GriekspoorGroupie
Rookie
I totally agree!! I am hoping to get over 20 hours on court before turning in my review!
Tennis Warehouse Playtest: Dunlop FX 2025
- Thread starter TW Staff
- Start date
I totally agree!! I am hoping to get over 20 hours on court before turning in my review!
EastAngels2014
Semi-Pro
Hit with the Tour tonight and felt as if my ball had nothing on it and was just sitting for my opponent to tee off on. I will say it was windy so definitely a factor but no matter how hard I swung my ball seemed to have no penetration. Thinking on adding a few grams of tape at 12 to boost SW.
Did you spec yours out since this appears to be an outlier experience thus far?
_FrankTheTank_
Semi-Pro
bigger target stick which is not giving much on the ball reads sad.
ShahofTennis
Hall of Fame
Definitely purple
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
The swingweight of the tour definitely seems to make a big difference. Mine was 288 unstrung and played pretty darn well at 322 strung. I bumped it up to 296 unstrung, 328 strung and there was more power but I didn’t love the higher swing weight. I’ve dropped it down to what should be 292/293unstrung, 324/325 strung (haven’t measured yet) and I think this should be my ideal spec.
I’ll also say that my observation so far is that you can 1. Put a more powerful poly in the tour without worry and 2. Drop the tension.
I was so worried about trying to reign in the power that I was straining at 50lbs. I dont think the tour needs that unless you just like how 50+ plays.
I also didn’t love the Dunlop Explosive Tour in it. That set up is comfortable but it didn’t have the same connection or pop to me at Pure Rush/Ghostwire.
I’m going to try Pure Rush 1.23 full bed at 48lbs and am playing tonight, so will see how my observations/hypothesis play out.
I’ll also say that my observation so far is that you can 1. Put a more powerful poly in the tour without worry and 2. Drop the tension.
I was so worried about trying to reign in the power that I was straining at 50lbs. I dont think the tour needs that unless you just like how 50+ plays.
I also didn’t love the Dunlop Explosive Tour in it. That set up is comfortable but it didn’t have the same connection or pop to me at Pure Rush/Ghostwire.
I’m going to try Pure Rush 1.23 full bed at 48lbs and am playing tonight, so will see how my observations/hypothesis play out.
Last edited:
EastAngels2014
Semi-Pro
Strung specs with Restring Zero, 330g, 32.23cm and 314sw.
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
Woof. One thing I’ve noticed is that 1g of lead at noon adds more than 3 SW pts. I was also shocked when 1.23 PR/1.27GW added 34 SW points. So you should be able to bump up the SW without adding too much weight.
I was reviewing some Swingvision footage of recent rally and groundstroke game sessions. To the extent that one trusts the Swingvision shot speeds, I'm getting an average +3-5mph on groundstrokes with the FX500 compared to my typical frames. However the thing that really stuck out when viewing the footage was I seem to be getting significantly more vertical movement on my shots, which the Swingvision speed calculations won't account for. Therefore I'm thinking that the actual ball speed and weight of shot is probably greater than the raw MPH numbers imply.
The other major difference is that it's so much *easier* to achieve this compared to with my typical heavier frames. I just don't have to work as hard to obtain the same (or better) quality ball. Therefore even as I'm playing with a "less controlled" frame, my data says that I've lost zero consistency (as measured by % of balls landing in) compared to with my usual sticks. Of course, this is during friendly rally/groundstroke game sessions, and doesn't account for the stresses of higher levels of match play.
I've also been tinkering. I started with weight at 12 to tick the SW to the mid-320s. Later I added 5g at the top of the handle, which really smoothed out the swing on the forehand. No desire to add additional weight at this time. Final strung up specs are 330.2g/327.5mm/327SW, MRI = 20.8.
The other major difference is that it's so much *easier* to achieve this compared to with my typical heavier frames. I just don't have to work as hard to obtain the same (or better) quality ball. Therefore even as I'm playing with a "less controlled" frame, my data says that I've lost zero consistency (as measured by % of balls landing in) compared to with my usual sticks. Of course, this is during friendly rally/groundstroke game sessions, and doesn't account for the stresses of higher levels of match play.
I've also been tinkering. I started with weight at 12 to tick the SW to the mid-320s. Later I added 5g at the top of the handle, which really smoothed out the swing on the forehand. No desire to add additional weight at this time. Final strung up specs are 330.2g/327.5mm/327SW, MRI = 20.8.
I've wondered this as well. I have to assume that, especially with this type of racquet, the "intention" is to have the string offset on the same side as the first weave, thereby decreasing the friction of the cross string on the outermost main. That's certainly how I'd string it to obtain the most string movement/spin.
To accomplish this, when you start your crosses (assuming that you start at the "1 o' clock" area of the racquet), you should start the first cross weaving *under* the first main. If you do this, then all of your subsequent crosses will line up as described above.
Pictures here which might be more illustrative. Also notice how the offsets run counter to each other at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions, such that a cross that offsets "up" at the 3 o'clock position will offset "down" at the 9 o'clock position. This means that when you weave your crosses, all of them will either be offset "with" the weave or "against" the weave at both ends of the cross.
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
I’m not following this. Regardless of how you start weaving your crosses there will be the same amount of over/under starts on the offset crosses.I've wondered this as well. I have to assume that, especially with this type of racquet, the "intention" is to have the string offset on the same side as the first weave, thereby decreasing the friction of the cross string on the outermost main. That's certainly how I'd string it to obtain the most string movement/spin.
To accomplish this, when you start your crosses (assuming that you start at the "1 o' clock" area of the racquet), you should start the first cross weaving *under* the first main. If you do this, then all of your subsequent crosses will line up as described above.
Pictures here which might be more illustrative. Also notice how the offsets run counter to each other at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions, such that a cross that offsets "up" at the 3 o'clock position will offset "down" at the 9 o'clock position. This means that when you weave your crosses, all of them will either be offset "with" the weave or "against" the weave at both ends of the cross.
I’m also tieing off at 6th main to start. But no real logic behind that other than the string went through that hole easily.
Sorry if unclear. All I'm saying is that depending on how you start your very first cross weave (above or below the main), once you reach the offset portion, all of your crosses will either weave "with" the offsets (offset is in the same direction as the adjacent weave), or "against" the offsets (offset is in the opposite direction of the adjacent weave).
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
Ahhh, I get what you’re saying. And also thinking about that lore makes sense.
I was thinking - it doesn’t matter because whatever you do to start the cross will be the opposite when you finish the cross; so it will be the same regardless. However, the offset of the grommet holes matters here to make sure you are maximizing the grommet hole offset by how it goes over the first cross and exists the last cross.
ChanterRacquet
Professional
I asked but TW never responded. I bit ominous that Dunlop doesn’t specify how you’re supposed to string either, wrt the wavy cross grommets. $5 says the guy who came up with it doesn’t even know because it’s a marketing scheme. I can imagine it now, email Dunlop and get the reply, “string it however you want!”. No duh.
diredesire
Moderator
I'll probably do a full/self-contained post with observations thus far, but just couldn't resist chiming in:
. The 23-LS felt like a bit of a rocket launcher that couldn't be reigned in - I didn't have great feedback from the string bed, and would often see a completely unexpected trajectory based on what I thought my stroke path was. I like to drop shot/volley and soft-hands angle a lot in doubles, and my confidence was very, very low with the 23-LS. There were perks, of course - free power, net clearance, access to lots of spin, way more stability than the weight would imply... the current '25-500 is just a lot more refined, but it's still too muted for my tastes. I initially strung the frame up with (old) Topspin Cyber Blue (@ 59lbs, was concerned about the prior experience & rocket launching) just because I had it and am familiar with it (and it sort of matches the cosmetic). I wanted to baseline the frame before testing out the explosive tour, but I couldn't get a good A/B without something being familiar. Yeah, I cut it out after one match/session because I highly prefer raw feedback. I strung the Explosive Tour (1.25mm) at 58, and there was super pleasant feedback, and it felt connected enough, but I like borderline unpleasant levels of vibration/connection. I usually play with leather, but left the frame stock just to get more data points. I'll be swapping my grip to leather next before trying new strings.
TL;DR: Cleaned up and refined, yes. De-muted, no. It's about the most pleasant muted I've found, there's something of an X-factor that I haven't put my finger on yet.
I demoed the 2023 LS (twice, and with two different strings), so take these comments with a healthy dose of skepticism. the 500 compared to the 2023 LS is cleaner, but IMHO quite muted, but in a firm, pleasant way. I broke my dominant/hitting hand not too long ago, and I think I developed some golfer's elbow/tendonitis from avoiding loading it, so I've (also) got less recent court time to compare to
. The 23-LS felt like a bit of a rocket launcher that couldn't be reigned in - I didn't have great feedback from the string bed, and would often see a completely unexpected trajectory based on what I thought my stroke path was. I like to drop shot/volley and soft-hands angle a lot in doubles, and my confidence was very, very low with the 23-LS. There were perks, of course - free power, net clearance, access to lots of spin, way more stability than the weight would imply... the current '25-500 is just a lot more refined, but it's still too muted for my tastes. I initially strung the frame up with (old) Topspin Cyber Blue (@ 59lbs, was concerned about the prior experience & rocket launching) just because I had it and am familiar with it (and it sort of matches the cosmetic). I wanted to baseline the frame before testing out the explosive tour, but I couldn't get a good A/B without something being familiar. Yeah, I cut it out after one match/session because I highly prefer raw feedback. I strung the Explosive Tour (1.25mm) at 58, and there was super pleasant feedback, and it felt connected enough, but I like borderline unpleasant levels of vibration/connection. I usually play with leather, but left the frame stock just to get more data points. I'll be swapping my grip to leather next before trying new strings. TL;DR: Cleaned up and refined, yes. De-muted, no. It's about the most pleasant muted I've found, there's something of an X-factor that I haven't put my finger on yet.
+1, same vibes. I do want that comparison, because the Blackout surprised me (a lot) from a very brief hit. After only a couple balls (coming back from my broken hand!), I said "ugh, I like this. I didn't want to like this." For context, I don't play super competitively anymore, and I'm somewhat of an off-the-couch player these days, I've been enjoying very light (~10oz strung + leather + minor matching customization) frames. My rust and poor preparation gets along fine with featherweight frames... I've played with the whole spectrum (13+ oz ~90si to ultra-lightweight early 2000s frames), and I've found I'm more sensitive to swingweight than other paper specs.
I'd lean the 500 at ~60% from raw to muted. I'm hoping a leather grip wakes it up a lot.
This frame doesn't remind me (in feel) of the AeroGel 500 tour, but it does remind me a lot of not expecting to like the frame much from the paper specs, and borderline not "connecting" with the frame (AG500T was very powerful in my hands), but the results/performance of the frame was wonderful! I'm deep in the confirmation bias - I'm expecting to really like this racquet after minor mods and maybe switching to it (despite my feel comments above). I'll probably be A/Bing with my buddy's Blackout if he'll loan it to me, and picking one. I also bought the older SX 300 LS, and I'm finding it to be too powerful and lacking enough touch (and/or connectedness).
I'm OK with that (read as: I acknowledge I'm early in my playtest and totally in the honeymoon phase, but my early thoughts are: "uh oh, I might switch.")
I'm actually a little embarrassed that I didn't even notice this drill pattern (and went into this playtest very blind to avoid biasing myself). I'll have to double check how I strung mine.I've wondered this as well. I have to assume that, especially with this type of racquet, the "intention" is to have the string offset on the same side as the first weave, thereby decreasing the friction of the cross string on the outermost main. That's certainly how I'd string it to obtain the most string movement/spin.
To accomplish this, when you start your crosses (assuming that you start at the "1 o' clock" area of the racquet), you should start the first cross weaving *under* the first main. If you do this, then all of your subsequent crosses will line up as described above.
Pictures here which might be more illustrative. Also notice how the offsets run counter to each other at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions, such that a cross that offsets "up" at the 3 o'clock position will offset "down" at the 9 o'clock position. This means that when you weave your crosses, all of them will either be offset "with" the weave or "against" the weave at both ends of the cross.
My wager is that it's designed to be open/allow for slippage vs. restricting, but I'm sure I'm not hitting the ball clean enough these days to notice enough of a difference to blame my gear
ShahofTennis
Hall of Fame
Played and taught with the FX 500 Tour Friday - Sunday. And then put it through some more serious pace rallies yesterday thru today. Kept the frame as close to stock as possible throughout, though today I had a leather base grip on it because with the synthetic grip the frame is too head heavy.
Ultimately had to pick the Prince Tour 95 back up to finish the session. The FX500 Tour is a sweet stick with loads of power and great access to spin, but Explosive Tour is not my cup of tea in a stiff frame (more on that during the official review write-up).
The leather grip did contribute to bringing the frame closer to what I like in a racquet, which is taking a long swing with a hefty(ish) head light frame. Hitting with full poly tamed the frame too much though, and I didnt get the pop I was looking for. Going to fully lean into the playtest with a gut(m)/poly(x) hybrid at this point.
Ultimately had to pick the Prince Tour 95 back up to finish the session. The FX500 Tour is a sweet stick with loads of power and great access to spin, but Explosive Tour is not my cup of tea in a stiff frame (more on that during the official review write-up).
The leather grip did contribute to bringing the frame closer to what I like in a racquet, which is taking a long swing with a hefty(ish) head light frame. Hitting with full poly tamed the frame too much though, and I didnt get the pop I was looking for. Going to fully lean into the playtest with a gut(m)/poly(x) hybrid at this point.
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
On the FXT - I’ve really liked 1g of lead at noon which bumps the SW on mine up to 291 or 292.
But what I’m curious about is how this racquet would play with lead at 6. I’m thinking of trying a set up of removing the 1g at noon and trying 2g at 6. The sweet spot and upper hoop are fantastic. The lower hoop is a little boardy and you lose power. I’m wondering if lead at 6 will make the lower hoop a little more playable / expand the sweet spot. That’s not a mod I usually do but I loved it on the Gravity Tour 98 for this very reason.
But what I’m curious about is how this racquet would play with lead at 6. I’m thinking of trying a set up of removing the 1g at noon and trying 2g at 6. The sweet spot and upper hoop are fantastic. The lower hoop is a little boardy and you lose power. I’m wondering if lead at 6 will make the lower hoop a little more playable / expand the sweet spot. That’s not a mod I usually do but I loved it on the Gravity Tour 98 for this very reason.
Circa 1762
Rookie
@diredesire I ended up posting a comparison in the “Dunlop FX500 or Solinco Blackout v2?” thread. It’s relatively brief but may be helpful. Ironically, “ugh, I like this, I didn’t want to like this” was my reaction to the new FX500, because I’d just picked up a few of the new Blackouts. But after another few weeks with those Blackouts, I’m content.I'll probably do a full/self-contained post with observations thus far, but just couldn't resist chiming in:
I demoed the 2023 LS (twice, and with two different strings), so take these comments with a healthy dose of skepticism. the 500 compared to the 2023 LS is cleaner, but IMHO quite muted, but in a firm, pleasant way. I broke my dominant/hitting hand not too long ago, and I think I developed some golfer's elbow/tendonitis from avoiding loading it, so I've (also) got less recent court time to compare to
TL;DR: Cleaned up and refined, yes. De-muted, no. It's about the most pleasant muted I've found, there's something of an X-factor that I haven't put my finger on yet.
+1, same vibes. I do want that comparison, because the Blackout surprised me (a lot) from a very brief hit. After only a couple balls (coming back from my broken hand!), I said "ugh, I like this. I didn't want to like this." For context, I don't play super competitively anymore, and I'm somewhat of an off-the-couch player these days, I've been enjoying very light (~10oz strung + leather + minor matching customization) frames. My rust and poor preparation gets along fine with featherweight frames... I've played with the whole spectrum (13+ oz ~90si to ultra-lightweight early 2000s frames), and I've found I'm more sensitive to swingweight than other paper specs.
I'd lean the 500 at ~60% from raw to muted. I'm hoping a leather grip wakes it up a lot.
This frame doesn't remind me (in feel) of the AeroGel 500 tour, but it does remind me a lot of not expecting to like the frame much from the paper specs, and borderline not "connecting" with the frame (AG500T was very powerful in my hands), but the results/performance of the frame was wonderful! I'm deep in the confirmation bias - I'm expecting to really like this racquet after minor mods and maybe switching to it (despite my feel comments above). I'll probably be A/Bing with my buddy's Blackout if he'll loan it to me, and picking one. I also bought the older SX 300 LS, and I'm finding it to be too powerful and lacking enough touch (and/or connectedness).
I'm OK with that (read as: I acknowledge I'm early in my playtest and totally in the honeymoon phase, but my early thoughts are: "uh oh, I might switch.")
I'm actually a little embarrassed that I didn't even notice this drill pattern (and went into this playtest very blind to avoid biasing myself). I'll have to double check how I strung mine.
My wager is that it's designed to be open/allow for slippage vs. restricting, but I'm sure I'm not hitting the ball clean enough these days to notice enough of a difference to blame my gear
SlapBackhands
New User
Hit a little with the tour the other day and was actually able to kind of compare it with the previous model since thats the racquet a friend uses. I'd say its still very similar to the old version except that it has slight improvements in each category which to me makes it an overall upgrade. It has better spin potential, the feel is less muted and there is more directness with ball pocketing, and the power is greater. I can't say that control is necessarily better since the old model is very point and shoot(what I'm more accustomed to) whereas the new one has a slightly more pocketing sensation. But overall I'd say its an upgrade and I think the paint job is better minus the ATP tour logo lol. I do think that the weight distribution does feel a little different, the new one feeling that more weight is placed below the throat and the old one feeling that most of the weight is slightly above the throat.
GriekspoorGroupie
Rookie
I had my first training session using the racquet! It is still a divine experience for me. I didn't tell my coach that I was using a new racquet -- he doesn't usually notice those things unless I point it out. I wanted to see how he reacted to my playing without having that in his head. Overall, things were very positive. My balls were so heavy that he was really wanting me to drive the ball more and go for pace, which is new. I'm not necessarily attributing this to the racquet over the week-to-week adjustments in my swing, but it was something I noted. I usually have an incredibly vertical swing path. It might be a bit more drawn out now that I am using such a light frame (500 stock vs. my usual VCORE 95 or weighted-up Pro Staff) and it isn't naturally keeping me plowing forward.
This could end up being a switch for me -- and not just because it's what the Winners Only boys use
This could end up being a switch for me -- and not just because it's what the Winners Only boys use
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
I’m really enjoying the playtest of the Tour. The power/control combo is intoxicating. What I’m finding in singles is that it really lets me build a point while still being under control. I’m definitely putting out less effort in my swing but actually hitting a bigger ball. It also allows me to focus more on foot work and moving to set myself up. And it’s also got enough pop to let me play some serve + 1 which isn’t something I usually do. There isn’t a place on the court that I feel I’m fighting it. The only shot I’m really not executing well is my backhand down the line.
EastAngels2014
Semi-Pro
Added some weight to 12 to my Tour to bring it to spec. Amazing racquet, changed everything about this racquet. Now easy access to depth and excellent spin.
ZeroLove
New User
Yes, the offset will either continue the angle of the last weave or counter it. Depending on how you start.
I was recently at Windsor in Japan and looked at all the strung versions and they all had it countering the final weave, as if to create another weave at the end.
ZeroLove
New User
Absolutely hilarious and ridiculous. No markings on the Racquet to indicate anything about this, btw.
Is this going to be another thing I have to call out in some video? Lame TW didn't respond. This is one of those things that should be discussed in the marketing somehow but many will just never think about it.
Ridiculous.
That's really interesting. I wonder why. Maybe their stringer also didn't notice the offsets and is just used to starting crosses in a certain direction.
I suppose if you wanted to dial in some level of additional control/reduced launch angle, you could string it with the offsets "against" the weave. As several have said, hard to know how much actual impact this has on the playability one way or the other.
Fighting phoenix
Hall of Fame
Wrapping up my playtest of the FX500, don’t want to give away too many spoilers but it’s going to be damn hard work to go back to my regular ezone 100 - the difference in feel is pretty dramatic and will have a conundrum for sure - how will I be able to go back to such serious mutedness? Going to be hard to put down
How did you end up liking Pure Rush?
I have an FX500 on the way, and am considering string it with PR or Mach-10. I'm a little worried about comfort and my arm, so was thinking of something relatively soft. Just hope the power with those wouldn't be off the fence.
What string and tension did you end up going with? Any suggestions on what type of string suits this frame the best?
Fighting phoenix
Hall of Fame
Yeah I agree with you that pure rush or Mach 10 would probably work really well - a little softer is better. I started with the explosive tour TW sent (a little on the stiffer side) which I liked, but I liked a hybrid of o-toro mains and sync crosses better.
EggSalad
Hall of Fame
I love Pure Rush 1.23 in the Tour. Lynx Tour is more plush where as PR is more direct/crisp. I could play with either string and be totally content.
Crossing PR with Ghostwire also feels great in the Tour and would be a nice option if you want a softer bed that is still very responsive.
One other data point - I strung up Tour M8 1.25 at 46lbs. I played a couple hours with it and afterwards my elbow and shoulder were sore. I haven’t had any issues with PR/GW/LT or the Explosive Tour string that TW provided. I’ve had issues with TM8 in the past so it may just be that string and I don’t jive.
Last edited:
¿Cuál de los dos es más rígido, según tus sentimientos? Me duele el hombro con la EZONE
Last edited:
Fighting phoenix
Hall of Fame
The fx500 feels stiffer, but for some reason the ezone 100 hurts my forearm more when I’m done playing - feels bulkier and tough on the arm for some reason, but it’s still probably objectively more comfortable.
Which version of the Ezone? The 2022 or the 2025?
Fighting phoenix
Hall of Fame
2025
And people say that stuff like this is made up... nonsense. It's as real as plain day. We just need some more makers to flip back in the other direction, to help illustrate how heavy-handed all this muting material has been applied in so many cases.
The only player who has a chance to do that is Draper, but even that is a low probability.
Fighting phoenix
Hall of Fame
Well, he made the 2024 us open semis, reached to number 4 in the world the summer of 2025, and won Indian wells, so I’d consider him to be one of the top contenders outside of the big two.
Joking aside, actually it might make him worse. He's used to the tighter and more consistent string bed rectangle of the CV 3.0 F (what he actually plays, under FX 500 paint jobs), which is more consistent and precise, especially in the middle and mid-high part of the typical strike zone area around 10:30 and 1:30, versus the recent "PowerGrid" nonsense they decided to put on the 2020, 2023 and apparently 2026 as well. (click to enlarge):Drape just needs to switch to the 25 FX Tour and the slams will start piling up
Dunlop300g
Semi-Pro
Jack Draper did win Indian Wells that's as close as Team Dunlop has done so I'm hoping he gets back to 100% because I think he has to potential to be a Top 5 player.
Looking at the Dunlop website, they have it strung this way as well. TW also strung it this way in their review video. So, maybe this is how it’s meant to be? Could be an attempt to add some additional control to a power frame.
Nicedropshott
New User
Can someone commment - are these the same thickness grip sizes as babolat and yonex, or do you need to go a grip bigger in Dunlop to match those? I saw a photo of the Dunlop 3/8 and handle looked a bit skinny
I always felt modern Babolat and Yonex run big. Idv say the Dunlop is true to size
Jwdalton0713
Rookie
GO BUCKS!
Alcawrath
Hall of Fame
It's a great week to be a Buckeye!!
thebigz
Professional
I found the Lynx Tour 1.20 is a lot more lively than the 1.25. Both in Champagne. It behaves like a different type of string with the 1.25mm being a lot more control oriented.
ShahofTennis
Hall of Fame
Have been hitting the FX 500 Tour with a leather grip and Luxilon Gut 1.20/Yonex Poly Tour Drive Soft 1.25 hybrid at 55lbs for the past weekend and Monday. Used to putting in a little bit of work to move the ball smoothly with my usual setup (A 12oz or sub-12oz 95 sqin frame with an 18x20 pattern) at 50-60%. The extra effort on a more demanding frame on my usual setup's (see bolded text above) is a good way to keep myself honest when nearing the end of a session as it usually means I am tired and have to fight for the last 10-15 minutes.
I have been hitting the ball just as smooth at what feels like 25-30%. It's absolutely amazing how much less intensity I need to strike the ball with to make it move just as well. But this comes at a cost, a big one, pretty much throughout the last 3 sessions with gut/poly; I have felt at risk. If I dont finish the swing I know I'm going to miss long. I probably should have strung at 60-63 lbs.
But man is this thing amazingly sweet. I get power with very little effort. With gut/poly, it's decent feel is buttery and smooth. It is a crisp setup with full poly, but the frames stiffness actually shines more with gut/poly as it can just be stable and retain good feel now.
Sweet, Buttery, and Crisp.
More in the full review to come, but gut/poly elevates this stick from an 8/10 to a 13/10.
I have been hitting the ball just as smooth at what feels like 25-30%. It's absolutely amazing how much less intensity I need to strike the ball with to make it move just as well. But this comes at a cost, a big one, pretty much throughout the last 3 sessions with gut/poly; I have felt at risk. If I dont finish the swing I know I'm going to miss long. I probably should have strung at 60-63 lbs.
But man is this thing amazingly sweet. I get power with very little effort. With gut/poly, it's decent feel is buttery and smooth. It is a crisp setup with full poly, but the frames stiffness actually shines more with gut/poly as it can just be stable and retain good feel now.
Sweet, Buttery, and Crisp.
More in the full review to come, but gut/poly elevates this stick from an 8/10 to a 13/10.
Last edited:
