Racquet design and tech - which company is likely to leap ahead of the others ?

Crocodile

Crocodile

G.O.A.T.
A post I made elsewhere in the classic racquet section motivated me to start this thread. This may or may not be of interest but I thought I would give it a try. I will try to refine my ideas as we go along, anyway these are my thoughts right now.
I’m going to start of by talking about how I think the racquet industry is different now compared to say the 1980’s and 1990’s,
Back in the 80’s many of the brands actually made their own racquets in diverse counties. They developed their own designs and technologies and then launched their products to the market. What you had was a situation where a new racquet would hit the market and almost made everything else from other brands look and play archaic. We had this here in Australia where the local subsidiary of Dunlop and Slazenger were still trying to sell aluminium frames and then a Taiwanese made brand called Emrik released all their new composites which wiped the floor with almost every company with design, materials and price,
Now in 2023 most of the companies with the exception of Yonex go to factories in China and make everything there and I think as as a result there is a lot more similarity in what each of the brands sell and many unique brands don’t even exist anymore or are in a very small corner.
Yes there are some racquet inventors here in Australia for instance that submit prototypes to the companies but if I had to pick the one concept that has attempted to improve tennis for the general community it’s the Wilson Clash.
In my opinion if I had to pick the best innovations in the last 30 years my vote would go to Pro Kennex and Volkl. With Pro Kennex it’s the Destiny design that has enabled Babolat and others to dominate with the Pure Drive and PK’s own kinetic technology, it is the best arm safe technology ever. Many don’t realise and respect how innovative PK was. With Volkl it’s their handle system, variable beam and big grommets found in their V1 and catapult frames that has made a huge difference for many players.
Looking ahead and what I was hoping to discuss is how we think that things will play out in the next few years. My impressions are that the big companies like Wilson, Head, Yonex and Babolat will have access to the money required for effective marketing and access to new technology and in the next few years may try to get a jump on their opposition to get a dominant share of the market or even put others out of business. Alternatively some of these large companies may look to sure up their dominance through the diversification of sporting goods they make, for example Wilson make a lot of different products. Could the sale of pickleball bats influence the financial health of a company,
I would like to see some of the micro brands come up with some special racquets that could become cult classics that represent a certain cool factor about them.
What are your thoughts about the future of the racquet world and what are we likely to see unfold ?
 
Last edited:
I believe you forgot Prince and their O ports. And their Twist Power shafts.

Head also had suspension grips for a time. Don't know whey they stopped. Perhaps because they went to pallet system for replaceable handles.

Thin throats at the bottom of the hoop seems to be making an appearance again. But it is old technology.

I believe it would take a major change in material used to construct the frames before anything major can occur. The existing tweaks will just continue until then.
 
esgee48 said:
Head also had suspension grips for a time. Don't know whey they stopped.
Click to expand...
Because it was total crap. I remember it on the Ti Series: Ti Fire, Ti Heat, TiS6 etc.. It was just a useless piece of plastic inside the butcap, which by the way frequently broke in time, causing weird noises and additional vibrations lol. When I was working in a tennis shop, we used to replace a lot of them.

Not the best innovation from Head but well done from a marketing POV.
 
Last edited:
esgee48 said:
I believe you forgot Prince and their O ports. And their Twist Power shafts.

Head also had suspension grips for a time. Don't know whey they stopped. Perhaps because they went to pallet system for replaceable handles.

Thin throats at the bottom of the hoop seems to be making an appearance again. But it is old technology.

I believe it would take a major change in material used to construct the frames before anything major can occur. The existing tweaks will just continue until then.
Click to expand...
Did the O ports help in any way? Made stringing a bit more difficult.
A litle similar to power slots or whatever they were called that Justine Henin had on her racquets.
 
I find this stuff quite fascinating. What I have done over the years is bought lots of racquets from the 70’s right through to now and I have made notes about them before I sold them off.
Im going to look through the notes and also buy more frames to get a feel of the changes in technology and in particular where the changes were significant within a decade between competing companies. I want to get a clearer idea of how things really are in reality and compare it to how the world racquet market is progressing now.
One way of looking at changes is to compare different iterations of the same model. Take the 10 series Volkl range if you hit with all of them you will notice a difference. Sometimes what I find telling is that a racquet that I thought was great in the day is not so great now and on the flip side there is always that special iconic frame that seems to hold its own today, Take the Volkl C10, it’s still a great racquet for a certain type of player today but here in Australia sales are down for the C10 and young players won’t be that happy with them. Lot of the young players find the grip shape awkward and the feel to be a bit disconnected because of its weight and lively yet soft feel. And here ls the other thing, with my testing and analysis I’m going to have to include a variety of players of different styles and ages to get the feedback. Over 30 years of playing tennis not only do racquets change but so does the athlete:
 
Last edited:
What I would like to see is a niche brand come up with something special that would shock the tennis world, be it with feel, enhanced service power, spin and comfort. It could even be something to do with some special aesthetic feature, some iridescent cosmetic that’s never been done before that’s super cool. If you think about it when Snauwert first released their HiTen frames it was a very different racquet to anything else out there. A few pros I have spoken to told me that they used to put hair spray on the string bed and the spin was insane.
The original Wilson Profile ( via Kuebler) changed the power dynamics of a tennis racquet.
As far as today, just my opinion but I think the Wilson Clash has been a more effective innovation for a lot of players than the shift,
 
esgee48 said:
I believe you forgot Prince and their O ports. And their Twist Power shafts.

Head also had suspension grips for a time. Don't know whey they stopped. Perhaps because they went to pallet system for replaceable handles.

Thin throats at the bottom of the hoop seems to be making an appearance again. But it is old technology.

I believe it would take a major change in material used to construct the frames before anything major can occur. The existing tweaks will just continue until then.
Click to expand...
Pallets system was before suspension grip and the suspension grip was only on a couple of models. All of HEAD’s rackets are designed and developed in Austria. CAP system grommets is a unique only to HEAD racquets.
 
Crocodile said:
What I would like to see is a niche brand come up with something special that would shock the tennis world, be it with feel, enhanced service power, spin and comfort. It could even be something to do with some special aesthetic feature, some iridescent cosmetic that’s never been done before that’s super cool. If you think about it when Snauwert first released their HiTen frames it was a very different racquet to anything else out there. A few pros I have spoken to told me that they used to put hair spray on the string bed and the spin was insane.
The original Wilson Profile ( via Kuebler) changed the power dynamics of a tennis racquet.
As far as today, just my opinion but I think the Wilson Clash has been a more effective innovation for a lot of players than the shift,
Click to expand...
Agreed to bad they didn’t build on the clash within other lines . A pro staff clash 9.7 Would be the bomb . Wilson hear me roar ?
 
Another way of looking at it is to ask which brands do you think might be in trouble by the end of the decade and who will dominate ?
If you think back to say the 90’s we did lose quite a few brands, some have come back but haven’t quite recovered. I remember hitting with. Spalding and Kniessl racquets once upon a time.
 
I think the racquet market is a very competitive industry. If you are a smaller fry you must either innovate or get a price advantage;
 
Quality of the racquets, or “tech” has nothing to do with it.

Donnay were excellent. Fischer were excellent. Kneissl. Slazenger.
They all fell by the wayside. So unfortunate that quality does not translate to commercial success…

From the looks of it, Head and Wilson are now the most prevalent. They have the worst quality, but very wide representation at all sporting goods stores, and Walmart.
 
Last edited:
From the point of view of quality / tech — I was most impressed by Diadem. They ticked all the boxes for me — the feel, the looks, the power level. Incidentally, I also prefer their strings to just about anything else.
Second after them are ZüS and Angell.
Quality wise, these three are heads and shoulders above the competition.
 
NicoMK said:
Because it was total crap. I remember it on the Ti Series: Ti Fire, Ti Heat, TiS6 etc.. It was just a useless piece of plastic inside the butcap, which by the way frequently broke in time, causing weird noises and additional vibrations lol. When I was working in a tennis shop, we used to replace a lot of them.

Not the best innovation from Head but well done from a marketing POV.
Click to expand...
What was in the Ti Series was the “ShockStop” buttcap. Just a (cheap) clear buttcap with some fanciful looking thing inside; meant to sell the (false) idea that it had some sort of shock absorbing suspension grip system. It was purely cosmetic and pretty laughable!
01910000_000.jpg

It was not the actual, much more complex Suspension Grip system that HEAD originally used with the Prestige Tour 600 and 660 from 2003 which actually worked very well to control excess vibrations. Unfortunately, the Suspension Grip system was prone to cracking and HEAD must have decided it was not worth trying to find a more durable plastic for it.
Fix for Head Prestige Tour 600
c0af3223ed05b30bc77ab7fe787615cb.jpg


It also meant that the hairpin handle was molded differently, which meant that one could not just replace a broken Suspension Grip with their standard pallets.
 
Last edited:
Tennisist said:
Quality of the racquets, or “tech” has nothing to do with it.

Donnay were excellent. Fischer were excellent. Kneissl. Slazenger.
They all fell by the wayside. So unfortunate that quality does not translate to commercial success…

From the looks of it, Head and Wilson are now the most prevalent. They have the worst quality, but very wide representation at all sporting goods stores, and Walmart.
Click to expand...
I understand the point being made however I feel it’s very hard for a small brand to get the opportunity to stock a Walmart so I think they need to go in a different direction and offer something else, be it exceptional quality, feel, price, beautiful cosmetics or hipster cool cult following.
Looking back in the 90’s brands like Volkl, Fischer and Kneissl along with Mizuno and Snauwert lhad this type of thing happening. Here where I was playing all the mainstream guys were hitting with the everyday Head and Wilson stuff. Then you had a group of guys who would turn up in their old BMW’s, Saab’s, Z’s and Volvos, some were sort of part surfing, part music and part tennis guru type guys and they would be hitting with the Fischers and Volkl’s and when you tried them you immediately noticed that these frames were different. At the time Wilson’s we’re very harsh and rough tools, Head had abandoned their twin tubes for their terrible Titanuim range and then you hit with this C10 Pro that was silky smooth and refined along with the Fischer Pro one . Their cosmetics looked very different as well. Volkl had this slogan, “You can feel the difference “, and then you saw that Johnny Mc and Cashy along with Mats hitting with them and you kind of thought that there was something going on about all these racquets that you had to try out. Only small specialised shops got to stock the brand and certain high performance coaches were being supported so it kind of became exclusive, special and cool at the same time.
I think this is how small brands need to build their cult following.
Perhaps today I think definitely Angell, Zus, Pacific, Diadem, Furi, Mantis, Heysill and even Solinco could be doing something like this.
Volkl need to rediscover their mojo and Snauwert and Donnay could do something if they got their act together with their ability to get out and connect with the right people,
 
Last edited:
I think Prince are making some great racquets but having challenges in getting their stuff out worldwide.
While I could be wrong many who have been around for a while will see the brand fondly as a past relic and some will see it as a has - been brand, and young men and women won’t gravitate to it, because they will see it as a dad racquet, so what I’m suggesting is that the company should rebrand their name to something new and vibrant. Just like how PK did a run of Wimbledon sticks I think Prince should rebrand themselves as, Hydrogen, like they already have with a few of their cosmetic efforts. You need to do something contemporary and looking towards the future.
I would suggest that PK needs to have a name change as well and maybe even adopt the Wimbledon logo. Those Wimbledon sticks looked great.
 
One of the things I would like to point out that while I don’t have anything against the big major tennis brands I am concerned about the ramifications of declines with the smaller brands. If you have less brands you can kiss goodbye the prospect of every returning to the days of value for money and competitive pricing or the desire to try harder to attract customers to newer and better products;
 
I think by now, everything that there was to be tried, has been tried: pure graphite, less graphite, more foam, less foam, and so on.
The only way there will be a “jump” is if they come up with some new materials. Non-Newtonian polymer, anyone? Like aluminum and graphite burst onto the scene in the 70s, and allowed Donnay and Head to rise.
Until such revolution, the battle has to be waged in the “human” domain. Trying to win the popularity contest with essentially the same things as the other guys.
 
I'm not sure if any company will "leap ahead" of others in innovation. I will say that I like where Wilson has been heading the past five years. Like everyone else, and especially Head, they went down the materials rabbit hole for a number of years (titanium, Hyper Carbon, nCode, Basalt, blah, blah, blah), but their recent technologies have been focused on the graphite layup pattern itself, exploring unconventional combinations of fiber orientations that activate other bending modes. Sure, the technologies still have silly names, but they seem to have an actual effect on racquet performance. For example, the newest Shift racquets are stiff bending horizontally but flexible laterally; you get power but more ball pocketing. Other manufacturers have followed suit in this direction; Head's Auxetic tech is based on laying up the fiber pre-preg in a way that achieves auxetic properties, i.e., negative Poisson's ratio. I'm still unconvinced it does anything though; time will tell.
 
Last edited:
Well, I’m fairly young and haven’t followed the racquet evolution through the decades nor am I a big racquet tech geek, but, answering the question based on how I feel playing with each bigger company’s racquets and the info I gather around here, I’d say Yonex is probably best positioned to leap ahead.
I reckon the muteness many people may dislike, but I find the Yonex feel very good and above the pack. The rackets feel solid, most feel comfortable and there’s way above average quality control. They have well defined line styles, with spin, control/advanced, power/allround.
Also, like OP mentioned, they produce their racquets in Japan, which denotes carefulness and translates in a better end product, imo. And they’re willing to work - Yonex is probably the brand that works harder on model updates (they tweak frame design, tech…). They already display a distinguished isometric head shape as well.
I personally love the fact that they paint their racquets matte instead of glossy, but thats personal haha. I don’t like their PJs much, tho.
To me, Yonex is doing most things right and might be best positioned to be producing the better racquets.
I play with a Pure Aero 98, though. xD
 
Underdog said:
Well, I’m fairly young and haven’t followed the racquet evolution through the decades nor am I a big racquet tech geek, but, answering the question based on how I feel playing with each bigger company’s racquets and the info I gather around here, I’d say Yonex is probably best positioned to leap ahead.
I reckon the muteness many people may dislike, but I find the Yonex feel very good and above the pack. The rackets feel solid, most feel comfortable and there’s way above average quality control. They have well defined line styles, with spin, control/advanced, power/allround.
Also, like OP mentioned, they produce their racquets in Japan, which denotes carefulness and translates in a better end product, imo. And they’re willing to work - Yonex is probably the brand that works harder on model updates (they tweak frame design, tech…). They already display a distinguished isometric head shape as well.
I personally love the fact that they paint their racquets matte instead of glossy, but thats personal haha. I don’t like their PJs much, tho.
To me, Yonex is doing most things right and might be best positioned to be producing the better racquets.
I play with a Pure Aero 98, though. xD
Click to expand...
I agree, Yonex has the highest-quality construction among all the top brands. Personally, I don’t like the look of the isometric head shape, even though they have become less rectangular over the years. The 2023 VC95 is almost acceptable.
 
@Crocodile - First off, kudos for your out-of-the-box thinking and posting; makes for great variety and content that you just can't find anywhere else other than TTW!

I would say there are primarily two ways to address this question: 1) from a tennis player's perspective and 2) from a business perspective. And they are different perspectives, certainly.

First, from a player's perspective, I would have to agree with you and @PistolPete23 that Wilson has been the mainstream OEM to push hardest as of late on frame tech that makes the most actual playability difference. In the mid-market would be ProKennex, with their continually-developing Kinetic tech, which is hands-down the most arm-protective tech available in a frame, period. Of all the tiny, boutique makers, I would say Angell, with their ASi concept, has to be a frontrunner. There are various others, of course, but the changes they are offering are a bit less disruptive, more iterative. Also, my evaluation is not based on any perception or opinion of "quality", as that is answering a somewhat different question.

Second, the business perspective. Without sounding too bleak, we live in a time where single-source production and consumption has never been greater, which is perhaps good if you want to whitelabel a baseline-viable tennis racquet for sale at Walmart, but perhaps not so great for fostering true innovation. That said, the making of stuff at scale has never been more accessible to those who might want to give it a shot: crowd-funding, 3D printing, smaller-scale contract engineering and manufacturing, it's all there for the taking, should someone (anyone, really) feel motivated, passionate and humble enough. Whether that happens from inside the million-dollar R&D labs at Wilson or in someone's garage is anyone guess, but I'd wager it will continue to be a mix of both, with a healthy majority of it coming from big guys, as would be expected.

Combining all of the above, I don't really see anything earth-shattering coming in frame tech in the next few product cycles (5-10 years), other than the continued tweaking of materials and weightings, which I would call more evolutionary, rather than revolutionary -- though I do like the cavalier spirit from those like Paul Angell and his ASi concept -- but ultimately I think the graphite hairpin is still here to stay for some time. Rather, in that time frame at least, I see more disruption coming in strings, specifically co-poly, partial-poly and multi-esters. I'm very curious to see how far the likes of Grapplesnake, Tecnifibre and others can push the limits. I think there's a lot more low-hanging fruit there than there is in frame tech.

At the end of the day, though, I'm all about more products that push the boundaries, in whatever category. Here's to innovation.
 
Last edited:
I have read every post and really enjoy reading the viewpoints and ideas. Keep them coming, I intend to do some testing with some players to see what they think of the various technologies.
 
I was just thinking about this topic and wanted to put forward the idea that there can be different ways for racquet brands to leap forward and get ahead of the competition. The first way I believe is presentation, appeal and attractiveness. If a racquet line is stunningly beautiful to a lot of people they will gravitate to that frame, The type of paint can influence how the racquet feels in hand and certain paint textures can even help with feel and dampening.
In the past I have never been a Wilson fan ( their frames always seemed unrefined ) but currently I feel they are on to a good thing with the colour shifting paint. The Ultra Pro really hits the spot, whereas the V1 Ultra Pro while still nice looking had an early batch with terrible paint chipping. Originally Clash and that vast amount of grey was not good but the version 2 velvet red finish is much improved.
I think Diadem with their V2 Elevate is a very appealing product. On the other hand I don’t think Volkl did a good job with the C10 especially the anniversary model, they should have made in more classy.
So from just from one metric if a company can produce an amazing cosmetic that looks good and feels inviting then that’s a real factor. Playing with beautiful equipment can attract players to the game.
 
My second metric in leaping ahead as a brand has to do with spec consistency. What I’m seeing at the moment is that some brands have improved, some have got worse and some have seen no change.
What I will say is this - Yonex who are well known to be the best has come back to the pack somewhat. I started to notice this after the DR and Tour G range which I thought were excellent were replaced with the EZone and Duel G. The brand that has surprised me with their attention to exactness in specs is Tecnifibre. Today I measured 2 TF 40’s with dampener and over grip and both were only 2 grams apart ( 340g, 342g ), very impressed.
The Pacifics I have used are very good but hard to gauge because there are not many around to compare.
Head and Wilson are quite variable and Babolat I don’t know but Prince are better than Wilson and Head, Volkl have deteriorated, and Pro Kennex seem Ok but samples not readily available. Artengo Control tour seem good.
I think the brand that can promise excellent spec consistency could be a big plus for players who buy multiple frames;
 
My third metric in leaping ahead has to do with ergonomics and quality of feel. I believe if a brand can make their racquet feel more pleasurable to use on the court and offer a confidence inspiring sensation then that can be a huge point if difference.
Sometimes a brand can release a range that all of a sudden feels dated compared to what everyone is producing. I felt this when Snauwert released their Grinta and Vitas range, they felt a few generations behind. I thought Volkl’s V Cell range was a step backward in what many have come to Exocet from them whereas Head are on to a good thing with their Gravity and Speed range.
I think the Yonex Percept H is jump up in feel and arrow like precision. I think the unsung stunner are the Angell K7 frames, they managed to combine beautiful feel with comfort,
 
My 4th metric is price and I think this may be the metric of the decade. Whoever can make excellent stuff and still make it great value for money can do really well, I would say at the moment here in Australia, that Prince are the best value for money. They are good racquets at a great price. Every now and again when Synergy, Vortex and Phantom are on sale I would grab them.
I think Artengo for the money is a great option. I think people need to support value for money propositions.
In the 1980’s here in Australia the Copper Ace was a killer of a racquet for the price along with
Emrik.
The reality expensive stuff may find themselves exposed if a value for money brand does the business,
 
Another metric for the future could be either clarity of range or personalisation.
Some brands are messy, others clear and concise. I think Diadem have good clarity, Prince is a mess and Head has too many lines. Volkl’s numbering system is very logical and smart and Dunlop is well colour coded. Yonex’s V Core and V Core Pro was painful so going to a percept had alleviated that somewhat, Babolat’s range are well understood. I think
Tecnifibre have too many white frames that look the same but are actuality different racquets;
I think as far as personalisation there us definitely a future appeal to this. Angell snd Zus are good things and I hope Dahcor have another go,
 
I think that one area that can make a difference in the future is brands understanding how to make a frame that can enhance for example service power and consistency. This could be extremely valuable for many social and recreational players looking for some help. There are some racquets out there that serve really well and also enables you to hit angles and targets at will.
 
From my point of view, which is a very competitive rec player, the main concern that needs to be adressed is the constancy of the racquets specs.
that's why I use Angell racquets as my main sticks
Even Yonex is reported to have trouble keeping their specs within their tolerance margins. for me it's impossible to trust a comany that can have so many variations in their production.
For exemple, I love my Ultra Tour, but the one I have is a beefed out of specs one (luckyily), and I'll be very lucky to find a another one like it. So I can't use as my regular racquet.
Even my 3 PC600 have different specs
 
You raise some interesting points in this thread and I have a few thoughts as I've read through.

I feel like Head and Wilson are playing the "something for everyone" game with a different line targeted at different aspects of the game. It's a mix of their tried and true lines mixed with other offerings for different aspects. It's safe but limits innovation.

From a pure performance aspect, I feel like Yonex has really upped the game. 3 racquet lines specifically tailored and not much deviation from them.Yonex also seems to have the most actual development between iterations and they incorporate more player feedback. The replacement of VDM with Servo Filter in the Percept and the upcoming EZones is a great example of how they listened and are bringing more feel back to their frames.

I would argue that Prince is probably pushing more on the innovation front because they feel the need to have something that sets them apart from the others. The Twist Power and Ripstick frames are great examples of this. Even if their offerings fail, they are at least willing to try. I would also say that ProKennex falls in this category. But they are taking a different approach and sticking to it.

The you have really niche companies like Angell and Zus trying to give everyone a chance to have exactly what they want.

It's a golden age of racquets for sure.
 
Last edited:
I consider a leap forward to be something that creates obsolescence.

I don't see anything replacing graphite as the core substrate of tennis rackets in the near future. As far as the way graphite is molded, as in the shape of the racket, I don't see much room for innovation. The Yonex isometric head isn't a gimmick, but it doesn't obsolete oval frames. Nor have stiffer rackets obsoleted flexible ones.

Grommets (Head's sound grommets or Babolat spin grommets), strings, headguards, additives, paint materials, and other minor features of the racket don't have enough bearing on playing characteristics to call alternatives obsolete. Even modern strings (Hyper G, Restring Zero) are arguably (I'd say not) better than first generation co-polys.

Innovation would be necessary to obsolete anything extant. Of the existing manufacturers, none are incentivized to replace graphite or change the way its laid up, molded, etc.
 
I do really think that most technologies are pure marketing tries to give the idea that the old models are outdated. The true thing that matters in a graphite racquet is the amount of layers and orientation of carbon fibers, and if it happens to be any other kind of fiber involved (were basalt fibers even a truth in the Wilson lines?).
 
I think there's a lot of room to start layups w exotic aerospace fibers to tailor to specific flex/feel properties in different sections of the racquet. It seems like graphite has been around forever, and new fibers are all over the aerospace industry and have made their way into other builds already. Dyneema, Innegra, etc.
 
@Crocodile , Have you hit with a Prince Twistpower X97 Tour? It isn't remarkable other than providing comfort with power without wrecking an elbow. I fended off trying it for quite a while when another higher level TT'r kept suggesting I try it. The downside was after finally getting one and then 2 more I thought, "I like "power" rackets." Then resurrected my affliction for Babolat APDs and PDs, again wrecking my elbow! I've tried, owned, gave away and traded over 200 rackets and am only hitting with 2 brand/model of rackets: Prince Twistpower X97 and on a good day the Wilson Ultra Tour 97, both comfy on the elbow with the Twistpower offering a bit more free power than the UT 97 for my 69 yrs old self. I do have a hefty collection of "old" Prince and Wilson OS rackets (truly OS in that they are 112-116") when I finally realize it is "time."
 
Underdog said:
I suggest we use this thread to keep ourselves updated on cool new racquet tech by each brand and even some nice marketing moves.
Click to expand...
Good idea, love to read what new tech is being introduced by each brand. Looking forward to what new things might be around the corner in 2024.
 
graycrait said:
@Crocodile , Have you hit with a Prince Twistpower X97 Tour? It isn't remarkable other than providing comfort with power without wrecking an elbow. I fended off trying it for quite a while when another higher level TT'r kept suggesting I try it. The downside was after finally getting one and then 2 more I thought, "I like "power" rackets." Then resurrected my affliction for Babolat APDs and PDs, again wrecking my elbow! I've tried, owned, gave away and traded over 200 rackets and am only hitting with 2 brand/model of rackets: Prince Twistpower X97 and on a good day the Wilson Ultra Tour 97, both comfy on the elbow with the Twistpower offering a bit more free power than the UT 97 for my 69 yrs old self. I do have a hefty collection of "old" Prince and Wilson OS rackets (truly OS in that they are 112-116") when I finally realize it is "time."
Click to expand...
No I haven’t hit with any of the twist power frames however I do like the idea that Prince are prepared to try different ideas.
I would like to see Prince do something with the vortex like make a heavier frame similar to the Volkl V Engine 10 MP but with an interesting string pattern.
 
ppma said:
I do really think that most technologies are pure marketing tries to give the idea that the old models are outdated. The true thing that matters in a graphite racquet is the amount of layers and orientation of carbon fibers, and if it happens to be any other kind of fiber involved (were basalt fibers even a truth in the Wilson lines?).
Click to expand...
While I can’t verify this the Angell K7 frames have a very good feel that is also comfortable and some testers believe that it’s due to the aramid fibres;
 
As far as any manufacturer leaping ahead of its competitors could come down to things like a big increase in power combined with ergonomic dexterity, comfort and feel. A racquet that can assist the ordinary player to serve big could be a game changer for that player,
 
Crocodile said:
As far as any manufacturer leaping ahead of its competitors could come down to things like a big increase in power combined with ergonomic dexterity, comfort and feel. A racquet that can assist the ordinary player to serve big could be a game changer for that player,
Click to expand...
Wilson did this. First gen forty five rackets. Blade V7, Clash V1, ultra v4, etc
 
Yamin said:
Wilson did this. First gen forty five rackets. Blade V7, Clash V1, ultra v4, etc
Click to expand...
Yes the release of the Clash was a good thing for Wilson and their idea of making a very flexible frame that was thick beamed and powerful, yet soft. I believe Volkl were on to this idea with their Catapult 10, but it was more towards the spectrum of a player racquet with more forgiveness and their other catapults were stiffer frames such as the Catapult V 10, very interesting frame. The Catapult V10 had an RA of 67. I’m surprised that Australia got this model but the US did not, but instead the US got the Catapult 8 V engine. Volkl was very innovative and experimental back about 10 years ago.
The guy who designs Bolt has also gone the other way with the variety of zip strips he can insert in the head to soften up a stiff frame and retain stability and power which I have yet to try:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Crocodile
Racquet factories
Replies
9
Views
965
chrisb
C
Crocodile
The rise and fall of racquet companies.
2
Replies
81
Views
12K
mtommer
mtommer
N
Racquet Production
Replies
0
Views
336
nvu
N
D
New User... Racquet Design Utopias
Replies
1
Views
558
louis netman
louis netman
Crocodile
The racquet making process and those who design them.
Replies
9
Views
687
n8dawg6
n8dawg6
Back
Top