String comparison database

[Chairman3]

Good day all!

I really enjoy testing strings and really enjoy comparing them. I also see a lot of threads pop up asking for comparisons of this string vs that string. But so far, I do not see a master list/thread.

As such I aim to create one mega-thread for string comparisons. At least initially, this is where I will document my personal comparisons.
However, ideally others will contribute via posting comparisons or posting links to existing comparisons in other threads. I'll then [try] to make a master list and link them in this first post for ease of use.

Here's what I have planned:
ALU Power Spin v. Eco Spin - Done
Razor Soft v. Element Soft - Done
Element Soft v. Eco Power - Done
PT Drive v. PT Strike - Done
PT Strike v. TF Ice Code - Done
40/40 challenge, Big Banger Original and Razor Soft (strung at 40lbs) - Done
Minty Fresh Surprise - Done
The thin grey-ish/green lines - Done
Tension v. Guage - Done
Hawk Power v. ALU Ocean Blue
Hawk Power v. Head Lynx
Hawk Power v. Yonex Poly Tour Pro - Done
Thinner's the winner - Done
Luxilon Element v. Head Lynx Touch - DNF
(p.hy.) Eco-G v. Eco HawkP -
Weisscannon Ultra Cable v. Volkl V-Square
Big Banger Original v. 4G
Volkl V-Torque v. Diadem Solstice Power
The Drive Trials (Pts. 1 and 2) - Planned
Head Hawk v. Lynx Tour v. Lynx Spin² - Done
TW- Head string comparison playtest -
Here
Eco Power v. Eco Rough - Done
TW- Eco Power and Eco Rough comparison playtest - Here
Hyper-GRound v. Hybrid-G - Done
TW- Hyper-G Round and Hybrid playtest - Here
Hawkers Gotta Hawk (Power v. Touch) - Done
TW- Hawk Touch and Hawk Power comparison playtest - Here
ALU Power v. KB Max Power
(mf) Head Velocity Power v. Tecnifibre X1 Biphase - Done

There are really no rules, the strings don't have to necessarily be comparable, you may want to compare tension or compare one string in two different racquets, just have fun with it.
Also note, I like to hit at least 10-15hrs, unless the poly dies tremendously, so this will take awhile. I will also take requests and prioritize these, as I like to keep the list fresh.

Happy hitting!

 

[Chairman3]

Razor Soft 1.25 v. Element Soft IR 1.27

Words coming soon...

 

[Chairman3]

Razor Soft v. Element Soft
I dreamed this up as I was selected for the playtest of Razor soft, then received a set of Element Soft IR as a birthday present
I quickly realized one string was the antithesis of the other....

Power: Element soft is a power players dream, can be a tad launchy on flatter shots, but overall a nice controllable power level. I do not find it overly powerful, but it has some pop for sure. Also provides good power outside the sweetspot. Razor soft has zero power. It is all about control. Even when it started losing tension, it didn't gain that much power.

Spin: Again, Element Soft outshines Razor Soft here. Element is not extra spinny and it definitely relies on quicker racquet head speed, but it does spin the ball better than Razor Soft. Razor Soft has mediocre spin, it is more suited to flat hitters. Neither really has "bite."

Control: This is where Element falters. Element is more of a big target players string. It does not provide that confidence and preciseness like Razor Soft or some stiffer strings. Razor Soft on the other hand only knows control. It, like your ex-girlfriend, is a control freak.

Feel: In terms of feel, Element is very nice, a hair muted, it reminded of some yonex strings (Rev and Fire) but overall good feedback. Decent pocketing and not spongy, maybe a bit springy and works well on touch shots if you play with good technique. My slices tended to float a bit, from not great technique. Definitely a bit softer than regular Element. Razor soft is firm and not very forgiving. It provides more raw feedback but it can work for touch shots. Not harsh, but definitely not soft.

Tension maintenance/durability: I have about 6hrs on element soft and tension maintenance seems ok for now. Seems like less than half way notched and it is still playing well. Will update after more time. Razor soft has excellent tension maintenance. After about 11hrs it was notched halfway through and there were only hints of tension loss. Control still reigned supreme.

Finale: Element soft would be a great complement to a power and spin player, likely someone using a stiffer frame as well. It really accels with some fast and more vertical swings. Razor soft is the opposite. This is supposed to be Medvedevs new string and he plays a flat, control oriented game. It is better for someone with more traditional strokes.

Both tested at 50lbs in UP16M

 

[Chairman3]

Christmas in April...

This does inspire me to try a hybrid of eco power mains and element soft crosses in the future

 

[Chairman3]

Eco Power (EP) v. Element Soft IR (ES)
This was primarily a comparison of convenience. I already had the Element in one racquet and had the Eco lying around and was finished with Razor Soft. Also a good chance to compare Luxilon's two newest string offerings.


Power: Element Soft is a great blend of power and comfort. It is much more powerful than Eco Power, EP is really focused more on spin. (Also to capture the eco-friendly market). You get above average power with ES and average with EP. I enjoyed the controllable power of ES.

Spin: This is a toss up for me. Initially, EP seemed very spin-friendly considering it is shaped, but after about 4 hours it faded. Meanwhile, ES mostly had the same spin the entire time and was modestly less than EP. I think ES provides more consistent spin and nicely complemented its power. EP is not overly competitive as a spin string to me. If you were a spin player the softer ES would probably break quicker.

Control: This is where EP can finally dethrone ES. EP is a stiffer string and has a shape thereby offering more control. But again, EP has such a short useful life it is hard to say it is better than ES in comparison. For a softer, powerful, and round poly I think ES has good control. It is probably better suited to big target players or control frames but nonetheless.

Feel: I really enjoyed the feel of ES. In terms of feel, Element is very nice, a hair muted, it reminded of some yonex strings (Rev and Fire) but overall good feedback. Decent pocketing and not spongy, maybe a bit springy. EP felt good for 2-3 hours and it was all downhill from there. It had that more crisp feel but also slightly muted. This could be indicative of shaped strings as the edges wear down, but either way. EP for me got a little unpleasant feeling after 6 hours. It never caused harm, but definitely was dead.

Tension maintenance/durability: Very obvious by now, EP is like some other Luxilon strings, it is great for a few hours then done. I cut it at about 7 hours as it felt and sounded not great. It was maybe half notched. I could have cut it at 5-6, honestly. ES on the other hand, I am now cutting at about 12.5 hours. Maybe about 3/4 notched. Useful life for most, probably 8-10 hours, which is average I would say, but maybe better than other soft polys (Looking at you cyclone tour!).

Finale: These both would complement spin players as they produce decent spin. If you're a heavy spin player, ES will probably break somewhat quickly due to its softness. I think ES has broader application than EP as it felt a little more versatile and lasted longer. EP is a little bit of a niche string trying to capture eco-conscientious people. It really isn't good enough to ellipse existing spin strings.

Both tested at 50lbs in UP16M

 

[Chairman3]

Here it is, as a result of my poll where 10 whole TTWers voted.....

The Poly Tour twins
PT Strike 1.20 and
PT Drive 1.25
This will be a good comparison of some lesser known PT strings.

 

[legcramp]

You need to do something with new vs. old or even a 4-way comparison like this:

Head Hawk Power vs Tourna Big Hitter Silver
Yonex Poly Tour Pro vs Isospeed Baseline Control

That would be awesome and probably get you lots of views

 

[Chairman3]

You need to do something with new vs. old or even a 4-way comparison like this:

Head Hawk Power vs Tourna Big Hitter Silver
Yonex Poly Tour Pro vs Isospeed Baseline Control

That would be awesome and probably get you lots of views

Always open to recommendations, which of those two should get priority?
Never used big hitter or baseline control

 

[legcramp]

Always open to recommendations, which of those two should get priority?
Never used big hitter or baseline control

I think Yonex vs Isospeed would have a bigger overall userbase, especially Yonex PTP.

 

[Chairman3]

I think Yonex vs Isospeed would have a bigger overall userbase, especially Yonex PTP.

Appreciate the recommendations

 

[Chairman3]

SITREP: PT Twins, after about 5 hours each.
Started out liking drive better then switched to liking strike...now I don't know. They have different attributes which make them likable.
Strike is made in Japan
Drive in Taiwan
Drive reminds a bit of Volkl strings, stiffer but not harsh, BUT the nice feel seems to be diminishing as play time increases.
Strike is very muted and actually sounds more like syngut when hitting the ball, which is odd at first. Plays very nicely though.
Both have pretty minimal notching, so thats good, especially surrpising as the Strike is 1.20.
Drive is getting a tad "springy" assumingly from tension loss.
Strike is doing its thing...and well.
It continues...

 

[Chairman3]

PT Drive 1.25 vs. PT Strike 1.20
I thought this would be a good comparison of some lesser known Poly Tour strings. One is a premium offering and one is a budget. I thought the thinner guage Strike would compensate for it being round versus Drive which is shaped. However, these strings are likely for two different players.

Power: After a few hours of playing, they both have decent power. Drive a bit more than Strike as Strike is more of a traditional round control string. Neither is a "power" poly but they don't feel as dead and powerless as other polys out there. They give a little extra pop once settled in, 1-2hrs. The thinner guage of Strike might have accounted for the additional pop felt.

Spin: Drive wins out here, its purpose is spin and it delivers. Despite the thinner guage, Strike is just more for control and a little flatter style. Strike does deliver spin but doesn't lift the ball like Drive or provide as much net clearance as easily. Also wasn't as good for kick serves. If you're a spin player, Drive is a good option.

Control: For me, spin does not equal control, so Strike is the winner here. Strike provides more confidence when swinging out or hitting flat, Drive could launch a bit on flat shots. I felt confident Drive would spin my balls in, but not as confident on targeting or going down the line. Perhaps in a more dense pattern Drive would provide more control. With a thicker guage Strike you'd likely get even more control but for a 1.20, it was good.

Feel: Drive is definitely crisper but felt nice and provided more feedback. Strike is more similar to other Yonex strings, very dampened feeling and somewhat muted. When I began playing the sound reminded me of synthetic gut. Initially I liked Drive better but then began to appreciate Strike a lot more. As play time wore on and Drive lost tension, it became harsh. I cut it at about 7 hours as I didn't want to risk any arm pain. Currently still using Strike at about 7.5 hours and it's still working well.

Tension maintenance/durability: I put about 7 hours on Drive and decided to cut it. It had started to become a bit harsh and tension had dropped significantly. Useful life about 5-6 hours. Strike still feels good and doesn't seem to have dramatically dropped tension. Currently about 7.5 hours of play time and even at 1.20, only slight notching. I'm going to keep playing it until it becomes harsh or uncontrollable. Being so dampened I wouldn't expect it to become harsh, but you never know. UPDATE: The useful life, for me, easily over 10 hours. I'm at about 11 hours and string movement has begun but control is still pretty good. No erratic launching either.


Finale: Drive is a great spin string and I would definitely use it again, mostly because I have a few sets. At $9 it is an ok deal, but has a short playability duration. Also worrying when a string dies and becomes harsh. Strike has really impressed me, it does most things well and seems to be holding tension well even in the thinner 1.20 guage. Very curious how much longer it will go on, but really enjoy it. At $18.50, I'm not really a buyer, but it does have a premium feel and good performance so far.

Both tested at 48lbs in UP16M

 

[K1Y]

Good day all!

I really enjoy testing strings and really enjoy comparing them. I also see a lot of threads pop up asking for comparisons of this string vs that string. But so far, I do not see a master list/thread.

As such I aim to create one mega-thread for string comparisons. At least initially, this is where I will document my personal comparisons.
However, ideally others will contribute via posting comparisons or posting links to existing comparisons in other threads. I'll then [try] to make a master list and link them in this first post for ease of use.

Here's what I have planned:
Razor Soft vs Element Soft - Done
Element Soft and Eco Power - Done
PT Drive and PT Strike - Done
PT Strike and TF Ice Code - in process
40/40 challenge, Big Banger Original and Razor Soft (strung at 40lbs)
Big Banger Original and RPM Rough 15
Hawk Power and ALU Ocean Blue
Hawk Power and Head Lynx
Hawk Power and Yonex Poly Tour Pro
Head Lynx Spin² and Eco/element soft hybrid
Weisscannon Ultra Cable and Volkl V-Square
Big Banger Original and DuraFluxx

There are really no rules, the strings don't have to necessarily be comparable, you may want to compare tension or compare one string in two different racquets, just have fun with it.
Also note, I like to hit at least 10-15hrs, unless the poly dies tremendously, so this will take awhile. I will also take requests and prioritize these, as I like to keep the list fresh.

Happy hitting!

Great idea!! Watching this. Cant wait for hawk power / head lynx / ptp. I recommend hawk touch / msv swift comparison as well.

 

[Chairman3]

Great idea!! Watching this. Cant wait for hawk power / head lynx / ptp. I recommend hawk touch / msv swift comparison as well.

Hawk Power v. PTP is next since PTP is so popular and Hawk Power is new and cheaper

I also keep adding impromptu comparisons. Like PT drive was done so that racquet is being restrung with Ice Code to compare to the PT strike still in my other racquet

 

[Chairman3]

Fire and Ice...well not really. Although Yonex PT Fire vs Ice Code could be a fun future comparo.. I digress

The TW product page for Ice Code lists PT Strike as a "similar string" so this should be good. My Strike is 1.20 and Ice Code 1.25, so not perfect, but I can postulate on performance differences attributable to guage.

 

[Chairman3]

Ice Code 1.25 vs. PT Strike 1.20
This was a tad derived from convenience, but the TW product page for Ice Code lists PT Strike as a similar string, so this is worthwhile. I find the guage to have made not a lot of difference in comparing them. Also huge  DISCLAIMER I really didn't care much for Ice Code, nevertheless it won't impact the comparison.

Power: These actually both had decent power, but Ice definitely more pronounced. Strike seemed to settle-in after the first hour or so then have decent pop for a more control oriented string. Ice though had power right out of the gate and I really wasn't a huge fan as I found it a bit erratic at times. It seemed to impact control whereas Strike was at a more controllable level. Also surprising given Ice was the thicker guage.

Spin: I pretty much have to call this a draw, with maybe a slight edge to Strike. However, the slight edge is likely due to the thinner guage. Neither of these are really spin monsters and neither really grips or bites the ball. These will only give what you put into them and require some good technique and racquet head speed. Slow swings or pushy strokes are punished with flatter trajectory.

Control: Even with the thinner guage, Strike is handedly the winner. I never felt the same confidence using Ice as I did with Strike. The performance of Ice was somewhat erratic the entire time. Strike was very consistent and very dependable. A thicker guage of Strike would likely net more control. The confidence to swing out knowing the ball would stay in is great to have and Strike delivered.

Feel: Strike is a Yonex string, dampened and somewhat muted feeling. You don't lose all feel for the ball, but its not as raw or communicative. Ice on the other hand I struggle with, it was inconsistent. At times it felt almost mushy and other times a little more crisp, perhaps different spots on the stringbed. It was not my favorite feeling string though. I always liked it for about the first 45 minutes to an hour each time I used it, then I was ready to stop. Not sure why, but that was the feeling. I think Strike could have more feel, but it did its job well so its hard to knock it.

Tension maintenance/durability: With Strike I am up to 11 hours and the strings are starting to move and some control may be going. It still is pretty playable though, no launching or erratic behavior. Ice I am at about 7 hours and really don't want to continue, I just really am not enjoying it. With the sound test (tapping one racquet on the strings of the other) Strike has a little higher ping and leads me to believe it is tighter. Ice sounds loose and is playing that way. Strikes performance was excellent, Ice was average to mediocre. Surprisingly, for a 1.20, Strike really doesn't have significant notches.

Finale: Ice was really disappointing. The TW review is pretty positive and it sounds like a great string. Sadly it is a bit of a one-trick pony (power) but its performance was so erratic, I really don't want to use it again and really didn't enjoy it. It is not often I dislike a string as much as I did Ice. I usually find some redeeming quality, sadly not this time. Strike on the other hand is stellar. It offered great performance and great longevity for a 1.20 guage. At 11 hours it is still pretty playable. If I could find another cheap reel I'd consider picking it up as a new go-to, it just really impressed me with its consistent performance.

Both tested at 48lbs in UP16M

 

[K1Y]

Ice Code 1.25 vs. PT Strike 1.20
This was a tad derived from convenience, but the TW product page for Ice Code lists PT Strike as a similar string, so this is worthwhile. I find the guage to have made not a lot of difference in comparing them. Also huge  DISCLAIMER I really didn't care much for Ice Code, nevertheless it won't impact the comparison.

Power: These actually both had decent power, but Ice definitely more pronounced. Strike seemed to settle-in after the first hour or so then have decent pop for a more control oriented string. Ice though had power right out of the gate and I really wasn't a huge fan as I found it a bit erratic at times. It seemed to impact control whereas Strike was at a more controllable level. Also surprising given Ice was the thicker guage.

Spin: I pretty much have to call this a draw, with maybe a slight edge to Strike. However, the slight edge is likely due to the thinner guage. Neither of these are really spin monsters and neither really grips or bites the ball. These will only give what you put into them and require some good technique and racquet head speed. Slow swings or pushy strokes are punished with flatter trajectory.

Control: Even with the thinner guage, Strike is handedly the winner. I never felt the same confidence using Ice as I did with Strike. The performance of Ice was somewhat erratic the entire time. Strike was very consistent and very dependable. A thicker guage of Strike would likely net more control. The confidence to swing out knowing the ball would stay in is great to have and Strike delivered.

Feel: Strike is a Yonex string, dampened and somewhat muted feeling. You don't lose all feel for the ball, but its not as raw or communicative. Ice on the other hand I struggle with, it was inconsistent. At times it felt almost mushy and other times a little more crisp, perhaps different spots on the stringbed. It was not my favorite feeling string though. I always liked it for about the first 45 minutes to an hour each time I used it, then I was ready to stop. Not sure why, but that was the feeling. I think Strike could have more feel, but it did its job well so its hard to knock it.

Tension maintenance/durability: With Strike I am up to 11 hours and the strings are starting to move and some control may be going. It still is pretty playable though, no launching or erratic behavior. Ice I am at about 7 hours and really don't want to continue, I just really am not enjoying it. With the sound test (tapping one racquet on the strings of the other) Strike has a little higher ping and leads me to believe it is tighter. Ice sounds loose and is playing that way. Strikes performance was excellent, Ice was average to mediocre. Surprisingly, for a 1.20, Strike really doesn't have significant notches.

Finale: Ice was really disappointing. The TW review is pretty positive and it sounds like a great string. Sadly it is a bit of a one-trick pony (power) but its performance was so erratic, I really don't want to use it again and really didn't enjoy it. It is not often I dislike a string as much as I did Ice. I usually find some redeeming quality, sadly not this time. Strike on the other hand is stellar. It offered great performance and great longevity for a 1.20 guage. At 11 hours it is still pretty playable. If I could find another cheap reel I'd consider picking it up as a new go-to, it just really impressed me with its consistent performance.

Both tested at 48lbs in UP16M

Very good review, this saves me money as I wanted to try ice code. But I know you like lynx like me, so I know I probaly wont like ice code either

 

[Chairman3]

Very good review, this saves me money as I wanted to try ice code. But I know you like lynx like me, so I know I probaly wont like ice code either

Appreciate the positive feedback. I always recommend trying yourself, but definitely understand saving time and money.

 

[Chairman3]

Wanted to put an update here on Ice Code....

I've yet to restring my racquets as I am waiting on my playtest strings.
I've been playing alot and have slight hand pain from overuse, it goes away when I rest.
I assumed it was just from overuse, broadly, but switching back and forth from Strike to Ice Code, Ice does seem to irritate it a bit more.

Not sure if its extra vibration or stiffness, but as I think of the last 2-3 times use, it is consistently worse with the Ice Code racquet. I realized it today when playing.
Just food for thought as far as arm-friendliness is concerned.
Typically I am not sensitive to any stiffness from racquets or strings.

 

[Chairman3]

Part of the Head string comparison playtest
Hawk 16 and Lynx Tour 16
Never used either but TW string database shows they have pretty similar specs, this will be fun
Follow the fun from all the playtesters here..

Tennis Warehouse Playtest: Head co-poly comparison

Head co-poly playtest! The application period has closed. Selected playtesters have been notified Selected playtesters will receive three strings - Lynx Spin 2 (hybrid), Hawk 16 (black) and Lynx Tour 16 (champagne). Using the review questions at the bottom, you must compare at least two of the...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

 

[Chairman3]

Little update on the Hawk vs. Lynx Tour since I am nearing the end. Both strung at 48lbs, Both have just under 10 hours play time and have been played simultaneously. I use one for a set and then switch to the other.

I can't give too much away as I still have to write my official review. I will come back and write a review here in my comparison format after.

Both strings have average to slightly above tension maintenance. I think Lynx Tour is going first, feel has changed a bit and it's getting a tad springy. This makes sense as shaped strings start losing those edges and playability and feel change.
Very minimal notching, but I am not surprised. I don't 17 or 18g poly, so definitely not 16.

Hawk still feels good, but there are subtle hints it may be starting to go. Minimal notching as well
Both have a fairly stiff feel, but Lynx Tour is stiffer. It really surprises me so many people love it so much based on this.
Both do have pretty good power for how stiff they are, although I feel like control could be a bit better. I guess it's always a balance.

Pretty solid offerings from Head and definitely cut from the same cloth in terms of tension maintenance and feel (I'll go into more detail on this). Spin is also similar but Hawk makes you work harder for it.
Hawk is definitely aimed at a more advanced player. Lynx Tour is too as it is unforgiving outside the sweetspot, but from using it I see why it appeals to beginner/intermediates (this isn't necessarily a good thing).

 

[Chairman3]

Here it is, the Hawk v. Lynx Tour v. Lynx Spin² official TW playtest comparison. My official playtest review is over in the playtest thread, here, but I wanted to do a write-up in my short form style. And away we go....

Power: This was pretty easy, LS² is the most powerful, it's a little softer than Hawk or LT. It provided me a good power boost on serve. I wouldn't quite say it is a power-poly, but above average while still controllable. Hawk and LT are pretty dead even. Both have more power than your average poly, and definitely more power than the stiffness would lead you to believe, but it isn't their specialty, just a nice bonus.

Spin: Despite it's name, LS² was not the spinniest, it was outshined by LT. LT has very easy access to spin, even for less developed players. The latter part is a bit of a detractor as I think lower level players won't develop good mechanics using this string. LS² did have better spin this time, as it was at a lower tension, but it lacked a bit of control, so a bit of a trade-off there. Hawk provided just as much spin as LT, but you HAVE TO have full and fast swings, i.e. be an advanced player. Less than fully developed strokes resulted in the strings pushing the ball.

Control: Both LT and Hawk have excellent control, LS² was a bit behind the other in that regard. LT and Hawk have that stiff and dead feel you expect from a control poly, while LS² is a bit softer and has a bit more give. LT and Hawk are pretty point and shoot while LS² is more of a big target string. I'd give a slight (very slight) edge to Hawk over LT because it is round and maintains a consistent feel.

Feel: As mentioned, LT and Hawk are stiff and feel stiff. Hawk is slightly less of that stiff/harsh feel, likely because it is round, but they are both kind of stiff and dead. I never experienced any pain or soreness, but be weary if you are sensitive. LS² I enjoyed more because I like a little more soft/plush stringbed. Don't mistake, it is still firm but has a little softer feedback than Hawk or LT. For a spin hybrid, LS² has nice feel and you get better feedback than a full shaped poly stringbed. LT also started feeling a bit worse with more time and tension loss. I attribute it to the edges losing their shape. Hawk has maintained a consistent feel and I prefer it over LT.

Tension maintenance/durability: Hawk was the best at 12.5hrs and still going pretty good. LT I cut at 12.5hrs as it got a little harsh and a little launchy. Slices were floating and I was missing some balls a little long. I feel it peaked at 8-9hrs. LS² is tough because I had a somewhat anomalous immediate tension loss, which I think was due to the hot/humid weather in FL. In prior times tension maintenance was about average for a poly. I wasn't close to breaking them as I don't break poly, definitely not 16g. But at the hours I put on there was very little notching; I'm also not a spin player.

Finale:  The surprise is how much I did enjoy regular Hawk. I feel like LT is so hyped as this amazing string while Hawk I never hear anyone talk about. I'll answer my own question, you do have to be an advanced player to really reap the full benefit of Hawk. Sadly, I am not. I may try a 17 or even 18g Hawk to see if it is a little more user-friendly and potentially softer. I have used LS² prior and liked it. Not as competitive in the spin sector as it should be, but a very good all-rounder with nice feel and decent power. LT was also a very nice offering not so low-powered and great spin but, for me personally, it is too stiff. I don't enjoy that type of feel. LT main with something softer, like regular Lynx, would probably be a winner and something I may try in the future.

All strung at 48lbs in my modified UP 16M.

 

[Chairman3]

This one should resonate with a lot of people...

We've got the newcomer
Head Hawk Power v. the long time staple
Yonex Poly Tour Pro. Both 1.25 and strung at 48lbs.

 

[Chairman3]

Played a doubles match with the PTP, first time ever using it!
I see why people like it.
Very nice power level and good spin. Pretty good control too
The 1.25 (16L) somehow seems thinner than that, even just looking at it.
Two hours down and many to go.
We'll see if it can fight off the newcomer Hawk Power.
I think these strings are similarly situated so looking forward to this comparison.

 

[Chairman3]

This is going to be closer than I thought.
Played the fresh Hawk Power tonight and it has very similar characteristics.
So far I think it has better feel, but only used each a couple hours.
Time will tell what separates them

 

[Chairman3]

About finished with Hawk Power and PTP, work travel has interfered and prolonged the comparison.

Review soon....

Stay tuned for Eco Rough vs Eco Power

 

[Chairman3]

Head Hawk Power vs. Yonex Poly Tour Pro
I'm not sure if Hawk Power is actually supposed to compete with ALU Power or that was purported because they both include the word "power." Reagrdless, PTP is a staple for many, probably more so than ALU, so here we are. Little did I know it would be a photo finish with these two...

Power: Neck and neck on the home stretch. They really are, I tried to find a difference, maybe a slight (very slight) edge to HawkP but not much. Both have a decent power level, for poly, and feel a bit lively versus feeling stiff or dead. Power is controllable and I enjoyed what they both had.

Spin: This is one differentiator. PTP has spin that comes more easily and a bit more overall. To get spin from HawkP it really requires full swings and good technique, slow, lazy, partial swings don't get the job done. HawkP is better suited to advanced players (like its older brother Hawk) whereas PTP is more approachable and easier to generate spin even with slower swings. PTP captures just a little more audience with its easier to use character.

Control: Again, pretty neck and neck down the back straight. Neither has that top tier level of control but, for the added power, both have a nice amount of control. I felt pretty confident targeting lines with either string. The one nuance, which I will touch on more in  feel is that PTP did seem softer on slower swings and firmer on faster swings. My theory is it firms up on faster swings to give more control on those big cuts. Not sure if that's possible but I noticed it.

Feel: This is the other primary differentiator. I enjoy the feel of HawkP a bit more than PTP. Neither was harsh or stiff or uncomfortable, they were mostly similar. There was just a bit of difference where HawkP seemed softer or maybe just more dampened. PTP seemed to have that firmer feel. Now, as mentioned above, PTP did seem 2-dimensional. Slower swings and touch shots, it felt softer but then on full fast swings it felt firmer. Real or imagined, I noticed it and it wasn't bad. For me though, I think I preferred the more consistent feel of HawkP.

Tension maintenance/durability: I used both about 10 hours. Not a spin-player, so no really significant notching. 10 hours was probably 2-3 hrs past their prime. I noted the major tension drop on HawkP at about 5-7hrs. This is consistent with when I playtested this string last year. PTP wasn't far behind, and while HawkP remains playable, I could tell PTP was starting to get that "dead poly feel." So 6-8 hrs is probably average for poly, I really like to get a solid 10hrs so neither impressed me here.

Finale: This was my first go with PTP, and I enjoyed it. I see why it's so popular, a very playable string for a variety of skill-levels. HawkP I do think is better suited to advanced players seeking a bit more power and forgiveness from their poly. Both are beyond my price range given the lack of longevity. Does HawkP dethrone PTP, not quite. I can't say PTP is better, they are just different and for two different types of players. PTP is probably better suited to baseliners, bit easier spin and, possibly, control if you're taking decent cuts. HawkP across the board is better for advanced players but also maybe a little better feel and more forgiving. A doubles player needing more forgiveness and power would like HawkP. Probably my favorite comparison so far though.

Both tested at 48lbs in my UP16M.

 

[Chairman3]

Strung at 48lbs and ready to roll...

Used Eco Power before, but it is always nice to revisit and get a second impression.

 

[Chairman3]

Wonder twin powers activate (form of EcoPower (EP) and EcoRough(ER))
Here it is, the ecomentalist delight, recycled plastic string...does that mean it is made of dead poly's? Zombie poly string....? Let's take a swing at the ol' cherry tree


Power: EP is a pretty classic shaped poly, crisp/firm bodering stiff and dialed back power. Is it powerless and dead, no, but it is less powerful than it is more powerful. ER on the other hand had decent power, not excessive or uncontrollable but a nice level of pop. I preferred the response of ER, but that has more to do with feel.

Spin: I noticed a little better and easier spin than when I used EP, previously. Could be the 2lbs drop in tension or maybe I was more comfortable with the string this time. Is it a "spin monster," flatly, no. Sorry. It has average spin for a shaped poly. There are definitely some that bite harder or grab the ball more. Maybe a further drop in tension could help a little. ER was disappointing, at least in this application, the rough texture doesn't do much more than a similar smooth round poly for spin. In addition, as time wore on and tension loss set in, spin potential seemed to decline. At least with EP, the spin mostly remained the same. ER really can't be classified as a spin string.

Control: As with spin, I felt a little better control this go around with EP. Not significant, but maybe just a little more confidence and trust in the string, targeting felt a bit better. Interesting though that control seemed better despite the 2lb tension drop. ER, again, somewhat disappointing in the control department. It wasn't bad, just medoicre. In a tight pattern racquet it probably would perform well, I have a couple more sets of ER and will probably test in a tight pattern racquet. But for ER, spin and control are not the standout attributes.

Feel: EP is just a standard crisp/firm poly. The slightest suggestion of deadness, but mostly a crisp response. It actually doesn't feel bad, if you like that response, but the feel fades pretty quickly, 4-5hrs and it's mostly gone. Now this is where ER comes into its own. I really enjoyed the feel of ER, softer than EP, but firm enough. However, it also fades and kind of begins to turn mushy as tension loss sets in. It never becomes uncomfortable, it just isn't as good. Also basically the same time line as EP, maybe an extra hour so 5-6hrs.

Tension maintenance/durability: This is either Luxilon magic or marketing. Luxilon strings just seem to lose their good feel and die quickly. Usually the feel is great for those few hours, but then it fades quickly. EP was very consistent, 3-4 good hours and by 5-6 it was done. ER was basically the same with maybe an extra hour. 4-5 good hours and by 6 is was basically done. Neither were near breaking for me, but I'm not a heavy topspinner. I'll use ER again to see if performance is about the same.

Finale: I enjoyed both strings, but given the short-life and still mostly premium price, they aren't really viable for me. EP is good on its own merits, albeit low playability duration. ER is a little more iffy. The nice feel and little power boost could work in a hybrid situation though. I'm also eager to try ER again and see if I get better performance. Honestly, I may hybrid these two together, EP main and ER cross. I may be onto something. Either way, classic Luxilon strings...good until they quickly aren't. If the eco-shtick thing is what you're into, go for it.

Both tested at 48lbs in my UP16M.

 

[K1Y]

awesome reads! 40/40 challenge up next? I love to hear more about your take on BB original in general.

 

[Chairman3]

awesome reads! 40/40 challenge up next? I love to hear more about your take on BB original in general.

Thank you for kudos and the suggestion! that might be a good way to go.
I am having a bit of indecision lately.
I haven't used BBO lately, so would be good to get reacquainted.

 

[Chairman3]

Here they are, things look normal, but will 40lbs be my downfall?

Big Banger Original and Razor Soft 1.25 at 40lbs.
Let's do it.

 

[NewcomerfromBalkan]

Here they are, things look normal, but will 40lbs be my downfall?

Big Banger Original and Razor Soft 1.25 at 40lbs.
Let's do it.

Very interesting comparison.Glad to hear results.

 

[Chairman3]

So far, not too strange but interesting results with about two hours on each string.

Spin really does seem to come easier and, except volleys, launch is actually pretty predictable. Volleys tend to launch a bit, this is likely partially my "needs improvement" technique though. Also I feel I am anticipating launchiness, so then I hesitate or pull back a bit, especially dropshots/volleys.

So far I like Razor Soft better. BBO seems like it is bottomed out at this tension. I don't feel an incredible amount of extra power. Easier spin, yes, but still feels a little dead just with more give and less stiffness.
Not sure if it just doesn't work great at low tension or what, makes me want to try it higher than my normal tension to compare.

We'll see as we get further along

 

[K1Y]

So far, not too strange but interesting results with about two hours on each string.

Spin really does seem to come easier and, except volleys, launch is actually pretty predictable. Volleys tend to launch a bit, this is likely partially my "needs improvement" technique though. Also I feel I am anticipating launchiness, so then I hesitate or pull back a bit, especially dropshots/volleys.

So far I like Razor Soft better. BBO seems like it is bottomed out at this tension. I don't feel an incredible amount of extra power. Easier spin, yes, but still feels a little dead just with more give and less stiffness.
Not sure if it just doesn't work great at low tension or what, makes me want to try it higher than my normal tension to compare.

We'll see as we get further along

Interesting results! I would try to also keep playing as if you have a 'normal' stringbed to really tell the differences maybe.

One question regarding BBO and lower tension: Kasatkina told in one of her youtube video that she raised the tension of BBO by half a kg compared to when she used TF ice code. To her BBO got softer faster than ice code. Is this something you can confirm having tried both?

 

[Chairman3]

Interesting results! I would try to also keep playing as if you have a 'normal' stringbed to really tell the differences maybe.

One question regarding BBO and lower tension: Kasatkina told in one of her youtube video that she raised the tension of BBO by half a kg compared to when she used TF ice code. To her BBO got softer faster than ice code. Is this something you can confirm having tried both?

Softer meaning lost tension?
If that is the case, I'd say they are pretty similar. BBO surprisingly doesn't hold tension that well and neither did Ice Code.
I thought Ice Code felt more powerful from the start and was far less predictable than BBO.
I'll have to watch the video and see if I understand what she's saying.

 

[K1Y]

Softer meaning lost tension?
If that is the case, I'd say they are pretty similar. BBO surprisingly doesn't hold tension that well and neither did Ice Code.
I thought Ice Code felt more powerful from the start and was far less predictable than BBO.
I'll have to watch the video and see if I understand what she's saying.

Starting from 18:20 in this video

. Yes it appears she means lost tension. She claims her previous string (ice code) was discontinuied but dont think thats the case..

 

[Chairman3]

Starting from 18:20 in this video

. Yes it appears she means lost tension. She claims her previous string (ice code) was discontinuied but dont think thats the case..

Still listed on TW, so maybe she knows something we don't

 

[Chairman3]

It all started because the internet. This internet in fact, with this thread....

The "String your Poly at 40" challenge thread

I just strung my Poly at 40 yesterday and loved it. Crushing balls at 100% with lots of spin. Nothing going long. Best serving of my life. This is a challenge. Not a debate. I do not want your opinion or prediction of what you think will happen. Please string your next poly at 40 and...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

String your poly at 40lbs...say..why not?
So I then selected two supreme control polys that I thought might benefit from such low tension. Enter Big Banger Original and Razor Soft.


Power: Both of these strings are controlled and low-powered. I'd call BBO the grand-daddy, OG and a personal favorite of mine. Razor Soft is a newboy but impressed me by how little power it had despite not feeling stiff. (It is stiff though) Both natural choices to string low for controlled power. Sadly, BBO did not yield the results I expected. It felt bottomed out and weak. I still felt I was swinging hard but only getting an erratic response. It felt dead before it had even been used, no spring in its step. Razor Soft however did gain a good bit of power. My prior experience was 50lbs in the same racquet. This low tension produced a welcome bit of pop compared to 50lbs. Driving the ball deep felt much easier and the feedback was better as well.

Spin: This was an area where both benefitted, although RS probably a bit more. Neither of these are spin strings, they rely on good ol' fashioned elbow grease (not too much or you'll get tennis elbow ). But whether it be pocketing or dwell time or other science words, the spin potrntial increased. For both strings spin just came easier. Razor soft was the larger benefactor having noticeably more spin than when strung tighter. Lack of spin was one of my main gripes when I reviewed RS. BBO also benefited, but the perceived benefit was outweighed by the negatives, which I'll get to in a minute.

Control: This is where the negatives begin. Both lost significant control. To me BBO became erratic but RS wasn't as bad. RS lost the pinpoint control and I was consistently missing balls long usually by a foot or less. Understandably some of this is technique, full consistent swings are required at these tensions, but broadly I lost confidence. I lost confidence that I wasn't going to overhit with either string and that the ball would stay in. For me, with these racquets, I need more control not less; it's a fine line. Confidence is also part of the game. Could I learn? Maybe. Is it worth it? Not really

Feel: Both had "better" feel. Both are firm, control strings so they tend to feel that way. At this low tension, the pocketing is off the chart and you really feel the ball sink in. Sadly, BBO did not stay good for long. I really thought the low tension would mitigate a severe change in feel from tension loss, it did not. RS felt good the whole time and the main reason I cut it out was for a playtest.

Tension maintenance/durability: As always, I don't break poly, so durability is always good. Funnily enough, I felt like RS notched faster at 40lbs than it did at 50lbs. No clue? It held tension well though as it did at my normal tension. BBO as I said lost tension quickly. It was probably good for 2-3hrs and beyond that felt lifeless. That is worse than when I use it at normal tension.

Finale: This was an interesting test with mixed results. Would I do it again, probably not, but maybe. Any perceived benefit was more than outweighed by some offsetting negative. Both strings I found to be more playable at my normal tension. Would I stop somewhere between 40 and 48 (my normal tension)? With Razor Soft I probably would but with BBO, I know it plays well at 48lbs, so maybe. I also learned you can "bottom out" a string, in this case BBO. It was so low that it lost all benefits and was overall not great. RS wasn't as bad, but I did lose confidence and confidence is key. In a tight 18x20, I might give it a try. In my Ultra Tour my go-to was 45lbs, so 40 isn't a stretch. These are always fun and I'm glad I gave it a shot or two.

Both tested at 40lbs in my UP16M.

 

[K1Y]

It all started because the internet. This internet in fact, with this thread....

The "String your Poly at 40" challenge thread

I just strung my Poly at 40 yesterday and loved it. Crushing balls at 100% with lots of spin. Nothing going long. Best serving of my life. This is a challenge. Not a debate. I do not want your opinion or prediction of what you think will happen. Please string your next poly at 40 and...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

String your poly at 40lbs...say..why not?
So I then selected two supreme control polys that I thought might benefit from such low tension. Enter Big Banger Original and Razor Soft.


Power: Both of these strings are controlled and low-powered. I'd call BBO the grand-daddy, OG and a personal favorite of mine. Razor Soft is a newboy but impressed me by how little power it had despite not feeling stiff. (It is stiff though) Both natural choices to string low for controlled power. Sadly, BBO did not yield the results I expected. It felt bottomed out and weak. I still felt I was swinging hard but only getting an erratic response. It felt dead before it had even been used, no spring in its step. Razor Soft however did gain a good bit of power. My prior experience was 50lbs in the same racquet. This low tension produced a welcome bit of pop compared to 50lbs. Driving the ball deep felt much easier and the feedback was better as well.

Spin: This was an area where both benefitted, although RS probably a bit more. Neither of these are spin strings, they rely on good ol' fashioned elbow grease (not too much or you'll get tennis elbow ). But whether it be pocketing or dwell time or other science words, the spin potrntial increased. For both strings spin just came easier. Razor soft was the larger benefactor having noticeably more spin than when strung tighter. Lack of spin was one of my main gripes when I reviewed RS. BBO also benefited, but the perceived benefit was outweighed by the negatives, which I'll get to in a minute.

Control: This is where the negatives begin. Both lost significant control. To me BBO became erratic but RS wasn't as bad. RS lost the pinpoint control and I was consistently missing balls long usually by a foot or less. Understandably some of this is technique, full consistent swings are required at these tensions, but broadly I lost confidence. I lost confidence that I wasn't going to overhit with either string and that the ball would stay in. For me, with these racquets, I need more control not less; it's a fine line. Confidence is also part of the game. Could I learn? Maybe. Is it worth it? Not really

Feel: Both had "better" feel. Both are firm, control strings so they tend to feel that way. At this low tension, the pocketing is off the chart and you really feel the ball sink in. Sadly, BBO did not stay good for long. I really thought the low tension would mitigate a severe change in feel from tension loss, it did not. RS felt good the whole time and the main reason I cut it out was for a playtest.

Tension maintenance/durability: As always, I don't break poly, so durability is always good. Funnily enough, I felt like RS notched faster at 40lbs than it did at 50lbs. No clue? It held tension well though as it did at my normal tension. BBO as I said lost tension quickly. It was probably good for 2-3hrs and beyond that felt lifeless. That is worse than when I use it at normal tension.

Finale: This was an interesting test with mixed results. Would I do it again, probably not, but maybe. Any perceived benefit was more than outweighed by some offsetting negative. Both strings I found to be mpre playable at my normal tension. Would I stop somewhere between 40 and 48 (my normal tension)? With Razor Soft I probably would but with BBO, I know it plays well at 48lbs, so maybe. I also learned you can "bottom out" a string, in this case BBO. It was so low that it lost all benefits and was overall not great. RS wasn't as bad, but I did lose confidence and confidence is key. In a tight 18x20, I might give it a try. In my Ultra Tour my go-to was 45lbs, so 40 isn't a stretch. These are always fun and I'm glad I gave it a shot or two.

Both tested at 40lbs in my UP16M.

Great experiment. Your findings confirm my view on tension. I actually think you need to string as high as possible while getting the comfort and depth you need at you regular rally shots. That doesnt mean that you try to string high. For some people that could be really low. Mannarino said that he only plays that low tension because its the only way he gets the ball over the net, its a necessity for him.

 

[Chairman3]

Great experiment. Your findings confirm my view on tension. I actually think you need to string as high as possible while getting the comfort and depth you need at you regular rally shots. That doesnt mean that you try to string high. For some people that could be really low. Mannarino said that he only plays that low tension because its the only way he gets the ball over the net, its a necessity for him.

Yep, not unlike racquet weight, there's an ideal tension.
The variable is that all strings have enough differences that what's ideal for one, may not be ideal for all.
But that's a huge rabbit hole that I'll probably never tackle.
For me, I have a tension for my racquet that works mostly well for all strings.

 

[Chairman3]

Couple of 93's, cuttin' it up

Here's a minty fresh twist on comparisons..same string in the same racquet BUT two different string patterns.
How will PT Rev 1.20 perform in an 18x20 vs a 14x18...we'll sure find out.

 

[Chairman3]

Aquafresh PT Rev 1.20 (because it has that teal aquafresh color about it) I for sure would do an aquafresh toothpaste hybrid if I could figure out how to get three strings on a racquet....I digress.

PT Rev, pretty good so far, only about 3.5hrs between the two racquets. For a shaped string, it does lack some of that "bite" or noticeable "lift." Some might call it "grab." PT Drive had it, but also didn't feel as good.

Rev is fairly muted. The sensation is nice and I am using a really soft racquet which may get credit for the feel. I thought Rev might be a little crisper given its rated stiffness (according to TW string database. Disclaimer: they don't have data for Rev 1.20) but it does not feel crisp. My prior experience [briefly] using lavendar Rev 1.25, was similar though. Muted and no significant bite. That was in a PS97 V13.

Definitely a fan of the color, but I need more time to see if the performance is really there. Yonex has alot of "spin" strings, do they have too many?

 

[Chairman3]

SITREP: I'm up to about 5hrs on each racquet, so 10 total with PT Rev. I'll break this down by racquet since I am compared the performance in two different patterns.

14M: Feels good, decent control and spin. Played singles with just this racquet today and was wanting a tad more control or "confidence" from it. I think a 1.30 guage would suit it better then this 1.20. The liveliness is spot on and while it doesn't grab the ball, my shots usually dip in. It's just the sensation of this string that isn't totally my favorite where it feels like the strings are pushing the ball versus really cupping the ball. Tension feels spot on too though. Notching has started but tension loss doesn't seem significant yet.

18M: 47lbs might have been too tight. It felt a little tight the other night when I played. The guage is perfect for this tight pattern and the liveliness still spot on. Definitely no control issues, but again spin performance is good but I'd like a little more from a shaped string. No notching or tension loss.

General: Performance has been good but the only thing I'm wowed by is the color. I can feel the ball well with such a thin guage but the actual response is somewhat muted. It works ok because these are very communicative racquets but in a muted racquet it might not be as nice. I'm not disappointed with the string, by any means, but there's nothing making me want to come back to it or choose it over others.

 

[Fighting phoenix]

Hey random question - someone recommended Gamma AMP Moto 17 (lime green) on a forum, and I tried it out in my Extreme Tour and absolutely LOVED it (I've been trying many strings in different frames over the last year), but I see very few reviews/write-ups on this string online. Does anyone have any experience / perspective to offer on this string? Am I just an outlier for liking it as much as I do?

 

[Chairman3]

Hey random question - someone recommended Gamma AMP Moto 17 (lime green) on a forum, and I tried it out in my Extreme Tour and absolutely LOVED it (I've been trying many strings in different frames over the last year), but I see very few reviews/write-ups on this string online. Does anyone have any experience / perspective to offer on this string? Am I just an outlier for liking it as much as I do?

I think Gamma is probably like Head, underrated strings that can go toe to toe with the big guys.
Last Gamma string I used was Marathon 15L, not a poly, but very unique and quality.
My only experience with Gamma poly is Ocho and it was pretty good. (It was awhile ago so I don't remember specifics. Produced great spin (8-sided))

Gamma feels like one of those "legacy" brands people forget about because they don't have the prestige or name recognition.
Great you like it, I always say use what you like. That's why I stick with Head Lynx and most people only know of Lynx Tour.

 

[Fighting phoenix]

I think Gamma is probably like Head, underrated strings that can go toe to toe with the big guys.
Last Gamma string I used was Marathon 15L, not a poly, but very unique and quality.
My only experience with Gamma poly is Ocho and it was pretty good. (It was awhile ago so I don't remember specifics. Produced great spin (8-sided))

Gamma feels like one of those "legacy" brands people forget about because they don't have the prestige or name recognition.
Great you like it, I always say use what you like. That's why I stick with Head Lynx and most people only know of Lynx Tour.

I really like regular Lynx, I might go back to that given how cheap a reel is.

Gamma TNT were my fave synthetic guts back in the days before the poly zombie apocalypse. So maybe I have a soft spot in my heart for that brand, but yeah - there’s been so much marketing hype with luxilon, babalot, and solinco strings, and then the newer social media hype around toroline and restring, that we forget these hidden gems like this gamma moto

 

[Chairman3]

I really like regular Lynx, I might go back to that given how cheap a reel is.

Gamma TNT were my fave synthetic guts back in the days before the poly zombie apocalypse. So maybe I have a soft spot in my heart for that brand, but yeah - there’s been so much marketing hype with luxilon, babalot, and solinco strings, and then the newer social media hype around toroline and restring, that we forget these hidden gems like this gamma moto

Lynx is solid and I am more drawn to round polys.
Right, Pro's use Lux or a string from their sponsor (bab rpm blast, yonex) so now everyone else is going full internet "free stuff to randoms for positive reviews" approach.
Then there's the other "boutique" brands like Tier 1 and grapplesnake that are heavily touted on boards like these.
It's a super competitive string market, which is awesome for us, but hard to know whats good without trying yourself.
I guess everyone is always looking for the latest and greatest.

 

[Chairman3]

This test came a bit out of left field, and from our favorite left field brand...Prince. I hadn't used my 93P's since buying them and it was high time. Add to the fact I was intrigued by the new Aquafresh Poly Tour Rev color and a lack of prior testing of PT Rev. Add further that I have been impressed by Yonex strings I tested in 2023 with really no underwhelming performances. PT Strike 1.20 even made it to my list of go-to's. So the idea was to test the same string and tension in two different patterns. Without further preambling...

Power: This is not a stiff or dead feeling string, but it doesn't particularly add power or have noticeable pop either. It has a nice predictable medium-low power level. The response was predictable and consistent until the tension starting dropping*. For these super low-powered frames, I would've liked a little more pop. Oddly enough the 18M felt more powerful due to its higher swingweight. But this came from the frame not the string. The strings definitely felt tighter in the 18M and I'd probably drop a few pounds to gain a little more power compared to the very open 14M which felt just right at 47lbs. Where I noticed a bit of pop the most was on volleys. Not sure why, but it felt like I was punching volleys alot more than finessing them, which is just fine with me.
*This really only happened in the 14M.

Spin: So for a shaped string, I felt spin was more on the mediocre side. Compared to PT Drive, which isn't as "premium" but also a Yonex, shaped string, Rev doesn't grab or lift the ball as noticeably. I also feel that the thin guage combined with the open 14M negated the impact of the shape a bit as if the shape wasn't aggressive enough. However, in the 18M I felt it did more to generate spin. The spin on my kick serves was better with the 18M and balls consistently dipped inside the lines. The 14M felt a bit too open for the 1.20 without an aggressive vertical stroke. My strokes seem to do better in tighter patterns, but a thicker guage would suit the 14M better, for various reasons. Regardless, the spin level did not impress me, and this is consistent from my prior [brief] time using the 1.25 lavender color.

Control: So control was pretty good given the more neutral feel. I say neutral to mean not really firm or stiff but not really soft either; I'll touch on that more in Feel. Naturally, control was excellent with the 18M, more attributable to the pattern than the string. However, I did find pretty good control with the 14M from the string itself. I think the string lent more power than control to the 14M but for as open as this pattern is, I felt confident going down the line. Of course you could up the tension, but the 47lbs I used was a pretty good balance of power and control for the 14M. Again, a thicker guage would provide more control in open patterns, but if you like the thin guage feel (like me) it gives enough control. The 14M, for me, isn't a pinpoint weapon anyway, its lower swingweight and launch really are better suited to baseline grinding for which you'd probably opt for a thicker guage.

Feel: So feel was pretty good. My prior [brief] experience the string felt more muted than this time. Now these racquets are very communicative, but the 1.20 guage really shines in the feel department. It had a nice semi-plush but not soft feel. It does have the characteristic Yonex dampened feel but you still get decent feedback. In a muted frame it could create some vagueness. One redeeming quality is the feel didn't change. My typical experience with shaped strings is the feel starts to change as the edges wear down, that didn't happen. The feel remained consistent which I like. That's always been the downside of shaped strings for me. At 47lbs in the 14M it was softer than the 18M and felt spot on. The same tension in the 18M was firmer. This especially stood out on a few colder nights hitting, the firmer feel was noticeable but only in the 18M. But, overall, the string seemed softer than PT Pro. (CAVEAT) I am comparing to 1.25 PT Pro. These are also soft racquets, so your experience may vary. I have it strung in a purportedly stiffer racquet now, so we'll see. (Stay tuned for that comparison!)

Tension maintenance/durability: This is where the patterns diverge and create different performance. At nearly 9 hours on the 18M, it doesn't feel like its lost tension at all and scant notching. So far so good. At about 8 hours on the 14M, I have cut it out. I could've eeked out a few more hours, if I wanted, but my last session I was beginning to consistently miss long by 6-12 inches. This is usually my tell for when I feel like tension loss has taken over. The strings were also moving, about half notched, and had a different sound. I call it the dead poly sound, kind of pingy and just off, you know it when you hear it. So I decided not to use it longer. For the 14M 8 hours is average, if the 18M makes it to more than 10 hours, this is above average. For a 1.20, these really aren't bad numbers as you might expect a thinner string to be less durable. I will update with a final number on the 18M.

Finale: The point was to see how the same string played in the same racquet with two different patterns. To be honest, not drastically different performance that can be attributed to the string, except in tension maintenance. That fact kind of speaks to this string more generally, which I'll get to in a second. As far as differences in performance, I do feel it added a bit of power to the 14M and a bit of spin to the 18M. As I said above, I think it was too thin for the openness of the 14M but worked nicely in the very dense 18M. My kick serves were bouncing higher with the 18M which I think was aided by the string. So more generally, the string was average. It has a little of an identity crisis. It doesn't have as much spin as PT Drive and maybe only marginally more than PT Pro. But it also didn't have the tension maintenance of PT Strike. Feel was pretty similar to other premium PT strings so not a clear strength compared to its contemporaries. I've also used PT Fire 1.20, which I believe is the round version of Rev, in a Pure Aero, and the performance wasn't markedly different from that. With such close performance, I don't see the point. The string was good, but not good enough for me to really be drawn to it again, save for the color.

Both strung at 47lbs.

 

[maksp]

Do which is your best round poly so far??? And yes poly tour pro are .04mm smaller after stringing ..I measured either digital caliper