Stiffness and Beam Width for racquets.

[pow]

When a racquet's stiffness rating is taken, wouldn't beam width strongly influence the results as the thicker beam would be harder to bend and the RDC machine bends a racquet to get the rating.

So is it correct to assume that a Wilson nPro Open (stiffness 68 beam 26mm) is made of material that is more flexible than a Wilson Tour 90 (stiffness 68 beam 17mm)?

If that assumption is correct, is there a reason why many companies seem to make more racquets nowadays with thick beams with less stiff material. Is it cheaper to produce or something? Afraid of racquets cracking?

I just thought that the Babolat Pure Drive would be interesting if the beam was thinner or something. Wouldn't it have less stiffness due to a thinner beam?

Final question, which kind of racquet is more prone to breakage? A flexible thin beam or a stiff thin beam?
(I didn't ask about thick beamed because all things equal, they should be less prone to cracking/breaking)

 

[ollinger]

Things designed to bend (steel beam skyscrapers, suspension bridges) are less apt to crack or break than stiffer analogs (e.g. stone buildings and bridges.) Bending mitigates some of the energy of impact, so breakage is less likely.