Nadal's racket specs

S

Steve Huff

G.O.A.T.
Just came across this, so thought I'd post it. Sorry if it's old news. I copied and pasted it from and article:


Here is a story about Nadal's racquet weight…What does it mean? Does it make sense? "Babolat…told us that rather than focusing on the overall weight of the racquet, they have fine-tuned Nadal's racquet swingweight by seven points to make it more headheavy and provide extra punch through the air.—Howard Beale

Howard,

Nadal and company indeed chose to make only minuscule changes to the racquet's "overall weight," focusing instead on slightly altering its balance and swingweight. So where does Nadal's Babolat AeroPro GT currently stand? According to Jean-Christophe Verborg, International Sports Marketing Director at Babolat, the frame's new specifications (unstrung) are as follows:

WEIGHT: 314 grams / 11.08 ounces—versus 311 grams / 10.97 ounces, in 2011
BALANCE: 32.63 centimeters / 5.2 points headlight—versus 32.50 centimeters / 5.6 points headlight in 2011
SWINGWEIGHT: 316—versus 308-310, in 2011

The racquet's total mass, as you can see, has increased by three grams, a measly sum. In itself, this is not a very significant change. But when we consider where the weight was placed—read: toward the tip of the racquet—we start to see a difference, specifically a more headheavy balance and an increase in swingweight. These tweaks, in Verborg's words, should effectively give Nadal "a little bit more power" off the serve and the ground "without changing the global specifications of his racquet too much." How much more power, however, is yet to be seen.
 
Thanks, for that, I've been looking for the new specs. My YT Rad Pro had a similar setup and balance in stock form. It was a top spin machine but the balance always made me late ;)

It's almost like Rafa is moving more to a Carlos Moya, club-like setup.
 
I can't believe the SW, can somebody confirm this? The change looks insignificant if so little were added to the weight........I think I can't even feel the difference with that change.......
 
carlos djackal said:
I can't believe the SW, can somebody confirm this? The change looks insignificant if so little were added to the weight........I think I can't even feel the difference with that change.......
Click to expand...

Well, if u had to get the best of your shots every time (il length, power and consistency), I guess u would feel it !
And as the man tends to make a winner or the best shot at almost every hit...

When u got used to your gear for years, i guess +3g can be actually a true change in the small adjustments to your game. The fact that Nadal changes in a so small range proves by itself that such change can be truely effective. Isn't it ?
 
gloumar said:
When u got used to your gear for years, i guess +3g can be actually a true change in the small adjustments to your game. The fact that Nadal changes in a so small range proves by itself that such change can be truely effective. Isn't it ?
Click to expand...

Excellent point, 3g is a big amount to add at the tip. The tip adds more bang for your buck, lead wise than any other spot.

I'm always amused by posters on here talking about slapping 15g of lead on the hoop and acting like it's NBD :)
 
PED said:
Excellent point, 3g is a big amount to add at the tip. The tip adds more bang for your buck, lead wise than any other spot.

I'm always amused by posters on here talking about slapping 15g of lead on the hoop and acting like it's NBD :)
Click to expand...

Me too....whenever I read "I'll start off by adding 10 grams of lead @ 12 and go from there" I think to myself...man...you've bought the WRONG racquet in the first place...
 
I agree with others about the significance of adding a small amount of lead at the tip. I recently added 4 grams across the 12 spot of my pdgt and noticed my serve have become way better, and groundstrokes have alot more oomph.

On my Speed, I added 4 grams in the same manner but it was too much, too sluggish. Two grams with enough blue tac in buttcap to make it 5,6 point HL, 332 gram static weight, makes this Speed virtually perfect.
 
813wilson said:
If you are not a touring professional it would be reasonable that you couldn't feel the difference.

I'd guess there are a lot of players who are like Michael Russell....

http://online.wsj.com/video/tennis-...-BD5C-4300CE67FC84.html?KEYWORDS=TOM+PERROTTA
Click to expand...

Actually, even merely "proficient" tennis players can detect small differences in frames. You don't need to be a touring pro to feel these things.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1460-2687.2000.00054.x/full

"The moments of a tennis racket are defined and the properties of the second moments are discussed. It was found that proficient tennis players can distinguish the swing weight moment of inertia of one racket from another for differences as small as 2.5%. For the polar moment, proficient players require at least a 5% difference in the moments for the rackets to be distinguishable. Since the polar moment is an order of magnitude smaller than the swing moment, players are actually more sensitive to differences in that moment."

For a SW of 320 that's just 8 points of SW.
 
^^^^ and Carlos,

I was not intending to slight you in any way. I play 4-5 times a week. My problem is I have the touch and feel of a bulldozer operator.
 
Man if you want to talk about feel, go from playing with a 12.4 frame to a 11.3! I play with k95's, but I hit with a apdgt yesterday and it was like swinging a feather!
 
I did the same thing today .. hit with my cousins PT600 that are leaded and weigh 365 grams. A huge difference compared to my Dunlop 300G's.
Logs n feathers
 
Is this a real Nadal's racket weight? I always had a feeling that pro's playing with at least 340 grams. 311 grams feels very light.
 
Steve Huff said:
...the frame's new specifications (unstrung) are as follows:

WEIGHT: 314 grams / 11.08 ounces—versus 311 grams / 10.97 ounces, in 2011
BALANCE: 32.63 centimeters / 5.2 points headlight—versus 32.50 centimeters / 5.6 points headlight in 2011
SWINGWEIGHT: 316—versus 308-310, in 2011
Click to expand...

Goodness, [insert insult].
 
I do remember Agassi saying that if he hit with a racket as light as Nadal's, he wouldn't be able to get the ball over the net. Of course, he was joking, but what he was saying is that Nadal uses a really light (for pro's) racket.
 
Steve Huff said:
I do remember Agassi saying that if he hit with a racket as light as Nadal's, he wouldn't be able to get the ball over the net. Of course, he was joking, but what he was saying is that Nadal uses a really light (for pro's) racket.
Click to expand...

I don't expect pros to have deep knowledge about racquet specs, but Nadal's stick still has a pro-level SW, which means it has enough pop on it regardless of its static weight.
 
Greg Raven's research:

Rafael Nadal's Babolat Aeropro Drive -- 2007 Pacific Life Open

Racquet Mass Bal. cm RDC Flex Swgwt Length
Nadal's 332 33.50 65 355 26-7/8
USRSA 337 33.75 69 337 27
Tennis Warehouse 320 32.70 67 324 27
Notes on Nadal's racquet

This racquet may be shorter than spec due to hoop compression during stringing. I did not get a chance to measure the racquet unstrung.
There is no way to take a racquet with the specs given by USRSA and make it into a "Nadal" racquet. However, if one had a racquet with Tennis Warehouse's measurements, one could add roughly 9.5 grams under the bumperguard near the tip, and about 2.5 grams one inch up from the end of the butt cap to get a racquet with measurements very similar to those of Nadal's racquet.
 
Bartelby said:
316 is just not right.
Click to expand...


I agree......
exactly my point in my first post, that's why I thought something's off with the press released specs, that so little was changed from the retail specs and I thought Rafa's specs is way different than the retail specs even before he added weight this season......
 
The first news I heard about Nadal's racquet was 12 at the tip and 3 at the butt, and then Raven's research showed 9 and 3.

It's possible that 12 and 3 is a return to the past for Nadal.
 
I speculate Nadal announcing he added 3 grams to his racquet during a press conference and Babolats release of bogus information was simply a ploy to dupe the unsuspecting public with what amount to a shameless publicity stunt.

They are professional liars, they lie about his real racquet, they lied about his real string and now they deceive some with bogus info, wouldn't surprise me if Nadal didn't add a damn thing.
 
Last edited:
On Raven's figures, his sw must be around 365 strung, so that's plus 50 on an unstrung 316.

Although his poly might be over 20, I can't see it being 35.
 
Bartelby said:
On Raven's figures, his sw must be around 365 strung, so that's plus 50 on an unstrung 316.

Although his poly might be over 20, I can't see it being 35.
Click to expand...

He uses 1.35 mm poly. That's pretty much the heaviest string you can use.
Even with average mass string 30+ SW additions are not uncommon.
I would say that an aeropro drive strung with 1.35 mm poly string is for sure between 30 and 35 points SW more than the unstrung racquet.
Don't have one to actually test...but more experienced tournament stringers and / or people who have that model at home and are willing to try this experiment can probably provide relevant info one way or another.
20 added SW points for the string he uses is ridiculously low and I don't buy it :).
Also...Greg Raven's figures are actually 355 not 365 as far as I can see ( http://www.hdtennis.com/grs/pro_racquet_specs/200703nadal_babolat.html ).
That spec is from 2007 ...and things might have changed slightly since then...but I'm not sure what the source for the 365 figure is (and no ... the poster TaihtDuhShaat does not constitute a reliable source for me. He posts assumptions, not measured facts).
 
Last edited:
0d1n said:
That spec is from 2007 ...and things might have changed slightly since then.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. They published his specs from the 2011 Aussie Open and they were a bit different from the 07 specs:

336g strung static weight
33 cm balance
344 SW

The more HL balance is the first thing that jumps out at me and not sure if he was using this just for hard courts or not.
 
If Nadal wants more power, penetration and a heavier ball, perhaps he should ditch the aeropro. With its flat, wide beam which is vertically stiff and aerodynamic, it is strictly tweaked for spin. Perhaps he would be better off with a box beam, or at least something a bit more traditional, like the regular pure drive (customized to his requirements)...
 
Povl Carstensen said:
If Nadal wants more power, penetration and a heavier ball, perhaps he should ditch the aeropro. With its flat, wide beam which is vertically stiff and aerodynamic, it is strictly tweaked for spin. Perhaps he would be better off with a box beam, or at least something a bit more traditional, like the regular pure drive (customized to his requirements)...
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, no highly ranked pros (or one of the GOATs at this point) would have the balls to do that.
 
0d1n said:
He uses 1.35 mm poly. That's pretty much the heaviest string you can use.
Even with average mass string 30+ SW additions are not uncommon.
I would say that an aeropro drive strung with 1.35 mm poly string is for sure between 30 and 35 points SW more than the unstrung racquet.
Don't have one to actually test...but more experienced tournament stringers and / or people who have that model at home and are willing to try this experiment can probably provide relevant info one way or another.
20 added SW points for the string he uses is ridiculously low and I don't buy it :).
Also...Greg Raven's figures are actually 355 not 365 as far as I can see ( http://www.hdtennis.com/grs/pro_racquet_specs/200703nadal_babolat.html ).
That spec is from 2007 ...and things might have changed slightly since then...but I'm not sure what the source for the 365 figure is (and no ... the poster TaihtDuhShaat does not constitute a reliable source for me. He posts assumptions, not measured facts).
Click to expand...

Yes, I assumed Nadal added the 3 grams under his bumper because he said that by himself to the media. I then took the measured specs from Greg Raven, the same source you trust, and plugged the numbers into the TWU reverse engineering tool. So based off of the measured specs Mr. Raven has provided, I assumed that Nadal's swingweight has increased to from 355 to 365, and his balance shifted longer from the calculated addition of 3 grams under the bumper. Either Greg's specs are wrong, and Nadal's SW is in the 350's now, or the specs posted in this thread are wrong, and Nadal's SW has increased the aforementioned amount from Greg's specs.
 
Last edited:
TaihtDuhShaat said:
Yes, I assumed Nadal added the 3 grams under his bumper because he said that by himself to the media. I then took the measured specs from Greg Raven, the same source you trust, and plugged the numbers into the TWU reverse engineering tool. So based off of the measured specs Mr. Raven has provided, I assumed that Nadal's swingweight has increased to from 355 to 365, and his balance shifted longer from the calculated addition of 3 grams under the bumper. Either Greg's specs are wrong, and Nadal's SW is in the 350's now, or the specs posted in this thread are wrong, and Nadal's SW has increased the aforementioned amount from Greg's specs.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. I wasn't questioning your calculations based on Greg Raven's data, I was essentially saying that one has to pick which source to go with, either Greg's data from 2007 (strung) or the specs published here which are more recent and unstrung.
Some people were going back and forth between the specs and used them interchangeably, which is what we need to avoid.

I can see the theory of Nadal going to a slightly different spec from 2007 to 2011 and then these "3 grams" being added on top of that spec being the valid one.
We can't say he's added these 3 grams to the 2007 spec and then assume that the 2011/2012 data is not accurate based on those calculations.

Edit. Sorry if my previous post seemed like an attack, it wasn't meant to be that...
 
Last edited:
0d1n said:
I agree with that. I wasn't questioning your calculations based on Greg Raven's data, I was essentially saying that one has to pick which source to go with, either Greg's data from 2007 (strung) or the specs published here which are more recent and unstrung.
Some people were going back and forth between the specs and used them interchangeably, which is what we need to avoid.

I can see the theory of Nadal going to a slightly different spec from 2007 to 2011 and then these "3 grams" being added on top of that spec being the valid one.
We can't say he's added these 3 grams to the 2007 spec and then assume that the 2011/2012 data is not accurate based on those calculations.

Edit. Sorry if my previous post seemed like an attack, it wasn't meant to be that...
Click to expand...

The specs Babolat gave out were from a stock APDGT, you think they were going to give out specs that don't match the racquet they are trying to pass off and sell to the public as Nadal's frame.

Like I said it was a publicity stunt to get some advertisement for free from the media, you can't trust anything Babolat says.
 
Last edited:
The specs given in the first post are not stock unstrung apdgt specs. If they were, theyvwould say 300g unstrung and 32cm balance. Also, the unmodified specs of rafas Apr original aren't that different from the GT version, the biggest difference being a less headlight balance in the GT.
 
Last edited:
it is the unstrung specs.. 300g stock APD original, 11g @12 under the bumper and 3g about 1" under the grip.. the SW, balance points and etc all are in unstrung specs..
plug in another 20G (string, over grip, dampener) you would get around 334g-336g strung specs..
 
^^It's the unstrung modded Rafa specs not just an unstrung STOCK apd as someone claimed above.
 
There are two separate set of specs for Nadal on Greg Raven's website, one from 2007 and one from 2009. I have no reason to believe that either of these are incorrect.

These new specs are much more suspect to me. They are unstrung for one. And we don't know if any additional customization might be done after these - could these specs be pre-lead - I'm still not convinced?

2007: 332g, 33.5cm, 355 SW
2009: 335g, 33.3cm, 350 SW

Based on the available information, I believe the 3g added near the tip would indeed boost his swingweight about 10 kg-cm^2.

It is my belief that Nadal's current swingweight is roughly 360, based on my assumption that the 2009 specs are most likely what was "pre-3g."

It's also worth noting that a swingweight in the 360s will tend to be optimal for heavy serves and heavy forehands (for maximizing weight of shot).
 
Last edited:
carlos djackal said:
lol........you are right, I am not a touring pro.....I play 5-7 days a week though depending on the weather.......
Click to expand...

The changes I saw during the AO in Nadal with his new specs were:

positive - his bh had more sting on it, particularly up the line

negative - hit more Fh's long than usual with less spin
 
travlerajm said:
There are two separate set of specs for Nadal on Greg Raven's website, one from 2007 and one from 2009. I have no reason to believe that either of these are incorrect.

These new specs are much more suspect to me. They are unstrung for one. And we don't know if any additional customization might be done after these - could these specs be pre-lead - I'm still not convinced?

2007: 332g, 33.5cm, 355 SW
2009: 335g, 33.3cm, 350 SW
Click to expand...

There's also these from the AO 2011 that I reposted a few posts back: it appears he does tinker a bit with his setup:

336g strung static weight
33 cm balance
344 SW

It appears he uses a more HL setup for the HC when he has less time on the ball
 
Can somebody clearly spell out what is the difference between the racquet sold to the general public as Nadal's racquet and Nadal's real racquet?
 
He uses the apd original.
21oypg9.jpg
apd
nz0qhl.jpg
nadal frame

It's about 338g strung, gripped, with impact absorber 2-3g+ added, a bal. pt. of 33, no silicone in butt. NOt the advertised version of cortex, etc. at all. It's stiffer, more powerful, and as you can see in the pic, no cortex, put a paint job. He places two strips about 4" of 33mm lead tape under the grommet at 12 oclock. He uses the 1.35mm string. He strings about 54/52 and strings more frames per tourny than any other male pro. He burns through the rpm blast (used to be duralast). Mass is too light, more for a junior set up. Ra is about the same as Feds: 65. Moment of inertia is lower than Feds or Joker, who is higher than the other two.
 
Last edited:
I added 5 grams at 12 and 1 1/2 grams at the end of the racquet's butt - I have a 2009 Aeropro Drive Cortex. Can somebody tell me what the racquet's SW is now? I'm trying to optimize it for heavy serve and FH. Am I on the right track?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

2
Pro's racket specs
Replies
0
Views
1K
2handsbothsides
2
Quadium
Racket Similar to Dunlop 200G 95
Replies
9
Views
4K
peli_kan
peli_kan
Break To Win
Angelique Kerber tennis racquet specs
Replies
0
Views
444
Break To Win
Break To Win
B
Babolat Pure Drive Team Plus Customization
Replies
4
Views
4K
Djlpenguin
D
F
For anyone Attempting to change the Balance point
Replies
0
Views
921
Final_Match_Point
F
Back
Top