JackB1
G.O.A.T.
yes, the Speeds have a more square (think Prince, Wilson, Dunlop) versus rectangular grip shape (think Volkl, Head Radical, Prestige,etc) and use a different pallet than the rest of the Head line.
SmilinBob's Racquet Reviews
- Thread starter SmilinBob
- Start date
yes, the Speeds have a more square (think Prince, Wilson, Dunlop) versus rectangular grip shape (think Volkl, Head Radical, Prestige,etc) and use a different pallet than the rest of the Head line.
I would absolutely agree with JackB1...He has it perfect. The Speed grip shape was very familiar to me, coming from Wilson's grip shape. The only Head racquet that has really thrown me with the grip shape is the Radicals. It's very rectangular and just feels weird in my hand. I'd slot the Prestige line somewhere between the two. It's not quite as round as the Wilson shape I'm used to, but not rectangular enough to drive me crazy.
I've found I'm not really a fan of the 18x20 patterns. I like the softer feel from the more open patterns and have found that the extra spin I get from them to be very helpful on my serves when trying to hit a big topspin/kick serve or cut a slice out wide. So in that regard, I'm probably not going to demo the Speed Pro.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
Sorry Bob, but the Prestige pallet is the same exact one as the Radical. Maybe it had a different grip on it that made it feel "different"?
Those two are ones I really want to swing. I'm interested in both of them quite a bit. How did you find the power out of the frames? Any big difference between the two? Would you consider one more arm-friendly than the other?
I'd believe that, and yes, they had different grips (that I wrapped with the same over grip.) I've found through this demo process that a handful of my observations are completely irrational and entirely based on feel. Both Radicals I've tried (the MP and the Pro) were strung with very stiff polys in the mains, and I'm thinking that the firmer feel on contact just accentuated the grip shape. Both Prestiges (the MP and the S) have felt much softer and more comfortable in my hand. The Radical grip shape is maybe one of those things where I didn't like the feel of the racquet/string bed so it made me focus more on everything else I didn't like.
Hopefully that makes sense.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
Power edge goes to the Pro 1. Both arm friendly. They really are almost the same frame....you'll see.
Shangri La
Hall of Fame
The two play very differently. The P1 has more power and is more suitable for 'modern' game. The Max 200G is an all-court racquet with a lot of touch and finesse, better for players with traditional strokes.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
So I made a change to my demo order and swapped out the Technifibre 315 LTD 16M for the Pacific X Feel Tour. I did this for two reasons:
1) It will be interesting to compare both the X Fast and X Feel together and I'm especially interested to see what kind of differences they have in power, feel (particularly softness...56RA vs. 68RA), and maneuverability with the extended length of the X Fast.
2) The local shop actually has a Technifibre demo, so I'll pick it up from them sometime next week.
TW order ships tomorrow, should be here for the weekend!
Donnay Pro One 16x19
Dunlop Bio Max 200G
Pacific X Fast Pro 100
Pacific X Feel Tour
1) It will be interesting to compare both the X Fast and X Feel together and I'm especially interested to see what kind of differences they have in power, feel (particularly softness...56RA vs. 68RA), and maneuverability with the extended length of the X Fast.
2) The local shop actually has a Technifibre demo, so I'll pick it up from them sometime next week.
TW order ships tomorrow, should be here for the weekend!
Donnay Pro One 16x19
Dunlop Bio Max 200G
Pacific X Fast Pro 100
Pacific X Feel Tour
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
looking forward to your thoughts on the XFast. I am very familiar with the Dunlop and Donnay...both great racquets. The XFeel is too advanced for me.
I arrived home from work to find a lovely box from TW waiting for me. I have court time scheduled Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Should be a good weekend.
A few things...
In another thread there was some conversation about the actual length of the Pacific X Fast Pro 100. TW lists 27.25", TW Europe lists 69.5cm (which is about 27.36"). So I measured the demo as-delivered and it clocks in at 27.375", 3/8" extended. I'm going with TW Europe being correct and my slightly higher measurement being within my acceptable margin of error.
Second, the strings in each...
The Donnay Pro One and the Dunlop Max 200G are both strung up with Dunlop Silk 1.30mm, and both look like they have the same amount of wear on them. Should make for a good comparison between the two.
The Pacific frames are another story. One is strung with a natural colored multi but there is ZERO writing on it. It's a 16g, but I have no clue what it is. The other however, is something entirely different. It's strung up with something that feels almost like a poly, but isn't. It's got a strange color, somewhere between brown and pink, and the cut end looks like it's solid core. It looks a lot like the picture of Monogut ZX natural, but I gotta think TW wouldn't string up a demo with that in it.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Ashaway_MonoGut_ZX_16_String_Natural/descpageACASH-ZYEXMONO16.html
It slides back into place like a poly when moved. Any thoughts on what it could be?
I'll see if I can get a picture hosted up somewhere to show you.
A few things...
In another thread there was some conversation about the actual length of the Pacific X Fast Pro 100. TW lists 27.25", TW Europe lists 69.5cm (which is about 27.36"). So I measured the demo as-delivered and it clocks in at 27.375", 3/8" extended. I'm going with TW Europe being correct and my slightly higher measurement being within my acceptable margin of error.
Second, the strings in each...
The Donnay Pro One and the Dunlop Max 200G are both strung up with Dunlop Silk 1.30mm, and both look like they have the same amount of wear on them. Should make for a good comparison between the two.
The Pacific frames are another story. One is strung with a natural colored multi but there is ZERO writing on it. It's a 16g, but I have no clue what it is. The other however, is something entirely different. It's strung up with something that feels almost like a poly, but isn't. It's got a strange color, somewhere between brown and pink, and the cut end looks like it's solid core. It looks a lot like the picture of Monogut ZX natural, but I gotta think TW wouldn't string up a demo with that in it.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Ashaway_MonoGut_ZX_16_String_Natural/descpageACASH-ZYEXMONO16.html
It slides back into place like a poly when moved. Any thoughts on what it could be?
I'll see if I can get a picture hosted up somewhere to show you.
ZX is very much yellowy brown/wheat/beige but definitely no hint of pink: http://postimg.org/image/ynr8uc8z9/
Last edited:
counterpuncher
Hall of Fame
And so your findings from the weekend of hitting were .......... ?
MikeHitsHard93
Hall of Fame
Well at least let me finish my beer...
MikeHitsHard93
Hall of Fame
MikeHitsHard93
Hall of Fame
You da man!
Donnay Pro One 16x19
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Donnay_Pro_One_97_16x19/descpageRCDONNAY-DPRO1.html
First Impressions:
A racquet from the TW demo program. It arrived with some paint that was pretty roughed up despite not looking like it had received much use. Others have mentioned peeling graphics and chipping on other Donnay models and the Pro One I received had the same issue. It was strung with Dunlop Silk 1.30mm.
Groundstrokes:
The Pro One was a reliable hitter from the baseline. Directional control was good, as was depth, but it didn’t have nearly the power I was getting from my old Skunk 6.2s. I was able to hit through forehands well and was getting good but not great spin from that side. The swing weight was noticeable on forehands. My backhand was the more improved side as my new one-hander gets away from me occasionally, and the Pro One added some nice control. The weight of the racquet really helped keep slices low and penetrating with good skid. Only a few sat up on the bounce.
Volleys:
I’ve read and watched plenty of marketing on the solid core construction of the Donnay racquets, and I could really feel it on volleys. The racquet felt much heavier that its spec’d weight with a substantial feel on contact. Control was good and keeping volleys deep was easy. Touch volleys were a little trickier for me but I could probably adjust over time. Off-center hits didn’t feel jarring. Maneuverability was pretty middle-of-the-road for me yet I wouldn’t call the racquet sluggish.
Serves:
The only area I struggled with the Pro One was on serves. I was finding OK control with my best serves being flat ones up the middle. While control up the middle was good, I was losing pace compared to my old Skunk 6.2s. I had trouble moving the ball out wide to both sides, with a slice to the ad court (lefty) not having quite the bite of many of the other racquets I had demoed. In many ways, noticeable mostly on serves, the racquet played denser than many other 16x19s. I probably won’t, but another demo with some 17 gauge string would be interesting to see if it could open up the string bed.
Second serves were good but not great. I was able to get OK top spin/kick on second serves and get them deep in the box, but had trouble moving them around. One positive though was that the racquet seemed to deliver plenty of pace even when really going up after the ball. It felt like my second serves lost some jump but gained a little velocity. The last thing I noticed on serves was that the Pro One plays every bit of its listed swing weight. While not nearly as tiring (not even close) as heavier racquets like the Juice Pro and/or the Prestige MP, it did feel like my shoulder got a workout. Not any hint of injury or soreness at all, just that “I used those muscles” kind of feeling.
Serve Returns:
The Pro One was a good return stick. It played like a heavier racquet on contact and I found even a short reactionary swing generated plenty of pace. This worked well with my typical chip/block return game. The racquet absorbed pace like a dream and was stable on harder returns. It was a little bit more difficult to be aggressive on returns as the racquet had a hint of sluggishness to it, more so on my forehand side.
Overall:
The Pro One was a solid stick, but didn’t really blow me away with its performance with any particular stroke. Depth on ground strokes was good, volleys felt really solid, but I couldn’t get dialed in on my serves and didn’t have the control I needed to make up for the loss of pace. The racquet did feel good to my arm though and I think there’s some truth to the solid core construction being easier on the joints. A good all-around racquet, but just not the first server I need.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Donnay_Pro_One_97_16x19/descpageRCDONNAY-DPRO1.html
First Impressions:
A racquet from the TW demo program. It arrived with some paint that was pretty roughed up despite not looking like it had received much use. Others have mentioned peeling graphics and chipping on other Donnay models and the Pro One I received had the same issue. It was strung with Dunlop Silk 1.30mm.
Groundstrokes:
The Pro One was a reliable hitter from the baseline. Directional control was good, as was depth, but it didn’t have nearly the power I was getting from my old Skunk 6.2s. I was able to hit through forehands well and was getting good but not great spin from that side. The swing weight was noticeable on forehands. My backhand was the more improved side as my new one-hander gets away from me occasionally, and the Pro One added some nice control. The weight of the racquet really helped keep slices low and penetrating with good skid. Only a few sat up on the bounce.
Volleys:
I’ve read and watched plenty of marketing on the solid core construction of the Donnay racquets, and I could really feel it on volleys. The racquet felt much heavier that its spec’d weight with a substantial feel on contact. Control was good and keeping volleys deep was easy. Touch volleys were a little trickier for me but I could probably adjust over time. Off-center hits didn’t feel jarring. Maneuverability was pretty middle-of-the-road for me yet I wouldn’t call the racquet sluggish.
Serves:
The only area I struggled with the Pro One was on serves. I was finding OK control with my best serves being flat ones up the middle. While control up the middle was good, I was losing pace compared to my old Skunk 6.2s. I had trouble moving the ball out wide to both sides, with a slice to the ad court (lefty) not having quite the bite of many of the other racquets I had demoed. In many ways, noticeable mostly on serves, the racquet played denser than many other 16x19s. I probably won’t, but another demo with some 17 gauge string would be interesting to see if it could open up the string bed.
Second serves were good but not great. I was able to get OK top spin/kick on second serves and get them deep in the box, but had trouble moving them around. One positive though was that the racquet seemed to deliver plenty of pace even when really going up after the ball. It felt like my second serves lost some jump but gained a little velocity. The last thing I noticed on serves was that the Pro One plays every bit of its listed swing weight. While not nearly as tiring (not even close) as heavier racquets like the Juice Pro and/or the Prestige MP, it did feel like my shoulder got a workout. Not any hint of injury or soreness at all, just that “I used those muscles” kind of feeling.
Serve Returns:
The Pro One was a good return stick. It played like a heavier racquet on contact and I found even a short reactionary swing generated plenty of pace. This worked well with my typical chip/block return game. The racquet absorbed pace like a dream and was stable on harder returns. It was a little bit more difficult to be aggressive on returns as the racquet had a hint of sluggishness to it, more so on my forehand side.
Overall:
The Pro One was a solid stick, but didn’t really blow me away with its performance with any particular stroke. Depth on ground strokes was good, volleys felt really solid, but I couldn’t get dialed in on my serves and didn’t have the control I needed to make up for the loss of pace. The racquet did feel good to my arm though and I think there’s some truth to the solid core construction being easier on the joints. A good all-around racquet, but just not the first server I need.
Dunlop Biomimetic Max 200G
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Dunlop_Biomimetic_Max_200G/descpageRCDUNLOP-DBM2HG.html
First Impressions:
Yet another racquet I demoed based on feedback from the TT boards. As it is the racquet of choice for a famous lefty serve-and-volleyer and I enjoyed hitting with the Slazenger V98 Team and Dunlop M3.0, I found a demo in order. Much like the Dunlop Pro One 16x19, it came strung with Dunlop Silk 1.30mm. This is not the only similarity in play these two shared.
Groundstrokes:
The Max 200G went through the ball really well and control with the racquet was very good. Moving the ball cross-court was very easy, and I even had some success turning cross-court rallies on my backhand up-the-line. Depth control was good but required hitting the ball a little loopier as the racquet was lower powered for me. In some ways, it played like a slightly more powerful version of the Pro Staff 95 or a lower powered Donnay Pro One from the baseline.
Volleys:
Despite the static weight of the racquet, I found it to be very maneuverable at the net. The leather grip felt firmer than I am accustomed to playing (I threw an over-grip on but typically don’t like the firmer feeling of leather) but the racquet itself didn’t feel firm or jarring. Directional control on volleys was very good and the racquet absorbed pace well. Touch shots were much easier with the Max 200G than the Donnay Pro One. I typically don’t like the feeling of headlight racquets, but the Max 200G was a pleasant surprise. I’ve had high praise for the Prestige line (including the S) and I would slot the Max 200G up there with them at the net. I did find the sweet spot to feel a little small though with shots outside of it losing considerable pop.
Serves:
Serving with the Max 200G was like serving with a Dunlop version of the Pro Staff 95 with just a hint more power. Directional control was outstanding and I was able to move the ball around very well. Spin from the racquet was excellent and slicing the ball wide to the ad court, even when taking pace off, earned me a few aces. Flat serves up the T were accurate but didn’t have enough pace to present too much of a problem to my opponent. A little more power would have made the Max 200G a fantastic first serve racquet.
Second serves were a unique blend: The racquet was on the higher side of the static weight range I have found to be comfortable yet it was also more on the head light side than I like. Despite that, the two “outside specs” somehow worked well together when trying to go up after a topspin/kick serve. The head light balance allowed me to swing quickly yet the racquet was heavy enough to not get “lost” during my motion. I was getting a lot of really good hop off the court. Depth control wasn’t spectacular though and I dumped a handful of double faults into the net.
Serve Returns:
Returns with the Max 200G were serviceable and my chip/block return game was good enough…But just enough. I found the best returns to be backhand slices which stayed nice and low yet still had good depth. Directional control was good, but I was leaving some returns shorter than I would like and found myself watching the responses to those returns go by me. I did have some luck though on more aggressive returns to weaker serves. The racquet felt quick and I made a few good cuts at the ball with good directional control.
Overall:
A TT poster said that the Dunlop and Donnay frames would play very similarly, and in many ways they did. I would say the Donnay was more powerful yet the Dunlop was more precise. The Donnay was more substantial while the Dunlop was whippier and could keep the tip speed higher. The Donnay felt like it had a bigger sweet spot and the Dunlop felt much spinnier.
I enjoyed the Max 200G quite a bit but much like the Donnay, I just couldn’t get the performance I wanted on serve. If it had a slightly lower static weight so I could change the balance more without adding too much weight, I might give it another demo. I would also ditch the leather grip (TT boards heresy!) for something lighter and softer.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Dunlop_Biomimetic_Max_200G/descpageRCDUNLOP-DBM2HG.html
First Impressions:
Yet another racquet I demoed based on feedback from the TT boards. As it is the racquet of choice for a famous lefty serve-and-volleyer and I enjoyed hitting with the Slazenger V98 Team and Dunlop M3.0, I found a demo in order. Much like the Dunlop Pro One 16x19, it came strung with Dunlop Silk 1.30mm. This is not the only similarity in play these two shared.
Groundstrokes:
The Max 200G went through the ball really well and control with the racquet was very good. Moving the ball cross-court was very easy, and I even had some success turning cross-court rallies on my backhand up-the-line. Depth control was good but required hitting the ball a little loopier as the racquet was lower powered for me. In some ways, it played like a slightly more powerful version of the Pro Staff 95 or a lower powered Donnay Pro One from the baseline.
Volleys:
Despite the static weight of the racquet, I found it to be very maneuverable at the net. The leather grip felt firmer than I am accustomed to playing (I threw an over-grip on but typically don’t like the firmer feeling of leather) but the racquet itself didn’t feel firm or jarring. Directional control on volleys was very good and the racquet absorbed pace well. Touch shots were much easier with the Max 200G than the Donnay Pro One. I typically don’t like the feeling of headlight racquets, but the Max 200G was a pleasant surprise. I’ve had high praise for the Prestige line (including the S) and I would slot the Max 200G up there with them at the net. I did find the sweet spot to feel a little small though with shots outside of it losing considerable pop.
Serves:
Serving with the Max 200G was like serving with a Dunlop version of the Pro Staff 95 with just a hint more power. Directional control was outstanding and I was able to move the ball around very well. Spin from the racquet was excellent and slicing the ball wide to the ad court, even when taking pace off, earned me a few aces. Flat serves up the T were accurate but didn’t have enough pace to present too much of a problem to my opponent. A little more power would have made the Max 200G a fantastic first serve racquet.
Second serves were a unique blend: The racquet was on the higher side of the static weight range I have found to be comfortable yet it was also more on the head light side than I like. Despite that, the two “outside specs” somehow worked well together when trying to go up after a topspin/kick serve. The head light balance allowed me to swing quickly yet the racquet was heavy enough to not get “lost” during my motion. I was getting a lot of really good hop off the court. Depth control wasn’t spectacular though and I dumped a handful of double faults into the net.
Serve Returns:
Returns with the Max 200G were serviceable and my chip/block return game was good enough…But just enough. I found the best returns to be backhand slices which stayed nice and low yet still had good depth. Directional control was good, but I was leaving some returns shorter than I would like and found myself watching the responses to those returns go by me. I did have some luck though on more aggressive returns to weaker serves. The racquet felt quick and I made a few good cuts at the ball with good directional control.
Overall:
A TT poster said that the Dunlop and Donnay frames would play very similarly, and in many ways they did. I would say the Donnay was more powerful yet the Dunlop was more precise. The Donnay was more substantial while the Dunlop was whippier and could keep the tip speed higher. The Donnay felt like it had a bigger sweet spot and the Dunlop felt much spinnier.
I enjoyed the Max 200G quite a bit but much like the Donnay, I just couldn’t get the performance I wanted on serve. If it had a slightly lower static weight so I could change the balance more without adding too much weight, I might give it another demo. I would also ditch the leather grip (TT boards heresy!) for something lighter and softer.
Pacific X Feel Tour
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Pacific_X_Feel_Tour/descpageRCPACIFIC-PXFLT.html
First Impressions:
There are many threads about Pacific racquets on the TT boards and they certainly have a strong following, especially it seems from those that played Fischer racquets in the past. Since I demoed and enjoyed the X Force, I wanted to give the others, including the X Feel Tour a try. I have no clue what string was in it (see earlier posts), and I believe the strings had a dramatic impact on the playability of the racquet.
Groundstrokes:
Hitting from the baseline with the X Feel Tour was OK. Directional control was good but I struggled a lot with depth control. It seemed as though I was either hitting shots too short or too long, with only a few goldilocks (just right) mixed in. I’m not sure if it was an inconsistent string bed or a lack of spin, but I really struggled with it. Forehands were noticeably better than backhands as my new one-hander is a little bit flatter and is the side where I tend to hit long. I was expecting the racquet to feel a lot like the X Force with a solid, almost “thunky” contact, but found it to be much livelier/firmer. This despite the incredibly low RA stiffness of the racquet.
Volleys:
Directional control on volleys was good and I found punching volleys into the corners was effective. I was again expecting volleys to feel a lot like the X Force but found ball contact to not only feel firmer, but also have a slightly disconnected feeling and it was tough to really feel the ball pocketing on the strings. The twist weight was spec’d higher than the X Force but I actually found the racquets to play almost reverse the numbers with the X Force feeling more substantial than the X Feel, especially on off-center hits. I caught a few reaching volleys on the top of the hoop and it felt very dead.
Serves:
I was very disappointed in the X Feel on serves. Flat serves up the middle were the only time I really felt the low flex of the racquet and the result was a lack of pace. I wasn’t getting good spin off the strings so I found it difficult to really move the serve around the box. The racquet did feel fine during my motion though and the hoop felt like it had just enough mass to know where it was.
Second serves were much a repeat of first serves. I wasn’t getting good spin at all and resorted to trying to really attack the ball as hard as I could and go up and after it extremely aggressively to create more spin. This only resulted in serves going long. I found the X Feel to be unforgiving on second serves, much like groundstrokes, either leaving too many in the net or long for my liking. Even when I managed to get them in where I wanted, it didn’t appear as though it was troubling my opponents at all, which I simply can’t live with as a serve-and-volleyer.
Serve Returns:
I was pleasantly surprised in returning serve after not having much success elsewhere. From some reason, chip/block returns where I took a very abbreviated swing were getting deep enough in the court to be effective. Backhand slice returns were the highlight when I hit them well, staying low and deep. I did however send a handful long, much like other strokes.
Overall:
Like I mentioned above, I had no clue what strings were in the racquet but I’m positive they had a dramatically negative impact on my playtest with the X Feel. I simply could not figure out depth control with the racquet. In addition, I found the descriptions online of the “Fischer Feel” to be much closer to my experience with the X Force than the X Feel. I think this racquet would play completely different with better strings, but I would be demanding that it be 17 gauge and something really fitting to the racquet. As is, with the strings it had, I was very disappointed in the X Feel. For a racquet that should play similar, given the X Feel Tour's specs, I would highly recommend the X Force and the Prince Rebel 98 over it. Again, given the strings in my demo and the shortcomings thereof.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Pacific_X_Feel_Tour/descpageRCPACIFIC-PXFLT.html
First Impressions:
There are many threads about Pacific racquets on the TT boards and they certainly have a strong following, especially it seems from those that played Fischer racquets in the past. Since I demoed and enjoyed the X Force, I wanted to give the others, including the X Feel Tour a try. I have no clue what string was in it (see earlier posts), and I believe the strings had a dramatic impact on the playability of the racquet.
Groundstrokes:
Hitting from the baseline with the X Feel Tour was OK. Directional control was good but I struggled a lot with depth control. It seemed as though I was either hitting shots too short or too long, with only a few goldilocks (just right) mixed in. I’m not sure if it was an inconsistent string bed or a lack of spin, but I really struggled with it. Forehands were noticeably better than backhands as my new one-hander is a little bit flatter and is the side where I tend to hit long. I was expecting the racquet to feel a lot like the X Force with a solid, almost “thunky” contact, but found it to be much livelier/firmer. This despite the incredibly low RA stiffness of the racquet.
Volleys:
Directional control on volleys was good and I found punching volleys into the corners was effective. I was again expecting volleys to feel a lot like the X Force but found ball contact to not only feel firmer, but also have a slightly disconnected feeling and it was tough to really feel the ball pocketing on the strings. The twist weight was spec’d higher than the X Force but I actually found the racquets to play almost reverse the numbers with the X Force feeling more substantial than the X Feel, especially on off-center hits. I caught a few reaching volleys on the top of the hoop and it felt very dead.
Serves:
I was very disappointed in the X Feel on serves. Flat serves up the middle were the only time I really felt the low flex of the racquet and the result was a lack of pace. I wasn’t getting good spin off the strings so I found it difficult to really move the serve around the box. The racquet did feel fine during my motion though and the hoop felt like it had just enough mass to know where it was.
Second serves were much a repeat of first serves. I wasn’t getting good spin at all and resorted to trying to really attack the ball as hard as I could and go up and after it extremely aggressively to create more spin. This only resulted in serves going long. I found the X Feel to be unforgiving on second serves, much like groundstrokes, either leaving too many in the net or long for my liking. Even when I managed to get them in where I wanted, it didn’t appear as though it was troubling my opponents at all, which I simply can’t live with as a serve-and-volleyer.
Serve Returns:
I was pleasantly surprised in returning serve after not having much success elsewhere. From some reason, chip/block returns where I took a very abbreviated swing were getting deep enough in the court to be effective. Backhand slice returns were the highlight when I hit them well, staying low and deep. I did however send a handful long, much like other strokes.
Overall:
Like I mentioned above, I had no clue what strings were in the racquet but I’m positive they had a dramatically negative impact on my playtest with the X Feel. I simply could not figure out depth control with the racquet. In addition, I found the descriptions online of the “Fischer Feel” to be much closer to my experience with the X Force than the X Feel. I think this racquet would play completely different with better strings, but I would be demanding that it be 17 gauge and something really fitting to the racquet. As is, with the strings it had, I was very disappointed in the X Feel. For a racquet that should play similar, given the X Feel Tour's specs, I would highly recommend the X Force and the Prince Rebel 98 over it. Again, given the strings in my demo and the shortcomings thereof.
Pacific X Fast Pro 100
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Pacific_X_Fast_Pro_100/descpageRCPACIFIC-PXFSTP.html
First Impressions:
There’s a lot of high praise on the TT boards for the Fast Pro with some comparisons to it being a softer Pure Drive. Since I’ve decided to test a handful of Pacific frames, the X Fast Pro got the nod too. It came strung with a 16 gauge with no writing or marking to indicate what it was, but it played a lot like Sensation to me.
Groundstrokes:
Of all the Pacific frames, the X Fast was easily the most powerful. I was able to keep the ball deep in the court well with good pace. I wasn’t getting a lot of spin but it seemed like that had more to do with the strings than the frame itself. Despite spec’ing out almost 3/8” extended, I really couldn’t tell that the racquet was longer at all. It felt maneuverable from both sides without any real sluggishness. In many ways, it did play a lot like a Pure Drive, although not quite as powerful. As for that “Pacific Feel”, the X Fast felt noticeably firmer than either the X Force or X Feel, with the difference between the X Force being the most notable. It didn’t have that buttery “thunk” on contact at all and felt much more “modern.”
Volleys:
The X Fast was a good volleying racquet with OK maneuverability and OK stability. I was getting good depth off the racquet and it absorbed pace well when hit in the sweet spot. It did have some hints of instability when really caught off-center. I also found (as it’s my common miss on all shots) that contact on the top of the bed was a little bit dead feeling. Like on groundstrokes, if I didn’t know it was an extended length racquet I would never have realized it. The extra length hid itself in the frame.
Serves:
I learned one thing with respect to advocates of smaller mid and mid-plus frames during my demo with the X Fast: I get it. For some reason, the X Fast frame just felt very “draggy” on my serve. It had a noticeable “swoosh” when swinging fast up at the ball and the beam thickness, especially at the tip, was noticeable. Even when compared to racquets I've demoed with similar head sizes and/or similar beam widths, the racquet just felt slower through my motion. I found good directional control with the X Fast though and had enough spin to move the ball out wide in the ad court (lefty.) The only shot I ever noticed the extra length was wide to the deuce court where that little extra reach helped me get the ball out tight to the line. Despite some comments about added MPH on serves from others, I had no such luck when compared to my Hammer 6.2s or some other cannons like the Juice Pro, Roddick Plus, or even the BLX Tour and Slazenger V98 Team. The racquet just wasn’t going through the air fast enough.
Second serves were good but still had that sluggish feeling, not due at all to the weight, but just the volume of the racquet frame. Despite that, I was getting good topspin/kick on my serves and was able to keep the ball deep enough in the box to be effective.
Serve Returns:
I had decent luck returning and my chip/block returns had good depth. I had good directional control too. Backhand slices stayed good and low with some nice skid, even though I had the occasional floater. More aggressive returns generated mixed results. I had a few balls launch on me (I think it might have been more strings than frame) but I did have a few wicked returns as well, with one notable backhand that I rolled over nicely and just hammered down the line.
Overall:
I think I was over-excited for the X Fast Pro 100, hoping it lived up to the hype from other users of it, but for me it just didn’t quite hit my expectations. A good but not great all-around racquet where the extended length hides itself, the frame just felt very slow through the air for me, especially on serves. Of all the Pacific racquets, I would slot this one well below the X Force yet above the X Feel Tour with the caveat that the strings in the X Feel were terrible.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Pacific_X_Fast_Pro_100/descpageRCPACIFIC-PXFSTP.html
First Impressions:
There’s a lot of high praise on the TT boards for the Fast Pro with some comparisons to it being a softer Pure Drive. Since I’ve decided to test a handful of Pacific frames, the X Fast Pro got the nod too. It came strung with a 16 gauge with no writing or marking to indicate what it was, but it played a lot like Sensation to me.
Groundstrokes:
Of all the Pacific frames, the X Fast was easily the most powerful. I was able to keep the ball deep in the court well with good pace. I wasn’t getting a lot of spin but it seemed like that had more to do with the strings than the frame itself. Despite spec’ing out almost 3/8” extended, I really couldn’t tell that the racquet was longer at all. It felt maneuverable from both sides without any real sluggishness. In many ways, it did play a lot like a Pure Drive, although not quite as powerful. As for that “Pacific Feel”, the X Fast felt noticeably firmer than either the X Force or X Feel, with the difference between the X Force being the most notable. It didn’t have that buttery “thunk” on contact at all and felt much more “modern.”
Volleys:
The X Fast was a good volleying racquet with OK maneuverability and OK stability. I was getting good depth off the racquet and it absorbed pace well when hit in the sweet spot. It did have some hints of instability when really caught off-center. I also found (as it’s my common miss on all shots) that contact on the top of the bed was a little bit dead feeling. Like on groundstrokes, if I didn’t know it was an extended length racquet I would never have realized it. The extra length hid itself in the frame.
Serves:
I learned one thing with respect to advocates of smaller mid and mid-plus frames during my demo with the X Fast: I get it. For some reason, the X Fast frame just felt very “draggy” on my serve. It had a noticeable “swoosh” when swinging fast up at the ball and the beam thickness, especially at the tip, was noticeable. Even when compared to racquets I've demoed with similar head sizes and/or similar beam widths, the racquet just felt slower through my motion. I found good directional control with the X Fast though and had enough spin to move the ball out wide in the ad court (lefty.) The only shot I ever noticed the extra length was wide to the deuce court where that little extra reach helped me get the ball out tight to the line. Despite some comments about added MPH on serves from others, I had no such luck when compared to my Hammer 6.2s or some other cannons like the Juice Pro, Roddick Plus, or even the BLX Tour and Slazenger V98 Team. The racquet just wasn’t going through the air fast enough.
Second serves were good but still had that sluggish feeling, not due at all to the weight, but just the volume of the racquet frame. Despite that, I was getting good topspin/kick on my serves and was able to keep the ball deep enough in the box to be effective.
Serve Returns:
I had decent luck returning and my chip/block returns had good depth. I had good directional control too. Backhand slices stayed good and low with some nice skid, even though I had the occasional floater. More aggressive returns generated mixed results. I had a few balls launch on me (I think it might have been more strings than frame) but I did have a few wicked returns as well, with one notable backhand that I rolled over nicely and just hammered down the line.
Overall:
I think I was over-excited for the X Fast Pro 100, hoping it lived up to the hype from other users of it, but for me it just didn’t quite hit my expectations. A good but not great all-around racquet where the extended length hides itself, the frame just felt very slow through the air for me, especially on serves. Of all the Pacific racquets, I would slot this one well below the X Force yet above the X Feel Tour with the caveat that the strings in the X Feel were terrible.
counterpuncher
Hall of Fame
Thanks for the reviews, very insightful and close to what I found with my hits with some of those racquets.
IMO your experience with the X Feel Tour is exactly what I experience when my poly strings go dead, inconsistent response off the string bed. A new string job made a night and day difference in how the racquet then played. Unfortunate, as you really don't know how the racquet plays. I played with the Fischer incarnation, the Magnetic Tour and was keen for your thoughts on this new version, especially given that you've hit with a lot of the frames that I've hit with and share similar thoughts.
So the big question in this epic search, where to from here? A final decision, a shoot out of your favourite frames or more to try?
IMO your experience with the X Feel Tour is exactly what I experience when my poly strings go dead, inconsistent response off the string bed. A new string job made a night and day difference in how the racquet then played. Unfortunate, as you really don't know how the racquet plays. I played with the Fischer incarnation, the Magnetic Tour and was keen for your thoughts on this new version, especially given that you've hit with a lot of the frames that I've hit with and share similar thoughts.
So the big question in this epic search, where to from here? A final decision, a shoot out of your favourite frames or more to try?
Last edited:
MikeHitsHard93
Hall of Fame
Sounds like a less than stellar demo, Bob 
. I think you really should stick around the 11-11.4 oz range of lighter players sticks. Seems like those work the best for you. I encourage you to try the pro open. It's my current racket (although I've taken a short break from tennis due to te) and it does everything decently. It's basically a much more controlled pure drive with more comfort. Very versatile.
At this point in my own journey, I'm probably either gonna buy a exo3 tour or a rebel for when my arm is feeling under the weather and keep using my pro open as my main stick.
I was really interested in your play test of the p1, but it basically sounds like a more comfortable blade 98. I like the blade, but the last time I played with it I just didn't groove with it well due to the sw and balance combo.
. I think you really should stick around the 11-11.4 oz range of lighter players sticks. Seems like those work the best for you. I encourage you to try the pro open. It's my current racket (although I've taken a short break from tennis due to te) and it does everything decently. It's basically a much more controlled pure drive with more comfort. Very versatile. At this point in my own journey, I'm probably either gonna buy a exo3 tour or a rebel for when my arm is feeling under the weather and keep using my pro open as my main stick.
I was really interested in your play test of the p1, but it basically sounds like a more comfortable blade 98. I like the blade, but the last time I played with it I just didn't groove with it well due to the sw and balance combo.
Bob, I feel you've hit the point of diminishing returns, as much as I've enjoyed your reviews. Actually, Tw should make them a sticky thread, as your reviews are better than the ones their own playtesters conduct.
You know you want the Juice Pro. How can it be too much stick for you when girls use it? Man up and go big.
ps. If I were you I would try another PDR but strung with TourBite at 40. The one you tried was probably strung way too tight.
You know you want the Juice Pro. How can it be too much stick for you when girls use it? Man up and go big.
ps. If I were you I would try another PDR but strung with TourBite at 40. The one you tried was probably strung way too tight.
Last edited:
I have responses for each of you, including another racquet review, however I'm traveling for work for the next several days. When I get back I'll get an update out.
A teaser: I leaded up a racquet I demoed previously and was amazed at the change. It was not what I expected, but impressive nonetheless.
A teaser: I leaded up a racquet I demoed previously and was amazed at the change. It was not what I expected, but impressive nonetheless.
counterpuncher
Hall of Fame
Okay I'll wait to hear what that leaded up racquet was. From your reviews and memory, the prime candidates for lead were the Speed, PS95 and SixOne Team.
Shangri La
Hall of Fame
Yeah you can change the leather to lower the weight and put a few grams in the hoop and hopefully the setup will *serve* you better. It will also make the racquet more even balanced which is to you preference.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
Bob, while using the Dunlop 200G, I replaced the leather with a Gamma Synthetic grip and it made the racquet more comfortable for me.
FWIW, I hated every demo I tried with Dunlop Silk in it. Something about that string just sucks the life out of the racquet. I loved the 200G with a hybrid of Prince Beast 17 / Nvy at 52/55.
FWIW, I hated every demo I tried with Dunlop Silk in it. Something about that string just sucks the life out of the racquet. I loved the 200G with a hybrid of Prince Beast 17 / Nvy at 52/55.
I'm not familiar with some of the racquets you've reviewed but certainly the 6.1 Team is vastly improved with a small amount of lead around the PWS area. Stabalizes the hoop and improves that 'hitting through the court' ability. It also takes it in the direction of the BLX Tour which you say that you like.
People have also mentioned that the PS95 is improved with lead though its not a racquet I've tried.
Interesting comparison that I'm inclined to agree with. The Donnay was a comfortable stick and did feel much more stable that the weight would suggest. Compared directly to the new Blade 98 with the same pattern, I'd say the Donnay was more comfortable and stable, and probably less string sensitive. The Blade 98 played amazing with a hybrid (really, it was pretty awesome) and terrible with a full bed of Sensation (I hate that string) yet the Donnay did just fine with Dunlop Silk, not a great string to me either. Giving them both a test drive with identical strings could be fun.
Two things:
First, interesting going with the "Challenge his Manhood" strategy. Not sure it will work though. Not really worried about what others are swinging...More worried about the scoreboard.
Second, I think the Juice Pro is best described as dating somebody who you know is bad news, yet every time you're out it's an epic time. You know you can't commit, yet it's a helluva good time in the short run. I'm tempted to wait until Wilson replaces them in their lineup and pick up a pair on super special just to have in the bag for the occasional fling, but there's no way I'm putting a ring on it. We'll see how cheap they get in the future.
If anybody can help me identify the string, I'd be very thankful. There's a picture of it one or two pages back. I don't think it was poly, yet it slid back into place well and didn't need to be straightened. It had hardly any notching on it and the string didn't get stuck out of place at all. Based on the cut from the knot, it looked solid-core.
The string did such a disservice to the X Feel, which is a shame as it made it really tough to compare. I thought that it would still have that really soft feel like the X Force, but that wasn't the case at all. I was really surprised how different each Pacific frame played from the other models. Not sure if anybody else has experienced the same thing. If I was forced to play a Pacific racquet, I'd take the X Force in a heartbeat. In fact, I'd still put it in the top 5 of racquets I've demoed. It's a solid frame.
Was it stiff or was it soft? As you probably know, if it didn't stick out of place and click when you manually manipulate the strings, and it slid back into place easily, then its almost certainly going to be a poly rather than a nylon, as nylon stretches with hitting and sticks out of place.
The colour reminds me of the Pacific strings such as Polyforce or Polyforce Extreme but both of those strings are stamped with their names, whereas yours presumably is not, so the string could be anything. Also looks too pink to be something like Discho Iontec (which also has a name stamp).
Last edited:
Re that 'teaser', go on - give us a clue!
So, The Great Leading of June 2013 goes like this...
I re-demoed a frame I've demoed before, as I mentioned earlier. I jumped out on to the TW racquet customizer (great tool once you figure it out) and started to get the swing weight and balance a bit closer to my old Skunk 6.2s. I started by weighing the actual frame instead of going off TW specs. From there, I threw 3 grams each at 3 and 9 which brought the swing weight to 331 and the balance to somewhere between even and 1 point head-heavy. Close enough to hit the court.
I was expecting to get more power and better stability out of the racquet. While I'm sure it was more stable, I did realize something after not noticing a huge difference: My misses on the string bed aren't towards 3 and 9, but much more so towards 6 and 12. So while more stable, it didn't improve my shots that much. Now, it did have more power, but that's not what I noticed most. This thing became a spin MONSTER.
The extra weight in those spots on the frame gave my backhand that little extra dip and made it much more effective. It also let me hit at the ball a lot harder on my forehand. Probably the one area where I noticed the biggest stability improvement was slices that really cut through the court. Some of them did sit up on the bounce though.
Where I really saw things change dramatically was hitting a serve with plenty of topspin/kick on it. The ball went over the net, nosed down into the court, and hopped off it big time. I've never found a kick serve all that hard to hit (swing up at it harder than you think, limit your pronation) but man, this was another level. My flat serves weren't all that much different, in fact I may have lost a little pace, but the kickers...Wow.
After hitting a bunch of serves, I started on returns. I didn't notice my returns were much different, but as rallies developed and I tried to made my way into the net on short balls, My approach shots had that same extra juice on the ball and I could hit them well placed, yet hard. It really made my opponent think about keeping the ball deep and had me on the mental offensive during rallies. If he left one short, I was going to crush it, and he knew it.
Not much more power, but a massive difference in spin. I was not expecting that at all from lead in the hoop, but it was interesting nonetheless. I'm tempted to try again with lead at 10 and 2 to address my common misses and maybe blend the extra spin with a bit more power by leading closer to the tip.
So now that I've dragged it out long enough...
Graphene Speed MP.
So I think I'm nearing the purchasing decision but plan on buying two different frames and getting them strung and gripped identically with what I'd like for grip, string, and tension, to see and isolate the differences in the frames.
It felt very soft and rocket launcher-esque. When I say soft though, it was a different kind of soft. It was not jarring or harsh and it was very powerful. Despite that, it had NO ball feel/pocketing. It was like a super powerful string where the entire string bed had no sweet spot. I wouldn't be surprised if it was poly, but it felt nothing like any poly I've hit. I speculated earlier that it might be Monogut ZX, but your earlier pics changed my mind on that. Much too pink/peachy.
Definitely could do with some more hoop stability based on the video below. The hoop looks very unstable on Carly's volley:
http://youtu.be/R8QvV2lsfi8?t=1m27s
I'm afraid you have me stumped. Those characteristics don't sound like any string that I know.
Last edited:
Very interesting for me, and not least as I'm also looking at the Graph Speed MP which I like a lot, though not sure it can oust the 99s from my no. 1 spot. FWIW I actually think these frames, with the very open patterns, hit somewhat similarly.
I'd agree they are similar frames, but found three distinct differences:
1) The Speed MP is much better on flatter serves. I found the 99S to react very well to spinny shots (like topspin/kick serves) but flat serves sort of had a fluttery ball flight to me and lacked pace. The Speed MP hit through the ball much better, at least for me.
2) The Speed MP was much more predictable. As a serve-and-volleyer, I found the 99S to be a little difficult to understand on volleys with unpredictable results off the string bed. Same for other shots that didn't require a full swing. That being said, if my game was more around the baseline and I was taking a cut at every shot, the 99S would be a much better fit than it is.
3) I found the Speed MP to hit through the court on flat shots better. I'm not a WW forehand kind of guy and by today's standards would be considered a flatter ball hitter. The 99S launched a few for me. The 99S however when really trying to spin a ball down was pretty freakin' fun...The ball just dives at the court.
My experiment with lead brought the 99S and Speed MP frames pretty close together though. The 16x19 on the MP for some reason plays VERY open, whereas the same pattern on something like the Donnay Pro One played much more closed.
I was just trying to encourage you. Your analogy has cerainly made me want to sample some of that Juice Pro action for myself though.
Bob seriously. You are the perfect racquet tester in that you are very analytical and far more sensitive to minor differences than I suspect most of us are. Perhaps it is because you seem to know exactly what you want to feel with each shot.
Now, my question. You are a S&V player. Why wouldn't you simply want to go with the best serving frame? In a happy coincidence, the best serving frames almost to a racquet are also at least adequate at the net, so there isn't a big tradeoff to be made there. I can understand you want to avoid a frame that might injure you or one that isn't optimum for a long match, but at the end of the day, don't you live and die with your serve? Isn't it worth it to accept tradeoffs elsewhere if you can get an extra helping of the special sauce on your weapon?
...And another falls into the trap.
Thank you ever so kindly for the comments! I started demoing all these racquets last July to prep for a tourney last October. I started writing down notes on them after I played just so I could sort it all out myself. I'm glad others are finding the tidied up versions of my notes useful.
I've bolded the key part here. I'm not wired as the kind of guy that likes to go hit balls on the weekend as I'd much rather keep score. Not to say I don't enjoy hitting a ball around, but really I'd like to get back to tournament play. I'm competitive by nature and so I want a racquet with which I can survive two-a-day matches. That combined with the arm pain that Babolat and the Steam 100 helped me discover...
As for the best serving racquet, that's basically what I'm looking for: A racquet that can let me hold serve easily and get a break here and there. Obviously I'm not gonna hit service winners every time, so I need something that volleys well and really let me stay on the offensive (which is what serve-and-volley tennis is.) The BLX Tour has been good (although my last demo wasn't as good as the previous), the V98 Team was great too. Speed MP was also good. The Juice Pro and the Roddick Plus are in another league on serve, I just don't think I can last through a tourney with them. The Juice Pro maybe, but the Roddick Plus is just too firm.
Nice find on the demo video...It does twist quite a bit. The lead did help, it's just my misses are much more frequently towards the 12 and 6 positions so I notice deadness in the top of the hoop more than twist weight. I'm going to give the Speed MP another whirl with lead at 10 and 2 to see if it adds a bit more power than 3 and 9. Hopefully it keeps some of the added sauce on the ball.
I've never hit any string as bad as what was in the X Feel. I've resorted to digging through every string TW sells online looking for one that at least looks similar.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
Bob...have u tried the Blade 104 yet? I am also a s&v / all court player and the 104 suits me to a tee. Great for slice approaches and volleys like a dream. Serves are also very strong with the extra .30" length. It's nice on your arm and the specs are low enough for leadtape customization if need be. I play it stock and its an easy racquet to play long matches with.
No I haven't. Swing weight seems pretty darn low so yeah, I'd probably lead it up. I still have plenty of time left on my demo program from the local shop so I'll still be giving some new sticks a try. Let me add the Blade 104 to the list.
Have you found it to be a string-sensitive frame? The Blade 98 16x19 certainly was for me.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
No...not string sensitive. I first had it strung with full poly and now use NXT Tour / copoly at 56/52 and I could go even lower. The frame has loads of control with power on tap when you want to let it rip.
About the weight...it FEELS much more substantial than the specs would have you believe. I added weight at forst, but found out I didn't need it and now play it stock. It never gets pushed around and still isn't too "whippy". The added lightness adds to my swingspeed on serves and lets you go for 3+ hours without getting tired. Can you tell I like it???
It's raining delivery trucks for me today!
Earlier today I got notification that a shipment arrived from TW containing all sorts of goodies, a bunch of string, grips, and a Slazenger V98 Team.
Mere moments later I got another notification that a shipment I made to myself last week while traveling showed up. My work travel last week took me back to my hometown, and before I left, I casually asked my old man if he happened to have seen my backup Skunk 6.2. He showed up to dinner with it! Turns out he had one of his own, slightly larger grip size, but it's in fantastic shape.
Then just now I received a call from the local pro shop. They have the Graphene Speed MP I ordered waiting for some string. Yay!
So while all these racquets are being re-strung and the skunks are being repaired (they have some grommet and butt cap damage), I'm also going to grab another round of demos from the local shop and get some reviews up. Here's the two on my list so far:
Wilson Blade 104
Wilson Pro Staff 100L
I can add a third, but it needs to be either Prince, Wilson, Head, Dunlop, or Volkl. They don't carry the smaller brands like Pacific, Pro Kennex, etc.
Thoughts? I'm half-tempted to give the Juice Pro another whirl. She just keeps reeling me back in.
Both Wilsons have lower swing weights than I would like but I still have plenty of lead left. I'll probably do what I did with the Speed MP and post a before-and-after.
Despite ordering the V98 Team and the Graphene Speed MP, I'm not locked into a frame yet, so I'll take any suggestions.
Earlier today I got notification that a shipment arrived from TW containing all sorts of goodies, a bunch of string, grips, and a Slazenger V98 Team.
Mere moments later I got another notification that a shipment I made to myself last week while traveling showed up. My work travel last week took me back to my hometown, and before I left, I casually asked my old man if he happened to have seen my backup Skunk 6.2. He showed up to dinner with it! Turns out he had one of his own, slightly larger grip size, but it's in fantastic shape.
Then just now I received a call from the local pro shop. They have the Graphene Speed MP I ordered waiting for some string. Yay!
So while all these racquets are being re-strung and the skunks are being repaired (they have some grommet and butt cap damage), I'm also going to grab another round of demos from the local shop and get some reviews up. Here's the two on my list so far:
Wilson Blade 104
Wilson Pro Staff 100L
I can add a third, but it needs to be either Prince, Wilson, Head, Dunlop, or Volkl. They don't carry the smaller brands like Pacific, Pro Kennex, etc.
Thoughts? I'm half-tempted to give the Juice Pro another whirl. She just keeps reeling me back in.
Both Wilsons have lower swing weights than I would like but I still have plenty of lead left. I'll probably do what I did with the Speed MP and post a before-and-after.
Despite ordering the V98 Team and the Graphene Speed MP, I'm not locked into a frame yet, so I'll take any suggestions.
Last edited:
