The best Wilson Six One 95?
- Thread starter LiquidWhip
- Start date
Wilhelm
Hall of Fame
I use the 16x18 as my main frame since it came out. There is a lot of power, control is very good (a bit worse than the 18x20) and the sweetspot is noticably bigger compared to older models. Spin is perfect and the launch angle is not crazy like the 95s or a Babolat Aero. The feeling is a bit stiff, but nicely dampened.
Wilhelm
Hall of Fame
Similar swingweight, but more weight in the handle for better stability. Flatter launch angle, but not necessarily less spin (depends on technique). Better control.
Basically: Weight and balance of a classic players stick.
kingcheetah
Hall of Fame
my favorite of the versions I've tried was the 2010 18x20-- so much stability and precision.The only racquet that felt more solid was/is the RF97. But slice and directional control is better with that 2010 18x20. It had a really good balance/swingweight combo imo.
macattack
Professional
I might have to try the 18x20 of the 2010 BLX. I remember trying the 18x20 of the PSC and wasn't a huge fan compared to the 16x18, but that was years ago.
kingcheetah
Hall of Fame
I enjoyed it-- it's a ROCK... swinging through the air, it feels similar to the RF in terms of mass. But it's very low powered and control oriented-- the player does all the work.
I'm really curious about the 6.1 95s, I just have two concerns about it.
I've heard that it's not the most arm friendly racket out there, how true is this? So far I've used pretty comfortable rackets, Blade 98S, AI98, DR98. The only uncomfortable racket that I've used so far is a Babolat Pure Strike 18x20 which hurt my elbow/upper arm. Second thing I'm worried about is how often this racket needs to be restrung. When I used the Blade 98s I felt like I had to restring after every 2-3 sets or else it would become a rocket launcher, does the 95s eat strings as quickly as the 98s?
I've heard that it's not the most arm friendly racket out there, how true is this? So far I've used pretty comfortable rackets, Blade 98S, AI98, DR98. The only uncomfortable racket that I've used so far is a Babolat Pure Strike 18x20 which hurt my elbow/upper arm. Second thing I'm worried about is how often this racket needs to be restrung. When I used the Blade 98s I felt like I had to restring after every 2-3 sets or else it would become a rocket launcher, does the 95s eat strings as quickly as the 98s?
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
A buddy just got a Prostaff 95s, very nice stick.. he leaded it up and it hits huge serves and nice spin. Probably would be better as a 16x18 but not jarring at all even in full poly.
Might eat strings though... choose something quite durable... he had his strung with toutbite soft.
DustinW
Professional
The 95s is firm, but not too stiff and not harsh. I find it very comfortable, and it has essentially zero vibration.
Strings can be a concern depending on your play style. You want to pick something that holds tension well until it breaks... something like Max Power or 4G. And you probably want to go with a thicker gauge (at least in the mains). I can usually get around 5 hours with Max Power 17 (1.25) before it breaks, whereas that string would never break for me in a "normal" 16x19 frame.
gino
Legend
Love that this thread is resurrected. We need @Wilson Official to bring back the 6.1 line!
The burn and other gimmicky racquets will eventually phase out. Bring the 6.1 back!
The burn and other gimmicky racquets will eventually phase out. Bring the 6.1 back!
macattack
Professional
I've never had any arm trouble with the PSC 6.1, K-Factor 6.1 or 2010 BLX 6.1. They're stiff, but they also have some weight to them, so it's not like a light but stiff Babolat. Also, they don't play nearly as harsh as the stiffness rating suggests. As far as strings go, I have used 4G and Kirschbaum pro line ii both at 50 pounds and don't have to restring terribly often. They don't eat strings for me.
RanchDressing
Hall of Fame
RA value is so useless lmao, I don't understand why it's still used.
wangs78
Legend
I'm surprised that Wilson hasn't made the 6.1 available in the US given that they have released the 6.1 Classic 25th Anniversary edition in Europe. However, I frankly don't see enough of a difference between the RF97 and the 6.1 to justify two different racquets (but then again, these days the racquet makers seem to think that the more models the better). I have been a long time user of the HPS 6.1 - will mess around with other racquets but keep coming back to my 6.1. I will say that the Prince Textreme 95 Tour may sway me though. Demo'd it recently and love that it is a little bit lighter but the tradeoff is less power...! I don't like the neon green of the inner frame though, would much prefer if it was red!
macattack
Professional
Love the string pattern, but the stick overall was a bit light and flexy for me. Just isn't in my spec range, so I might not be a good judge.
You're talking about this version, I assume?
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/reviews/ps95/ps95review.html
Fintft
G.O.A.T.
I do prefer the 2014 BLX 6.1 95 for
The PS I've tried were too light for me.
- Shock absorption (more compared to previous models such as 2010, 2012 and especially KFactor)
- Control and easy to manoeuver
- Increased sweet spot (due to parallel drilling).
The PS I've tried were too light for me.
zalive
Hall of Fame
Yes, exactly that version.
I was surprised with power level for a stick with SW specified at 308, considering its other specs. And delighted with its precision. Also comfort is top - I love the feeling of graphite/kevlar braided racs.
I even considered buying one (though I would add some mass on it). Despite that I never play with racquets under 97''.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
That is a really nice stick, my main hitting partner uses his whenever he is coming back from an injury or long layoff... easy power, super stable... a tad much power but a fun stick... He just switched to the 2015 prostaff 95S, leaded up it serves just a as big but it lets him hit with more variety and bleed off the pace.
Fintft
G.O.A.T.
If you consider the BLX 6.1 95 to have too much power, you must be a pro
Judging by the apparent weight of your rackets, you very well might be!Cheers!
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
I need to update my sig specs I actually play with 370g not 360g Angell custom stick! I grew up with 13+oz Max 200g's so 12.7oz is actually me having a more spin oriented game now. Actually, in most cases needing more power from a stick isnt an issue, I have long somewhat Wawrinka-esque strokes.If you consider the BLX 6.1 95 to have too much power, you must be a pro
Cheers!
Does that make me a pro, hardly, but Im good enough to hit with them and get beat by their insane consistency (deep corner, next deep corner...repeat ). I can get points off them (because I do have legit weapons) but Its like winning the point twice/thrice against my good regular opponents. It is tough to explain if youve not experienced it but they do have a certain perfect quality to their game, they weather your great shots and make you beat them... which takes something special (which usually draws an unforced error). Im talking futures players...a top 10 or 50 player is in a different category... Never been lucky enough to hit with one of those.
The thing about a true pro is they eventually will find any weakness (in under 1.5 minutes) and be able to go there all day long.
But yeah my highlight reels are pretty cool
my main hitting partner who was a former teaching pro in SF and a wta warmup hitting partner says he wishes I could see some of the stuff I do... at age 45 that's winning for me.If you consider the BLX 6.1 95 to have too much power, you must be a pro
Cheers!
Nah, it is a super powerful frame. My game dived for a few months until I got used to it and put in a lower powered string.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
true, easy power for days... that's why it is fun... esecially ive you play with sticks with less zip. It is a great serving frame... just too much pop for my return game.
Really? I actually think loads of pop on the return is better than on serve. I can hit big with most frames on the serve but on the return is when i need the pop. I am actually loving the return with this frame, much better than my old 90. Everything in my game has improved but my mid court/aggressive forehands haven't and they have probably gotten worse but I am improving every time I play. Season is ending, so I can work on that.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
Im a big returner and rarely block balls back... more specificly I like lots of dwell time on returns and stiffer frames like the 67ra 6.1 95 dont work as welll for me as the massive dwell time machine that is the x feel pro 95 or Angell TC95. You will notice that both Djokovic and Murray use sub 60RA frames ... low RA doesnt directly equate to dwell time but it can be an indicator. Stability matters on returns though and the 6.1 16x18 has tons of stability. It is a great frame and I cant believe wilson discontinued it.
Djokovic and Murray use rackets with big SW. They must be pretty powerful frames though? Does a powerful frame have less dwell time than a frame with the same RA but lower SW?
I hit a great return with the 6.1 95, can hit aggressive returns but I mostly go for depth.
zalive
Hall of Fame
Regarding power, hitting with mentioned PS 95 16x19 (2014) got me pretty confused.
I switched racquets with the guy I met for fun. Prior to this I was hitting with my PK Destiny FCS, customized to 357 grams and SW of 352 (calculated value, real value may be a bit lower but not that much). Then I took the PS95...and it had a bit more power than Destiny. So I asked a guy about string bed. He told me he strung it recently with Signum Pro Poly Plasma 1.23 at 25/24 kg. Mine PK was strung with Isospeed Cream 1.28 at 25/25 kg.
Ok, I guess Plasma is a bit more powered string than Cream, which is true I believe, and the tension is a bit lower at crosses. Perhaps Plasma holds tension worse than Cream. But let's check the other facts:
headsize: PK 98.6'' > PS95 95''
head shape: similar
spec. flex: PK 69 RA > PS95 62 RA
beam width: PK 20-26 mm (head is 24-26 mm, and round 20 mm throat is reinforced with FCS to increase stiffness) >> PS95 18 mm
spec/calc SW: PK 352 >> PS95 308
weight: PK 357 g > PS95 around 340 g (estimated)
string pattern: 16x19 both (but PS95 has a denser pattern in the upper hoop, which should again lead to less power)
How is it possible that difference in string bed (which should not be that much considering it's both copoly strings strung at similar tension) outweighs all the specs which should favour the Destiny? I can count in PS95 being quicker through the air, but nevertheless...
What does it tell? Is it possible that layup itself is responsible for such an unexpected outcome?
At the same time, it's my first string job on this (my second) Destiny frame and since it's newer made than my first one, it's possible that its layup is a bit different too if PK changed the production in between. It's also my first experience with Cream - I can suspect it's a very low powered string (significantly lower powered than Yonex PTP 1.25), since result is indeed on the control side, regadless of ample SW.
Comments and ideas on this?
I switched racquets with the guy I met for fun. Prior to this I was hitting with my PK Destiny FCS, customized to 357 grams and SW of 352 (calculated value, real value may be a bit lower but not that much). Then I took the PS95...and it had a bit more power than Destiny. So I asked a guy about string bed. He told me he strung it recently with Signum Pro Poly Plasma 1.23 at 25/24 kg. Mine PK was strung with Isospeed Cream 1.28 at 25/25 kg.
Ok, I guess Plasma is a bit more powered string than Cream, which is true I believe, and the tension is a bit lower at crosses. Perhaps Plasma holds tension worse than Cream. But let's check the other facts:
headsize: PK 98.6'' > PS95 95''
head shape: similar
spec. flex: PK 69 RA > PS95 62 RA
beam width: PK 20-26 mm (head is 24-26 mm, and round 20 mm throat is reinforced with FCS to increase stiffness) >> PS95 18 mm
spec/calc SW: PK 352 >> PS95 308
weight: PK 357 g > PS95 around 340 g (estimated)
string pattern: 16x19 both (but PS95 has a denser pattern in the upper hoop, which should again lead to less power)
How is it possible that difference in string bed (which should not be that much considering it's both copoly strings strung at similar tension) outweighs all the specs which should favour the Destiny? I can count in PS95 being quicker through the air, but nevertheless...
What does it tell? Is it possible that layup itself is responsible for such an unexpected outcome?
At the same time, it's my first string job on this (my second) Destiny frame and since it's newer made than my first one, it's possible that its layup is a bit different too if PK changed the production in between. It's also my first experience with Cream - I can suspect it's a very low powered string (significantly lower powered than Yonex PTP 1.25), since result is indeed on the control side, regadless of ample SW.
Comments and ideas on this?
Last edited:
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
Of course they have massively high swingweights and power from that but their frames raw are not inherently powerful... they are classic control frames a classic prestige (Murray) and radical (Novak). They also are frames with lower ra and very good dwell time. Im an unusually good returner, I hit a lot of clean winners and unreturnables against good opponents... many credit me for forcing them to improve their second serves. My main hitting partner's second serve is better than most 1sts and with a ton of variety (he's a lefty too). He once said I can return with anything (fryingpan etc) and its true (fryingpan works) but the best frames for me have a lot of dwell time its what helps me turn a good return into something special. Having the right frame can help with that... the 6.1 95 16x18 returns very well and is quite stable but it does have more inherent pop than I like. That hitting partner of mine just switchede to the 2015 Prostaff 95s because it helps him bleed off pace better against me and he does return better with it than his 6.1. Im a big server too.
All that said, if you love the 6.1 16x18 dont question it it is a great stick... very versatile and has power galore when you need it. Many big servers love that stick.
These are the best six.one 95's:
K Factor gets my vote for the direct feel. Add shiny red rounded butt caps and fresh leather grips and I'm pretty happy.
I have BLX2 and BLX3 frames, and they hit the ball just as well, but the feel is different.
K Factor gets my vote for the direct feel. Add shiny red rounded butt caps and fresh leather grips and I'm pretty happy.
I have BLX2 and BLX3 frames, and they hit the ball just as well, but the feel is different.
gino
Legend
These are the best six.one 95's:
K Factor gets my vote for the direct feel. Add shiny red rounded butt caps and fresh leather grips and I'm pretty happy.
I have BLX2 and BLX3 frames, and they hit the ball just as well, but the feel is different.
Which buttcaps are those? The 2014 6.1 16x18? GORGEOUS @seekay
ThePhamster
New User
These are the best six.one 95's:
K Factor gets my vote for the direct feel. Add shiny red rounded butt caps and fresh leather grips and I'm pretty happy.
I have BLX2 and BLX3 frames, and they hit the ball just as well, but the feel is different.
I second this.
What does it tell? Is it possible that layup itself is responsible for such an unexpected outcome?
Comments and ideas on this?[/QUOTE]
I think someone on these forms mentioned that he doesn't go by just SW numbers but goes out and play with racquet to see how racquets feels and plays.He also mentioned that after trying many racquets over the years he came to a conclusion that one should look at SW ,weight and many other things as a whole so i guess lesson may be keep open mind and also keep in mind high SW also a important parameter but not everything.
May be layup also plays a role and sometimes i' wonder if there is something special about classic Prostaff racquets.
Comments and ideas on this?[/QUOTE]
I think someone on these forms mentioned that he doesn't go by just SW numbers but goes out and play with racquet to see how racquets feels and plays.He also mentioned that after trying many racquets over the years he came to a conclusion that one should look at SW ,weight and many other things as a whole so i guess lesson may be keep open mind and also keep in mind high SW also a important parameter but not everything.
May be layup also plays a role and sometimes i' wonder if there is something special about classic Prostaff racquets.
They're the rounded off (non-Pro-Staff) Sony Sensor compatible buttcaps currently available at Tennis Warehouse (link).
I think the 2014 Six.Ones were updated to include them once the Sony Sensor came out, but I'm not sure. I'm fairly positive they weren't used when BLX3 launched.
gino
Legend
thanks for that. I really love the look of the red buttcap. especially the shiny one. Played with the K6.1 during my developmental years as a junior (see my post earlier in the thread), and absolutely love the frame. I've found that mine are a bit tank-like with the addition of a leather grip. Have since replaced with Gamma synethics
zalive
Hall of Fame
I've read somewhere that orientation of graphite structure in graphite layers/sheets (which is made different on purpose for different layers to ensure three-dimensionality of carbon structure to achieve needed firmness). And that different graphite structure layers are responsible for different properties - one of the orientations aids power the most. So, it's possible to have different power levels with the same number of graphite sheets with manipulating the carbon structure orientation (layer) quantities (all three orientations layers are needed, but more layers that aid power should give more power).
But if potential of this is as big, this really means that specs as we know them (and not just specs but really all that is visible) are in a way...secondary. And any racquet cannot be judged based on it specs as it can be very misleading. So I indeed find this player's approach meaningful, when I look at this situation.
And if we talk about package of specs, this package should obviously include - playing with actual racquet, to get data which is not specified or visible from the design.
Last edited:
As always interesting an thoughtful post and this also goes to show why pros probably use the racquet they have started playing when they were young as their muscle memory is set to that particular model (specific layup ).
No wonder Delpo didn't want to change and Roger never really wanted to change until almost at the end of his career and I guess all these players made these decisions right by feel but they were probably smart decisions at the end as well.Even though Roger played well with his new racquet as the bigger head probably helped to go for more and finish quicker at that stage of his career[/QUOTE]
No wonder Delpo didn't want to change and Roger never really wanted to change until almost at the end of his career and I guess all these players made these decisions right by feel but they were probably smart decisions at the end as well.Even though Roger played well with his new racquet as the bigger head probably helped to go for more and finish quicker at that stage of his career[/QUOTE]
zalive
Hall of Fame
If you ask me, Roger didn't realize the potential of a bigger head size early enough. Still it needed some work from Wilson to cook the frame that would suit him - and they did a great job in that. It's hard to get in his head now - I wonder if he regrets he didn't make such a switch some 5 years earlier. Because his PS90 was visibly harder to create depth at his RPM's. Roger had to put more energy into his shots with less effect.
Does Delpo use loonger length racquet as well (27.5)?.No wonder with his technique ,dense pattern and long arms allows him to over power Djokovic which is rare.I'm sure there is little help from the racquet as well esp on the forehand wing.
Great to see him using core on most of his forehands as there is a great rhythm to his forehand as he comes off the ground after every hit.
Great to see him using core on most of his forehands as there is a great rhythm to his forehand as he comes off the ground after every hit.
macattack
Professional
I was mostly joking as the racquet is only one small part of DelPo's huge forehand. I think he uses a standard length 18x20 Pro Staff Classic 6.1 under the paint job. At least that's what he used for most of his career. Not sure what's under the paint job this year. Probably a 6.1 mold of some sort.
macattack
Professional
I'm sure he's been playing with the same model 6.1 for his whole career for a reason. I can say with my PSC 6.1s I am able to more easily hit a much more flat, booming forehand than with other racquets of similar specs. I use a 16x18. DelPo uses 18x20 which I'm sure is even better for hitting flat with that tight pattern. I don't know the technical side of it though, as far as the racquet goes.
kingcheetah
Hall of Fame
I agree with this... the six one was a great line but the RF97 steals a large portion of the potential market... SW is very close, the pattern/spacing between strings is a good compromise between the 16x18 six one and the 18x20 when it comes to balancing spin and control. However, given the questionable feedback for the Burn FST 95, why not bring back at least one of the six ones and give it those handle inserts (unless they are causing the wrist issues people seem to have with it)
I had a teammate last season that switched back to the hyper pro staff 6.1 that he had used when he was a very young national level junior for last season-- it was funny to see those out there among the zillions of pure aeros and blades.
Agree RF97 is a great racquet and well loved by many but my experience has been that my Wilson K Factor 16*18 ( 342sw, 352grms ) moves through the air effortlessly
not tiring me after first set.I guess the Twistweight on RF97 is probably reason why that racquet feels so heavy and I wonder if Roger's personal racquet specs have changed a lot going from old prostaffs to new one other than the big headsize.I know this question was debated a lot and noone knows the answer.
Do we really think Roger's personal raquet Twistweight has a changed a lot with RF97?, as this would make a big difference to his swing.
May be Wilson should have increased the classic 95 headsize to fit into today's requirements and bigger pool of people.
not tiring me after first set.I guess the Twistweight on RF97 is probably reason why that racquet feels so heavy and I wonder if Roger's personal racquet specs have changed a lot going from old prostaffs to new one other than the big headsize.I know this question was debated a lot and noone knows the answer.
Do we really think Roger's personal raquet Twistweight has a changed a lot with RF97?, as this would make a big difference to his swing.
May be Wilson should have increased the classic 95 headsize to fit into today's requirements and bigger pool of people.
gino
Legend
The retailers have spoken. I was just made aware that the 2014 6.1 95S will make a comeback!
For $89 per frame! As someone who has used all iterations of the 6.1 this is welcome news. Especially at such a low price point. I bought my 3 6.1 95S frames at retail price. They're my second favorite 6.1 behind the PSC
For $89 per frame! As someone who has used all iterations of the 6.1 this is welcome news. Especially at such a low price point. I bought my 3 6.1 95S frames at retail price. They're my second favorite 6.1 behind the PSC
donnayblack99
Semi-Pro
The original is the best... the Wilson Pro Staff Original 6.1 circa 1991.
gino
Legend
100% agree. However, it's great to see that there is a market for the 6.1 out there.
@Wilson Official can you speak on bringing the 95S back to select retailers?
What's the rationale there? Any chance we get an updated 6.1 line with new cosmetics? Thanks!
