Slazenger: Wilson copier?

Discussion in 'Racquets' started by iloveradical, Jan 13, 2005.

  1. iloveradical

    iloveradical New User

    Dec 10, 2004
    Why does Slazenger imitate Wilson? The specs of Pro X1 are enough to remind me of 6.0 95. Pro Braided seems a lighter version of 6.1 Classic. Marketing strategy or lack of creativity?

    BTW, is Slazenger affiliated with Dunlop? Is it true? Then, they may be a safeguard against Wilson in British market.
  2. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Feb 18, 2004
    Yes, Slazenger and Dunlop are the same company. That's why they both make high quality racquets and balls IMHO. The Pro X-1 does not play anything like the PS 6.0 95. It plays more like a lighter version of the PS 6.1 Classic, just like the Pro Braided did. They play similar because they are both made of braided graphite and kevlar, so they have a similar feel to them.
  3. uk_skippy

    uk_skippy Hall of Fame

    Feb 22, 2004
    Waterlooville, Hampshire, UK
    Slaz and Dunlop are the same company but with different divisions for rqts. However that company has just been bought buy the company that now owns the Donnay brand here in the UK, a company called sportsworld. It sells donnay products (not just a few rqts) at cheap price. Its a real pile it high, sell it cheap company. I hope that they dont do the same to Slaz and dunlop, although having seen pics of the new Dunlop rqts they seem to be keeping the history going of a quality rqt brand.
  4. AndrewD

    AndrewD Legend

    Dec 11, 2004
    uk_skippy, you might be interested to hear that there is a guy who has posted a few times on the board who used to be the chief designer or engineer for Dunlop. Apparently he and most of the staff (who were responsible for the 200G etc ranges) left in the recent company shuffle. Not sure how that will affect the quality of the two brands but we'll all find out shortly.
  5. 007

    007 Professional

    Feb 20, 2004
    Take Off Eh!
    the Pro Braided and X1 molds appear, IMO, to the the same as a PS 6.1 mold less the PWS.
  6. Craig Sheppard

    Craig Sheppard Hall of Fame

    Feb 19, 2004
    Raleigh, NC
    I have both the X1 and the PSC 6.1. They're not the same mold. The PSC is slightly wider and slightly thinner for starters. The X1 is also flat at the throat, where the PSC is grooved and does not flatten out.

    I would disagree and say that the X1 has more in common w/ the PS 6.0 Original 95 than the PSC 6.1. It's nowhere near as stiff as the PSC 6.1. Someone may think it's stiff because of the excellent shock dampening. But the PSC 6.1 is a harsh, stiff, heavy frame (loved it though). The X1 is much more comfortable. The PS 6.0 is a very "direct" feeling frame, but not as harsh as the 6.1. The X1 has more of a dampened feel, which is where it differs from the PS 6.0 95. But I still feel it has more in common (a "modern" 6.0 95 if you will) with the PS 6.0 95 than the PSC 6.1.


Share This Page