
 
drakulie,
you are right. sorry for that omission, so hereby i call 'tennis man' into this argument too.
regarding me liking arguments - i think this is a discussion board where whoever feels like expressing his opinions (within the stated limits) is free to do so. it cannot be excluded that there will be conflicting opinions which should be debated in a civilized manner though - i think that we have managed to do this so far, haven't we?
so why don't we go on with it? - a heavier frame does not have to be a more demanding one. it surely can be - i feel the 350 ntour 90 (haven't played the k90 yet) is more demanding than the 315g nblade 98 for instance. that has to do with weight, headsize, weightdistribution, stiffness, stringpattern in my opinion. so, what i mean to say is that by simply looking at the weight of the frame it will not be possible to establish which is the more demanding racquet. to go on with my point i introduce the pure drive into this discussion. with it's higher stiffness and open stringpattern i find it more demanding, although it is comparable in weight, headsize and swingweight, than the nblade 98.
now, how do you feel about these things, what is your opinion?
 
I have an easier time swinging my woodies than the K90. I feel the PS85 is easier to swing as well.

That said. I don't see the point of criticizing the people who like the racquet. I'm sure most people genuinely love the frame. The paint job is laughable, but it's a great racquet.
 
stormholloway said:
I have an easier time swinging my woodies than the K90. I feel the PS85 is easier to swing as well.

That said. I don't see the point of criticizing the people who like the racquet. I'm sure most people genuinely love the frame. The paint job is laughable, but it's a great racquet.
Click to expand...

Wood frames swing/swung DIFFERENTLY. On this I think we can all agree? ;)

Recall that the SPECS of the n90 and K90 are nearly identical, but they play VERY differently, with the K90 MUCH easier to swing/get around.

It's all about the 'lay up' the distribution/concentration of the mass within different parts of the frame.

Happy Hitting, :grin:

CC
 
i haven't hit with the k90, just hit with the n90. it is really a very good frame and if i would have been some 15-20 years younger i might definitely have gone for it. it's not the headsize by itself and not the weight by itself, it is the combination of more characteristics that make this racquet, i'm speaking of the n90 and i assume the k90 will not be a completely different cup of tea, very demanding. if you really want to be happy with it, and i'm talking from a competitive mindset because i still play competition, you need to properly setuo for most of the strokes otherwise you will have a complete misshit - there is no inbetween with this stick - i found it to be kind of "digital" - either it's right or it's wrong, there's no way to make an acceptable shot. therefore i have decided it's not for me and have gone at that time for the n6.1 95.
there's nothing wrong with liking this racquet at whatever level you are. in my opinion though it will start to improve your game from a certain level up (i'm not so accustomed to ntrp ratings) and only if you are able to move properly to most of the shots. otherwise it will not be much fun i guess.
 
Have grown up playing with heavy racquets, so I like the weight of this one. When I switched to it though what really bothered me was the grip size. It actually runs thiker than it´s labled. I removed the leather grip and instaled the overgrip on the "frame itself". The problem´s gone and it plays wonderfully now.
BT
 
Craig A. Clark said:
Recall that the SPECS of the n90 and K90 are nearly identical, but they play VERY differently, with the K90 MUCH easier to swing/get around.
Click to expand...

So many people said that lately, but never before did I use a racket that is harder to swing than the K90. Compared to other frames like the PS85, the K90 feels like its SW is around 350. Even the N90 feels easier to swing. I would love to get my hands on your K90 to be able to tell the difference. After all, Wilson's specs seem to vary on each racket...
 
Last edited:
Pete.Sampras. said:
So many people said that lately, but never before did I use a racket that is harder to swing than the K90. Compared to other frames like the PS85, the K90 feels like its SW is around 350. Even the N90 feels easier to swing. I would love to get my hands on your K90 to be able to tell the difference. After all, Wilson's specs seem to vary on each racket...
Click to expand...


True enough, it might very well be a 'specs thing' because each and everyone (believe it or not!!) of my K90's are EXACTLY 12.5oz and 9 pts HL stock!!!

If I were 'guess-timating' their SW, I'd say 325-328, which is pretty much ideal for me. ;)

Best,

CC
 
pete.sampras,
funnily my two blades 106, coming from different batches, are absolutely identical in weight (scale used is precise to +/-0.5g), balance, etc. maybe i'm just lucky, but i was really surprised to see this when i did my mods on them and rebalanced according to my preferences.
 
My PS85s all had pretty much the same weight but my new K-rackets have a difference of 7gr I think... that's why I think Craig's rackets for example may feel easier to swing than the K90-demo I used ;)
 
pete sampras,
oh yes, i remember you made a thread expressing your opinion about poor qc at wilson. i think i even replied saying that 7g would be less than 2%, so that it would be quite within the regular tolerance. since i am also modding my sticks i can understand that it's a difficult thing to adjust the weightdifference in order to have consistent dynamic behaviour of your sticks, because you don't really know "where the 7g are missing". you will eventually get there by adjusting balance and weight, and after some trial and error you'll get it right. i was spared that pain in the arse by getting two sticks that were identical - so i was sort of lucky i guess.
but i can recall the old times - 25+ years ago, when i was doing this with wooden racquets - the differences, specially in balance were sometimes absurd, even if i was allowed to pick my sticks from a batch. i usually spent almost an entire day to find 3 similar sticks!
 
Big Tigger said:
Have grown up playing with heavy racquets, so I like the weight of this one. When I switched to it though what really bothered me was the grip size. It actually runs thiker than it´s labled. I removed the leather grip and instaled the overgrip on the "frame itself". The problem´s gone and it plays wonderfully now.
BT
Click to expand...

Hey BT, how has replacing the leather grip with just an overgrip affected the balance? It's obviously going to be less headlight, but is it real noticeble? Also, what overgrip did you use? Thanks!
 
I'm a newer member to the board, but I see all the crap going around and it disgusts me. People reccomending players racquets for beginners/intermediate players. I use a Dunlop M-fil 300 which is a demanding frame but I feel I can still learn with it and progress, but using anything below 95 as an intermediate/below player is just ridiculous IMO. Thanks for making this.

~Jordan
 
The best players at my club who are all ranked and play on the Satellite and Futures/Juniors circuits all use PD's, NPro Opens, K 6.1 95's and Head Radical MP. None use Wilson 6.0 or 85's. It only seems the fanboys who idolise certain players use those way too demanding sticks. When a player is really serious about their tournament play they use what's gonna give them the best results, not what looks cool?
 
I've tried a demo K90 at the tennis club a couple of times. Strung with some kind of cheap synthetic.

Compared to my Head Liquid Metal Mid strung with Klip Legend natural gut or a gut/ALU hybrid and with plenty of lead tape added to the handle for a more solid and headlight feel, it feels like, well, a toy.
 
bee,
when you say it feels like a toy do you refer to weight or to playing characteristics overall?
 
Craig A. Clark said:
Wood frames swing/swung DIFFERENTLY. On this I think we can all agree? ;)

Recall that the SPECS of the n90 and K90 are nearly identical, but they play VERY differently, with the K90 MUCH easier to swing/get around.

It's all about the 'lay up' the distribution/concentration of the mass within different parts of the frame.

Happy Hitting, :grin:

CC
Click to expand...

Then you must think the N90 was harder to swing than the 85 right? Because the 85 is definitely easier to swing than the K90.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
[n]90 vs [k]90
Replies
12
Views
1K
dacrymn
D
leonardtay
KFactor K Six-One Tour 90 Club
8 9 10
Replies
470
Views
58K
johndugan
J
Y
Wilson K Factor Six One Tour 90
Replies
15
Views
2K
yarovol
Y
KingOfTennis
My Wilson K-90 Review
Replies
15
Views
3K
15_ounce
1
D
K-Factor Six-One TEAM (95)--Feedback?
2
Replies
56
Views
4K
El Guapo
E
Back
Top