New Head 2.0 stiffness feelings

Don’t know about you .. personally I’m saddened by the re issue . Well hold on . Maybe sad is not quite the word .
Disappointed is more in line. Don’t get me wrong I’m happy they brought out thin beam mid plus “ no frills “ stick . But to call it the pro tour 280/630 2.0..
Falsehood dude . I feel they should have given it a dif paint job due to its big difference in the RA department.
maybe this is the first round ? And maybe they’ll come out with a second round with the exact same lay up as the OG..
that would be awesome . But . I don’t understand why they did this .
It’s almost as if why waste all that money on r & d, for a completely different stick than what the market is screaming for . Do u think they thought it would be too flexible and that no one would like that?
I wouldn’t necessarily call the 280/630 soft and flexible. Not at all . I’d use more “ buttery/ more feel/ plush . I’ve never hit with that racket and thought wow this is super soft. And I think I have a great perspective as when I went to the og head pt 280 I was previously using the prince graphite 90 with the bar .. which is crazy stiff . Wicked stiff . I even think it felt stiffer than any babolat . Granted it was a foam filled stiffness so not on the same level as the run of the mill aero or pure drives . Anyway ..
Going from the prince directly to the pt 280 was indeed wonderful. I had much better control , more comfort . More plush . Not super flexible .
Matter of fact that was the neatest thing about the pt 280 , which I assume others can attest too. It shared a similar feel with my old pumas . Both of those sticks if hit in the absolutel perfect spot on the string bed , you could feel a unreal amount of cupping and control . It was intoxicating. Now. That being said . It didn’t happen frequently but when it did it was rewarding as hell ..
So I digress .
Guess I need to say thank you to head for trying to do something cool . But wish they would of left well enough alone and just give us back the original recipe.
 

dak95_00

Hall of Fame
Don’t know about you .. personally I’m saddened by the re issue . Well hold on . Maybe sad is not quite the word .
Disappointed is more in line. Don’t get me wrong I’m happy they brought out thin beam mid plus “ no frills “ stick . But to call it the pro tour 280/630 2.0..
Falsehood dude . I feel they should have given it a dif paint job due to its big difference in the RA department.
maybe this is the first round ? And maybe they’ll come out with a second round with the exact same lay up as the OG..
that would be awesome . But . I don’t understand why they did this .
It’s almost as if why waste all that money on r & d, for a completely different stick than what the market is screaming for . Do u think they thought it would be too flexible and that no one would like that?
I wouldn’t necessarily call the 280/630 soft and flexible. Not at all . I’d use more “ buttery/ more feel/ plush . I’ve never hit with that racket and thought wow this is super soft. And I think I have a great perspective as when I went to the og head pt 280 I was previously using the prince graphite 90 with the bar .. which is crazy stiff . Wicked stiff . I even think it felt stiffer than any babolat . Granted it was a foam filled stiffness so not on the same level as the run of the mill aero or pure drives . Anyway ..
Going from the prince directly to the pt 280 was indeed wonderful. I had much better control , more comfort . More plush . Not super flexible .
Matter of fact that was the neatest thing about the pt 280 , which I assume others can attest too. It shared a similar feel with my old pumas . Both of those sticks if hit in the absolutel perfect spot on the string bed , you could feel a unreal amount of cupping and control . It was intoxicating. Now. That being said . It didn’t happen frequently but when it did it was rewarding as hell ..
So I digress .
Guess I need to say thank you to head for trying to do something cool . But wish they would of left well enough alone and just give us back the original recipe.


Have you actually hit with the new one or are you just basing it off of the written specs? I'm not attacking you. It's just you've constantly posted about these mythical specs and RA being the ONLY spec that matters. I've hit with many, many racquets and I've found that string and tension are much more important or at least as equally important. I can take a stiff racquet and string low or high and get a completely different feel. I can do the same with very flexible racquets. It's just odd to me how much credence you put into a single category. I've wondered if you ever string different tensions or different strings.

For the record, I haven't hit the Pro Tour 2.0. It could be garbage but it seems you are currently in the minority. I have a friend locally, 5.0 USTA player, who has one and really likes it. He is also a Babolat Pure Drive player so he likes stiffer racquets.

I can play anything. The lowest modern RA racquet I have is my BLX Wilson Blade Team which spec at 52. I really don't see any difference between in and other racquets I have. The really flexy racquets I have are wooden racquets.
 
Have you actually hit with the new one or are you just basing it off of the written specs? I'm not attacking you. It's just you've constantly posted about these mythical specs and RA being the ONLY spec that matters. I've hit with many, many racquets and I've found that string and tension are much more important or at least as equally important. I can take a stiff racquet and string low or high and get a completely different feel. I can do the same with very flexible racquets. It's just odd to me how much credence you put into a single category. I've wondered if you ever string different tensions or different strings.

For the record, I haven't hit the Pro Tour 2.0. It could be garbage but it seems you are currently in the minority. I have a friend locally, 5.0 USTA player, who has one and really likes it. He is also a Babolat Pure Drive player so he likes stiffer racquets.

I can play anything. The lowest modern RA racquet I have is my BLX Wilson Blade Team which spec at 52. I really don't see any difference between in and other racquets I have. The really flexy racquets I have are wooden racquets.
No I understand man. I must admit I have not hit with it . And I’m sure I will at some point. I’m in the way way low minority for sure as I like the super ridiculous soft .
To me personally it’s what feels best to me . I didn’t use to be this way .as a matter of fact I used to be the exact opposite for all of my earlier playing days . But I can say had I been using softer frames before I would have been a much better more controlled player . But I’ve always needed an almost handicap if you wil to keep me inside the lines .
I’ve used syn guts in the 70’s all the way to poly in the 20’s and everything in between .
I learned a little bit while prepping for the Usrsa master tech test . But I have gathered most of my stuff just by being in the tennis world . Constantly, obsessive about all stuff equipment .
But yeah I understand where your coming from .
Still though my opinion is that head screwed us on not giving the original.
 

dak95_00

Hall of Fame
No I understand man. I must admit I have not hit with it . And I’m sure I will at some point. I’m in the way way low minority for sure as I like the super ridiculous soft .
To me personally it’s what feels best to me . I didn’t use to be this way .as a matter of fact I used to be the exact opposite for all of my earlier playing days . But I can say had I been using softer frames before I would have been a much better more controlled player . But I’ve always needed an almost handicap if you wil to keep me inside the lines .
I’ve used syn guts in the 70’s all the way to poly in the 20’s and everything in between .
I learned a little bit while prepping for the Usrsa master tech test . But I have gathered most of my stuff just by being in the tennis world . Constantly, obsessive about all stuff equipment .
But yeah I understand where your coming from .
Still though my opinion is that head screwed us on not giving the original.
I used to be like that. I crushed the ball and lacked control. I’d string original Big Banger at 70 libs in my POG 90 and went that high in other frames that just snapped from the force. I learned I just lacked feel and technique.

On a whim I tried a wooden racquet which made me concentrate and I played lights out. I’m talking the best tennis of my life with a 65 sq in cheap wooden piece of garbage. It wasn’t even a quality stick. The strings were likely original from the 1980s or 1970s. This was probably 2015 or so. I loved the low power and the small head.

I’ve gone on a different path than you. I’m not blaming my equipment and I’m looking to perfect my technique and touch. I still like to tinker with equipment but if Jimmy Connors can beat people with a frying pan, I should be able to play with modern equipment and strings at a level better than I am currently.

Just a little extra background. I started in tennis in the 1980s, left tennis in the mid 1990s for golf, and went back to tennis in 2005 or so. My golf technique and fundamentals are very good. I’m a little guy and always had old inexpensive equipment. My irons are 1992 models to this day which are ancient by golf standards; especially, considering their equipment explosion that’s started in the late 90s and continues to this day. I can hit the ball much farther than much bigger guys. I can also hit it more accurately. It’s not equipment. It’s technique. The only equipment that was somewhat important was having shafts that matched your swing speed to give optimum distance and control. Too whippy and you lose control. Too stiff and you lose distance.

Tennis is more about technique first and then matching the string with the racquets feel for the player. It’s not precision as much as it’s a range. It would be interesting if there were tennis customization and fitting stations like there are in golf. I think there’s just too many different techniques and it wouldn’t be realistic to mold and produce racquets the way you can simplify shorten and lengthen golf shafts.

It doesn’t matter what clubs I use if the course is under 6200 yards long. If I’m playing a decent amount, 6800 yards. Once the course gets longer than 7000 yards, I need decent equipment and the course to be in good shape.

Tennis conditions are roughly always the same. Equipment matters less than technique.

^^^Lots of ramblings but Head needed to produce a racquet that would hit the sweet spot of many players. They produced a small headsize racquet with enough weight to give pop to the shot in a 18x20 string pattern that looks retro and cool. They must’ve done something right because the 4 1/4 is already back ordered.
 
From my first hits with my PT 2.0's, I found that the feel was exceptionnaly good, plush without being mushy at all, I couldn't believe the racquet was 66 RA, my Phantom 100X 305 didn't feel more confortable, and the PT 2.0 gave me a much cleaner feel at impact.

I tried one of my PT 2.0 factory strung with Head Lynx string, and it was perfectly fine, I tried my other one with Ashaway crossfire (kevlar) 18g in the mains and tecnifibre Synthetic gut 17g in the crosses, mains and crosses at 42 lbs, and it worked wondefully well, exceptional bite, clean feel and no discomfort at all. The PT 2.0 is one of the only few racquets that I find to play and feel well strung with Kevlar Hybrid.
 

jwcleung

New User
I guess I can understand a bit of that sentiment. I played the 2.0 along with the old PT yesterday. Yes, in the strictest sense, the 2.0 is a different stick, and from the same family. I went through some mental reckoning, the 2.0 is not a Pro Tour, although very similar, there is no going back, realistically speaking. Perhaps because other than racquet making artistry, there are also commercial factors.
I am also a guitar guy. The Gibson and Fender ones from the 50’s and 60’s are the holy grails. And no matter how the big two’s on re-creating them, there are always some differences here and there. I don’t have hundred of thousands of dollars to indulge in that search for the ONE, so I just have to accept that.
 

Razrfish

New User
PT2 VS PT280 - OGHO (One Guys Humble Opinion)

I have the Pro Tour 280 and have a love affair with it. We set up a friends PT2 similarly as I play with Gut (M) and Poly (X) and took it out for a spin. A little background...For most of my 40 year playing career, I've always played a classic feel, soft hitting, beastly stick (always weighted up to spec of 357g and 318 bal). My last 4 primary sticks have been, Prince Phantom Pro 93p, Wilson Ultra Tour 2.0, Wilson Pro Staff 97 CV, Tecnifibre TFight 315 LTD.

I had high hopes for the PT2! It looks totally amazing! Love the colors and the nostalgia. Love the head size 95, and the string pattern 18/20! The cap grommet is awesome!! What a nice job Head did in rendering a looker of a stick! One question - why not a leather grip! Truly!!

Pluses: Weights, and swings like the original, Clean contact is rewarded with a very powerful shot, definitely more powerful than the PT280. Spin production good, plow thru excellent, launch angle penetrates the court nicely. Has excellent stability in volleys. Control is like a scalpel. Stiff slices penetrate nicely, stay low, and slide thru, rarely sit up. Put away power is there in spades when hit clean.

Concerns (in comparison to the PT280). Contact high in the head (dead zone) yields quite a bit less flexy feel than expected. Focused on those quite a bit to explore the feel difference. Striking the high deadzone/trailing strings contact point where I find my sweetest shots on the PT280, the PT2 did not respond with the love that the PT280 just simply exudes. To be clear - its honestly margarine when I really expected butter. To me it feels much more like a 2017 Wilson Blade 18/20 weighted up. The TF Tfight 315 LTD 18/20 is a closer cousin to the PT280 than the PT2.

I had very high hopes - and it's a beautiful classic looking stick. But anyone seeking the buttery accurate response, addictive pocketing, and controlled flex of the PT280 needs to look elsewhere. I would have stocked up on this puppy if it played out as the beastly sub 60 (ie 57-58 RA) PT280 reissue.

In the same respect - those who enjoy an ample mass bearing, stiff responding, more powerful classic box frame racquet (Ala a soft Pro Staff RFa stick with a lower launch trajectory, and more scalpel like control), they will love this stick. PT2 falls a bit short on the amazing feel you get when you hit the RFa perfectly, but it's also a touch softer than the RFa when you don't hit it perfectly. Not a racquet to avoid, just be aware of what you're getting into.

The only thing I'd like to do some day with the PT2 --- I'd like to put on a nice leather grip and see if it makes much difference in feel, of course it won't make it more flexy, but may soften the sharp feel when hitting the dead zone contact locations. There isn't a racquet I hit with on a regular basis that has anything other than a leather grip.

Good hitting -
 
Last edited:

penguin

Professional
PT2 VS PT280 - OGHO (One Guys Humble Opinion)

I have the Pro Tour 280 and have a love affair with it. We set up a friends PT2 similarly as I play with Gut (M) and Poly (X) and took it out for a spin. A little background...For most of my 40 year playing career, I've always played a classic feel, soft hitting, beastly stick (always weighted up to spec of 357g and 318 bal). My last 4 primary sticks have been, Prince Phantom Pro 93p, Wilson Ultra Tour 2.0, Wilson Pro Staff 97 CV, Tecnifibre TFight 315 LTD.

I had high hopes for the PT2! It looks totally amazing! Love the colors and the nostalgia. Love the head size 95, and the string pattern 18/20! The cap grommet is awesome!! What a nice job Head did in rendering a looker of a stick! One question - why not a leather grip! Truly!!

Pluses: Weights, and swings like the original, Clean contact is rewarded with a very powerful shot, definitely more powerful than the PT280. Spin production good, plow thru excellent, launch angle penetrates the court nicely. Has excellent stability in volleys. Control is like a scalpel. Stiff slices penetrate nicely, stay low, and slide thru, rarely sit up. Put away power is there in spades when hit clean.

Concerns (in comparison to the PT280). Contact high in the head (dead zone) yields quite a bit less flexy feel than expected. Focused on those quite a bit to explore the feel difference. Striking the high deadzone/trailing strings contact point where I find my sweetest shots on the PT280, the PT2 did not respond with the love that the PT280 just simply exudes. To be clear - its honestly margarine when I really expected butter. To me it feels much more like a 2017 Wilson Blade 18/20 weighted up. The TF Tfight 315 LTD 18/20 is a closer cousin to the PT280 than the PT2.

I had very high hopes - and it's a beautiful classic looking stick. But anyone seeking the buttery accurate response, addictive pocketing, and controlled flex of the PT280 needs to look elsewhere. I would have stocked up on this puppy if it played out as the beastly sub 60 (ie 57-58 RA) PT280 reissue.

In the same respect - those who enjoy an ample mass bearing, stiff responding, more powerful classic box frame racquet (Ala a soft Pro Staff RFa stick with a lower launch trajectory, and more scalpel like control), they will love this stick. PT2 falls a bit short on the amazing feel you get when you hit the RFa perfectly, but it's also a touch softer than the RFa when you don't hit it perfectly. Not a racquet to avoid, just be aware of what you're getting into.

The only thing I'd like to do some day with the PT2 --- I'd like to put on a nice leather grip and see if it makes much difference in feel, of course it won't make it more flexy, but may soften the sharp feel when hitting the dead zone contact locations. There isn't a racquet I hit with on a regular basis that has anything other than a leather grip.

Good hitting -
Wouldn't the feel from a leather grip be harsher than a synthetic?
 

moon shot

Hall of Fame
My Pro Tour 2.0 feels flexier that any 90s radicals I own or my i.prestige.

I only have relational data based on what TW says frames are and what I own, none of mine have been measured.
 
Last edited:

Jster

Professional
Hopefully HEAD will troll us further with Iprestige 2.0 with high 50+ flex* then with russell peters smile.
Tadaaaaaaaa

Someone's gonna hurt real bad.
 

pow

Hall of Fame
Does anyone know what the stiffness RA rating was for the original version? I had assumed it was low because of the thin beam but I recall reading somewhere that it was in the same stiffness range as the 2.0.
 

Faris

Professional
Does anyone know what the stiffness RA rating was for the original version? I had assumed it was low because of the thin beam but I recall reading somewhere that it was in the same stiffness range as the 2.0.
Nope, not the same range.. Original PT280 measured by TW was 58 RA (I have played with one that was measured at 55 RA too). The PT 2.0 measured by TW is 65 RA...
 

longtimelurker

Professional
Does anyone know what the stiffness RA rating was for the original version? I had assumed it was low because of the thin beam but I recall reading somewhere that it was in the same stiffness range as the 2.0.

Don't get caught up on numbers, my trek font was 56ra, and this new one feels pretty darn close, even though peope are measuring from 62 up to 65
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ-

Faris

Professional
Don't get caught up on numbers, my trek font was 56ra, and this new one feels pretty darn close, even though peope are measuring from 62 up to 65
I mean I love mine but 2.0 is not as buttery as the original and plays a lil crisper (and thats not a bad thing). Mine is 66 RA. But yes plays much softer than its RA suggests..
 

FranzS

Semi-Pro
Yeah, but PT280/630 was a retail stick to start with though......
Right, however the story is about the same since it's been discontinued for quite some years but pro players still use "it". At least that's what the poster meant I think.
Anyway, how much is it about Head and how much is it about TW? I mean, the PT half-reissue
 

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
H19 wannabe?
The PT2.0 was never targeting the PT630 spec. It was the 2.0 version that was targeting a different spec and achieved the modern update.
Head does have the PT57A layup available.
The H19 was unsuccessful PT57A wannabe to start with and UT diverted even more for some weird reason (both are Made in China and have no layup restrictions).
Nevertheless, all are nice frames for specific players
 

asifallasleep

Hall of Fame
Ok i'm kinda annoyed I read the OP's rant only to discover that he hasn't even tried the new version. Seriously???????
Even moreso that so so so so many users of the original PT630 HAVE actually tried the 2.0 and gave it a thumbs up.
(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)(n)
Also, this is a HUGE step for Head after ignoring the pleas of many consumers for over a decade. So, yeah, I gotta give them props for this move.
A wee bit stiffer for the modern game is a compromise many will gladly take.
 

FranzS

Semi-Pro
PT 2.0 doesn't feel that flexy to me, 65 RA is all there (my own experience). This doesn't mean it isn't plush or comfortable. I think it is both.
PT 2.0 feels pretty good, and doesn't have the same plastic/hollow feel as first generation Graphenes for example.
Angell TC90 at 70 RA is still the best feeling frame I own. So, don't confuse stiffness with that bad plastic/brittle/hollow feel.
 

Grieeegoorr

Semi-Pro
PT 2.0 doesn't feel that flexy to me, 65 RA is all there (my own experience). This doesn't mean it isn't plush or comfortable. I think it is both.
PT 2.0 feels pretty good, and doesn't have the same plastic/hollow feel as first generation Graphenes for example.
Angell TC90 at 70 RA is still the best feeling frame I own. So, don't confuse stiffness with that bad plastic/brittle/hollow feel.
Hey FranzS,
I apologise upfront for going off topic, but what string and tension are you enjoying in the TC90, I haven't found something that makes me go oh yeah baby yet. Cheers
 

ewiewp

Hall of Fame
PT 2.0 doesn't feel that flexy to me, 65 RA is all there (my own experience). This doesn't mean it isn't plush or comfortable. I think it is both.
PT 2.0 feels pretty good, and doesn't have the same plastic/hollow feel as first generation Graphenes for example.
Angell TC90 at 70 RA is still the best feeling frame I own. So, don't confuse stiffness with that bad plastic/brittle/hollow feel.

Haven't tried pt2. 0. But I don't think
there are classic feel frames in all
manufacturers current offerings.
Maybe except those foam filled ones
like donnay and angell?
 

FranzS

Semi-Pro
Haven't tried pt2. 0. But I don't think
there are classic feel frames in all
manufacturers current offerings.
Maybe except those foam filled ones
like donnay and angell?
I think we all need to take a step back and first define what's actually that "classic feel".
I get the impression that it's just a way to describe the good quality of the racquets from the 80s-90s and differentiate it from the nasty hollow/plastic/brittle feel of many current frames. In other words, if a current frame is a good quality one (foam inside, dampening Kevlar or Twaron fibers in the layup, overall layup in the first place) I think one would describe it as having that "classic feel".
So, is it really "classic feel" or is it simply "good-as-it-always-should-be" feel?
 

FranzS

Semi-Pro
“good feel”. Imo.
my good feel isn’t always the same as my next neighbour....
Also true of course. However, sometimes racquet quality comes along with perceived feel in a pretty objective way (no one likes jarring vibrations, etc.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: esm

ewiewp

Hall of Fame
I think we all need to take a step back and first define what's actually that "classic feel".
I get the impression that it's just a way to describe the good quality of the racquets from the 80s-90s and differentiate it from the nasty hollow/plastic/brittle feel of many current frames. In other words, if a current frame is a good quality one (foam inside, dampening Kevlar or Twaron fibers in the layup, overall layup in the first place) I think one would describe it as having that "classic feel".
So, is it really "classic feel" or is it simply "good-as-it-always-should-be" feel?

Yeah, it's hard to describe it.
Hollow and brittle (even in pretty flexy ones).
But I don't think we can necessarily classify all modern feel frames as lesser of quality, no?

It just recent trend? I think young players who started out with modern frames have no issue at all.

It's just solid classic feel I've got used?


By the way, have you tried tawron infused prince frames of their recent offering?
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Why start a a discussion if you only read the numbers and not even have tested/played the new PT2.0?
Makes no sense.
Play it, compare it and then give your opinion.

TW's RA numbers are usually very accurate. If they say its 65 I believe them. I'm in the group that was going to buy some of these but now don't even want to demo one.

The issue is why bother bringing back this great racquet and not bother to reproduce one of the things that was so good about it, the flex?

This was a huge lost opportunity to provide a flexible racquet to customers when there are barely any on the market.

Would love to hear TW's take on why they went with 65 instead of high 50s like the old ones.
 

FranzS

Semi-Pro
Yeah, it's hard to describe it.
Hollow and brittle (even in pretty flexy ones).
But I don't think we can necessarily classify all modern feel frames as lesser of quality, no?

It just recent trend? I think young players who started out with modern frames have no issue at all.

It's just solid classic feel I've got used?


By the way, have you tried tawron infused prince frames of their recent offering?
Are you just mimicking/mocking Nadal when you put ", no?" at the end of a question or is it really a slang thing? Just asking, since I'm Italian and I'm tempted to end questions like that as well. :-D
There are still several great frames on the market nowadays, made by the "big brands". But I wish you had the chance to just keep an Angell racquet in your hands and see what I mean when I'm talking about "objective quality". Don't want it to sound like an advertisement for that particular brand, but man, do they deliver! You have to give them credit.
I couldn't stand first-generation Head Graphenes, but now it seems Head got it right with the new 360+ models (no direct experience, that's just what I'm reading over here).
I hit for a few minutes with a friend of mine's Phantom P93. Great stick, really like the feel. Not as flexy as its RA suggests, feels firmer, but comfortable and plenty of feel whatever that means!
 

vsbabolat

G.O.A.T.
TW's RA numbers are usually very accurate. If they say its 65 I believe them. I'm in the group that was going to buy some of these but now don't even want to demo one.

The issue is why bother bringing back this great racquet and not bother to reproduce one of the things that was so good about it, the flex?

This was a huge lost opportunity to provide a flexible racquet to customers when there are barely any on the market.

Would love to hear TW's take on why they went with 65 instead of high 50s like the old ones.
You should have a hit with the racquet before complaining about it.
 
Last edited:

ewiewp

Hall of Fame
Are you just mimicking/mocking Nadal when you put ", no?" at the end of a question or is it really a slang thing? Just asking, since I'm Italian and I'm tempted to end questions like that as well. :-D
There are still several great frames on the market nowadays, made by the "big brands". But I wish you had the chance to just keep an Angell racquet in your hands and see what I mean when I'm talking about "objective quality". Don't want it to sound like an advertisement for that particular brand, but man, do they deliver! You h noave to give them credit.
I couldn't stand first-generation Head Graphenes, but now it seems Head got it right with the new 360+ models (no direct experience, that's just what I'm reading over here).
I hit for a few minutes with a friend of mine's Phantom P93. Great stick, really like the feel. Not as flexy as its RA suggests, feels firmer, but comfortable and plenty of feel whatever that means!

Yes, I'm definitely influenced by Nadal.:-D

Angell is definitely great frames.
I've tried their 97 and 100.
Don't own them but I'm always lurking.
I want something in between their 97 and 100. 18x20.
I own 4 donnay pro one. Love their solidness.
Never liked modern feel but recently liked tf40. Modern feel but pretty solid.
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
So Head tried to replicate the feel of the original in the 2.0 without the flexibility. For players who are not flex sensitive, they'll like it and players who are flex sensitive won't if the original's true feel was what they're looking for. I'm in the latter category and can notice and prefer frame flex, especially at the throat. I understand a frame can be soft or comfortable without being flexible.
 
Top