Tennis Warehouse Playtest - Dunlop Srixon CX Racquets

Hi @McLovin, are you still considering switching to this frame? I was wondering if you had the chance to compare it to any of the Yonex 98+ models like the DR98+, EZONE, SV, etc. I am always "on the verge" of switching to one of those. My CX 200 was standard length and required weight, but I am thinking with the extra 0.5" it might be a very worthy competitor to the Yonex XL frames without needing any mods.
 
Hi @McLovin, are you still considering switching to this frame? I was wondering if you had the chance to compare it to any of the Yonex 98+ models like the DR98+, EZONE, SV, etc. I am always "on the verge" of switching to one of those. My CX 200 was standard length and required weight, but I am thinking with the extra 0.5" it might be a very worthy competitor to the Yonex XL frames without needing any mods.
I really, really, really wanted to switch full time, but I just could not get comfortable w/ my forehand. Everything else is perfect, but without confidence on my forehand, its a lost cause.

This isn't the only time I've run into this problem. The original VCORE Tour 97, the Pacific X Tour 97, Volkl V1 Pro, VCORE SV 98 +, the list goes on. At some point I'll realize the problem is my forehand, and not the racquet, but damn if I don't start playing w/ my Black Granite Pro No 1 and everything goes back to normal.

Like I said in my review, the closest thing I can compare it to is the older Pure Storm +/Pure Control + frames. I think the DR98+ has more 'oomf', spin, and a different launch angle (at least for me, the Ai/DR98 was a foot or two higher over the net). The SV98 was considerably stiffer, although the new version did feel a bit softer the one time I hit w/ it.
 
My local club happened to have a CX 200 Tour 16x19 demo available so I've had the chance to play with it for a couple of days.
My usual setup is a TC95 70RA, 320g/310mm so the CX Tour stock setup was extremely similar but about 10g lighter.

After about 5 hours of hitting time with it I'm highly considering switching. My usual hitting partner hits Rafa levels of topspin off his forehand, so I've been looking for something a little more stable than the TC95 to help me get those heavy balls back consistently.

Just about everything felt better with the CX over the TC95 except for power levels, I assume due to the higher flex. Comfort, maneuverability, and control were all great. The CX has a slightly lower launch angle than the TC which provided some extra control on my forehand, while not being so low I lose my mojo with my flat backhand.
Most surprisingly, even with 10g less weight the stability seems to be improved with the CX over the TC95. High backhand volleys seemed easier and I rarely, if ever, felt like my hitting partners shots were pushing the racket around. I want to take a few more days to compare and really confirm that statement because it doesn't seem physically possible to me.
Finally, on serve I really appreciated the 10g weight reduction and flexibility, but was just missing a little of that huge power the TC95 can generate on serve.

Let me know if yall have any questions and I'll do my best to answer them.


I've also been testing the Vcore Pro 330g. The extra weight and plow through is great, but has been a difficult adjustment on serve getting the timing right & racket head speed up. I prefer the feel of the Dunlop as well; it's flexible but communicative, whereas the Yonex feels a bit dull in comparison. Planning to try out the new Aero Tour and maybe the Phantom 100P (93P will probably have too low a launch angle for me; TW give us a 16x19 version!) before I pull the trigger on anything, but the CX 200 Tour 16x19 is at the top of the list for now.
 
Just about everything felt better with the CX over the TC95 except for power levels, I assume due to the higher flex.

If you want to bump up the weight and power, there are a couple options. A mild option would be to throw a leather grip and perhaps a tiny bit of counter-balance lead onto the Tour 16x19, since unlike the 18x20 it comes with a synthetic grip. I was a playtester for the regular CX 200, and it was a bit light in stock form. With a leather grip and some lead at 3 and 9 it came alive with quite a lot of power. If you customize the CX 200 you still have the slightly stiffer beam and 98" head, at a weight just a bit above the stock Tour models.
 
That's an interesting thought on weighting up one of the non-tour models.
I'm gonna try throwing about 5grams at 3&9 first on the Tour since it's the only sub 65RA racket I've ever meshed well with, but if that doesn't give me the extra boost I'm looking for I'll definitely give a modified non-tour model a shot.
 
Got a couple hits in with the extra 5g added to the head over the weekend... I didn't find there was a huge change in power level, but I am still really digging the frame. I ended up adding a second overgrip to counterbalance the weight, and make it more comfortable (demo grip is smaller than my usual 4 1/2) and surprisingly that seemed to provide some additional power. Admittedly it was a different day, hitting with a different (harder hitting) person, with better quality balls, so not an apples to apples comparison.

I'm finding the frame to be great at counterpunching, but also quite good at attacking/getting to net. If you're looking to just sit back and grind from the baseline the lower power may make things tough, but if you're playing against a huge hitter who's giving you the pace you need to redirect, or you like using smart placement and controlled aggression to get to net, it's damn near perfect.

I'm going to try stringing a few lbs lower than my usual (43lbs) next time and see if that won't squeeze a little bit more power out of it without losing the great control & feel.
 
After significant trial, I have settled in with a couple of perimeter weighting preferences for the 16 x19 Tour model. I really like using about one and one half inch of lead tape at 9 and 3. Also, the same weight at 10 and 2 allows me to get of ton of downward movement on my first serve. With either weighting, the frame is still very comfortable and I still get tons of spin and pinpoint accuracy.
 
I strung up my CX 200 again at lower tension, trying to soften up the string bed and get a bit more spin. I installed a pre-packaged hybrid, Wilson NXT Duo II, with Luxilon Adrenaline at 50 in the mains and NXT at 48 in the crosses. Did I really just put multi at less than 50 in a 98" racquet? Oh yes I did, and this is my favorite setup so far. Finally I got the spin I would expect from a 98" 16x19 and even with my stiffer leather grip the comfort was there. I was able to get aggressive topspin angles with ease and mindless slice. The launch angle remained low, however, so I still had to aim a bit higher than usual to get heavy, deep topspin. Serving is also still one of my favorite parts of this frame, with good precision and solid power; no wonder this series is designed for Kevin Anderson.

I agree with @fl4tsc that the Dunlop CX series in general is more about counter-punching and controlling the ball, although with the extra weight I can hit a respectable drive. But even given modifications such as the ones I've done to increase weight and plow-through, someone who hangs behind the baseline and hits heavy, spin-loaded bombs would probably prefer something else.
 
Hi @McLovin, are you still considering switching to this frame? I was wondering if you had the chance to compare it to any of the Yonex 98+ models like the DR98+, EZONE, SV, etc. I am always "on the verge" of switching to one of those. My CX 200 was standard length and required weight, but I am thinking with the extra 0.5" it might be a very worthy competitor to the Yonex XL frames without needing any mods.
I tried the CX200+ for about 2 hrs and the specs are very close to the stock VC98+.
For groundies, the CX200+ feels a little less powerful but as stable as my modded VC98+, and has a little less bite on the ball when hitting inside the sweet spot, but more outside it, especially in the upper hoop. I found the VC98+ to respond more 'evenly', but that's just about getting used to the CX200+. It definitely has a bigger sweetspot than the VC98+
I'm guessing it has a higher twist weight, judging from my wrist flick shots weren't as 'flicky'.
Serves were similar in power and spin, which for me is the main stroke I use as a test for any racquet.
The feel is crisp and feels stiffer than the VC98+, but a little less than the SV98+. Volleys were solid and powerful.
The one I borrowed was 32.9cm headlight, 322g and swing weight was 339, which makes it easier to get to my spec of 32.5cm headlight, SW of 350, without adding much more weight. I suspect to get to my specs, it'd weigh about 5-7g lighter than my SV/VC98+.
Overall it is as powerful, and stabler than the VC98+ in stock form but less maneuverable. If you liked the VC98+, you should definitely try the CX200+
At some point I'll realize the problem is my forehand, and not the racquet, but damn if I don't start playing w/ my Black Granite Pro No 1 and everything goes back to normal.
That is the worst thing about switching, the lack of confidence. Which is why I don't gauge by groundstrokes but by the service. If I can get a more powerful, heavier serve while not lose consistency, then the racquet is worthy of a longer trial. Muscle memory can be difficult to erase, and finding true trust in the ground strokes took me 6-8 months, but the bigger serve when I switched to the SV98+ made it easier.
 
Got the official AO Dunlop balls they sent to the srixon testers a few days back. These balls are pretty awesome, the felt is super nice. I dunno if I'm just excited about free balls or what, but these are the nicest set of balls I've played with.
 
Looking at this review sounds like the plus length version could be spot on with more put away power. Can’t wait for the review of the plus length.

I'm tempted to pick up the CX 200+ and compare it to my weighted-up CX 200 to see how they stack up and which is the easiest to use. I'm perpetually on the edge of switching to an XL frame "once I get a little more used to the length" and I don't have one in the bag right now. I usually carry a Yonex of some type. It's amazing how similar the basic specs are on the CX 200+, EZONE 98+, and VCORE 98+.

PS Michelle had some intriguing comments about the CX 200+ on a recent thread about the Yonex SV 98+. She said it is very solid and compared it to the RF 97A. Coming from her, that's high praise! Based purely on my experience with the standard-length CX 200, however, I expect it to be a bit less spin friendly than the Yonex offerings.
 
Last edited:
Got the official AO Dunlop balls they sent to the srixon testers a few days back. These balls are pretty awesome, the felt is super nice. I dunno if I'm just excited about free balls or what, but these are the nicest set of balls I've played with.
The need here for a 'that's what she said' is still almost ridiculous...
 
Last edited:
I tried the CX200+ for about 2 hrs and the specs are very close to the stock VC98+.
For groundies, the CX200+ feels a little less powerful but as stable as my modded VC98+, and has a little less bite on the ball when hitting inside the sweet spot, but more outside it, especially in the upper hoop. I found the VC98+ to respond more 'evenly', but that's just about getting used to the CX200+. It definitely has a bigger sweetspot than the VC98+
I'm guessing it has a higher twist weight, judging from my wrist flick shots weren't as 'flicky'.
Serves were similar in power and spin, which for me is the main stroke I use as a test for any racquet.
The feel is crisp and feels stiffer than the VC98+, but a little less than the SV98+. Volleys were solid and powerful.
The one I borrowed was 32.9cm headlight, 322g and swing weight was 339, which makes it easier to get to my spec of 32.5cm headlight, SW of 350, without adding much more weight. I suspect to get to my specs, it'd weigh about 5-7g lighter than my SV/VC98+.
Overall it is as powerful, and stabler than the VC98+ in stock form but less maneuverable. If you liked the VC98+, you should definitely try the CX200+

That is the worst thing about switching, the lack of confidence. Which is why I don't gauge by groundstrokes but by the service. If I can get a more powerful, heavier serve while not lose consistency, then the racquet is worthy of a longer trial. Muscle memory can be difficult to erase, and finding true trust in the ground strokes took me 6-8 months, but the bigger serve when I switched to the SV98+ made it easier.
Great review! :) Ditto with the serve being the best - and to me most important - gauge of racquet suitability; comparing serve results eliminates a lot of variables.
 
Still absolutely hangin' for the + review; I gotta get out more...
Right there with you! I'm all about the extended length these days and have a DR98+ but prefer the Ezone 98+ at the moment (have 3 of them) just find with the heavier topspin I can control the ball and go for my shots more. I'm being swayed into picking up a Vcore 98+ (or maybe this Dunlop) as liked the SV but wanted a little more control and it sounds like the Vcore has that, so it could be a nice alternative weapon that's similar enough to the Ezone 98+ not to completely throw me if I do switch it up mid-match.

I'm becoming a collector of players racket plus lengths as I fear they may not be around forever with the current trend of club players and juniors playing SL at max.
 
Has anybody out there played with the Prince 100P and could compare to the CX200 Tour 16x19? @TW Staff
Yes, I've hit both. Here are my two cents: The 100P has a lower launch angle, but not by as much as you might expect -- the 200 Tour 16x19 has a lower launch angle than most 16x19's in my feeling. The 100P had more inherent power, in my opinion, and the 200 Tour had more control. However, I suspect that the 100P would have plenty of control for those with strokes who can play 18x20's. In fact, I think it might be the holy grail of the modern mid-plus 18x20 players-to-tweeners -- power, feel, control, arm-friendly but not noodley. The 200 Tour 16x19 is incredible at net, I felt like it was probably the best volleying stick I've hit recently (and I've been demoing for months), when I got the sweet spot. I would say the 200 Tour is a proper player's frame. I still felt connected to the ball with the 100P however, and I felt the 100P was more forgiving. I felt the sweet spot wasn't as large with the 200 Tour, as would be expected. The 100P was comfortable, with good touch/feel, good power, and plenty spin-friendly with shapely strokes (a hitting partner was ripping massive spin with it). The 200 Tour was intoxicating, with pinpoint accuracy and great feel, when I got my timing and mechanics right. I felt it was a bit lacking in power when I didn't get it all lined up well, and I found it to be a bit uncomfortable outside of the sweet spot. I'm used to 97s and 98s, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone used to 95s would feel otherwise on that count. I would have gone with the 100P as a daily driver were the launch angle higher. 18x20s have never have worked well for me -- I need the arc-assist of 16 mains. The Tour 100 310 I found to be a bit too open with its the 16x18 pattern, it didn't have enough consistency for me. I'm very curious to see what @TW Staff has to say!
 
Thanks for the great info. I thought I was going crazy until I realized you were talking about the Textreme 100P. I was actually referring to the Phantom 100P earlier as like you, I struggle with the lower launch angle of 18x20 stringbeds.

I've been really grooving with the Tour 16x19 lately and am on the verge of pulling the trigger just trying to get rid of some racket FOMO
 
Has anybody out there played with the Prince 100P and could compare to the CX200 Tour 16x19? @TW Staff
I've hit with both the Textreme Tour 100P and the CX 200 Tour 16x19. The Prince frame is a great frame that is very control oriented. The Textreme 100P has an closed 18x20 string pattern, but the launch angle is very similar to that of a 16x19 string pattern, especially if you put a string like Solinco Hyper-G in the racquet. I can knife a slice low and get exceptional touch and feel, it's a fairly soft frame. When using this frame, I have to work a little more because I tend to hit a more spin-friendly ball, as opposed to a flatter ball, which in my opinion works better with an 18x20 string pattern. The 100P isn't as forgiving outside of the sweetspot as I like, but I get a lot stability and solid plowthrough on the run due to the swingweight. If you are looking for a solid 18x20 frame with good feel up at net and solid stability, I would try out this frame. The CX 200 Tour 16x19 on the other hand is a really nice frame, for me it just didn't have as much forgiveness outside of the stringbed on the run as I wanted. It also has a little lighter of a swingweight for my taste, so I've weighted it at around 10 and 2 to increase the swingweight and add a little bit more plow through and stability. The 95 square inch frame is very controlled and super great if you want a frame that allows for good access to spin and is super control oriented. The feel up at net is also exceptional and I felt super connected to the ball especially on drop shots and drop volleys. If you play a very offensive minded game and want solid access to spin, or wanting to weight it up to a desired spec, I would definitely try the Dunlop CX 200 Tour 16x19. I hope this helps!

All the best!
Erik, TW Staff
 
Thanks for the great info. I thought I was going crazy until I realized you were talking about the Textreme 100P. I was actually referring to the Phantom 100P earlier as like you, I struggle with the lower launch angle of 18x20 stringbeds.

I've been really grooving with the Tour 16x19 lately and am on the verge of pulling the trigger just trying to get rid of some racket FOMO

Oh shoot, sorry, yes, I should have asked/specified Textreme Tour. Since it was just recently released I just assumed...

I have hit a phantom but not for long. Wasn’t my cup of tea, too soft for me.

Tomorrow my first Angell, the K7 Red, arrives. I’m hoping it will be my holy grail [emoji12]
 
I've hit with both the Textreme Tour 100P and the CX 200 Tour 16x19. The Prince frame is a great frame that is very control oriented. The Textreme 100P has an closed 18x20 string pattern, but the launch angle is very similar to that of a 16x19 string pattern, especially if you put a string like Solinco Hyper-G in the racquet. I can knife a slice low and get exceptional touch and feel, it's a fairly soft frame. When using this frame, I have to work a little more because I tend to hit a more spin-friendly ball, as opposed to a flatter ball, which in my opinion works better with an 18x20 string pattern. The 100P isn't as forgiving outside of the sweetspot as I like, but I get a lot stability and solid plowthrough on the run due to the swingweight. If you are looking for a solid 18x20 frame with good feel up at net and solid stability, I would try out this frame. The CX 200 Tour 16x19 on the other hand is a really nice frame, for me it just didn't have as much forgiveness outside of the stringbed on the run as I wanted. It also has a little lighter of a swingweight for my taste, so I've weighted it at around 10 and 2 to increase the swingweight and add a little bit more plow through and stability. The 95 square inch frame is very controlled and super great if you want a frame that allows for good access to spin and is super control oriented. The feel up at net is also exceptional and I felt super connected to the ball especially on drop shots and drop volleys. If you play a very offensive minded game and want solid access to spin, or wanting to weight it up to a desired spec, I would definitely try the Dunlop CX 200 Tour 16x19. I hope this helps!

All the best!
Erik, TW Staff

I think you hit it on the head, Erik. Are you still swinging the Tour 100 310 as your racquet of choice?! I wish I could control it, I do love that frame. I just don’t have enough arc in my forehand I think.
 
I think you hit it on the head, Erik. Are you still swinging the Tour 100 310 as your racquet of choice?! I wish I could control it, I do love that frame. I just don’t have enough arc in my forehand I think.
I am still hitting with the 310 as my racquet of choice. It's such a fun frame to hit with, especially with some Hyper-G 17 gauge, personally my favorite string. I surprised myself though, I didn't think I would like a 16x18 with a 100 square inch head, but this one doesn't feel as open as I thought it would. I can hit a very loopy and heavy ball, but it isn't too high of a launch angle and isn't overwhelmingly powerful. It also has a softer feel, which is a great aspect, and I feel totally dialed in on the slice with this frame. I love hitting drop shots and drop volleys as well, and the softer feel of the frame definitely complements those shots. Up at net I feel like hitting volleys is almost effortless with the 310, especially deep volleys, this is where I feel the 16x18 string pattern comes in handy the most. I did weight it up at 10 and 2 so the racquet really comes through the ball more naturally, and a little more stability and plow through never hurts.

All the best!
Erik, TW Staff
 
Racquet Received - DUNLOP SRIXON CX Tour 16 x19

TENNIS EXPERIENCE / BACKGROUND - Self taught. currently 4.5 league and tournament level player. Grew up playing multiple sports but mostly baseball. I have accumulated decades of tennis playing experience. Spectate for about 50 days of pro tennis including ATP, WTA, USTA Circuits, and WTT, each year.

DESCRIBE PLAYING STYLE - Solid 4.5 singles and doubles, one-hand off both sides, flat fastball first serve (s/b no surprise there) with a wicked yet effectively inconsistent kicker for a second serve. All court player that can rally, chip and charge, and serve / volley on offense, and be an all-court defender that loves to attack and dominate at the net.

CURRENT RACQUET/STRING SETUPS - The current racquet and go-to racquet of choice for a good while now is the Dunlop Aerogel 4D 200 Tour 95 with a 16 x 18 string pattern. It is just an old-school, firm, thin-beam, all-around players frame. It is the type of frame that it seems more tour players are using again. The regular string setup is a full set of Dunlop Black Widow 17 gauge, strung 50 lbs x 50 lbs.

STRING AND TENSION USED FOR TEST - Started out with the Dunlop Silk that came strung in the frame. Then, I strung the CX Tour frame with my familiar Dunlop Black Widow 17 in order to match my normal setup for a more consistent, comparison sake. The frame was played at tensions first 50, then 52 pounds with Black Widow string.

NUMBER OF HOURS PLAYED WITH THE RACQUET - I managed to wait out the smoke from wildfires and work around rainy/wet conditions to get in plenty of hitting on hardcourts both indoors and outdoors for this playtest. During the test, I played with the Dunlop Silk string that came in the frame for about six hours. Then, I strung Black Widow at two different tensions and played for over ten hours with each tension.

COMMENTS ON RACQUET PERFORMANCE:

GROUNDSTROKES - Overall, groundstrokes are really pretty nice with this frame. Very consistent. The lighter weight frame did take some time for me to get used to. The light weight actually helped improve my strokes by forcing me to take a shorter backswing, and make a faster stroke and extend through the hitting area. That is something that I have been trying to get myself to do more consistently for a while now.

Overall, this frame is relatively low powered. There is power to be had in this frame, but most of it is going to come from the racquet head speed rather than frame bulk and / or stiffness. The light weight allows the frame goes through the air very fast. Even with the light weight, there is plenty of head stability so the frame does supply some plow through on every stroke.

The light weight and the open string pattern and the Black Widow strings makes this frame setup quite accessible to spin. My opponents did not notice any reduction in my topspin off of either side, or at all throughout play.

This frame gives up pinpoint control. You have to work a little to get power and pace, but the ball will go where you want with the depth that you want. My opponent's court seemed to be a little wider because the amount of control makes it easy to get great angles even from the center of the court.

SERVES - Pace on my first serve suffered just a bit with this frame. The lighter frame goes faster through the air but the lower power but made me lose a foot or so on my first serve. Still, the excellent control that comes with this frame makes it an effective serving weapon. There is plenty of spin available with this racquet and string on slice and kick serves. There was plenty of movement on the ball flight of slice serves and excellent jump off of the court on kick serves. Even with the reduction in raw power, the pinpoint accuracy makes this frame quite fun to serve with.

VOLLEYS - Loving volleys with this racquet. This frame is really a volleying machine. The light weight of the frame makes this racquet lightning quick at the net. I found it to have plenty of comfort and accuracy on touch, and on drop volleys. It is also easy to get some pop on drive volleys with excellent control on depth.

SERVE RETURNS - The low power aspect of this frame is most noticeable on service returns. On returns where I did not get the opportunity to get my feet set and take a full swing I was just a little underpowered. Some of the lack of power was offset by the pinpoint control. It was interesting watching some slow-motion, yet very accurate, returns going past serve-and-volleyers! I think that serve returns will be helped a lot much with addition of some weight in the head.

GENERAL REACTION/COMMENTS OF OVERALL PERFORMANCE - I played this entire playtest with the racquet in stock form mostly because I wanted to feel the factory form. It took a little time for me to get accustomed to the light weight. For me, the stock weight seems to be toward the low end of what is playable for me.

Overall, this is a very, very nice frame. It is stays comfortable on all shots and even after long periods of play. It is on par with the current trend of lighter weight, "Tour" molds. It plays consistently, it does everything well, and it will work for all levels of players with different types of games. It is comfortable and can be easily modified to personal preference using different strings, tensions, and weight if preferred.

I can't see any weakness in this frame. It is comfortable. If offers pinpoint control. The 16 x 19 string pattern makes it accessible to plenty of spin. Because of the stock balance of the frame, it seems like it will be easy for any player to customize, or modify to their preference.

In the upcoming weeks, I am planning to continue to play and test this frame with some different perimeter weighting and different string tensions. Once I get that dialed in to my preference, I will also try the Dunlop NT strings that came with the package.

I also really like the racquet cover that comes with the frame. It can be used as a cover, or as a large cinch backpack, or even as a carry bag for extra clothes, food, or gear. I love the uniqueness and quality. Very Next Gen!

Thank you Tennis Warehouse and Bravo Dunlop Srixon for the play test and for making a very fine frame.

Can you comment on the feel/flex of the CX 200 Tour 16x19 compared with the Aerogel 4D 200 Tour?
 
Can you comment on the feel/flex of the CX 200 Tour 16x19 compared with the Aerogel 4D 200 Tour?
To me they are both quite similar, and different at the same time. For each, that can be attributable to the weight. The Aerogel is significantly heavier in stock form than the CX Tour. The frame flexes feel close to the same but the stock weight of the Aerogel gives it better feel than the CX Tour. The CX Tour weighted up a bit feels very similar to the Aerogel.

If you like the feel and flex of the Aerogel, I think that you will also like most, if not all, of the playability aspects of the CX Tour. They are both really great frames. CX Tour can be weighted up a little to play and feel quite similar to the Aerogel.
Hope that helps.
 
I strung up my CX 200 again at lower tension, trying to soften up the string bed and get a bit more spin. I installed a pre-packaged hybrid, Wilson NXT Duo II, with Luxilon Adrenaline at 50 in the mains and NXT at 48 in the crosses. Did I really just put multi at less than 50 in a 98" racquet? Oh yes I did, and this is my favorite setup so far. Finally I got the spin I would expect from a 98" 16x19 and even with my stiffer leather grip the comfort was there. I was able to get aggressive topspin angles with ease and mindless slice. The launch angle remained low, however, so I still had to aim a bit higher than usual to get heavy, deep topspin. Serving is also still one of my favorite parts of this frame, with good precision and solid power; no wonder this series is designed for Kevin Anderson.

I agree with @fl4tsc that the Dunlop CX series in general is more about counter-punching and controlling the ball, although with the extra weight I can hit a respectable drive. But even given modifications such as the ones I've done to increase weight and plow-through, someone who hangs behind the baseline and hits heavy, spin-loaded bombs would probably prefer something else.
Any follow-up thoughts on the CX 200 after another month? Are you still hitting it with added weight and your hybrid setup? I'm about ready to pull the trigger I think, I've been on the demo train for too long and the frame just seems to work easily for me. I'll need leather and weight but I haven't found anything that works quite as well with as little effort.
 
Any follow-up thoughts on the CX 200 after another month? Are you still hitting it with added weight and your hybrid setup? I'm about ready to pull the trigger I think, I've been on the demo train for too long and the frame just seems to work easily for me. I'll need leather and weight but I haven't found anything that works quite as well with as little effort.

I wish I could add more but honestly I haven’t used this frame in a while. I’ve been playing a lot of matches lately and I always use my Beast 98s for those. I’ve been checking out the VCORE Pro 100 (easy to use for casual rallying) and VCORE 98+ (Want to love it but don’t) when I’ve been messing around with other sticks. I just picked up a Phantom Pro 100 18x20 and that might be worth comparing to the Dunlop, so maybe I will pull it out again soon.
 
I wish I could add more but honestly I haven’t used this frame in a while. I’ve been playing a lot of matches lately and I always use my Beast 98s for those. I’ve been checking out the VCORE Pro 100 (easy to use for casual rallying) and VCORE 98+ (Want to love it but don’t) when I’ve been messing around with other sticks. I just picked up a Phantom Pro 100 18x20 and that might be worth comparing to the Dunlop, so maybe I will pull it out again soon.
Ok cool, no worries, thanks for the reply!
 
Back
Top