Pro Staff 97 315g Discussion

macguyvur

macguyvur

Rookie
I thought I'd start a thread just for the new (forthcoming) Pro Staff 97 315g unstrung stick. There has been lots of discussion and play-test reviews of Roger's RF 97 Autograph version, but not much on the lighter PS 97, and getting through the massive amount of posts on the RF97a thread is a challenge.

Here are the current TW specs of the PS 97 315g, just for the record:

Head Size: 97 sq. in. / 625.81 sq. cm.
Length: 27in / 68.58cm
Unstrung Weight: 11.1oz / 315g
Unstrung Balance: 12.2 in. / 31.0cm / 10 pts HL
Beam Width: 21.5mm / 21.5mm / 21.5mm /
Composition: Braided Kevlar & Graphite / Basalt Fibers
Power Level: Low
Stroke Style: Full
Swing Speed: Fast​

Has anyone hit with this stick yet? Could you please share you thoughts?

I know it's not officially released until Oct 1, 2014, but I saw on other threads that some people had the stick and planned to hit with it.
 
I wonder if it'll feel similar to 2003 pure control team:

Midplus Specs
Head Size:
98 sq. in. / 626 sq. cm.
Length: 27 inches / 69 cm
Strung Weight: 11.8oz / 335g
Balance: 7pts Head Light
Swingweight: 327
Stiffness: 70
Beam Width: 21.5 Straight Beam
Composition: Graphite / Kevlar
Power Level: Low
Swing Speed: Fast
Grip Type: ATP Tour Grip
String Pattern:
16 Mains / 20 Crosses
 
MayDay said:
I wonder if it'll feel similar to 2003 pure control team
Click to expand...

Mid West Sports has the strung specs listed, as well as a stiffness rating of 64 RA, which would make it more plush than the PCT 2003 probably, right? More classic PS feel. Also the swing weight is listed there as 310.

Here are the specs listed there (url isn't coming through in this post so you'll have to just google it to check it yourself):
Racquet Specifications
Headsize: 97 sq. in.
Length: 27.00 in.
Weight (strung): 11.70 oz.
Stiffness (Babolat RDC): 64
Balance: 12.60 in. Head Light
Cross Section: 21.5 mm Flat Beam
Swingweight: 310 kg*sq. cm
String Pattern: 16x19
Grip: Wilson Pro Hybrid​
 
Can't think of any Pretender Racquet (a lighter version of an established standard) I'v ever hit with that was any good at all. ("Established" either by test of time or in this case tested by the pro it was created for).
 
The specs for the lighter version seem "right up my alley" as some of the TW playtesters like to say. Looking forward to playing with it more than the RF 97A.
 
macguyvur said:
Mid West Sports has the strung specs listed, as well as a stiffness rating of 64 RA, which would make it more plush than the PCT 2003 probably, right? More classic PS feel. Also the swing weight is listed there as 310.

Here are the specs listed there (url isn't coming through in this post so you'll have to just google it to check it yourself):
Racquet Specifications
Headsize: 97 sq. in.
Length: 27.00 in.
Weight (strung): 11.70 oz.
Stiffness (Babolat RDC): 64
Balance: 12.60 in. Head Light
Cross Section: 21.5 mm Flat Beam
Swingweight: 310 kg*sq. cm
String Pattern: 16x19
Grip: Wilson Pro Hybrid​
Click to expand...

What? This is excellent.

I think this is really the new Pro Staff. The other one is the signature version specced for Roger. IE - this is not a pretender racquet.
 
ollinger said:
Can't think of any Pretender Racquet (a lighter version of an established standard) I'v ever hit with that was any good at all. ("Established" either by test of time or in this case tested by the pro it was created for).
Click to expand...
Isn't it hard to classify a standard (i.e. not L or LS) Pro Staff as a "Pretender"? But it does pale in comparison to the king's version of course, no question. For the rest of us mortals, though, I hope they put enough design attention into the 315g version.

endbegin said:
The specs for the lighter version seem "right up my alley" as some of the TW playtesters like to say. Looking forward to playing with it more than the RF 97A.
Click to expand...
For me as well. I'm hoping that it's not a "pretender" (via @ollinger), because if it is, that'll ruin what could be a great stick for many, including me. Those who have hit with it thus far have had good things to say about it, so all hope is not yet lost...
 
Very interesting spec. With a leather grip, this could be ideal.

Only gripe is that I'd personally would prefer to see a slightly higher swingweight but suppose if this was the case then there wouldn't be enough degrees of separation versus the Autograph edition.
 
Power Player said:
What? This is excellent.

I think this is really the new Pro Staff. The other one is the signature version specced for Roger. IE - this is not a pretender racquet.
Click to expand...
Yeah, looks nice, doesn't it? Can't wait to hit with it. Definitely hoping it's not a pretender -- I can't see how Wilson would short-change it, it's gotta be suited to many more of us than the RF97A, and although the king guided the latter's development, the "new generation" of Pro Staffs has to be populated with more than one keeper, doesn't it?
 
LiquidWhip said:
Very interesting spec. With a leather grip, this could be ideal.

Only gripe is that I'd personally would prefer to see a slightly higher swingweight but suppose if this was the case then there wouldn't be enough degrees of separation versus the Autograph edition.
Click to expand...
Yes, 310 seems like it might be awfully light and whippy and have a hard time fielding heavy balls respectably. But we can always throw some lead tape on. I am wishing for a leather grip too, but it will add static weight and make it even more head light. I'm going to try it stock before i swap out the grip I think. And have tape on hand to firm up the hoop if it needs it. But people playing it right now are saying good things, and not complaining about it getting pushed around too much.
 
macguyvur said:
Yeah, looks nice, doesn't it? Can't wait to hit with it. Definitely hoping it's not a pretender -- I can't see how Wilson would short-change it, it's gotta be suited to many more of us than the RF97A, and although the king guided the latter's development, the "new generation" of Pro Staffs has to be populated with more than one keeper, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Oh yes for sure, especially when the 315 frame is called the pro staff.

The thing is that they measured the signature at 64 RA as well. So I am wondering if that is a mistake.

The SW is a little low, but luckily the balance is very HL. So I think I would just add 5 grams of lead at 12 for an easy mod and be good to go.

That was the only flaw in the Tecnifibre 315, which I think is a similar frame. The balance is 6 pts hl, and has the same SW. So when you added lead it you had to counter balance, and it made keeping the racquet around 345 grams challenging. I play mine at 352 as a result. Feels great though.
 
Power Player said:
Oh yes for sure, especially when the 315 frame is called the pro staff.

The thing is that they measured the signature at 64 RA as well. So I am wondering if that is a mistake.
Click to expand...

I missed the RA discussion somewhere (even after hours of reading through the other thread!) -- what are people saying about the real stiffness of the RF97A?

Power Player said:
The SW is a little low, but luckily the balance is very HL. So I think I would just add 5 grams of lead at 12 for an easy mod and be good to go.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a good plan. Unstrung they were reporting HL 10, right? So strung, that'll take a HL 7 or so down to something like a HL 3 or 4? I might throw a leather grip on, that might keep it HL 5 or so?
 
hmmm..I think it is 9-10 hl strung, but I could be wrong.

Well, go look at the drakulies video in his thread. He measures the RA at 67 and he may mention the balance as well.
 
macguyvur said:
Sounds like a good plan. Unstrung they were reporting HL 10, right? So strung, that'll take a HL 7 or so down to something like a HL 3 or 4? I might throw a leather grip on, that might keep it HL 5 or so?
Click to expand...

Only issue with adding 5 grams of weight as PP has suggested and then adding a leather grip (+10-15grams in) plus a overgrip (4-5grams) is that you're going to end up with a racket not to dissimilar in weight to the Autograph edition - approximately 12.4 - 12.5 ounces strung.

With Wilson's quality control there's every chance you could pick up one of the Autograph rackets that falls into this weight bracket so you might be better off doing that...
 
^^^

Yes. My goal would be to have a 6 pts hl racquet with a Sw ~326 weighing 340-345. If I pull that off, Im going to be happy. It took me a lot of playtime and racquet tweaking to lock those specs in, so I really want to try and get the Pro Staff at that weight if possible.
 
Power Player said:
hmmm..I think it is 9-10 hl strung, but I could be wrong.

Well, go look at the drakulies video in his thread. He measures the RA at 67 and he may mention the balance as well.
Click to expand...

Right. Just rewatched. A little sad actually that it's that stiff. Maybe the PS 97 will be softer...

LiquidWhip said:
Only issue with adding 5 grams of weight as PP has suggested and then adding a leather grip (+10-15grams in) plus a overgrip (4-5grams) is that you're going to end up with a racket not to dissimilar in weight to the Autograph edition - approximately 12.4 - 12.5 ounces strung.

With Wilson's quality control there's every chance you could pick up one of the Autograph rackets that falls into this weight bracket so you might be better off doing that...
Click to expand...
Yep, true. I prefer stock with minimal mods, so will consider this. The weight gets above my limit here either way though, so I probably should be happy with a head-light stick with a minimal tape added to the hoop and forego the leather grip, hoping the hoop will be stable enough as is or with only a couple grams.
 
macguyvur said:
Right. Just rewatched. A little sad actually that it's that stiff. Maybe the PS 97 will be softer...
Click to expand...

Stiff≠discomfort. If made correctly, stiff can just mean a more crisp response. The best example is the Tour 90s, which, despite a relatively high stiffness reading close to the current RF PS 97, were rarely called uncomfortable. drakulie alluded to that in his review and I would not be surprised if that is the case again. The Wilson Pro Staff line has a long heritage of stiff, yet not terribly uncomfortable racquets (unless you are extremely susceptible to tennis elbow and/or similar issues).
 
I think Wilson is missing the mark if the strung SW is really 310 grams. So, the RF97 is 338ish SW and the PS97 315g is 310 SW. Head prestige and radical "pro" models have SW in the high 320s. I think Wilson should be coming in around 320-325 stock SW.

310 SW requires a lot of lead if you want to get in the 330-335 SW range. You have to add 6-7 grams very high on the hoop or more if you add at 3/9 o'c.

It would have been cool to only need 3-5 grams of lead to get to 330+ range so the static weight doesn't go too high.
 
One thread without people crying over a paint job would be awesome.

I do agree that the SW is low. I would rather it to be 325 as well.
 
Power Player said:
One thread without people crying over a paint job would be awesome.

I do agree that the SW is low. I would rather it to be 325 as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the numbers are accurate… Remember: Hank said that the racquet felt solid. I doubt that would be the case at a swingweight of 310 (unless some kind of magic happened here).
 
Yeah since the RA is off, Im hoping the SW is as well.

Only thing is their measurement of the sig was 336, which is accurate.
 
TennisCJC said:
I think Wilson is missing the mark if the strung SW is really 310 grams. So, the RF97 is 338ish SW and the PS97 315g is 310 SW. Head prestige and radical "pro" models have SW in the high 320s. I think Wilson should be coming in around 320-325 stock SW.

310 SW requires a lot of lead if you want to get in the 330-335 SW range. You have to add 6-7 grams very high on the hoop or more if you add at 3/9 o'c.

It would have been cool to only need 3-5 grams of lead to get to 330+ range so the static weight doesn't go too high.
Click to expand...

Everything he said
 
macguyvur said:
a stiffness rating of 64 RA, which would make it more plush than the PCT 2003 probably, right? More classic PS feel.
Click to expand...
Isn't the classic Pro Staff feel stiff though? Hit with some old PS85's[St Vincent I guess] a number of times and they were stiff, have an early China PS85 myself and it's quite stiff. And the original 6.1 95 was 72RA as well...
 
Hope Wilson's quality control tradition continues and will provide a good spec range to suite different users. This is even better than the Vantage stuff.
 
ollinger said:
Can't think of any Pretender Racquet (a lighter version of an established standard) I'v ever hit with that was any good at all. ("Established" either by test of time or in this case tested by the pro it was created for).
Click to expand...

This is 100% user dependent. That is, if you can't generate enough RHS or it becomes too cumbersome when tired, the lighter racquet is usually best.
 
Like others, I'm interested if the SW is around 325. I like to play my rackets stock and a 310 SW will likely be too light for my taste. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
 
SpinToWin said:
Stiff≠discomfort. If made correctly, stiff can just mean a more crisp response. The best example is the Tour 90s, which, despite a relatively high stiffness reading close to the current RF PS 97, were rarely called uncomfortable. drakulie alluded to that in his review and I would not be surprised if that is the case again. The Wilson Pro Staff line has a long heritage of stiff, yet not terribly uncomfortable racquets (unless you are extremely susceptible to tennis elbow and/or similar issues).
Click to expand...
Yes, all true. I certainly should have said "a little sad for me," as I do feel vibration more than most, and I personally was hoping for a softer frame. But I will try to make this one work regardless... and I'm sure you and drakulie are right, it'll be a better stick somewhat stiffer. I just got wooed by these new numbers...

I also hope the SW numbers we have are lower than actuals.

With wilson quality control and variation, weight amount and distribution seems to vary a lot piece-by-piece... is this true of stiffness as well?
 
Really disappointed to hear that the SW is so low. I was really thinking about this racquet as my next racquet, but I just don't think I can get used to something that is going to lack that plow through I desire.
 
EasternRocks said:
Really disappointed to hear that the SW is so low. I was really thinking about this racquet as my next racquet, but I just don't think I can get used to something that is going to lack that plow through I desire.
Click to expand...

Then pick the one out with a higher swingweight. the swingweight varies from 313 to 337 just like the rest of the specs. It won't be hard to find one with a high swingweight.
 
Looks like TW USA might have the video review up on Wed: http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=8737475

It was interesting to read Andy's response to EasternRock's question of which current racquets the PS97 is most similar to:



To Andy: Would you say that the closest frame on the current market to the new PS97 is the PS95 it replaces?
Click to expand...

I think the Wilson Blade 98 16x19 and the Babolat Pure Control Tour+ are two that closely resemble the PS97. It's heavier, crisper-feeling and more powerful than the PS95 it replaces.

Andy, TW
 
314 was probably to be expected, although 320 would have been nicer. You wouldn't want one substantially under 314.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

babar
Pro Staff 97 CV
Replies
1
Views
3K
mpournaras
mpournaras
Voodoosoul
Wilson Pro Staff 97LS
Replies
2
Views
1K
Voodoosoul
Voodoosoul
P
Racquet comparison - Six One vs. Pro Staff 97
Replies
3
Views
2K
Arak
A
time_fly
Pro Staff v14 X vs Shift 99 Pro
Replies
17
Views
7K
PhxRacket
PhxRacket
T
Thoughts on Wilson Six.One 95 v13 vs Pro Staff 97 v13?
Replies
0
Views
904
TheHusband
T
Back
Top