Prince Textreme Tour 100 (310) Thread

lima

Rookie
Stability of my O3 is no different from my solid TT310 (and as a rule, the O3 versions of Prince racquets are usually around the same twistweight as their solid beam counterparts).

End of the day they're both really good frames, I just preferred the more predictable response of the O3 due to the 8 mains but could switch between the two with no issues (although I don't use mine much any more).
What do you play with?
 

t_pac

Rookie
Tecnifibre TF40.

The TT310 is a great all court frame but I just prefer a tighter string pattern and smaller head size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AA7

Kurt0707

New User
Tried O3 in Beasts with solid version and also Tour 310. With ports the rackets swing very easy and fast, it is also very manuevarable, but I preferred the solid version for the feel and timing. TT310 is good overall racquet, especially if you play with spin.
 

Ramon

Legend
I have both the Beast 98 O3 and the solid beam Beast 98. Personally, I like the solid beam version because I think the feel and control are better.

There are still some good arguments for the O3 version: the spin is better, and it has better response on off-center hits. However, despite the fact that I like to play with a lot of spin and I hit off-center too often, I still prefer the solid beam version because I'm more confident that I can place the ball where I want it, and compared to most solid beam racquets the spin and off-center response are still very good. I heard reviewers comment that O3 racquets are easier on the arm. That's true, and I have a sensitive elbow, but both version of the Beast are easy enough on my arm that it doesn't matter to me which one I use.

The final nail in the coffin for the O3 version is the stringing. I string my own racquets, and I can tell you that the Beast 98 O3 is dreaded by anyone who strings racquets. Not only do you need to employ special techniques for the O-ports, but on top of that you have to deal with tie-off holes that are too small and holes that are difficult to get through because they are blocked by other strings. If you don't string your own racquets, you might think this doesn't apply to you, but it does apply to whoever strings your racquet, and if he ends up taking shortcuts or gets inconsistent tension, it can affect your game.
 

2nd Serve Ace

Hall of Fame
I have both the Beast 98 O3 and the solid beam Beast 98. Personally, I like the solid beam version because I think the feel and control are better.

There are still some good arguments for the O3 version: the spin is better, and it has better response on off-center hits. Not only do you need to employ special techniques for the O-ports, but on top of that you have to deal with tie-off holes that are too small and holes that are difficult to get through because they are blocked by other strings. If you don't string your own racquets, you might think this doesn't apply to you, but it does apply to whoever strings your racquet, and if he ends up taking shortcuts or gets inconsistent tension, it can affect your game.
On that one, best to do the "50-50" method and just start the crosses in the middle, working outwards.

Right about the small tie-off holes! Gotta razor those ends thin, no doubt.

Personally thought the solid beam 98B was ordinary, but the o3 was an absolute joy to play. (Maneuvers like a mid but forgiving and powerful like a 100)
 

Ramon

Legend
On that one, best to do the "50-50" method and just start the crosses in the middle, working outwards.

Right about the small tie-off holes! Gotta razor those ends thin, no doubt.

Personally thought the solid beam 98B was ordinary, but the o3 was an absolute joy to play. (Maneuvers like a mid but forgiving and powerful like a 100)
I would agree that the Beast 98 is kind of ordinary. For me that means it has that old familiar feel that I've grown accustomed to. It's easy to switch from a lot of popular frames to the Beast 98. The O3 version is different for better or worse. It will appeal to some but not others. I guess that means the OP is going to be even more confused now! :)
 
I have been VERY pleased with this racquet, coming from the Yonex SV100 and SV98.
I also demod a LOT of frames before settling on this one. I started with full poly (Hyper G) at about 48lbs and it was too springy. It’s about perfect with Weiss Canon Ultra Cable 17 (or Fire Stroke 17) at 55/53. Comfortable, nice control, great topspin (better than my SV’s) and enough power for sure. Less than my SV100 (which I wanted). Power is comparable to the PS97 but more comfortable, better feel.
I hit a OHBH and it has been great for that as well.
I find it easier to hit deeper topspin shots with control as well as the ability to flatten out balls when I want to put a point away. Excellent frame. The balance could feel a little nicer but I dont have much to complain about here. I loved the balance of the PP with the solid beam (not box beam) and the uber thin beam profile, but my demo was strung too tight and it had no power. I may give that a hit again sometime with some different string setups to see what I think again, but for now I am really happy with this frame. Highly recommended-do it all type of frame.
 

soulfree914

New User
On that one, best to do the "50-50" method and just start the crosses in the middle, working outwards.

Right about the small tie-off holes! Gotta razor those ends thin, no doubt.

Personally thought the solid beam 98B was ordinary, but the o3 was an absolute joy to play. (Maneuvers like a mid but forgiving and powerful like a 100)
I picked up a Beast 98 O3 and I like it more than TT310, despite the fact that I paid less than half of what I paid for the TT310.
With Beast 98 03, topspins come effortlessly and put-away volleys are easier, plus I feel like I'm unlocking certain aspects of my game with the added maneuverability, power, and tighter cross string pattern. It did seem to require a low-powered poly for me to tame the power coming from the racquet and still be able to get a few touch volleys, but the racquet was comfortable enough to use a stiffer poly. I'm in a 4.0 league and surprisingly, I didn't feel a significant drop-off in stability against big hitters either. I've heard the new Beast model is released in Japan; I'm hoping they'll make 98-sized ones.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

Spiny

New User
After playing with the PP 100P, I get the feeling with the RA of 65 and even with the Twaron the 310 tour is going to be quite stiff. What turns me off with the modern racquets is the upper portion of the hoop plays very stiff and has no forgiveness. I grew up playing in the early 90’s and the racquets made then we’re alot more forgiving as well as more arm friendly. I grew up playing with the head prestige classic, pro staff classic and the Volkl C10 Pro. Those were the best racquets made IMO.

I am currently playing with PK 7G which is good racquet, however I find a big power and stability drop with balls hit towards the upper hoop of the frame. I have some shoulder issues which has made a little difficult finding another racquet.

The question is whether the 310 tour will be jarring to my arm when hit a bill way off center? I found the PP 100P to be jarring on my arm after playing with it for a few months. I also strung it around 50 lbs with a Synthetic string. One TW tester Jason stated that balls hit near the upper hoop were more jarring than usual! Maybe the 310 tour would agree with my arm with a multi?? I don’t like demos because they usually have poly string and the grip is too small. I don’t play with poly anymore and need a 1/2 or 5/8 grip to good flavor for a racquet strung with Synthetic string. Anyone have any other thoughts?
 
Top