New Angell K7!!!

tennis347

Semi-Pro
I will definitely be able to tell you since I played with the Becker London for a few years. I agree that it should be a similar but hopefully the K7 Red should have a little more power. I will keep you posted!
I played with Angell K7 Red with 3 grams of at 3 and 9 with my usual string Gosen OG Sheep Micro 16 at 55lbs which is mid tension. I have say after playing with numerous players racquets over the years that I was disappointed with the playability of the Angell frame. The power level was quite low and the response was very unpredictable! A lot of times I had no idea where the ball was going on my usual swing. Maybe the racquet is string sensitive and needs a stiffer string for better control. The fact that the K7 Red is low powered takes it away some arm friendliness on my shoulder due to swinging harder than usual. The new Blade 98 16 x 19 v7 is a much super racquet IMO in all areas, except for spin possibly.

The K7 Red plays too mushy with a synthetic with my Gosen Synthetic string and IMO it does not play like the Becker London. The London is a better all around racquet then the Angell frame IMO. It played well with a soft string and had a very predictable response! I would say the new Blade plays similar to the Becker London with the only difference being that the Blade has a bit more power and better stability. Wilson did a spectacular job with the new Blade as the stiffness rating was lowered to 62 and comfort and ball pocketing is off the charts!!
 

Jouke

Semi-Pro
I played with Angell K7 Red with 3 grams of at 3 and 9 with my usual string Gosen OG Sheep Micro 16 at 55lbs which is mid tension. I have say after playing with numerous players racquets over the years that I was disappointed with the playability of the Angell frame. The power level was quite low and the response was very unpredictable! A lot of times I had no idea where the ball was going on my usual swing. Maybe the racquet is string sensitive and needs a stiffer string for better control. The fact that the K7 Red is low powered takes it away some arm friendliness on my shoulder due to swinging harder than usual. The new Blade 98 16 x 19 v7 is a much super racquet IMO in all areas, except for spin possibly.

The K7 Red plays too mushy with a synthetic with my Gosen Synthetic string and IMO it does not play like the Becker London. The London is a better all around racquet then the Angell frame IMO. It played well with a soft string and had a very predictable response! I would say the new Blade plays similar to the Becker London with the only difference being that the Blade has a bit more power and better stability. Wilson did a spectacular job with the new Blade as the stiffness rating was lowered to 62 and comfort and ball pocketing is off the charts!!
Sounds like these will be for sale again soon. I also experienced some weird twingle in the elbow with the K7 red. And i have never had any arm problems. I got rid of mine after that. I did like their playability a lot! And I loved the serve with it.
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
Sounds like these will be for sale again soon. I also experienced some weird twingle in the elbow with the K7 red. And i have never had any arm problems. I got rid of mine after that. I did like their playability a lot! And I loved the serve with it.
Yes! I am done trying any more racquets! The K7 Red is too low powered! The control was quite bad for a thin beam racquet. I think it might be to flexible! It had a mushy dead feel! The Angell racquet is not in the same league with the classic Head Prestige and not a classic IMO.
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
Can anyone compare comfort
K7 Red vs Phantom Pro 100

Thanks!
I have played with both racquets. I think the comfort is pretty close! The problem with the Phantom line is that there is too much vibration with off center hits. Come to think of it, the Angell racquet has the edge in comfort. I did not care for either racquet. The new Blade line is one if not the best players racquet on the market right now in IMO.
 

lima

Rookie
I have played with both racquets. I think the comfort is pretty close! The problem with the Phantom line is that there is too much vibration with off center hits. Come to think of it, the Angell racquet has the edge in comfort. I did not care for either racquet. The new Blade line is one if not the best players racquet on the market right now in IMO.
I'm looking something to replace my Phantom 100P Pro. Comfort is my main priority. I don't think Blade is a racquet for me. I'm a baseliner
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
I'm looking something to replace my Phantom 100P Pro. Comfort is my main priority. I don't think Blade is a racquet for me. I'm a baseliner
The Blade is a solid all around racquet and great on the baseline. The new version has a lower flex rating and better comfort. I find the Blade more arm friendly than the PP 100P. It really depends on what kind of arm issues you have. No vibration with the Blade even on off center hits.
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
I played with Angell K7 Red with 3 grams of at 3 and 9 with my usual string Gosen OG Sheep Micro 16 at 55lbs which is mid tension. I have say after playing with numerous players racquets over the years that I was disappointed with the playability of the Angell frame. The power level was quite low and the response was very unpredictable! A lot of times I had no idea where the ball was going on my usual swing. Maybe the racquet is string sensitive and needs a stiffer string for better control. The fact that the K7 Red is low powered takes it away some arm friendliness on my shoulder due to swinging harder than usual. The new Blade 98 16 x 19 v7 is a much super racquet IMO in all areas, except for spin possibly.

The K7 Red plays too mushy with a synthetic with my Gosen Synthetic string and IMO it does not play like the Becker London. The London is a better all around racquet then the Angell frame IMO. It played well with a soft string and had a very predictable response! I would say the new Blade plays similar to the Becker London with the only difference being that the Blade has a bit more power and better stability. Wilson did a spectacular job with the new Blade as the stiffness rating was lowered to 62 and comfort and ball pocketing is off the charts!!
I guess that just goes to show that specs on paper don't tell the whole story. Angell 16x19s are wide open, so I'm not surprised that the response was erratic. The Delta Core Becker frames were great and pretty unique, but there are better frames out there now, like my TC95s and your Blade. I've had a long-running curiosity with the Angell K series, but I'll pass on them and stick with what I'm hitting. Paul himself told me in a phone conversation that the K7 Red can't touch the performance of his TC frames. Thanks.
 

lima

Rookie
The Blade is a solid all around racquet and great on the baseline. The new version has a lower flex rating and better comfort. I find the Blade more arm friendly than the PP 100P. It really depends on what kind of arm issues you have. No vibration with the Blade even on off center hits.
I have shoulder pain, mainly during the serve. Even my Phantom is hurting me
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
I guess that just goes to show that specs on paper don't tell the whole story. Angell 16x19s are wide open, so I'm not surprised that the response was erratic. The Delta Core Becker frames were great and pretty unique, but there are better frames out there now, like my TC95s and your Blade. I've had a long-running curiosity with the Angell K series, but I'll pass on them and stick with what I'm hitting. Paul himself told me in a phone conversation that the K7 Red can't touch the performance of his TC frames. Thanks.
Very true that the specs on paper don’t tell the whole story! The Becker frame was great in its day but is outdated. I have not tried the TC 95 as the K7 Red was the first Angell frame I hit with.

The K7 Red probably plays well with a stiff poly but I no longer with play with poly due to some shoulder issues. I will stay with the new Blades as I have a matching pair.
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
I have shoulder pain, mainly during the serve. Even my Phantom is hurting me
That doesn’t sound like the racquet. It could be a technique issue or something going on with the shoulder itself. I had no pain serving with PP 100P. It was the off center hits and the fact it was too low powered affected my shoulder.

Maybe you need to go to a lighter racquet. The PP 100P has a substantial swing weight.
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
Very true that the specs on paper don’t tell the whole story! The Becker frame was great in its day but is outdated. I have not tried the TC 95 as the K7 Red was the first Angell frame I hit with.

The K7 Red probably plays well with a stiff poly but I no longer with play with poly due to some shoulder issues. I will stay with the new Blades as I have a matching pair.
I don't blame you. You seem to have found a good thing with that Blade. Everyone seems to love that Blade:unsure:

If you ever venture into Angell territory again, I'd suggest the TC95 18x20 or TC97 18x20. But I don't think you're missing out on anything. Enjoy your Blades. The best frame is always the one you're most familiar with, especially if you have no complaints.
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
Personally, having tried both (but not the K7 Lime - as the Red was not a good experience), I happen to agree with Paul. Like you @Pneumated1 I now stick with the TC frames that I have.
I'm happy to say that I'm set with my TC95 18x20s. I've never hit the TC97 16x19 and would like to, but I don't play as well with wide open patterns like in Angell 16x19s, so I can predict the outcome. I bought a v3, 310g, TC97 18x20 but only hit it around 2-3 hours before selling it. Maybe I didn't give it a fair shake, but the feel/response/performance of the TC95 was much more satisfying ... at least for me.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
I'm happy to say that I'm set with my TC95 18x20s. I've never hit the TC97 16x19 and would like to, but I don't play as well with wide open patterns like in Angell 16x19s, so I can predict the outcome. I bought a v3, 310g, TC97 18x20 but only hit it around 2-3 hours before selling it. Maybe I didn't give it a fair shake, but the feel/response/performance of the TC95 was much more satisfying ... at least for me.
I'm going to be picking up my TC95 63RA 18x20 and TC97 18x20 next week for a direct back-to-back comparison. Both will be strung at the same tension and the same string (MSV Co-Focus 1.18mm @48M/45C). Looking forward to it. This will be the first time I'm going to be hitting with the TC95 18x20, but I've played with the TC95 63RA 16x19, and both string patterns of the TC97. Depending on how it goes, I'll then compare the TC95s back-to-back to see if I keep both or stick to one string pattern.
 

lima

Rookie
That doesn’t sound like the racquet. It could be a technique issue or something going on with the shoulder itself. I had no pain serving with PP 100P. It was the off center hits and the fact it was too low powered affected my shoulder.

Maybe you need to go to a lighter racquet. The PP 100P has a substantial swing weight.
SW on my Phantom is nowhere near 328 as posted on TW. It's more like 310. I was thinking to buy lighter racquet but they are all stiff
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
SW on my Phantom is nowhere near 328 as posted on TW. It's more like 310. I was thinking to buy lighter racquet but they are all stiff
I serve better with racquets that have swing weight in the high 320’s to 330. I don’t have to muscle the ball because of the weight. It’s difficult to find a racquet that is not too stiff these days. Maybe the Pro Kennex 5G, has a swing weight around 315 and is arm friendly but low powered.
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
I'm going to be picking up my TC95 63RA 18x20 and TC97 18x20 next week for a direct back-to-back comparison. Both will be strung at the same tension and the same string (MSV Co-Focus 1.18mm @48M/45C). Looking forward to it. This will be the first time I'm going to be hitting with the TC95 18x20, but I've played with the TC95 63RA 16x19, and both string patterns of the TC97. Depending on how it goes, I'll then compare the TC95s back-to-back to see if I keep both or stick to one string pattern.
I hope you'll share your experiences. One of the best racquets I ever hit was the previous version of the Pure Control Tour. My pair were 10g over specs and had a noticeably smooth flex, probably a little more of a head flex than throat, but pretty uniform. I thought the TC97 18x20 would play similarly, but the one I purchased was (at least for me) noticeably stiffer overall but especially in the throat. Please report back after you hit them.

And I know you're a Tecnifibre guy as well. Isn't that new TF40 305 tempting? I'll have to hit it at some point, but the TC95 always wins out for me.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
I hope you'll share your experiences. One of the best racquets I ever hit was the previous version of the Pure Control Tour. My pair were 10g over specs and had a noticeably smooth flex, probably a little more of a head flex than throat, but pretty uniform. I thought the TC97 18x20 would play similarly, but the one I purchased was (at least for me) noticeably stiffer overall but especially in the throat. Please report back after you hit them.

And I know you're a Tecnifibre guy as well. Isn't that new TF40 305 tempting? I'll have to hit it at some point, but the TC95 always wins out for me.
The TC97 18x20 is supposed to be more like an IG Prestige in the flex profile. I initially strung it with a Kevlar Main and a Syn Gut cross, but that did not feel good at all (bought a used Classic 6.1 95 with that string set-up and it was great so I thought to try it in other racquets). So, I'm going to try a bunch of different strings to see if it still keeps feeling firmer than what I would like and expect, or improves. I liked the flex of the TC95 63RA 16x19, but that had thinner strings when I bought it and the launch angle was more challenging. Will have to try thicker strings in there, but thought I'd try the 18x20 with thin strings and see whether that is just an easier fix.

Yeah, I am a Tecnifibre guy as well. Love the TFight 315 Limited (customized), and I have the 305 XTC as well. The 305 XTC is on the upper level of firmness for me, but plays very nicely (also customized as I prefer a 6-8 HL balance). I would love to try the TF40, but not sure which one would be better. Both will need to be modified to be what I like, it's just which one will be easier to spec up. Also, saw a post recently on the Tecnifibre thread that showed a TF44 all blacked out (with just the words on the side of the head)... don't know what that is about or which racquet that may be or what the specs will be.

I have too many racquets so may need to wait (sell a few) before getting my hands on any new ones.

Will let you know how the TC97 & TC95 18x20 "testing" goes, and my general impressions of the TC95 18x20 (since it will be the first time I hit with it).
 

Caol-ila

New User
I played with Angell K7 Red with 3 grams of at 3 and 9 with my usual string Gosen OG Sheep Micro 16 at 55lbs which is mid tension. I have say after playing with numerous players racquets over the years that I was disappointed with the playability of the Angell frame. The power level was quite low and the response was very unpredictable! A lot of times I had no idea where the ball was going on my usual swing. Maybe the racquet is string sensitive and needs a stiffer string for better control. The fact that the K7 Red is low powered takes it away some arm friendliness on my shoulder due to swinging harder than usual. !!
It sounds like you had a K7 from the first batch. I had two from different batches, they played very different. The first one played as you describe, the second one was firmer, more powerful and much more predictable. I got rid of the oldest one and I am still playing the second one. I am actually planning to get another from the second batch.
 

lima

Rookie
It sounds like you had a K7 from the first batch. I had two from different batches, they played very different. The first one played as you describe, the second one was firmer, more powerful and much more predictable. I got rid of the oldest one and I am still playing the second one. I am actually planning to get another from the second batch.
What about grip size? From the first batch it runs a little bigger.
 

esm

Semi-Pro
The TC range is definitely better than the K7 Red IMO - but it doesnt mean K7 Red is a bad Angell frame though.
I just much prefer the playability/flex on the TC100 16x19 and TC95 16x19, both 63RA.
Re: K7 Red grip, mine ran large and i have noticed a white plastic "sleeve" under the base grip, which i had to remove to get closer to my usual L3 + 0.70mm OG grip size
my current K7 Red setup is about 339g/31.5cm & 328SW with fb of multi - it plays nicely, but still prefer the TC range with the similar setup.
each to their own i suppose :)
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
It sounds like you had a K7 from the first batch. I had two from different batches, they played very different. The first one played as you describe, the second one was firmer, more powerful and much more predictable. I got rid of the oldest one and I am still playing the second one. I am actually planning to get another from the second batch.

Not sure, but really enjoying the Red K7 after a month of playing with it.
 

ChrisG

New User
The TC97 18x20 is supposed to be more like an IG Prestige in the flex profile. I initially strung it with a Kevlar Main and a Syn Gut cross, but that did not feel good at all (bought a used Classic 6.1 95 with that string set-up and it was great so I thought to try it in other racquets). So, I'm going to try a bunch of different strings to see if it still keeps feeling firmer than what I would like and expect, or improves. I liked the flex of the TC95 63RA 16x19, but that had thinner strings when I bought it and the launch angle was more challenging. Will have to try thicker strings in there, but thought I'd try the 18x20 with thin strings and see whether that is just an easier fix.

Yeah, I am a Tecnifibre guy as well. Love the TFight 315 Limited (customized), and I have the 305 XTC as well. The 305 XTC is on the upper level of firmness for me, but plays very nicely (also customized as I prefer a 6-8 HL balance). I would love to try the TF40, but not sure which one would be better. Both will need to be modified to be what I like, it's just which one will be easier to spec up. Also, saw a post recently on the Tecnifibre thread that showed a TF44 all blacked out (with just the words on the side of the head)... don't know what that is about or which racquet that may be or what the specs will be.

I have too many racquets so may need to wait (sell a few) before getting my hands on any new ones.

Will let you know how the TC97 & TC95 18x20 "testing" goes, and my general impressions of the TC95 18x20 (since it will be the first time I hit with it).
Interesting to hear your reviews as it confirms my experience. K7 red is a nice frame for relaxed tennis, maybe for teaching or recovery from injury as it's so confortable and manoeuvrable. But it lacks authority and I was also surprised of the erratic response once the rhythm of play get higher. I could either hit the fence or the net, with the same stroke intensity ...
I agree TC95 16x19 is a beast of a racquet and I'm now thinking about testing the 18x20 as I'm a moderate spinner and like to flatten a lot from the baseline. That's my main concern: is the 18X20 friendly enough for someone who likes to play from the baseline (no grinder, mostly I counter a lot so I also need some forgiveness).
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Interesting to hear your reviews as it confirms my experience. K7 red is a nice frame for relaxed tennis, maybe for teaching or recovery from injury as it's so confortable and manoeuvrable. But it lacks authority and I was also surprised of the erratic response once the rhythm of play get higher. I could either hit the fence or the net, with the same stroke intensity ...
I agree TC95 16x19 is a beast of a racquet and I'm now thinking about testing the 18x20 as I'm a moderate spinner and like to flatten a lot from the baseline. That's my main concern: is the 18X20 friendly enough for someone who likes to play from the baseline (no grinder, mostly I counter a lot so I also need some forgiveness).
Thanks for your question.

I have found the TC95 63RA 18x20 to be brilliant. I've strung it with MSV Co-Focus 1.18mm @ 48/45.

My racquet is modified with weight added both in the Head (3,9, and 12 o'clock), as well as the handle (2 overgrips due to the handle being a size 3 instead of 4 - I bought it 2nd hand; additionally there is also some weight 7" above the butt cap). This was done for two reasons. The first was to match the TC97 which had some weight in the head and handle, and the other was due to the fact that I needed to add the two overgrips and it would have made the racquet way too HL as it started with a 305mm balance.

I am able to impart all kinds of spin on the ball, as well as flatten out my shots. I have no problem with the lower launch angle in comparison to the 16x19, and I find the racquet to have plenty of forgiveness.

I am yet to string the 16x19 TC95 with a thicker gauge string and then compare it directly to the 18x20... this will be done next in order to decide whether I'm keeping both string patterns or just one.

Hope that helps
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
@Pneumated1 I've now had a chance to play both 18x20s side-by-side (TC95 and TC97).

Prior to this test, I found the TC97 firmer than expected, but could play with it no problem. Now having played them at the same time, with the same strings, and at the same tension... I am having a harder time adjusting to the TC97. It's still firmer than the TC95, which is to be expected, but I think it's the way they flex that is now proving to be the more jarring difference (or maybe it's the thinner strings and a difference in weight in the head in comparison to the Kevlar/ Syn Gut I had in there before).

I'll keep playing them both, but if I still keep enjoying the TC95 more, I may have to cull the collection and make the difficult choice.

It's strange how that can happen, a racquet you had no problem with in the past (other than it being slightly firmer than expected) suddenly becomes problematic when you come back to it after trying out other racquets. Or vice versa, you didn't like it before then come back to it, and are suddenly gelling with it.
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
@Pneumated1 I've now had a chance to play both 18x20s side-by-side (TC95 and TC97).

Prior to this test, I found the TC97 firmer than expected, but could play with it no problem. Now having played them at the same time, with the same strings, and at the same tension... I am having a harder time adjusting to the TC97. It's still firmer than the TC95, which is to be expected, but I think it's the way they flex that is now proving to be the more jarring difference (or maybe it's the thinner strings and a difference in weight in the head in comparison to the Kevlar/ Syn Gut I had in there before).

I'll keep playing them both, but if I still keep enjoying the TC95 more, I may have to cull the collection and make the difficult choice.

It's strange how that can happen, a racquet you had no problem with in the past (other than it being slightly firmer than expected) suddenly becomes problematic when you come back to it after trying out other racquets. Or vice versa, you didn't like it before then come back to it, and are suddenly gelling with it.
This confirms my experience to a tee. After my first session with the TC97 18x20 (310g/9hl--full bed of multifeel) I was on the fence. I could tell it was a stellar frame but just not for me. It had an odd flex that I wouldn't call uncomfortable in the least, but I felt the stiffness more than I wanted to. Played a doubles match a week later and brought my TC95 16x19s (hit 16x19s at the time) along just in case. I immediately felt very disconnected from the TC97 in the warm-up, grabbed my TC95, and never looked back.

I can usually tell within five minutes if I'll like a frame or not. The TC97 was tricky to dismiss immediately because of its quality. Nonetheless, I've been hitting the TC95 (exclusively) for two years now (one of those with the 18x20), and I'm close to the 'extension' realm where it doesn't really matter what other racquets are out there. I just know the frame so well and it checks all of the boxes.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that I'd love that new TF40 305, which is why I'm staying away. In the best-case scenario that I liked it as much or more than my Angell, what are the chances that it would make a noticeable difference in my game?:unsure: ... lol.
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
The more I play with the Angell K7 Red, the more I realize how this is such a forgiving racquet and extremely user friendly. It may not have the power of the newer modern racquets but it makes up for it in spin, feel, comfort and awesome on the slice! Initially I did not like the K7 Red but now see how it’s more suitable to my game than the Wilson Blade 98 16 x 19 v7. Such a buttery feel that most racquets don’t have today!
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
This confirms my experience to a tee. After my first session with the TC97 18x20 (310g/9hl--full bed of multifeel) I was on the fence. I could tell it was a stellar frame but just not for me. It had an odd flex that I wouldn't call uncomfortable in the least, but I felt the stiffness more than I wanted to. Played a doubles match a week later and brought my TC95 16x19s (hit 16x19s at the time) along just in case. I immediately felt very disconnected from the TC97 in the warm-up, grabbed my TC95, and never looked back.

I can usually tell within five minutes if I'll like a frame or not. The TC97 was tricky to dismiss immediately because of its quality. Nonetheless, I've been hitting the TC95 (exclusively) for two years now (one of those with the 18x20), and I'm close to the 'extension' realm where it doesn't really matter what other racquets are out there. I just know the frame so well and it checks all of the boxes.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that I'd love that new TF40 305, which is why I'm staying away. In the best-case scenario that I liked it as much or more than my Angell, what are the chances that it would make a noticeable difference in my game?:unsure: ... lol.
TF40 is excellent with a feel that is just perfect.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
How does the TF40 compare to the new Blade in terms of power, control, spin and feel?
I can only compare to new Blade 16x19
Power: blade but TF does have power
Control: and precision TF40
Spin: easier with Blade but TF40 has surprisingly good spin
Feel: TF40 and i don’t think anything else compares. This is a standout feature.
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
I can only compare to new Blade 16x19
Power: blade but TF does have power
Control: and precision TF40
Spin: easier with Blade but TF40 has surprisingly good spin
Feel: TF40 and i don’t think anything else compares. This is a standout feature.
Thanks for the input. I am looking to stay with a more forgiving frame that generates easy spin for my western forehand. I really like the new Blade but found the K7 Red easier to use and I am keeping more balls in play. The K7 Red gave me room to add weight and it swings easier than the Blade. At 52, frame forgiveness goes a long way especially on the backhand slice where I can really carve the ball with K7 Red! The Blade is also solid but a bit more demanding on all the strokes except the volley. The topspin I can generate with the K7 Red is quite good with no mishits.
 

esm

Semi-Pro
I strung up the K7 Red last week with PP Red Devil 1.19 at low tension (inspired by Chris at TW's low tension thread).

Strung up 33/31 one piece (just for fun to see how it plays) - it was kind of strange at the beginning, but after about 5/10 mins, it felt quite alright. the pocketing feeling was great and with decent-ish control. There were no soreness/tinge on the elbow afterwards.

I was able to do all sorts of shots with confidence, which i have not felt in the K7 Red in a long time. I was able to find the corners, angle shots, angled dropshots, and the serves were decent. Put on about 2 hours on it, so will see how long it lasts. Would be interested to find out what the next 2 - 3 hours will be... lol

So this has tempted me to do the same on the TC95 and TC100 (both 63 RA, 16x19)... to experiment with soft co-poly at low tensions.
 

tennis347

Semi-Pro
I strung up the K7 Red last week with PP Red Devil 1.19 at low tension (inspired by Chris at TW's low tension thread).

Strung up 33/31 one piece (just for fun to see how it plays) - it was kind of strange at the beginning, but after about 5/10 mins, it felt quite alright. the pocketing feeling was great and with decent-ish control. There were no soreness/tinge on the elbow afterwards.

I was able to do all sorts of shots with confidence, which i have not felt in the K7 Red in a long time. I was able to find the corners, angle shots, angled dropshots, and the serves were decent. Put on about 2 hours on it, so will see how long it lasts. Would be interested to find out what the next 2 - 3 hours will be... lol

So this has tempted me to do the same on the TC95 and TC100 (both 63 RA, 16x19)... to experiment with soft co-poly at low tensions.
Since the K7 Red is a flexible frame it certainly does play better with a lower tension. I have been using Gosen Micro 16 in the low to 50’s and plays quite well.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
I suspect feel and control would be a wash compared to my TC95 18x20. Now, if you tell me it's noticeably more forgiving and stable, you'll have my attention. And I doubt it would be as powerful.
Well the specs are different so if you brought a TF40 to the same spec you’ll get same if not better stability and power will be pretty close. However the clean connected feel of the TF40 is a new standard
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
Well the specs are different so if you brought a TF40 to the same spec you’ll get same if not better stability and power will be pretty close. However the clean connected feel of the TF40 is a new standard
If you're playing it with a heavier leather grip, then we're close in specs. Can't remember the balance of the TF, but I'm playing the Angell stock with a skin feel grip, so probably 315g.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
If you're playing it with a heavier leather grip, then we're close in specs. Can't remember the balance of the TF, but I'm playing the Angell stock with a skin feel grip, so probably 315g.
Stock with OG. The SW and less HL balance (33.3cm strung) plays very stable at stock weight yet nicely maneuverable
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
Stock with OG. The SW and less HL balance (33.3cm strung) plays very stable at stock weight yet nicely maneuverable
Yeah, I forgot the OG on mine as well, but that's splitting hairs. I also need to add a few grams at 7". If I order more TC95s from Paul, I'll probably go with the 310g v. and a 7hl balance and add a heavier grip, if necessary. I'd rather that lower chamber in the handle be empty, only weighted in the upper chamber.

From you, this is high praise for the TF, and we do seem to share an affinity for similar racquets.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
I agree with @Pneumated1 on several points, the TC95 63RA 18x20 is one hell of a racquet (although mine is modified and heavier as standard - 330g/ 305mm Balance), and @topspn this is indeed very high praise for the TF40 coming from you and making me want to try it even more, even though I'm still not sure which version I would get considering I like a more HL Balance.

On a separate note, after several hits with the TC97 18x20 (strung with the same string as the TC95 - MSV Co-Focus 1.18mm), and almost losing hope, I have started grooving with it as well (again). I still prefer the feel of the TC95 18x20 as I like the plusher feel on contact (and probably the flex pattern), and the TC97 probably needs to be strung lower than the TC95 due to the great RA value (it's DT was 39 Vs 38 for the TC95), but they are both excellent racquets and stack up very well against their competitors and deserve to be kept. Spoken like a true racquet addict... :rolleyes::D:whistle:;)
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
... I still prefer the feel of the TC95 18x20 as I like the plusher feel on contact (and probably the flex pattern). ...
Yeah, I'm set with the TC95 18x20. The TF is an interesting idea, but I think that's as far as it will go with me. Still, I just can't help but imagine the 'plusher feel' and exact 'flex pattern' of the TC95 in a true TC98 18x20 or TC100 18x20 at 21mm.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Yeah, I'm set with the TC95 18x20. The TF is an interesting idea, but I think that's as far as it will go with me. Still, I just can't help but imagine the 'plusher feel' and exact 'flex pattern' of the TC95 in a true TC98 18x20 or TC100 18x20 at 21mm.
Once the current 18x20 TC95's and TC97's strings go dead, I will string up the 16x19s in both with a thicker gauge string to see how they compare and whether I can play with them as easily. Then decide whether to keep both string patterns or just the 18x20s.

For me, if Paul (@Racketdesign ) would come up with a TC95 that has either a 16x20 or a 16x19 with 8 Mains would be the Goldielocks solution. I don't care whether he calls it the TC98, TC95, or whatever (they all share the same grommets anyway so not a big difference if any), just as long as he does come up with it and makes it 63RA or lower unstrung and D Beam. Preferably, he doesn't increase the Beam thickness as I find the current TC95 and TC97 to be powerful enough with the 20mm Beam.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
Once the current 18x20 TC95's and TC97's strings go dead, I will string up the 16x19s in both with a thicker gauge string to see how they compare and whether I can play with them as easily. Then decide whether to keep both string patterns or just the 18x20s.

For me, if Paul (@Racketdesign ) would come up with a TC95 that has either a 16x20 or a 16x19 with 8 Mains would be the Goldielocks solution. I don't care whether he calls it the TC98, TC95, or whatever (they all share the same grommets anyway so not a big difference if any), just as long as he does come up with it and makes it 63RA or lower unstrung and D Beam. Preferably, he doesn't increase the Beam thickness as I find the current TC95 and TC97 to be powerful enough with the 20mm Beam.
I really tried talking him into 8 mains in the throat TC100!
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
I really tried talking him into 8 mains in the throat TC100!
Too big a head size for me... I'd prefer 93-98... but that's just me... although I may feel differently after playing with my new but modified Head Youtek IG Speed 300. It still feels easy to swing on my OHBH side, whereas, the Babolat Pure Drive Roddick from 2012 always felt weird unless I had heaps of time to set-up (and I was much fitter then). Most of the time I would just slice my BH with the PDR. The 95-98s (and especially the 93s) feel more maneuverable and I can come over my BH much easier. All personal, of course.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
Too big a head size for me... I'd prefer 93-98... but that's just me... although I may feel differently after playing with my new but modified Head Youtek IG Speed 300. It still feels easy to swing on my OHBH side, whereas, the Babolat Pure Drive Roddick from 2012 always felt weird unless I had heaps of time to set-up (and I was much fitter then). Most of the time I would just slice my BH with the PDR. The 95-98s (and especially the 93s) feel more maneuverable and I can come over my BH much easier. All personal, of course.
The right 100 fine by me so i just got a 16x20, 8 mains in the throat PK Ki+5. Also loving my 2 TF40s 305 with a leather grip. Can’t play with a PD in all honesty, its just way too harsh
 

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
I definitely prefer 95-98 in head sizes, and yes, a 16x20 or 8-main-in-the-bridge 16x19 would be amazing all else being equal. But I do prefer a 21mm beam, like my former PCTs. I mean we're dreaming about ideal specs here. We'll probably never get any of these requests, so the current TC95 is no slouch of a consolation. I'm very satisfied.
 
Top