Prince Magnesium Pro's specs?

Cesare

Cesare

Semi-Pro
Does anybody have the specs of this frame, i mean the 90 sq. in. used by Pat Cash? I've hit with it yesterday, and i came away very impressed. soft and very precise, great all-around racquet, in the same league of the dunlop max 200g and the Rossignol f 200 carbon, even more solid
 
I am surprised that the FLEX in the 60.. it plays and feels much softer than that.. I have both.. the Prince Magnesium Pro 90 is very rare and a great racket to hit with..
 
courtking said:
I am surprised that the FLEX in the 60.. it plays and feels much softer than that.. I have both.. the Prince Magnesium Pro 90 is very rare and a great racket to hit with..
Click to expand...

I was surprised too. The RDC-ratings are usually a pretty good indicator, but sometimes my guesses have been way off, such as in this case. There's simply more to a flexy feel than the RDC shows.
 
Dino Lagaffe said:
Hi Cesare,

I checked my RDC-log http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=308724 and only found the 110. Then I checked my collection and couldn't find a 90 to measure, unfortunately. Sorry about that, really thought I had the 90... Anyway here are the specs for the 110:

Weight: 341/12.03
Flex: 60
SW: 319
Balance: 32.5 cm

Sorry I couldn't help you out, buddy.
Click to expand...


No problems Dino, thanks ,i think that the flex could be very similar to the 90's version. The pro 90 flex very much in the throat, but overall it's a firm frame. pin point accuracy and great touch at the net.unfortunately, the racquet is not mine. it reminds me a bit the old rossignol f 290.
 
Dino Lagaffe said:
Hi Cesare,

I checked my RDC-log http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=308724 and only found the 110. Then I checked my collection and couldn't find a 90 to measure, unfortunately. Sorry about that, really thought I had the 90... Anyway here are the specs for the 110:

Weight: 341/12.03
Flex: 60
SW: 319
Balance: 32.5 cm

Sorry I couldn't help you out, buddy.
Click to expand...

Keep up the great work Dino !
I have a few mag90s, wish I could send you one but dont want to spend the cross pond shipping costs.

In general, for other rackets that had a 90 and 110, or mid and OS, how much would the RDCs differ ?
I could check the listings, but figured you may just have a good idea.
Im assuming same beam width, just bigger head.

PS: I was trying to maintain a listing of all your findings at: http://woodtennis.com/rdc.txt
Do you have an updated file I could use for refresh ?
 
Last edited:
Dino Lagaffe said:
Hi Cesare,

I checked my RDC-log http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=308724 and only found the 110. Then I checked my collection and couldn't find a 90 to measure, unfortunately. Sorry about that, really thought I had the 90... Anyway here are the specs for the 110:

Weight: 341/12.03
Flex: 60
SW: 319
Balance: 32.5 cm

Sorry I couldn't help you out, buddy.
Click to expand...

Hi Dino, I'm looking for a Prince Magnesium Pro 90, but I only found a "demo" racket, that only says "Magnesium Pro" on its side. Not series 90 nor series 110. I know the oval specs are 10 inches from left to right, and 13 inches from top to bottom. Could you please compare it to your 110, and let me know if these are the 90 or the 110 specs?
Thanks!
Ettore
 
FWIW, the Magnesium 110 is nowhere near 110sq.in. I always thought it looked and played like a 95sq.in. It's not the frypan the 110 label suggests it is.
 
Thanks MAXXply!
But this is the problem: I'm looking for a Mag 90 not to play with, but only as a collector, and I would like to get the same racket Pat Cash used to win his Wimbledon. So, if the 90 and the 110 are very close in the oval dimension, this doesn't help me understanding what kind of racket it is without the exactly specifications of the 90 (or the 110). I've compared it with one Head Prestige 600, and the Mag was a little bit wider, and with an Head Elektra 660, and the Mag was surely shorter and tighter. So, maybe, it's a Mag 110, as it seems to stay between a midsize and a midplus (and you said "I always thought it looked and played like a 95sq.in.").
What do you think about?
Ettore
 
^^ It plays fine, but then I did not use it for a long time. Definitely not oversize in terms of maneuverability - it is easy to move and hit with. I prefer to think of it as a midplus. Good feel and flex.
 
Along with several close to mint mag OS rackets I have, I also have a 90 that is unused condition. When I find it, I take along to club to measure on the RDC ...
 
This would be great! Could you please take (and tell me...) the head measurements too? I have to know if a 10x13 inches (left to right/top to bottom) is a 90 or a 100 Magnesium Pro.
Thanks a lot!!
Ettore
 
Tacco said:
Hi Dino, I'm looking for a Prince Magnesium Pro 90, but I only found a "demo" racket, that only says "Magnesium Pro" on its side. Not series 90 nor series 110. I know the oval specs are 10 inches from left to right, and 13 inches from top to bottom. Could you please compare it to your 110, and let me know if these are the 90 or the 110 specs?
Click to expand...
I have a Mag Pro 110 whose string bed I measured at 333.5 mm long and 253 mm wide. That's measuring inner surface of hoop to inner surface of hoop. If you were measuring the same way, you have a 110. If you were measuring from the outside of the hoop, you have a 90.

Applying the area-of-ellipse formula to the above measurements gives an area of 102.7 sq. inches, so the 110 was in the 102 to 104 range.

Man, those were some great sticks – the only metal racket I know of that really held its own with the graphite composites. They were a real PITA to string, though.
 
Oh...
It's a 110 (16 mains; 10x13 inches inner string pattern measurements), but it's not a racket of mine. I was just thinking to buy it, but I had to know before what Mag Pro it was. And I'm looking for a 90, so I will wait to find the right one...
Ettore
 
I just found my old Prince Magnesium Pro 110.
It seems like it can compare to what I actually want in a new racket.
16x9 open string pattern for more spin.
I want slightly more oversized for spin and power.
I can use a Head 107 and this Mag. 110 is smaller.
So, I agree that it's probably like a 102-104.

I just regripped it.
I will use it next week, with the 10 year old strings.
If it's not terrible, I will restring it.
It says 65 to 75. Not sure if I should do 65, 70, or 75.
 
Yes, this racquet is quite rare. As a big fan of Cash i wanted this racquet very badly but was surprised - there are many 110" available and nothing about 90". I think it's because 90" used mostly by pros and were destroyed after several restrungs. 110" were mostly club players' choice and did not restring often.
So after several years of searching i found one Magnesium Pro 90 in good condition even with stencils on strings. I want to try it in game but this one is mostly for collectors use in my case and i afraid to broken it.
 
Dino Lagaffe said:
Hi Cesare,

I checked my RDC-log http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=308724 and only found the 110. Then I checked my collection and couldn't find a 90 to measure, unfortunately. Sorry about that, really thought I had the 90... Anyway here are the specs for the 110:

Weight: 341/12.03
Flex: 60
SW: 319
Balance: 32.5 cm

Sorry I couldn't help you out, buddy.
Click to expand...
Not sure how often @Dino Lagaffe reviews but wonder if a general flex interpretation can be predicted ? How do the same models/material rackets change in flex between models of 90/100/110 ??? Obviously the larger heads would have greater swing weights but would this also make them slightly more flexy with the more head heavy balance ?
Answer should be in the physics of tennis book for anybody looking to take this action :)
 
BorgCash said:
Yes, this racquet is quite rare. As a big fan of Cash i wanted this racquet very badly but was surprised - there are many 110" available and nothing about 90". I think it's because 90" used mostly by pros and were destroyed after several restrungs. 110" were mostly club players' choice and did not restring often.
So after several years of searching i found one Magnesium Pro 90 in good condition even with stencils on strings. I want to try it in game but this one is mostly for collectors use in my case and i afraid to broken it.
Click to expand...
Do you realize that once you die, someone will take your prized rackets and toss them in the trash? Use your rackets and enjoy them while you can
 
BorgCash said:
Yes, this racquet is quite rare. As a big fan of Cash i wanted this racquet very badly but was surprised - there are many 110" available and nothing about 90". I think it's because 90" used mostly by pros and were destroyed after several restrungs. 110" were mostly club players' choice and did not restring often.
So after several years of searching i found one Magnesium Pro 90 in good condition even with stencils on strings. I want to try it in game but this one is mostly for collectors use in my case and i afraid to broken it.
Click to expand...
I believe you bought your Magnesium Pro 90 from me! :-) I'm happy it is being well looked after - it is true that this was a rare frame when new, and very rare to find a good one today.
 
retrowagen said:
I believe you bought your Magnesium Pro 90 from me! :) I'm happy it is being well looked after - it is true that this was a rare frame when new, and very rare to find a good one today.
Click to expand...

Yes man, i think so. I was lucky you had for sale one in a good condition also. I wanted to collect the racquet' models the most famous players from the 80's played with. So i have now Borg, Mac, Jimbo, Lendl, Cash, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Curren, Agassi (not OS - i don't play with big headed frames).
 
I have several Prince Magnesium Pro 110 and love playing with them. I also have a 125 which I play with hybrid string combination at low tension now and then for kicks. Never saw a 90. My understanding that all the OS series of that era (1984) were actually 107 square inch. I've compared the Boron and POG and Maggie and Woodie and they all look to be the same area to me. Boron was supposed to be the stiffest and the Woodie the most limber (and heaviest).
I agree that lower tensions are a prudent idea with these as they can and do flatten out with age if we keep using the high tensions that were recommended and used in those days (thirty three years ago).
 
TimeToPlaySets said:
How do these 80s rackets hit compared to the modern rackets?
Click to expand...
The Prince Magnesium (all sizes) were great for serving and volleying and doubles. With modern strings the average tennis player , if honest, would not notice a difference. There is a natural tendency to think that new designs MUST be better. Also, advertisement. A touch player that uses lots of drops and lobs could win a club tournament with a Prince Woodie.
 
Perhaps.. but players who used the mag pros back in the 80’s remember that this racquet had a very distinct feel to it. Different than any of the other metal frames and very different than the carbon frames of that time.

Magnesium is a unique metal. Also should note that most of my buddies who had them had their frames crack on them (somewhat brittle). That’s why my mag 90 gets very little use.
 
Ultra 2 said:
Perhaps.. but players who used the mag pros back in the 80’s remember that this racquet had a very distinct feel to it. Different than any of the other metal frames and very different than the carbon frames of that time.

Magnesium is a unique metal. Also should note that most of my buddies who had them had their frames crack on them (somewhat brittle). That’s why my mag 90 gets very little use.
Click to expand...

I think it feels closer to wood than to metall or graphite.
 
Ultra 2 said:
Perhaps.. but players who used the mag pros back in the 80’s remember that this racquet had a very distinct feel to it. Different than any of the other metal frames and very different than the carbon frames of that time.

Magnesium is a unique metal. Also should note that most of my buddies who had them had their frames crack on them (somewhat brittle). That’s why my mag 90 gets very little use.
Click to expand...

I think it feels closer to wood than to metall or graphite.
 
Yes, don't string the Mag Pro too tightly. The reason they died was that they deformed with use quickly - probably the reason there aren't many around.
 
Having picked up one of these recently, for the sake of posterity, and to the best of my measuring capabilities, I can confirm the following specifications for mine.

Prince Magnesium Pro 90 (4 5/8 grip size)

Strung Static Weight: 341g
Strung Swing Weight: 327
Head Light: 7 pts
Balance Point 32.4 cm
Total Length: 69.2 cm
String Pattern: 14x18
Head Size: 90 in2
Flex: 60 RA (as Dino measured for the 110 feels about right, but I have no way to confirm this accurately)
 
TimeToPlaySets said:
I just found my old Prince Magnesium Pro 110.
It seems like it can compare to what I actually want in a new racket.
16x9 open string pattern for more spin.
I want slightly more oversized for spin and power.
I can use a Head 107 and this Mag. 110 is smaller.
So, I agree that it's probably like a 102-104.

I just regripped it.
I will use it next week, with the 10 year old strings.
If it's not terrible, I will restring it.
It says 65 to 75. Not sure if I should do 65, 70, or 75.
Click to expand...
only use 2 point mounting system stringing machines to avoid deformation!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Grand Slam Singles Winners and Racquets, 1980-1991
Replies
48
Views
11K
ServenVolley
S
Dino Lagaffe
All RDC stats so far
2
Replies
67
Views
15K
Dino Lagaffe
Dino Lagaffe
H
I wish I had my old racquets back....
Replies
4
Views
2K
Hannah19
Hannah19
Grafil Injection
Rossignol Graphite 200 - wooden racquet
Replies
24
Views
1K
dje31
dje31
Grafil Injection
Slazenger Phantom IMF vs Dunlop MAX 200G (and 300i)
2 3
Replies
127
Views
7K
Grafil Injection
Grafil Injection
Back
Top