New, very old, Head racquet

dmastous

Professional

I know it's a Head, I think it's a model of one of the first aluminum frames. I doubt it's very valuable, but it's kind of neat, and I'm curious about it's history.

Dan
 

Skppr05

Semi-Pro
don't know anything about its history, just curious to how you got it. I got an old rawlings "john newcombe" racquet my parents got from a yard sale for like $15. I played with it a few times, the real old racquets are plenty of fun.
 

tnsdoc

New User
This is one of the Head Arthur Ashe competition models; the original was an aluminum skinned frame with foam core, if memory serves me correctly. The Competition 2 model which followed added boron somehow into the mix. Arthur actually used these frames in competition, including his Wimbledon shocker over Jimmy Connors. I still have one in good condition and have a few hits with it now and then; a pretty nice racquet even by today's standards.
 

dmastous

Professional
I got it Thurday at a Play It Again Sports for $10. Last night I got my Tennis Magazine which, in it's news & notes has a blurb on Hugh Hefner. It shows an old cover with Hefner on it with a racquet that looks very similar. That cover was from from, from memory, 1972.

Dan
 

Midlife crisis

Hall of Fame
pro_staff said:
wow. is it like solid aluminum? i bet it's heavy as hell
That picture looks to be of a Comp I. The Comp II had different color striping on it.

There are two aluminum skins that sandwich a composite core material. I had one of the early Comp I's, and if you hit the ground in just the wrong way, the skin would separate from the composite. Also, there were string holes near the throat which were not countersunk, so the string did the countersinking, and you had really bad tension loss the first couple of string jobs until the hole got deformed enough to not deform further.

Still, it was a great racket in its day.
 

Deuce

Banned
Yes, the feel of those racquets was something today's frames can only dream of.

The material in the middle of the aluminum 'plates' is fiberglass.
 

Midlife crisis

Hall of Fame
Deuce said:
Yes, the feel of those racquets was something today's frames can only dream of.
You know, now that I've started playing seriously again after 15-20 years away, I've had the opportunity to hit with most of the rackets I ever remember owning, with one exception being just this racket. However, NONE of the rackets hit as good as I thought I remembered. Maybe it's just me, but there is such a huge difference in playability of modern rackets compared to what we had in the "good old days".
 

tandayu

Professional
Ronaldo said:
Mid, try a Head Vilas or XRC to find what you are missing
Yes, I agree.

I might add the Graphite Edge Matte, Graphite Director, graphite edge TXE (the first head with twaron). ALL these frames are the precedent of what will becoming the "PRESTIGE" line.

The real original Head while under "AMF Head" name, made in USA, great leather grip quality, great paint quality, and....... INDIVIDUAL GROMMET FOR EACH HOLE (This will never offerred again given the material cost of producing it)
 

Midlife crisis

Hall of Fame
Ronaldo said:
Mid, try a Head Vilas or XRC to find what you are missing
So far, the list of rackets I've tried, all of which I have used in my tennis career, include a Wilson Ultra II mid, Head Graphite Edge, and a POG OS, all of which I still own from all those years ago. I've also recently purchased several wood rackets, and have also hit with a Head Pro, Prince Woodie, and the original Wilson Pro Staff. I even played one year of Division 1 collegiate tennis with the Graphite Edge or POG, and then played at a high level for a few more years with the Ultra II. NONE of these rackets comes close to the precision, control, power, and forgiveness that I can get with my newer racket.
 

Deuce

Banned
Midlife crisis said:
So far, the list of rackets I've tried, all of which I have used in my tennis career, include a Wilson Ultra II mid, Head Graphite Edge, and a POG OS, all of which I still own from all those years ago. I've also recently purchased several wood rackets, and have also hit with a Head Pro, Prince Woodie, and the original Wilson Pro Staff. I even played one year of Division 1 collegiate tennis with the Graphite Edge or POG, and then played at a high level for a few more years with the Ultra II. NONE of these rackets comes close to the precision, control, power, and forgiveness that I can get with my newer racket.
That's interesting - I'm traveling in the opposite direction. After years of being frustrated by the garbage frames of today (or 5 years ago), I went back to the Graphite Edge, and find that it is 10 times the racquet as any racquet made in the past 10 years.

The only possible exceptions would be the Head Prestige Mid, Head Pro Tour 280, and the Volkl Catapult 10. The graphite Edge is only about 3 times bnetter than these three.
 

Rabbit

G.O.A.T.
I also own an Ashe Comp 2. When I was in high school, I was the proud owner of a Comp 1. I hit with my Comp 2 not too long ago. It hits really good, better than most of its contemporaries. The Comp series wasn't balanced as evenly as most rackets of the period, it is more headlight and more playable. The frame is also very comfortable, it has enough flex that it doesn't kill your arm when you play. Power is good off the ground, but on volleys, you probably need to pay attention and watch the ball and your form. Overall, one of the better early frames that was not made of wood.

I like the Comp2 better than the XRC, but nowhere near as much as the Vilas.
 

SteveI

Legend
Midlife crisis said:
That picture looks to be of a Comp I. The Comp II had different color striping on it.

There are two aluminum skins that sandwich a composite core material. I had one of the early Comp I's, and if you hit the ground in just the wrong way, the skin would separate from the composite. Also, there were string holes near the throat which were not countersunk, so the string did the countersinking, and you had really bad tension loss the first couple of string jobs until the hole got deformed enough to not deform further.

Still, it was a great racket in its day.
It is a Comp I... used to play that frame.. and yes... weighs a ton!

Steve
 

joe sch

Legend
Deuce said:
Yes, the feel of those racquets was something today's frames can only dream of.

The material in the middle of the aluminum 'plates' is fiberglass.
Close Deuce, its was actually boron.
Those AA comps played great, more power from the aluminum sandwich but the feel of a woodie. They did have a small head and sweetspot so one needed advanced strokes and good control. I did not like most of the metals, but these rackets were sweet, especially when strung au natural.
 

joe sch

Legend
Rabbit said:
I also own an Ashe Comp 2. When I was in high school, I was the proud owner of a Comp 1. I hit with my Comp 2 not too long ago. It hits really good, better than most of its contemporaries. The Comp series wasn't balanced as evenly as most rackets of the period, it is more headlight and more playable. The frame is also very comfortable, it has enough flex that it doesn't kill your arm when you play. Power is good off the ground, but on volleys, you probably need to pay attention and watch the ball and your form. Overall, one of the better early frames that was not made of wood.

I like the Comp2 better than the XRC, but nowhere near as much as the Vilas.
Agree, the head AA Comps, XRC & vilas woodie were all awesome hitting sticks if you can consistently hit the dime size sweetspots. I still have quite a few of all of these rackets, including some virgins :)
 

Midlife crisis

Hall of Fame
Deuce said:
That's interesting - I'm traveling in the opposite direction. After years of being frustrated by the garbage frames of today (or 5 years ago), I went back to the Graphite Edge, and find that it is 10 times the racquet as any racquet made in the past 10 years.

The only possible exceptions would be the Head Prestige Mid, Head Pro Tour 280, and the Volkl Catapult 10. The graphite Edge is only about 3 times bnetter than these three.
I think that during those times, I didn't think analytically about what it was that I liked in a frame, and when I did figure it out that I liked the feel of very stiff frames, I ended up with a Wilson Ultra II Mid. That's probably why I've gravitated towards the 78 stiffness racket that I now use and may be why you've gone the way you have - because these are preferences that developed earlier in our tennis lives but later enough in those tennis lives to still be applicable today.
 

Midlife crisis

Hall of Fame
Ronaldo said:
Midlife, still using your RIP? Have one and never hit with it. Will try it this weekend
Yup, and still loving it. I've further weighted it down and it's running right at 12 ounces now, and just a few (like two or three) points headlight. It feels just about perfect, and in fact I just purchased another brand new one which is sitting waiting for a delivery from Tennis Warehouse (which should be arriving today) which contains a grip sleeve and some Babolat lead tape. Once I get those on, I should be ready to go with two of these rackets.

BTW, the second RIP is strung with NXT OS, and though I've only batted around the ball easily with it so far, it doesn't feel like I'm going to have to hard of a time adapting to it after playing with ProBlend on the other racket. I just purchased a stringer, so with no more need to stay with durable strings, I can now play around.

If you try your RIP and don't like it, let me know and I'd be very tempted to take it off your hands!
 

Deuce

Banned
joe sch said:
Close Deuce, its was actually boron.
Those AA comps played great, more power from the aluminum sandwich but the feel of a woodie. They did have a small head and sweetspot so one needed advanced strokes and good control. I did not like most of the metals, but these rackets were sweet, especially when strung au natural.
Not that I want to argue with you, Joe, as you've no doubt possessed more Ashe Competition frames than I've ever even seen... but I'm quite sure that the Competition 1 was essentially an aluminium & fiberglass sandwich. The Competition 2 had the Boron, I believe.

What did the Competition 3 have?
 

joe sch

Legend
Deuce said:
Not that I want to argue with you, Joe, as you've no doubt possessed more Ashe Competition frames than I've ever even seen... but I'm quite sure that the Competition 1 was essentially an aluminium & fiberglass sandwich. The Competition 2 had the Boron, I believe.

What did the Competition 3 have?
Deuce, the comp II filler is orange in color and the com I & III are black. They all look like the same material. The Comp I does not list the material, the comp II lists boron and the comp III lists graphite. I thought they all played pretty similar so sorta figured the same filler composite was used but not exactly sure ? Keubler book lists them as "fiberglass cores".
 

cadfael_tex

Professional
I have all three and I think that the 1 is fiberglass, 2 adds boron to the fiberglass, and three comes closest to the graphite fiberglass racquets of a few years later. I also have a AA competition edge that looks like a squared off Edge but I'm not sure of the makeup of it.
 

Rabbit

G.O.A.T.
I agree, the 2 had a boron additive in it. There probably wasn't any more boron in those frames than there was titanium in their descendants. :)
 
Top