switching away from the k90.. to what?

[ebster]

hey everyone. i've been using the k90, and when things are going good the racket is sweet. i'm just getting to the point where I'm playing tougher matches and preparing to play division 1 tennis in the fall, and when playing against 5.5+ opponents the pace makes it difficult to hit that small sweetspot all the time. its not like i'm framing every third ball or anything, but its just often enough to sway close matches. before you tell me to go pay for lessons, I know, i know, its about hand-eye coordination, and yes, I know i'm going to frame shots with whatever racket i use, but i'm making the choice to switch to a different frame that will give me some more room for error. if i wasn't taking my game up to a higher level and was just going to relax and play some easier tennis then the k90 would be perfect.

the frames i am considering are as follows:

rds 002 tour
aerogel 200
m-fil 200
babolat pure control
technifibre 335
k-factor 95 (not team)

just wondering if anyone has done the same kind of switch for similar reasons. I love the k90, don't get me wrong, but I know its going to be to my benefit in the long run to have 5-8 more square inches.

if anyone could reccomend out of the above frames, or give other suggestions, that would be awesome. i like a good weight to a frame (around 12 or so strung), and the dnx 10 mid was a little to flexy and head light.

thanks ahead of time for the help!

 

[Jimmyk459]

The only one that i have hit with is the babolat pure control. This is just a matter of pure preference but I loved the way that it balanced. It is very hard to describe. However, i am a head player. The one that i want to really try out is the RDS 002 tour. i would go though either of those two. They are both 98 inchers and what i my friends have said, play like more mid racquets with lots of control.

 

[vkartikv]

Try the aerogel 200, it's a really nice frame especially if you like the prestige. It's much cheaper than the flexpoints also. After a long time we now have an impressive all round frame in the market. As for the yonex, though others might tell you otherwise, I have never served well with a yonex and I don't like their head-shape and weight distribution on volleys. The tf 335 18x20 is a nice slice machine but has a jarring effect on shots. The aerogel 200 should do it.

 

[drakulie]

Well, are you looking to switch because:

1. framed balls or,

2. enlarge the sweetspot,

3. both?

If it's reason # 1, then I don't see a benefit going to a 95, as the difference is minimal. If it's reason # 2, then yes, a 95 will usually have a more considerable difference in the size of the sweetspot. If it's # 3, again no, because of the "framed ball" issue.

You may want to think of going to a 100. Just some things to think about.

Good luck.

 

[brayman9]

that was a short run with the k factor 90 what 2 months?

 

[BounceHitBounceHit]

hey everyone. i've been using the k90, and when things are going good the racket is sweet. i'm just getting to the point where I'm playing tougher matches and preparing to play division 1 tennis in the fall, and when playing against 5.5+ opponents the pace makes it difficult to hit that small sweetspot all the time. its not like i'm framing every third ball or anything, but its just often enough to sway close matches. before you tell me to go pay for lessons, I know, i know, its about hand-eye coordination, and yes, I know i'm going to frame shots with whatever racket i use, but i'm making the choice to switch to a different frame that will give me some more room for error. if i wasn't taking my game up to a higher level and was just going to relax and play some easier tennis then the k90 would be perfect.

the frames i am considering are as follows:

rds 002 tour
aerogel 200
m-fil 200
babolat pure control
technifibre 335
k-factor 95 (not team)

just wondering if anyone has done the same kind of switch for similar reasons. I love the k90, don't get me wrong, but I know its going to be to my benefit in the long run to have 5-8 more square inches.

if anyone could reccomend out of the above frames, or give other suggestions, that would be awesome. i like a good weight to a frame (around 12 or so strung), and the dnx 10 mid was a little to flexy and head light.

thanks ahead of time for the help!

Frames I'd consider:

1. Head LM/FXP Prestige MP
2. Prince O3 White
3. Volkl Tour 10 Gen 2 MP
4. Wilson nCode 95 16x18

Good luck!

CC

 

[power_play21]

wow, youre playing 5.5+ dudes and youre switching frames? youre screwed lol.

 

[ebster]

drak,

yah its reason #2. sorry i didn't clarify. ive used the dnx 10 mid (93) and the fischer mag pro (98) and hadn't had any sweetspot issues. 100 could be good, but those frames tend to get a little stiffer and lighter, which im trying to stay away from.


also, yes, it was a short run. i admit, it was somewhat of an impulse buy, but during the time period when i bought it i wasn't playing as tough of tennis. balls were coming in a little slower and allowing me more time to react and set up for my shots. that said, i got a good deal on them ( i work in a tennis shop) and ill be able to get whatever i choose at a good price too, so if it seems like im overlooking the financial aspect, i assure i havent.

thanks again everyone for responding

 

[ebster]

wow, youre playing 5.5+ dudes and youre switching frames? youre screwed lol.

ha, tell me about it. ive got one more tournament next weekend then i have some time off when im going to switch and have some down time to adjust to whatever frame i choose. it'd be a different story if i was trying to switch in the midst of things.. that could be tough stuff.

 

[armand]

The Yonex RDS001 Mid sounds like it may be perfect. It's also 90sq" but it has a larger sweetspot, is more stable and is easier to swing.
more details http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=123664

 

[bad_call]

... i like a good weight to a frame (around 12 or so strung), and the dnx 10 mid was a little to flexy and head light.

thanks ahead of time for the help!

suggest you use the racquet finder. the volkl tour 10 mp gen 2 might qualify for your selection criteria.

good luck.

 

[ebster]

badcall,

thanks for the advice. to tell you the truth, and i should of had put this originally, im not a big fan of volkl's. i tried the tour 10 mp, and it was ok, but i wasn't really liking the overall feel.

armand,

thanks for the link to your review of the rds 001. im going to give that frame a try.

 

[drakulie]

badcall,

thanks for the advice. to tell you the truth, and i should of had put this originally, im not a big fan of volkl's.

What a coincidence! That makes two of us!

 

[SFrazeur]

I would agree with armand. Give some thought to a demo of the RDS 001 MID.

 

[Voltron]

I have to agree with SF and Armand, give the RDS 001 Mid a try.

 

[[K]aotic]

well if u like the k90 but think its too small, try the k95.

 

[textbook strokes]

Try the k factor 95 18x20. It has the power and sweetspot's size of a 95, and the accuracy of a 90. Good luck!.
TBS.

 

[bluegrasser]

hey everyone. i've been using the k90, and when things are going good the racket is sweet. i'm just getting to the point where I'm playing tougher matches and preparing to play division 1 tennis in the fall, and when playing against 5.5+ opponents the pace makes it difficult to hit that small sweetspot all the time. its not like i'm framing every third ball or anything, but its just often enough to sway close matches. before you tell me to go pay for lessons, I know, i know, its about hand-eye coordination, and yes, I know i'm going to frame shots with whatever racket i use, but i'm making the choice to switch to a different frame that will give me some more room for error. if i wasn't taking my game up to a higher level and was just going to relax and play some easier tennis then the k90 would be perfect.

the frames i am considering are as follows:

rds 002 tour
aerogel 200
m-fil 200
babolat pure control
technifibre 335
k-factor 95 (not team)

just wondering if anyone has done the same kind of switch for similar reasons. I love the k90, don't get me wrong, but I know its going to be to my benefit in the long run to have 5-8 more square inches.

if anyone could reccomend out of the above frames, or give other suggestions, that would be awesome. i like a good weight to a frame (around 12 or so strung), and the dnx 10 mid was a little to flexy and head light.

thanks ahead of time for the help!

The 200 or the K95 would be my choice - just remember that the 200 has a closed pattern.

 

[grass_hopper]

k-95 is awsome, you get the choice of open or close pattern too.

 

[Jimmyk459]

I need help too!

I've simply been adding rackets to my bag ever since in became serious about tennis. I started out with a Ti. Radical, realized i needed a spare and got a flexpoint radical. After a year, I got racket envy and purchased a Flexpoint prestige mid and most recently a prince O3 tour mid. Now i only play with the prestige and the O3 but obviously, this does not help with my game when a string breaks. I don't know which one to choose. The prestige can be awesome as long as I am playing my game but the prince's higher power and head size (its weird because my friend has the O3 tour mid plus and my mid has a bigger head size when you hold them up to each other even though prince says that mine is 5 square inches smaller). So...
-the prince is good if i am ever playing someone who is either pushing or i have to serve and volley.
- the prestige is great for everything else

What SHOULD I CHOOSE?

 

[nickb]

Definitely give the k95 or n95 a demo. The k is stiffer than ncode and people have mixed opinions on which is better so if you can try them both.

Nick

 

[Jimmyk459]

Hm... interesting

 

[grass_hopper]

JimmyK459, you must like flexable racquets, so K95 is not for you.

 

[rocket]

hey everyone. i've been using the k90, and when things are going good the racket is sweet. i'm just getting to the point where I'm playing tougher matches and preparing to play division 1 tennis in the fall, and when playing against 5.5+ opponents the pace makes it difficult to hit that small sweetspot all the time. its not like i'm framing every third ball or anything, but its just often enough to sway close matches.

If you have a fast swing & can live with Head's flat handle, consider the fxp Rad Tour. It's got a very open string pattern, good for t-spin of course, but you can flatten out your shots with it too. It's very stable, handles heavy hitting nicely & delivers a wicked kick on serve.

 

[rocket]

So...
-the prince is good if i am ever playing someone who is either pushing or i have to serve and volley.
- the prestige is great for everything else

What SHOULD I CHOOSE?

Pick one that gives you confidence in playing any type of game.

 

[ebster]

update on the search

heres my update-

i just took out the aerogel 200 (of which i'd heard good things and had high hopes), a prostaff rok that i had acquired in a trade, and a babolat pure control. i hit with all of them (and my k90), and to my slight suprise, the pure control felt absolutely amazing. here are my thoughts on each:

aerogel 200 first off, the good: volleys were solid, and it helped to have some more weight near the head of the frame than i was used to with the 12 pts headlight k90. serves were wicked; excellent pace and placement, although the kick lacked some spin. now, the bad: groundstrokes were nothing special. i hit with a semi western forehand and the 18x20 pattern made it hard to get the topspin i love. off-center shots were clearly felt, and to hit it solid it seemed as though i had to line up the ball to the center off the frame every time.

rok: felt too flexy to me. i'd heard this about this frame ahead of time, and now i understand why. once again, the 18x20 pattern made it hard to hit the groundstrokes i wanted. someone with flatter strokes possibly with an eastern grip might better benefit from this frame. volleys, on the other hand, were superb. this is one of the most stable frames i have used at the net.

pure control team standard: wow. this played like a dream. in the past i'd lived by the motto of smaller headsize = more control, so i was prepared to sacrafice some control for the 97 sq in head. not the case. i could place my groundstrokes where ever i wanted. my forehand is by far my strongest shot, and i could consistently place it with more pace than ever before while still getting the topspin to keep it in. along with the rok, this frame volleyed superbly. not only was the weighting and stability dead on, but it was extremely manueverable (one problem i'd had with the k90). serves were awesome; most pace i've hit with, but still able to throw a wicked slice or kick with lots of movement for a second serve. after playing with the rok and ag200 i knew that i belonged in an open pattern frame, and this fit everything i asked for in a frame to a tee.

any comments on the pure control? any lovers/haters? it seems like since its not such a new frame it is sometimes overlooked. so far its leading the race for me towards a new frame.

 

[nickb]

heres my update-

i just took out the aerogel 200 (of which i'd heard good things and had high hopes), a prostaff rok that i had acquired in a trade, and a babolat pure control. i hit with all of them (and my k90), and to my slight suprise, the pure control felt absolutely amazing. here are my thoughts on each:

aerogel 200 first off, the good: volleys were solid, and it helped to have some more weight near the head of the frame than i was used to with the 12 pts headlight k90. serves were wicked; excellent pace and placement, although the kick lacked some spin. now, the bad: groundstrokes were nothing special. i hit with a semi western forehand and the 18x20 pattern made it hard to get the topspin i love. off-center shots were clearly felt, and to hit it solid it seemed as though i had to line up the ball to the center off the frame every time.

rok: felt too flexy to me. i'd heard this about this frame ahead of time, and now i understand why. once again, the 18x20 pattern made it hard to hit the groundstrokes i wanted. someone with flatter strokes possibly with an eastern grip might better benefit from this frame. volleys, on the other hand, were superb. this is one of the most stable frames i have used at the net.

pure control team standard: wow. this played like a dream. in the past i'd lived by the motto of smaller headsize = more control, so i was prepared to sacrafice some control for the 97 sq in head. not the case. i could place my groundstrokes where ever i wanted. my forehand is by far my strongest shot, and i could consistently place it with more pace than ever before while still getting the topspin to keep it in. along with the rok, this frame volleyed superbly. not only was the weighting and stability dead on, but it was extremely manueverable (one problem i'd had with the k90). serves were awesome; most pace i've hit with, but still able to throw a wicked slice or kick with lots of movement for a second serve. after playing with the rok and ag200 i knew that i belonged in an open pattern frame, and this fit everything i asked for in a frame to a tee.

any comments on the pure control? any lovers/haters? it seems like since its not such a new frame it is sometimes overlooked. so far its leading the race for me towards a new frame.

The pure control is a great racquet...i played it for around 4 months. Great spin, power and serves/volleys very well. Some people say it dosnt have that much control like every other babolat but I thought it had more enough esp as im a big topspin player with a western grip. What I really liked about the pure control was the fact it does everything well: imo it dosnt really have a weakness...it also feels alot less stiff than its RA rating. What string are you using in the control?

Nick

 

[Pete.Sampras.]

The K95 (18x20) is a great racket. You should give it a try. I played with the PS85 for eleven years and I thought the K90 would become my new stick. Unfortunately, it wasn't the best choice for a long clay-court match on a hot summer's day, so I gave the K95 a try and I really liked it and bought a few. Nothing gives you the control and precision of a PS85, but you will hardly notice the difference between the K90 and the K95. The rackets feel different though and the 95 has a lot more power...

 

[movdqa]

You might try the Redondo MP if you can find one. 12.1 ounces. I used the Mid before going the K90 and the Redondo is more forgiving, lighter, and the Mid is a bit bigger than the K90. The MP at 98 sq in should give you a little more room to work with.

The playabilty of the Redondo at net is great though you may not like the 18x20 on the racquets.

I'm going to spend about 2 months on the K90 working on conditioning and focus. I was unsure about K90/K95 and just
went with the K90 as a few others with Redondos were trying
them out.

 

[sureshs]

hey everyone. i've been using the k90, and when things are going good the racket is sweet. i'm just getting to the point where I'm playing tougher matches and preparing to play division 1 tennis in the fall, and when playing against 5.5+ opponents the pace makes it difficult to hit that small sweetspot all the time. its not like i'm framing every third ball or anything, but its just often enough to sway close matches.

Very candid post from an advanced player which contradicts the oft-repeated ideas here that small sweetspots don't affect your game as you should be striking the sweetspot anyway, and arguments like that. Or that since most players here don't play pros, a small racquet has no disadvantage. 5.5 is not a pro but nevertheless the small sweetspot seems to make a difference between wins and losses.

 

[NoBadMojo]

heres my update-

i just took out the aerogel 200 (of which i'd heard good things and had high hopes), a prostaff rok that i had acquired in a trade, and a babolat pure control. i hit with all of them (and my k90), and to my slight suprise, the pure control felt absolutely amazing. here are my thoughts on each:

aerogel 200 first off, the good: volleys were solid, and it helped to have some more weight near the head of the frame than i was used to with the 12 pts headlight k90. serves were wicked; excellent pace and placement, although the kick lacked some spin. now, the bad: groundstrokes were nothing special. i hit with a semi western forehand and the 18x20 pattern made it hard to get the topspin i love. off-center shots were clearly felt, and to hit it solid it seemed as though i had to line up the ball to the center off the frame every time.

rok: felt too flexy to me. i'd heard this about this frame ahead of time, and now i understand why. once again, the 18x20 pattern made it hard to hit the groundstrokes i wanted. someone with flatter strokes possibly with an eastern grip might better benefit from this frame. volleys, on the other hand, were superb. this is one of the most stable frames i have used at the net.

pure control team standard: wow. this played like a dream. in the past i'd lived by the motto of smaller headsize = more control, so i was prepared to sacrafice some control for the 97 sq in head. not the case. i could place my groundstrokes where ever i wanted. my forehand is by far my strongest shot, and i could consistently place it with more pace than ever before while still getting the topspin to keep it in. along with the rok, this frame volleyed superbly. not only was the weighting and stability dead on, but it was extremely manueverable (one problem i'd had with the k90). serves were awesome; most pace i've hit with, but still able to throw a wicked slice or kick with lots of movement for a second serve. after playing with the rok and ag200 i knew that i belonged in an open pattern frame, and this fit everything i asked for in a frame to a tee.

any comments on the pure control? any lovers/haters? it seems like since its not such a new frame it is sometimes overlooked. so far its leading the race for me towards a new frame.

sounds like you found your diamond in the rough. dont think there are many frames made that way..stiff, heavier, and low powered.

am curious if you came on to this frame by using Racquetfinder?