Stiffness Index of Wooden Racquets

WilsonPlayer101

WilsonPlayer101

Professional
I'm pretty sure in the old days of wooden racquets there were no stiffness indexes like there are today but if you were to rate racquet stiffness what would you rate a wooden racquet? Just curious how they would rank in stiffness compared to the modern age of racquet stiffness.


Thanks,


James
 
If you mean "Stiffness Index" literally, that was a term Wilson used in the early 90's to rate the stiffness of their racquets, and they later changed it to "Swing Index". It was never an industry standard.

The current industry standard is the Babolat Racquet Diagnostic Center's RA rating, which for most modern frames ranges from the high 50's (flexible) to the low 70's (stiff). The only RA rating I've seen posted was a 41 for the Snauwaert Vitas Gerulaitis, and (warning: this is just a guess) I'd expect that to be closer to the stiff end of the spectrum for 100% wood racquets.

TW now has a list of vibrational frequencies for current racquets, and I'd love to see that become the new industry standard.
 
Last edited:
Don't Let It Bounce said:
If you mean "Stiffness Index" literally, that was a term Wilson used in the early 90's to rate the stiffness of their racquets, and they later changed it to "Swing Index". It was never an industry standard.

The current industry standard is the Babolat Racquet Diagnostic Center's RA rating, which for most modern frames ranges from the high 50's (flexible) to the low 70's (stiff). The only RA rating I've seen posted was a 41 for the Snauwaert Vitas Gerulaitis, and (warning: this is just a guess) I'd expect that to be closer to the stiff end of the spectrum for 100% wood racquets.

TW now has a list of vibrational frequencies for current racquets, and I'd love to see that become the new industry standard.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out the Vibration Frequency list, this is very intertesting!

I'd have thought stiffer racquets would have higher frequency vibration (and they normally do), but some quite stiff racquets vary quite a lot and have a lower VF, I wonder why?
 
jimbo333 said:
Thanks for pointing out the Vibration Frequency list, this is very intertesting!

I'd have thought stiffer racquets would have higher frequency vibration (and they normally do), but some quite stiff racquets vary quite a lot and have a lower VF, I wonder why?
Click to expand...

VF can be changed easily with a dampener, like a rubber band, or adding d3o to the handle (youtek). RDC factor really influences the play of a racket and can be minimized by playing softer and looser strings or changing the flexpoint/balance of a racket (lead). It is good that were are getting more scientific ways of determining the playing characteristics of our rackets. We need some cheap particle beam analyzers :)
 
Thanks Bounce for the info. I started on wood racquets as a kid in the '70s then went "modern" in the '80s and am fairly up to date. Now I play using a Pro Staff 6.6 from Wilson, the Jim Courier. Not quite up to date but fairly so. Good racquet.

I brought out an old Wilson T-2000 metal racquet and it hits well and feels good on the shots but after awhile my arm hurts so I won't be playing with that for a long time. I did though break out the old wood racquets and they felt good on the arm but as expected lacked power. I have a strong arm and swing with power so I don't need a super powerful racquet so I'm more interested in comfort.

I do have a made in Japan, I forget the name now but it's probably during the end of production of the wood frame era because it's not all wood but fiberglass reinforced. You don't see the glass but it's probably sandwiched in there some where. Still feels good though but I don't think I'll be playing matches with it. I'll stick to the Courier.

I do have an Adidas Ivan Lendl I bought from a friend in 1984 for $40. I can't find it now but it's around somewhere. From my understanding it was made of modern materials but had the feel of a wood racquet when you swung at the ball.

I'd be curious if there was a modern racquet that has a wooden racquet feel to it. I'm thinking a less stiff racquet possibly? I did try the Wilson BLX Tour. Besides from a funny paint job it was great. It felt comfortable on shots. Like I say I don't need a really powerful racquet because I have strength in my own swing and I just play to have an enjoyable time, not to fire cannon balls off at my opponent and having cannons shot at me from my opponent.

Oh that wooden racquet I have is shaped like a modern racquet with a split shaft not a single shaft like the old ones.
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
Thanks Bounce for the info. I started on wood racquets as a kid in the '70s then went "modern" in the '80s and am fairly up to date. Now I play using a Pro Staff 6.6 from Wilson, the Jim Courier. Not quite up to date but fairly so. Good racquet.

I brought out an old Wilson T-2000 metal racquet and it hits well and feels good on the shots but after awhile my arm hurts so I won't be playing with that for a long time. I did though break out the old wood racquets and they felt good on the arm but as expected lacked power. I have a strong arm and swing with power so I don't need a super powerful racquet so I'm more interested in comfort.

I do have a made in Japan, I forget the name now but it's probably during the end of production of the wood frame era because it's not all wood but fiberglass reinforced. You don't see the glass but it's probably sandwiched in there some where. Still feels good though but I don't think I'll be playing matches with it. I'll stick to the Courier.

I do have an Adidas Ivan Lendl I bought from a friend in 1984 for $40. I can't find it now but it's around somewhere. From my understanding it was made of modern materials but had the feel of a wood racquet when you swung at the ball.

I'd be curious if there was a modern racquet that has a wooden racquet feel to it. I'm thinking a less stiff racquet possibly? I did try the Wilson BLX Tour. Besides from a funny paint job it was great. It felt comfortable on shots. Like I say I don't need a really powerful racquet because I have strength in my own swing and I just play to have an enjoyable time, not to fire cannon balls off at my opponent and having cannons shot at me from my opponent.

Oh that wooden racquet I have is shaped like a modern racquet with a split shaft not a single shaft like the old ones.
Click to expand...

Have you tried the Dunlop Max200G? Sounds exactly what you're looking for:)
 
joe sch said:
VF can be changed easily with a dampener, like a rubber band, or adding d3o to the handle (youtek). RDC factor really influences the play of a racket and can be minimized by playing softer and looser strings or changing the flexpoint/balance of a racket (lead). It is good that were are getting more scientific ways of determining the playing characteristics of our rackets. We need some cheap particle beam analyzers :)
Click to expand...

What is interesting is that Kuebler did a lot of work looking at VF back in the late 80's when perfecting his Resonance/Profile racquets!

At one point he came out with a racquet with a VF of 280, surely the stiffest racquet ever made, and would guess has stiffness RA of over 100:shock:
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
I'd be curious if there was a modern racquet that has a wooden racquet feel to it. I'm thinking a less stiff racquet possibly?
Click to expand...
For sure. As mentioned the Max 200G is the prototypical wood racquet made out of graphite. And if you're willing to go back far enough, there are other graphite and fiberglass frames (especially Rossignols, it seems) that wave in the breeze like woodies. Ex. I don't know what a Donnay GC18 is, but someone measured it with at RA 19!

Among current racquets, a lot of TT posters speak of the Pro Kennex Heritage Type C Redondo in ways that remind me of wood racquets.
 
jimbo333 said:
What is interesting is that Kuebler did a lot of work looking at VF back in the late 80's when perfecting his Resonance/Profile racquets!

At one point he came out with a racquet with a VF of 280, surely the stiffest racquet ever made, and would guess has stiffness RA of over 100:shock:
Click to expand...
Sweet! Was that the R50?

One bit from Technical Tennis that really stuck with me came, I feel sure, from Kuebler's work. It was the stiffness threshold where the frequency was so high (~200 Hz) that the racquet actually completes its first vibration before the ball even leaves the strings; thus, the ball actually damps the vibration of the frame! The Profile 2.7, I believe, had that high a frequency. The Secret 04 may have had it, too. Anyone know for sure?
 
Don't Let It Bounce, if I could find my old Adidas Ivan Lendl I think that racquet would do the trick too. The modern material but the wooden feel. No wonder Lendl did so well with it.
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
Don't Let It Bounce, if I could find my old Adidas Ivan Lendl I think that racquet would do the trick too. The modern material but the wooden feel. No wonder Lendl did so well with it.
Click to expand...
If you can't find it, you could try to snag one of the 80's Kneissl's that the Adidas came from. As far as I know, the only difference is that they were hollow, and the Adi wasn't. And the Kneissls look cooler (to me) and are maybe easier to find these days.
 
Don't Let It Bounce said:
If you can't find it, you could try to snag one of the 80's Kneissl's that the Adidas came from. As far as I know, the only difference is that they were hollow, and the Adi wasn't. And the Kneissls look cooler (to me) and are maybe easier to find these days.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of kneissl lendl type frames (white stars) around and rossignol wilander mold Fseries frames. These fiberglass frames were some of the most flexible graphites, in the low 30s rdc, as well as the famous dunlop max 200g which uses soft graphite with fiber fill, much like a wood racket. They are all a blast to hit with but you must have the strokes to supply the power and topspin.
 
joe, I was thinking recently that with all the technological advances people are being more at the mercy of technology today in terms of tennis ability than they ever have been. Now when I read reviews I see all these people talking about all the strengths and weaknesses of their tennis racquets that affect their playing ability. It's like there are so many racquets now a days that there is a racquet for everyone. Back when I was a kid you bought either a wooden racquet or a metal racquet like the T-2000 by Wilson. Then when I was a teen all these special new materials used for racquets like fiberglass, boron, and graphite. Even at that the racquets seemed very primitive looking back now compared to todays. So the kneissl and the Adidas Lendl that we are talking about are very much like what I am talking about. You say they are fun but you need the strokes to supply the power and top spin.

I agree with you that the racquets back in those days were not that powerful or stiff. Now a days pick your choice. Whatever stiffness or power or control you want can be found in the various racquets. I think that is what makes the racquets of the day fun, that they were not that specialized and that they were made to hit the ball and you supply your own power or topspin.

So when I recall playing with the Lendl or even the Head Arthur Ashe I feel that it was more fun playing then rather than now making it a power game or a game with a racquet that does half the work for us. Okay it's still fun now with a modern racquet but saying that the old Lendl or Ashe racquets made it more fun in some ways. Also, even though the heads are smaller on the T-2000s of the world or the Lendls or the Ashes I have to say back then I had no problem hitting the sweet spot but now if you are playing on a bigger head racquet like those offered today you get spoiled and it's potentially hard to go back to a small head size. I have to say though when I bit again with the T-2000 recently I was surprised at how I could hit the sweet spot with not much problem. I must have been concentrating more on the shots than I would a bigger frame. All in all it was super fun playing with the T-2000 but for some reason my arm got sore fast with that one. I have to go out and hit with the Head Arthur Ashe too sometime and see how that goes and if I find the Lendl that I own I have to try that. I recall the Lendl being a blast to hit with.
 
I had a head Arthur Ashe Comp Boron for a couple of months when I was in college.

It was the only racquet, when I was young and athletic, to ever give me tennis elbow--almost instantly.

Stiffness factor of 88.
 
hood, I have not played tennis with my Arthur Ashe in years but as a teenager I don't recall getting tennis elbow BUT that does not mean that I won't get tennis elbow if I play with it again these days. I have to give it a go and see how it hurts me or not. It's been years and it might give me tennis elbow. I'll give it a try again.
 
hoodjem said:
I had a head Arthur Ashe Comp Boron for a couple of months when I was in college.

It was the only racquet, when I was young and athletic, to ever give me tennis elbow--almost instantly.

Stiffness factor of 88.
Click to expand...

Ah, the good old days. While the AA Comp 2 was stiffer than the original, it was still pretty flexy...kind of like a new wood frame that wouldn't break down as quickly as the wood would :) .

My room mate had me string his almost weekly with Leoina 66 @ 64#. We went through a couple dozen of those Comp 2 frames over the years.

Darned thing is deader than dead if you hit high in the face, especially if you aren't supplying the power. I REALLY preferred the Red Head for stiffness and pop. I still take Comp 2 out from time to time but I enjoy the aluminum rackets of the '70s more.
 
coach, man I have not heard the name Leoina 66 in ages. I forgot about that string. Do they still make Leoina strings? Man it's been a long time. If you had not mentioned it I would have forgotten about those strings.

You like the aluminum racquets from the '70s more huh. Do you mean the Wilson T-2000? If so does it give you tennis elbow?

Also, the T-2000 is actual steel not aluminum and I'm wondering if the other racquets of the day were aluminum or steel? Curious how an aluminum racquet would be because the T-2000 is actually steel.
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
Back when I was a kid you bought either a wooden racquet or a metal racquet like the T-2000 by Wilson. Then when I was a teen all these special new materials used for racquets like fiberglass, boron, and graphite. Even at that the racquets seemed very primitive looking back now compared to todays. So the kneissl and the Adidas Lendl that we are talking about are very much like what I am talking about. You say they are fun but you need the strokes to supply the power and top spin.

I agree with you that the racquets back in those days were not that powerful or stiff. Now a days pick your choice. Whatever stiffness or power or control you want can be found in the various racquets. I think that is what makes the racquets of the day fun, that they were not that specialized and that they were made to hit the ball and you supply your own power or topspin.

So when I recall playing with the Lendl or even the Head Arthur Ashe I feel that it was more fun playing then rather than now making it a power game or a game with a racquet that does half the work for us. Okay it's still fun now with a modern racquet but saying that the old Lendl or Ashe racquets made it more fun in some ways. Also, even though the heads are smaller on the T-2000s of the world or the Lendls or the Ashes I have to say back then I had no problem hitting the sweet spot but now if you are playing on a bigger head racquet like those offered today you get spoiled and it's potentially hard to go back to a small head size. I have to say though when I bit again with the T-2000 recently I was surprised at how I could hit the sweet spot with not much problem. I must have been concentrating more on the shots than I would a bigger frame. All in all it was super fun playing with the T-2000 but for some reason my arm got sore fast with that one. I have to go out and hit with the Head Arthur Ashe too sometime and see how that goes and if I find the Lendl that I own I have to try that. I recall the Lendl being a blast to hit with.
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. While the total game is perhaps more challenging today with the power and speed, the equipment of the '70s 'allowed' the player to move the ball, rather than doing it FOR the player. Generally, you chose a racket type BECAUSE of your power or lack thereof, rather than buying a racket that could give you all the power in the world. In comparison, the most powerful rackets of that era(T2000, Yonex 7500, Yamaha YFG, Fischer Superform-type rackets) were NOTHING like the bazookas filling the pegs of today's pro shop. It took talent just to make the ball go! No wonder I had a 15 1/2 inch forearm back then!

Much like the transformation in golf, tennis 'decided' to make it easier to move the ball, perhaps making the game more accessible to less-talented beginners and allowing a quicker improvement in the most basic necessary talent--making the ball go somewhere. Good idea or bad, we can't un-ring that bell. :)
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
coach, man I have not heard the name Leoina 66 in ages. I forgot about that string. Do they still make Leoina strings? Man it's been a long time. If you had not mentioned it I would have forgotten about those strings.

You like the aluminum racquets from the '70s more huh. Do you mean the Wilson T-2000? If so does it give you tennis elbow?

Also, the T-2000 is actual steel not aluminum and I'm wondering if the other racquets of the day were aluminum or steel? Curious how an aluminum racquet would be because the T-2000 is actually steel.
Click to expand...

I dont have Leoina 66 but have alot of victor staytight and some vintage blue swirl. I also did not find the head AA's stiff wonder where hood got that 88 rdc, I would guess 44 at max ?
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
coach, man I have not heard the name Leoina 66 in ages. I forgot about that string. Do they still make Leoina strings? Man it's been a long time. If you had not mentioned it I would have forgotten about those strings.

You like the aluminum racquets from the '70s more huh. Do you mean the Wilson T-2000? If so does it give you tennis elbow?

Also, the T-2000 is actual steel not aluminum and I'm wondering if the other racquets of the day were aluminum or steel? Curious how an aluminum racquet would be because the T-2000 is actually steel.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was typing my long-winded response to another post :) . I believe Leoina 66 is still out there. TOA and Gosen were two of the largest synthetic string companies with Leoina 66 being an extremely popular string for the '70s and '80s. Gosen was more of an OEM company, making strings that would be sold under a variety of brand names. The Gosen name became popular in the early-mid '80s as TOA strings lost favor and marketing 'push' here in the States. IMO, theToalson Leoina 77(16ga) was a far better playing string compared to 66; but, the 66 sold so well because of its relative durability.

Indeed, the Wilson T-series rackets were chromed steel while rackets like the Head Pro and Spalding Smasher were extruded aluminum. The 'series' of aluminum made quite a difference in playability; for example, the 7005 series Head Pro was considerably stiffer than the 6000 series Head Master or Standard(and later the Edge). The frame cross-section also affected playability, with the more rounded Master being softer feeling than the angular cross-section rackets like the Red Head. I have a CAST aluminum racket(thanks Don) and a COLD DRAWN Rawlings TieBreaker. My personal favorite for play is the Yonex(Yoneyama) YY 7500 and 8500, the 'goldie' and 'greenie' of the mid-seventies. I still hit with those almost every time I go out. I would say the Red Head was associated with TE for some players, mainly because of the stiffness compared to the wood rackets so many players were leaving behind at that time. On the other hand, the 'hairpin' metal rackets were so much faster through the air and provided more power up to a point.

So many of the '60s and '70s metal rackets were rivet-fastened at some points, not making for very solid construction. Some of the others were welded but had plastic pallets that would rattle and buzz like crazy. Some of the worst popular offenders were the Spalding Smasher, Garcia X-15, Wilson T-series, Chemold(oww!...it hurt just typing that name :) ). One of the most solid arm-wreckers was the Slazenger Plus--another chromed frame(although they had some other nasty metal frames like the Aluminum Plus). Tensor also had some terrible metal frames that fortunately never caught on in my hometown.

If I had to go play a match with one of my old favorites, I would choose the YY 7500 or Red Head first, but should probably help myself a little by using a mid/m+ like the Head Vector or Director or Yonex OPS 5. Ah, the good old days!
 
Just got back from the park. Hit against the wall for awhile with different racquets and then did a bunch of practice serves on the court. The Ashe 2 wore out my arm. I tried out the wooden racquet with split shaft. Nice feel but after awhile my arm was worn. Don't know why a wood would wear out the arm though. Then went to my main racquets, two Jim Courier Pro Staff Tour 6.6. One has Kirchbaum (spell?) strings and another Babolat Excel. For some odd reason I don't care for the Excel strings but the Kirchbaum Spikey Smash are good for me. So I hit well and served well with the Spikey Smash strings. The wood I hit and served well but was tired out with that one fairly fast. Looks like I'll stick to the Jim Courier racquet. But I might though buy a BLX Tour racquet because it's light and easy on me and pretty accurate. Sadly only pros using that racquet are the women. I love women's tennis but I'm a guy and not sure if I want the BLX that only women use. I know when Wilson made it they probably made it for everyone just the pros ended up being ladies who use them.
 
WilsonPlayer101 said:
jimbo, I never tried that racquet but that is a much loved racquet from what I hear. Isn't that Max 200G the McEnroe racquet?
Click to expand...

Yes, McEnroe first made it a well known racquet in the early 80's!

I really recommend you try a Dunlop Max200G, they are just amazing racquets:)
 
jimbo333 said:
What is interesting is that Kuebler did a lot of work looking at VF back in the late 80's when perfecting his Resonance/Profile racquets!

At one point he came out with a racquet with a VF of 280, surely the stiffest racquet ever made, and would guess has stiffness RA of over 100:shock:
Click to expand...

Don't Let It Bounce said:
Sweet! Was that the R50?

One bit from Technical Tennis that really stuck with me came, I feel sure, from Kuebler's work. It was the stiffness threshold where the frequency was so high (~200 Hz) that the racquet actually completes its first vibration before the ball even leaves the strings; thus, the ball actually damps the vibration of the frame! The Profile 2.7, I believe, had that high a frequency. The Secret 04 may have had it, too. Anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...

No not the Kuebler R50, although that and the Kuebler Resonance were the first racquets made that did this in about 1985!

I'm talking about a later Kuebler racquet from late 80's, actually called the "280HZ"!

I think it's the stiffest racquet ever made, unless anyone knows differently? (Maybe I should start a thread on it:))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Anyone still producing wooden tennis racquets?
Replies
25
Views
4K
NicoMK
NicoMK
d-quik
Stiffness or flex of Estusa Aerotech or Aerosupre BKS (and other non-egg shaped midplusses with 18 mains)
Replies
1
Views
494
Sanglier
Sanglier
Tenny
Nothing new under the sun : Wooden racquet question?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Steve Huff
S
R
Open throat racquet anatomy
Replies
10
Views
3K
Steve Huff
S
U
Anyone still use/collect wooden racquets? If so, please read.
2
Replies
61
Views
4K
Ultra 2
U
Back
Top