Tecnifibre Official - Racquets

parasailing

Hall of Fame
I had a chance to hit with the TF 40 this evening for about an hour. I will update with more time on the court but here is my general overview. The racquet is very stable and felt solid and plush. I was hitting amazing slices that penetrate the court and would skid. The racquet design in the throat area reminds me of the Wilson Blade with the same beam width. Serving was solid with this racquet. As a 2015 Wilson Blade 18x20 user, I think this is a very solid racquet but the 2015 Blade 18x20 still comes out ahead with more power and plow spec'd at the same weight, SW, and balance.

Serves - Edge goes to the Blade because it was more maneuverable
Slices - TF 40 was a slice monster and best racquet for slice I have used in a long time
Groundstrokes - Blade was more solid when hitting outside the sweet spot
Comfort - Blade because off center hits was a bit more forgiving. TF 40 was plush if you hit the sweet spot and overall solid.
Plow - Blade just crushes the ball whereas the TF is solid

I didn't get a chance to hit volleys with this so will update once I have more time on the court.

Overall, this racquet definitely has potential for those who want to spend some time tuning the racquet. The racquet came strung with Prince Premiere Control so if you willing to figure out the right string combo, this will be a nice racquet. Overall, I enjoyed hitting with it I wish I demo the XTC 305 side by side comparison.
 

JeanF

New User
Just hit with TF40 315, simply solid racquet.
I am just wondering if both of them are foam filled?

Thanks!
My ordered TF40 305's arrived yesterday and before they were strung I have measured them to see what the specs of both frames were.
One frame had a static weight of 304 gram and a balance point of 32,5 cm and the other one had a static weight of 307 gram and a balance point of 32,3 cm.
As Michelle already mentioned in the sneek preview of the TF40 frames the 305 gram version feels reasonably head heavy and somewhat less maneuverable (exactly comparable with the TFight 305 XTC) so I decided to lower the balance point by filling the shaft at the gripside with wadding pieces and black Sikaflex, something I also did with both of my Tfight 305 XTC's and what worked out very well regarding to the maneuverability of the racket.
To fulfill the job I had to remove the original basegrip and the buttcap (still no trapdoor on the TF40....what a shame Tecnifibre ! :mad:)
Comparable with the TFight 305 XTC the TF40 has also a completely foam filled shaft so I milled the foam carefully out to a depth of around 4 cm and filled it first with wadding pieces and then with black Sikaflex which is a perfect solution for this kind of applications due to its strong vibration dampening capacity, quick hardening, and the reasonably high weight/volume ratio.

Both frames have equal specs now, only one is strung with Tecnifibre Black Code 4S 1.25 mm. and the other one is strung wit Yonex Poly Tour Pro graphite 1.25 mm.
Static overall weight (strung, with Wilson pro overgrip) is 330 gram and balance point (strung) is 33,1 cm.
Tomorrow I will play with both frames to get a good impression of the TF40 305 and to discover what will be the main differences in playability between de TF40 305 and the TFight 305 XTC.

@tenniswarehouse When can we expect the video review of the TF40 305/315 ? Troy mentioned that it will be online this week....
 
Last edited:

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
My ordered TF40 305's arrived yesterday and before they were strung I have measured them to see what the specs of both frames were.
One frame had a static weight of 304 gram and a balance point of 32,5 cm and the other one had a static weight of 307 gram and a balance point of 32,3 cm.
As Michelle already mentioned in the sneek preview of the TF40 frames the 305 gram version feels reasonably head heavy and somewhat less maneuverable (exactly comparable with the TFight 305 XTC) so I decided to lower the balance point by filling the shaft at the gripside with wadding pieces and black Sikaflex, something I also did with both of my Tfight 305 XTC's and what worked out very well regarding to the maneuverability of the racket.
To fulfill the job I had to remove the original basegrip and the buttcap (still no trapdoor on the TF40....what a shame Tecnifibre ! :mad:)
Comparable with the TFight 305 XTC the TF40 has also a completely foam filled shaft so I milled the foam carefully out to a depth of around 4 cm and filled it first with wadding pieces and then with black Sikaflex which is a perfect solution for this kind of applications due to its strong vibration dampening capacity, quick hardening, and the reasonably high weight/volume ratio.

Both frames have equal specs now, only one is strung with Tecnifibre Black Code 4S 1.25 mm. and the other one is strung wit Yonex Poly Tour Pro graphite 1.25 mm.
Static overall weight (strung, with Wilson pro overgrip) is 330 gram and balance point (strung) is 32,7 cm.
Tomorrow I will play with both frames to get a good impression of the TF40 305 and to discover what will be the main differences in playability between de TF40 305 and the TFight 305 XTC.

@tenniswarehouse When can we expect the video review of the TF40 305/315 ? Troy mentioned that it will be online this week....
Very much looking forward to hearing your thoughts and comparisons. I too am awaiting the video review...
 

JeanF

New User
Very much looking forward to hearing your thoughts and comparisons. I too am awaiting the video review...
Today I could finally playtest my new TF40 305 frames during a two hour session on hardcourt.
I had serious plans to play on clay, but due to some rainy conditions here this week I had to play indoor on Plexipave surface.
Nevertheless it was more than good enough to get some detailled overall impressions of the TF40 305.

In the first 15 minutes of playing I experienced almost directly a couple of clearly feelable differences in comparison with the TFight 305 XTC and that were mainly the launch angle of the stringbed (lower), the level of power from the frame (less), and most feelable the flex of the frame (much more).
After around 30 minutes of playing it felt like I was completely used to the TF40 and it played wonderfully well with an impressive level of control, feel, and stability.
The good playability and overall feel I experienced with the TF40 today reminds a lot to my ex heavily customized TFight 315 LTD DC18M's, but with the noticeable difference that the TF40 305 in stock form definitely delivers more stability, plow through, and some free power, so for me personally the TF40 305 is without a doubt the better playing frame.

In comparison with the TFight 305 XTC the most noticeable advantages of the TF40 305 are the significant better control and precision, and the feedback from the frame (feel).
Besides the good control and feedback, the higher flex of the frame gives the TF40 also a nice plush and comfortable feel, so with longer hitting sessions you will definitely notice less arm/shoulder fatique.

I have played with two different strings today and both strings performed well in the TF40.
Tension weight for both strings was 23/22 kg.
Black Code 4S felt a bit stiffer than Poly Tour Pro (graphite) and gave a bit more agressive ball bite, but a lower power level.
The level of control was really good.
Poly Tour Pro (graphite) provided me with a nice comfortable feel and ball pocketing and more free power out of the stringbed.
Control was above average, but a bit less than Black Code 4S.
The level of spin was surprisingly higher in comparison with Black Code 4S, probably due to the fact that the Poly Tour Pro is a round string which achieves easier snapback in dense string patterns.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Today I could finally playtest my new TF40 305 frames during a two hour session on hardcourt.
I had serious plans to play on clay, but due to some rainy conditions here this week I had to play indoor on Plexipave surface.
Nevertheless it was more than good enough to get some detailled overall impressions of the TF40 305.

In the first 15 minutes of playing I experienced almost directly a couple of clearly feelable differences in comparison with the TFight 305 XTC and that were mainly the launch angle of the stringbed (lower), the level of power from the frame (less), and most feelable the flex of the frame (much more).
After around 30 minutes of playing it felt like I was completely used to the TF40 and it played wonderfully well with an impressive level of control, feel, and stability.
The good playability and overall feel I experienced with the TF40 today reminds a lot to my ex heavily customized TFight 315 LTD DC18M's, but with the noticeable difference that the TF40 305 in stock form definitely delivers more stability, plow through, and some free power, so for me personally the TF40 305 is without a doubt the better playing frame.

In comparison with the TFight 305 XTC the most noticeable advantages of the TF40 305 are the significant better control and precision, and the feedback from the frame (feel).
Besides the good control and feedback, the higher flex of the frame gives the TF40 also a nice plush and comfortable feel, so with longer hitting sessions you will definitely notice less arm/shoulder fatique.

I have played with two different strings today and both strings performed well in the TF40.
Tension weight for both strings was 23/22 kg.
Black Code 4S felt a bit stiffer than Poly Tour Pro (graphite) and gave a bit more agressive ball bite, but a lower power level.
The level of control was really good.
Poly Tour Pro (graphite) provided me with a nice comfortable feel and ball pocketing and more free power out of the stringbed.
Control was above average, but a bit less than Black Code 4S.
The level of spin was surprisingly higher in comparison with Black Code 4S, probably due to the fact that the Poly Tour Pro is a round string which achieves easier snapback in dense string patterns.
Thanks so much for your review. Very interesting findings.

What you say makes sense when looking at the Racquet Comparison Tool on TW. The TF40 305 would feel more stable at stock weight due to the different balance point (one of the strengths of the TFight 305 XTC - kind of like the 2015 Wilson Blade 98 18x20) compared with the TFight DC 315 LTD 18M. Have you ever tried the 2013 TFight 315 Limited 18M? That version was more comfortable IMO than the DC 315 LTD version. I think the TF40 305 would still be more stable stock due to the balance point difference, but since I like a more HL balance, I would need to modify it, which would increase the static weight and bring them closer in line to each other. The difference may be just the RA (2013 TFight 315 Limited has an RA of 61).

What Tecnifibre have done here is very interesting. Previously, they would offer a 315 version that had a low SW (like the 315 Ltd), and a 305 with a higher SW. Then, you either added weight to the handle of the 305, if you wanted a better HL balance (but the SW was closer to target and you didn't need to do much there), or you added weight to the head to increase the SW but the HL balance was more to one's liking. The two TF40 options here are different in that the SW is not so different, but the balance points are. Neither seems right stock for me, as I would prefer a SW in the 330s, so both would need to be modified in some way. Here, however, the approach to reach one's goal is not as clear cut.

From previous experience, a racquet with good stability stock but a lower static weight (due to a higher balance point and more weight in the head resulting in a higher SW stock - like the TF40 305), causes some timing issues for me when trying to swing fast under pressure or when the ball is close to the baseline and I haven't set up properly (due to being rushed). In this situation (like with a Wilson Blade 98), I tend to add more weight at the handle of the racquet to lower the balance point, increase the HL balance and make it easier to swing the racquet faster through the strike zone. I may add very small amounts of weight in the head if I feel the sweet spot could be improved or stability enhanced, but on the whole, it's more weight in the handle.

On the other hand, the TF40 315, has a lower balance point (more HL) but nearly the same SW as the TF40 305. Therefore, the static weight strung will be higher by those 10g, but the balance will be more to my liking. I will need to increase the SW by a bit, and in order to keep the original balance, will need to add more weight to the handle (but not much).

Which is the better option to take as a starting point? On the Racquet Power Comparison Tool, the TF40 305 is slightly better, but not by much, but the TF40 315 has a better balance for me. To reach the same SW, both racquets would need a similar amount of weight added to the head of the racquet, but very different amounts to the handle. Would that mean that the TF40 305 would still be more powerful at the end? Or is it all a moot point, as we may end up at the same place either way? Thoughts...
 

DrWang

Rookie
Received my Tflash CES 300. Beautiful racquet. String it with Volkl v-torque tour 18g at 50 lbs.

Below are some comparison pics if the previous model and the new one. I removed the grip so you can see the green silicone encased handle. I will play with them tonight.











 
Last edited:

peterparker

New User
Did I just see Daniil slam his racket, pick it off the ground, and proceed to serve four straight aces from two break-points down to win a championship?

Pretty awesome sales pitch for Tecnifibre.
 

JeanF

New User
Thanks so much for your review. Very interesting findings.

What you say makes sense when looking at the Racquet Comparison Tool on TW. The TF40 305 would feel more stable at stock weight due to the different balance point (one of the strengths of the TFight 305 XTC - kind of like the 2015 Wilson Blade 98 18x20) compared with the TFight DC 315 LTD 18M. Have you ever tried the 2013 TFight 315 Limited 18M? That version was more comfortable IMO than the DC 315 LTD version. I think the TF40 305 would still be more stable stock due to the balance point difference, but since I like a more HL balance, I would need to modify it, which would increase the static weight and bring them closer in line to each other. The difference may be just the RA (2013 TFight 315 Limited has an RA of 61).

What Tecnifibre have done here is very interesting. Previously, they would offer a 315 version that had a low SW (like the 315 Ltd), and a 305 with a higher SW. Then, you either added weight to the handle of the 305, if you wanted a better HL balance (but the SW was closer to target and you didn't need to do much there), or you added weight to the head to increase the SW but the HL balance was more to one's liking. The two TF40 options here are different in that the SW is not so different, but the balance points are. Neither seems right stock for me, as I would prefer a SW in the 330s, so both would need to be modified in some way. Here, however, the approach to reach one's goal is not as clear cut.

From previous experience, a racquet with good stability stock but a lower static weight (due to a higher balance point and more weight in the head resulting in a higher SW stock - like the TF40 305), causes some timing issues for me when trying to swing fast under pressure or when the ball is close to the baseline and I haven't set up properly (due to being rushed). In this situation (like with a Wilson Blade 98), I tend to add more weight at the handle of the racquet to lower the balance point, increase the HL balance and make it easier to swing the racquet faster through the strike zone. I may add very small amounts of weight in the head if I feel the sweet spot could be improved or stability enhanced, but on the whole, it's more weight in the handle.

On the other hand, the TF40 315, has a lower balance point (more HL) but nearly the same SW as the TF40 305. Therefore, the static weight strung will be higher by those 10g, but the balance will be more to my liking. I will need to increase the SW by a bit, and in order to keep the original balance, will need to add more weight to the handle (but not much).

Which is the better option to take as a starting point? On the Racquet Power Comparison Tool, the TF40 305 is slightly better, but not by much, but the TF40 315 has a better balance for me. To reach the same SW, both racquets would need a similar amount of weight added to the head of the racquet, but very different amounts to the handle. Would that mean that the TF40 305 would still be more powerful at the end? Or is it all a moot point, as we may end up at the same place either way? Thoughts...

Thanks for your reply and absolutely interesting to read your insights and thoughts about the TF40 305 vs the TF40 315.
To answer your question first: I have never tried the 2013 version of the TFight 315 LTD 18M so unfortunately I have no experiences with that frame.

The reason for me to choose the 305 gram version of the TF40 was more than less based on the experiences I have between the playability of the TFight 305 XTC vs the TFight 315 XTC; two frames I have owned and played with (still have two TFight 305's...)
From the first moment that I start playing with the TFight 305 XTC I noticed the high balance point and reasonably high swingweight of this frame regarding to the static weight of it.
Although I was really impressed by the good control, feel, and specially the stability of the frame I found it a bit sluggish and ''head heavy'', so I fixed that problem by lowering the balance point (around 4 mm.) with some grams of Sikaflex in the shaft of the frame and it played absolutely well according to my personal taste and preferences.

Personally I prefer to play with rackets with a maximum overall static weight around 340 gram, so with a 305 gram TFight or a TF40 there will be enough free space in weight for personal customization.
In case of the TFight 305 XTC (and maybe also the TF40 305...) there's a (technical) reason for its better stability and higher SW in comparison with the less stability and SW of the TFight 315 XTC and that's the internal added mass at the 3/9/12 h position of the hoop of the frame which the TFight 315 XTC does not have.
This is of course not visible when you compare both rackets visually, but I received this technical information from someone who's working for Technifibre as a representative and I think this information is correct.
The TFight 315 XTC I had was definitely lacking in mass and stability in the hoop of the frame compared to my TFight 305 XTC and it took a lot of time and lead weight to get almost the playability of the TFight 305 XTC.
Due all of this necessary customization the static weight of the TFight 315 XTC increased to a weight which was above my personal preference, so I sold it finally.

I do not know if the above mentioned situation is also applicable for the TF40 305 vs the TF40 315, but for me it was the main reason to choose definitely the 305 version instead of the 315 version.
This week I'm going to play with Ice Code in it, so looking forward to my upcoming impressions...
 
Got my TF40 review frames today along with both Blade patterns. Curious to compare head to head and am hopeful one of the TF40s will be a worthy successor to the 2013 315 LTD I used to use. Got some HDMX to test out as well.
 
Hey @Tecnifibre Official - I think the TF40 305 I got has misprinted specs on it. Isn’t the unstrung balance on that one 325mm? It’s printed as 310mm which is the balance of the 315. Wonder how widespread of a misprint that is.

Reminds me of the very first 2013 TFight LTD I got that just said “TFigh” on the throat
 
Last edited:

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Thanks for your reply and absolutely interesting to read your insights and thoughts about the TF40 305 vs the TF40 315.
To answer your question first: I have never tried the 2013 version of the TFight 315 LTD 18M so unfortunately I have no experiences with that frame.

The reason for me to choose the 305 gram version of the TF40 was more than less based on the experiences I have between the playability of the TFight 305 XTC vs the TFight 315 XTC; two frames I have owned and played with (still have two TFight 305's...)
From the first moment that I start playing with the TFight 305 XTC I noticed the high balance point and reasonably high swingweight of this frame regarding to the static weight of it.
Although I was really impressed by the good control, feel, and specially the stability of the frame I found it a bit sluggish and ''head heavy'', so I fixed that problem by lowering the balance point (around 4 mm.) with some grams of Sikaflex in the shaft of the frame and it played absolutely well according to my personal taste and preferences.

Personally I prefer to play with rackets with a maximum overall static weight around 340 gram, so with a 305 gram TFight or a TF40 there will be enough free space in weight for personal customization.
In case of the TFight 305 XTC (and maybe also the TF40 305...) there's a (technical) reason for its better stability and higher SW in comparison with the less stability and SW of the TFight 315 XTC and that's the internal added mass at the 3/9/12 h position of the hoop of the frame which the TFight 315 XTC does not have.
This is of course not visible when you compare both rackets visually, but I received this technical information from someone who's working for Technifibre as a representative and I think this information is correct.
The TFight 315 XTC I had was definitely lacking in mass and stability in the hoop of the frame compared to my TFight 305 XTC and it took a lot of time and lead weight to get almost the playability of the TFight 305 XTC.
Due all of this necessary customization the static weight of the TFight 315 XTC increased to a weight which was above my personal preference, so I sold it finally.

I do not know if the above mentioned situation is also applicable for the TF40 305 vs the TF40 315, but for me it was the main reason to choose definitely the 305 version instead of the 315 version.
This week I'm going to play with Ice Code in it, so looking forward to my upcoming impressions...
Thanks @JeanF for your explanation.

In the case of the TFight XTC racquets, it was the 305 XTC and the 320 XTC that had similar SW, same string patterns, but differing RAs, and the 300 XTC and 315 XTC that were similar to each other in the string pattern. The TFight 315 XTC had the lowest SW of the lot.

When they reviewed the TFight XTC racquets the TW reviewers preferred the 305 over the 320 due to the lower RA and therefore deeper pocketing (I'll check out the reviews again). Here they have the same RA and the same SW, and string pattern, so the result may be different. I guess we'll have to wait for the reviews. However, I understand your argument and reasoning for getting the TF40 305.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
I don't think it's an improvement, but I don't use stencils, and if the racquet plays really well, that's the most important thing. I like the font they use for the name "Tecnifibre" written on the racquet heads though.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Received my Tflash CES 300. Beautiful racquet. String it with Volkl v-torque tour 18g at 50 lbs.

Below are some comparison pics if the previous model and the new one. I removed the grip so you can see the green silicone encased handle. I will play with them tonight.











What scale is that? It looks very accurate. Mine does not get that precise.
 

DrWang

Rookie
That's some no name cheap one I got off Lazada (like an ****). They have tons of different scales. I've checked it against other scales and it's dead on the money.
 

DJ-

Hall of Fame


As posted in the other 300ps thread, this beam is thicker 25/26.6/24.7 wow why they would go up from 24mm / 25mm / 23mm / has got me. I think I will give this one a miss due to that alone
 

DrWang

Rookie


As posted in the other 300ps thread, this beam is thicker 25/26.6/24.7 wow why they would go up from 24mm / 25mm / 23mm / has got me. I think I will give this one a miss due to that alone
I will write a more in depth review tomorrow after I hit with both racquets again to solidify my observations.

Don't let the incresed thicker beam put you off. This racquet is head lite and swings fast enough. It does not feel clunky in anyway at all. However, I think some people might want to add weight to the hoop. I am using 18g string and I think 17g would be better.

The feel is muted substantially more than the previous model. I removed the grip and replaced it with a Wilson feather thin. No way does this racquet feel like it's 72 RA rating. The silicone encased handle certainly does its job although some of you might find it too muted.

The string pattern is still very open and it's kind of hard to see the change unless you look really closely. I will get more into shots after I play with it again tomorrow. Right off the bat I did notice slightly more control. This racquet follows the footsteps as the previous model in that the ball just seems to go wherever you want to put it with little effort. Weight seems to be centered more towards the middle to middle lower of the racquet, hence the +8 headlite balance mine measured in at.

I'll get into more details tomorrow, but so far, I have to say that I really enjoy this racquet and the updates. More to come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ-
It looks like TFlight prices all dropped. Has it been 1 year since the XTC racquets were released?
Hi Addxyz. The TFIGHT XTC Series remains in the line for 1 more year. We are celebrating Daniil Medvedev's win with a 20% off special on the racquets series, his bag series & his strings.
 
UGH. I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the heads up.
Of course! TF was very generous when I got that misprinted TFight LTD back in the day, letting me keep it and sending me a new one, so if I can help the brand somehow, happy to! Regardless of printed specs, I thought the TF40 305 was a gem in my initial hit with it last night. Looking forward to logging some more court time with it!
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Of course! TF was very generous when I got that misprinted TFight LTD back in the day, letting me keep it and sending me a new one, so if I can help the brand somehow, happy to! Regardless of printed specs, I thought the TF40 305 was a gem in my initial hit with it last night. Looking forward to logging some more court time with it!
If you could outline differences with the TFight 305 XTC and TFight 315 Limited (if you've used both - or just the Ltd if not), that would be great. Thanks
 
If you could outline differences with the TFight 305 XTC and TFight 315 Limited (if you've used both - or just the Ltd if not), that would be great. Thanks
Haven’t really hit the regular 305 XTC much. My LTD were the 2013 originals so really low flex and very low SW. Unbelievable feel and control but they lacked put away power and would get pushed around by big hitters without a fair amount of customization. My initial run with the TF40 last night was that it had similar control but with a firmer, more direct feel. Feel on contact was still really nice, just doesn’t have as much give in the throat like the LTD. The meatier SW of the TF40 gives it way better punching power and stability than my old LTD (especially in stock form comparison). I thought the TF40 felt more maneuverable than what I can recall of the 305 XTC and it was faster than its balance would suggest. Spin was solid for 18x20 and I never felt hampered by a lower launch angle or anything. Keep in mind I’ve never hit with the most recent LTD that had an increased SW but was stiffer, all my comparisons are with the 2013 LTD. I also hit the TF40 315 briefly last night and it is very similar but I’d opt for the 305 just to have a lower starting static weight if I wanted to customize. I need more time in some serious hitting to reach a solid conclusion and am reviewing them simultaneously with the new Blades at the moment
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Haven’t really hit the regular 305 XTC much. My LTD were the 2013 originals so really low flex and very low SW. Unbelievable feel and control but they lacked put away power and would get pushed around by big hitters without a fair amount of customization. My initial run with the TF40 last night was that it had similar control but with a firmer, more direct feel. Feel on contact was still really nice, just doesn’t have as much give in the throat like the LTD. The meatier SW of the TF40 gives it way better punching power and stability than my old LTD (especially in stock form comparison). I thought the TF40 felt more maneuverable than what I can recall of the 305 XTC and it was faster than its balance would suggest. Spin was solid for 18x20 and I never felt hampered by a lower launch angle or anything. Keep in mind I’ve never hit with the most recent LTD that had an increased SW but was stiffer, all my comparisons are with the 2013 LTD. I also hit the TF40 315 briefly last night and it is very similar but I’d opt for the 305 just to have a lower starting static weight if I wanted to customize. I need more time in some serious hitting to reach a solid conclusion and am reviewing them simultaneously with the new Blades at the moment
Thanks for your reply. What I was wondering with the two TF40s (since they both have a similar SW) is would they end up in a similar spec anyway if a 7pts HL balance was achieved for both (I prefer a more HL balance than 3-4pts HL strung). I modified my 305 XTC to a more HL balance as well.

I too have a few of 2013 TFight 315 Limited in 18M and one in 16M (as well as a DC 315 LTD 18M and 2 TFight 305 XTC). All have been modified.

I look forward to hearing your further impressions as you play more, and how the TF40s compare to the Blade v7 and 2013 TFight 315 Limited 18M. When it comes to stability and sweet spot size, are the two TF40s similar, or is one better than the other? This is something else that I would like to know, once you have done more play testing. Thanks
 
Of course! TF was very generous when I got that misprinted TFight LTD back in the day, letting me keep it and sending me a new one, so if I can help the brand somehow, happy to! Regardless of printed specs, I thought the TF40 305 was a gem in my initial hit with it last night. Looking forward to logging some more court time with it!
Hi again. You are very kind. It's always so tough when launching new products with such detailed information. I'm glad you like the TF305. I especially like the word "gem" in your description. It has been getting alot of positive reviews wherever I go.....however after Daniil's recent performance, players are asking for his racquet first :)
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
You could try either Black Code or Ice Code to see if you get more pop, but you'll lose "bite" since those strings aren't as shaped. Have you tried lowering the tension a smidge? 50?
Lowering the tension causes loss of control. but also problem with this string was that it was causing elbow and wrist pain. I am hoping Technifiber would make it Softer and more powerful with same amount of spin
 

DrWang

Rookie
Follow up with the Tflash 300 PS vs Updates CES.

Please note that these are my obrservations and experiences, based on several factors including style of play, strings, string tension, etc., so you may or may not agree with my results. I don't want this to be too long winded so I will just get to the point on the things that stood out the most for me. The 2019 Tflash 300 CES is strung with Volkl V-torque Tour 18g @ 50 lbs and the Tflash 300 PS with the new Volkl V-square 18g @ 46 mains 48 crosses.

First. The new update CES version has a more dampened feel. It doesn't feel like a 72 RA stiff rated racquet to me. It is more comfortable than the PS, but not by a huge amount. Certainly no issue with discomfort.

Second. The power generated by both is about the same, perhaps slighly more with the CES. However, the launch angle is a little lower with the new CES version. For me, this is a plus as I am a heavy hitter and this slightly lower launch angle means more balls landing in (deep too) and not hitting the back fence. In comparison to my 2019 PA+, it is not far behind it terms of power. It's very close in fact, with the PA+ pulling through with a heavier ball. However, it is more powerful than my 300g PA.

Third. Spin generated by the racquet is pretty much the same to me. Both generate a considerable amount of spin. As I said earlier, you have to look very closely to see the change in the new version. It is still very open. These Tflash racquets do generate easy spin due to the open string pattern and that still holds true for the new CES update.

Fourth. Maneuverablity is NOT an issue with this racquet at all despite it's bulky appearance. It is rated at +6 HL strung (mine is actually +8). Does the PS swing easier? Well, yes it does, but not in a way that would make you say, Oh my God what a huge difference! It isn't, and in general it is easy (imo) to swing. Then again, if you're weak and frail, then maybe it will seem hard to swing. Positioning into and excuting volleys were simple. Keep in mind. If you are used to playing with the PS, of course this one is going to feel a little slower to swing. Does that mean it's a slow swinging racquet? No way, man. Not at all. It means you need some time to get used to the feel just like you would do with ANY differently spec racquet you try. Those of you who own Pro Staff RA 97's know what I'm talking about.

Fifth. Stability IS increased somewhat with this version vs the PS. However, I still think some people will want to add some weight to the hoop. Remember, most 300g racquets typically spec in at 4HL strung. There is a reason why Technifibre must have
designed this racquet with a +6HL. I'm no racquet engineer and please correct my speculation here, but perhaps it's to help the racquet to be more maneuverable with the added thickness of the frame, and maybe to serve as a platform to modify easily. Return of serves, volleys, etc, were no problem and at no time did I experience any type of instability that would affect my game.

Sixth. The control with the CES update IS slightly better than the PS. I am not saying the PS is uncontrollable. The CES's new string pattern does make a difference. One shot I love to do is a deep backhand slice. This racquet is simply amazing at doing that. It really takes little effort to put the ball where you want with this racquet, and that goes for the PS model as well. That being said, the CES does it a little better.

Seventh. Serving with this racquet was pretty much in line with the previous version. I served great with both of them and they are not that far behind than the beast I usually use to practice serves which is my Babolat PA+ 2019. Still, my 2016 PA+ is the king when it comes to racquets for serving. I know there are others here on the forum who own the PA+ too and know exactly what I'm talking about.


Do I like this update? Absolutely. For my style of play, it suites me perfect. If you've been playing with the PS for a long time then switch to this, of course it's not going to feel or play entirely the same. You need to give the racquet (any update) a considerable amount of time before you can really get a clear picture of how the racquet is going to play once you adjust to it. You simply can't do it in a two hour hitting session. I think we all saw this when the new Babalot PA's came out. I was one of the first to critise the lower RA etc., until I spent a few weeks playing with the PA+ 2019. I would like to try a slightly larger gauge string next time with the Tflash CES. I think the 18g just might be a little on the small side for the open string pattern. I was thinking of Hyper-G 16L and probably Luxilon ALU.

I am very satisfied and happy with this new update. I am somewhat new to Technifibre racquets, and so far, I am impressed. Job well done on the new Update to the Tflash 300!
 
This is very interesting, thanks. But I still find it extremely difficult to compare 2 racquets with different strings. Honestly I find it almost impossible...
 

DrWang

Rookie
This is very interesting, thanks. But I still find it extremely difficult to compare 2 racquets with different strings. Honestly I find it almost impossible...
I had the same Volkl v-torque 18g on the previous Tflash PS model for a long time before I tried the new Volkl v-square so I know the feel of both racquets using exactly the same string. I strung the PS with the new string the same day I strung the CES. I played with the CES first and my observations for the most part were based on the PS with the same string because that's the string I use the most and had been using since I got the PS. The volkl v-sqaure was only put on there to try it out since it is a new string from Volkl. I should've clarified that.
 
I had the same Volkl v-torque 18g on the previous Tflash PS model for a long time before I tried the new Volkl v-square so I know the feel of both racquets using exactly the same string. I strung the PS with the new string the same day I strung the CES. I played with the CES first and my observations for the most part were based on the PS with the same string because that's the string I use the most and had been using since I got the PS. The volkl v-sqaure was only put on there to try it out since it is a new string from Volkl. I should've clarified that.
Ok, great.
 
Top