THE CLASH equals TRASH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#1
I just had to come out of self imposed exile to report on the worst frame every promoted. Yes the clash was so TRASH I could not even begin to write a review. Anyone comparing it flex to that of PT630 or PT57A is clueless. They are not even close. The Clash is a lobotomy on its own. ANYONE BUYING THIS FRAME IS IN FOR A SURPRISE............ THE FIRST generation blades silver and black that break easily are long gone...... good luck Wilson. Yonex with it Vcore is not stable yes it is spiny but not stable.... The Prestige Pro XT is still king if you know how to reduce the SW ( i know how ) other than that I have nothing else to say...........
 
#2
I just had to come out of self imposed exile to report on the worst frame every promoted. Yes the clash was so TRASH I could not even begin to write a review. Anyone comparing it flex to that of PT630 or PT57A is clueless. They are not even close. The Clash is a lobotomy on its own. ANYONE BUYING THIS FRAME IS IN FOR A SURPRISE............ THE FIRST generation blades silver and black that break easily are long gone...... good luck Wilson. Yonex with it Vcore is not stable yes it is spiny but not stable.... The Prestige Pro XT is still king if you know how to reduce the SW ( i know how ) other than that I have nothing else to say...........
LOL
 
#3
I just had to come out of self imposed exile to report on the worst frame every promoted. Yes the clash was so TRASH I could not even begin to write a review. Anyone comparing it flex to that of PT630 or PT57A is clueless. They are not even close. The Clash is a lobotomy on its own. ANYONE BUYING THIS FRAME IS IN FOR A SURPRISE............ THE FIRST generation blades silver and black that break easily are long gone...... good luck Wilson. Yonex with it Vcore is not stable yes it is spiny but not stable.... The Prestige Pro XT is still king if you know how to reduce the SW ( i know how ) other than that I have nothing else to say...........
With clash being so heavily marketed as being so different, very flexible, this and that, I was a little skeptical. Our local clubs even promoted free demo sessions with the clash line. I never bought into all this hype and gimmicky stuff - staying with my Youtek Prestiges.
 
#7
How does it compare with the Prince Phantom 100 for those who have tried both?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
My wife has a Clash and I have a Phantom 100 (and 93p and pro 100 18x20). Clash doesn’t feel as pillowy soft as the Phantom but still feels easy on the arm. It has a significant higher launch angle than any of the Phantoms which gives it easy depth (or easy balls to the fence in my case). It serves easy due to its light weight. Has less touch than the Phantom.

I feel the Clash is a racket designed to move 3.0 ladies away from their old Ultras and Pure Drives and get rid of the elbow braces. Phantoms on the other hand require some technique and a full swing to get the most out of them and are meant as an arm friendly option for those that can generate their own power.
 

TagUrIt

Professional
#9
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think that statement is a little more than unfair. I’ve never played with any of the Prince racquets people compare the Clash to. I can say from experience it’s a unique racquet. It does flex quite a bit, it’s soft on volleys and solid on ground strokes. I’m glad I gave the Clash Tour a chance, I’m enjoying playing with it. I let one of my friends hit with it and he couldn’t believe how powerful his shots were. When I let him borrow it, I used my former racquet the Ultra 100 CV. I immediately felt the difference between the two. I couldn’t believe how much better the Clash felt. So to each their own, my only thought is if you don’t like it, than obviously it’s not the racquet for you. With that being said, there’s no need to literally trash the racquet because it doesn’t suit you.
 
#10
The Clash is transforming the recreational 3.5 pro tour in my country into GOAT level NTRP flex league dominance.

So much Clash that Babolat is losing millions everyday. It’s over for many monolithic racket companies.

The Clash is like the Compact Disc taking over the cassette and 8 track recording industry. It cannot be stopped. They tried the do the same to R. Kelly’s libido with pills and surgery. Good luck with that.
 
#11
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think that statement is a little more than unfair. I’ve never played with any of the Prince racquets people compare the Clash to. I can say from experience it’s a unique racquet. It does flex quite a bit, it’s soft on volleys and solid on ground strokes. I’m glad I gave the Clash Tour a chance, I’m enjoying playing with it. I let one of my friends hit with it and he couldn’t believe how powerful his shots were. When I let him borrow it, I used my former racquet the Ultra 100 CV. I immediately felt the difference between the two. I couldn’t believe how much better the Clash felt. So to each their own, my only thought is if you don’t like it, than obviously it’s not the racquet for you. With that being said, there’s no need to literally trash the racquet because it doesn’t suit you.
Spot on - whatever works for you. I can’t hit a Pure Aero or an Ezone for toffee but completely accept that they are very popular effective sticks. Problem the Clash faces is the marketing hype - hard to live up to it and there will be some disappointed folks out there. I’ve played the PT and the older Head line and they are are fabulous for me - but not everyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#12
I think we need more time for Clash to see how it goes. I,ve only had limited time with the Tour version and and I think the choice of string and tension does not do justice with what they are trying to do with a 55 RA frame.
For a 100sq inch frame with a 24.5mm beam the cosmetics make this racquet look like a goofy lollipop. They need to get rid of that grey and make it less garish.
 
#13
I think we need more time for Clash to see how it goes. I,ve only had limited time with the Tour version and and I think the choice of string and tension does not do justice with what they are trying to do with a 55 RA frame.
For a 100sq inch frame with a 24.5mm beam the cosmetics make this racquet look like a goofy lollipop. They need to get rid of that grey and make it less garish.
I agree. Also, funny how people say certain racquets are just for women or 3.0 players. I'm a hard-hitting former 5.5 (but ages ago as my last Open singles trophy was in 93). But I still have the strokes and I'll give this stick a shot and will report back as I hit more with it. Maybe this isn't the logical racquet for me, moving from the RF Auto 97 (12.5 oz) to the Pure Strike (at 11.8 oz.) and now the Tour, but I like the concept of a low stiffness racquet that is easy on the arm but also has properties similar to the stiff frames. Also, when I tried the Pure Drive several years ago, it felt like cheating! I could be between courts on the run and whip crosscourt forehand winners. I never felt such easy power! But then the arm died and I went back to the RF Auto, then the Pure Strike due to time away and wanting to go with a little lighter frame (with a little added weight). So, hopefully, I can dial the Clash Tour in. I'm going to try different poly and tensions between 48 - 55 lbs. -A 98 version of the Tour might be better. The Prince Phantom 100 also sounds like a good frame with very low stiffness. The last Prince racquets I used were CTS Lightning 90 frames (free to USPTA pros at the time). Forgot I played with those. lol. Those were odd sticks as they had rubber grip pallets.
 
#14
I agree. Also, funny how people say certain racquets are just for women or 3.0 players. I'm a hard-hitting former 5.5 (but ages ago as my last Open singles trophy was in 93). But I still have the strokes and I'll give this stick a shot and will report back as I hit more with it. Maybe this isn't the logical racquet for me, moving from the RF Auto 97 (12.5 oz) to the Pure Strike (at 11.8 oz.) and now the Tour, but I like the concept of a low stiffness racquet that is easy on the arm but also has properties similar to the stiff frames. Also, when I tried the Pure Drive several years ago, it felt like cheating! I could be between courts on the run and whip crosscourt forehand winners. I never felt such easy power! But then the arm died and I went back to the RF Auto, then the Pure Strike due to time away and wanting to go with a little lighter frame (with a little added weight). So, hopefully, I can dial the Clash Tour in. I'm going to try different poly and tensions between 48 - 55 lbs. -A 98 version of the Tour might be better. The Prince Phantom 100 also sounds like a good frame with very low stiffness. The last Prince racquets I used were CTS Lightning 90 frames (free to USPTA pros at the time). Forgot I played with those. lol. Those were odd sticks as they had rubber grip pallets.
Do you remember how the CTS Lightning 90 played?!
 
#16
I agree. Also, funny how people say certain racquets are just for women or 3.0 players. I'm a hard-hitting former 5.5 (but ages ago as my last Open singles trophy was in 93). But I still have the strokes and I'll give this stick a shot and will report back as I hit more with it. Maybe this isn't the logical racquet for me, moving from the RF Auto 97 (12.5 oz) to the Pure Strike (at 11.8 oz.) and now the Tour, but I like the concept of a low stiffness racquet that is easy on the arm but also has properties similar to the stiff frames. Also, when I tried the Pure Drive several years ago, it felt like cheating! I could be between courts on the run and whip crosscourt forehand winners. I never felt such easy power! But then the arm died and I went back to the RF Auto, then the Pure Strike due to time away and wanting to go with a little lighter frame (with a little added weight). So, hopefully, I can dial the Clash Tour in. I'm going to try different poly and tensions between 48 - 55 lbs. -A 98 version of the Tour might be better. The Prince Phantom 100 also sounds like a good frame with very low stiffness. The last Prince racquets I used were CTS Lightning 90 frames (free to USPTA pros at the time). Forgot I played with those. lol. Those were odd sticks as they had rubber grip pallets.
I believe the white pure strike is stiff as a pure drive, so why did you switch?
I think its better to switch to lower string tension and more arm friendly strings, like Nishikori did, than to switch to wet noodle sticks.
 
#18
I guess one of the biggest test for the clash in my opinion is whether the factory assigned to making it for them can make them according to specification. Quite a few of the brands of late have been quite variable, particularly in swingweight. It can be a problem if the demo you tried in the shop turns out to be very different to the 2 or 3 you bought.
The "No Tolerance", policy Pacific had was a good idea and it's a consistency in quality that can be more appealing than having a nice paint job.
 
#23
I used my former racquet the Ultra 100 CV.
See you are the target demographic right there. The Clash is the "easy power with better arm health" for the Ultra/Babolat crowd. I was only half joking about the 3.0 ladies. There are lots of 3.5-4.5 men with Ultras and Babolats and arm braces that might do with a switch.

I'm a hard-hitting former 5.5
You can play with anything if you are that good. Your technique doesn't necessitate arm friendliness like most 3.0-4.0 players.
 
#24
I agree. Also, funny how people say certain racquets are just for women or 3.0 players. I'm a hard-hitting former 5.5 (but ages ago as my last Open singles trophy was in 93). But I still have the strokes and I'll give this stick a shot and will report back as I hit more with it. Maybe this isn't the logical racquet for me, moving from the RF Auto 97 (12.5 oz) to the Pure Strike (at 11.8 oz.) and now the Tour, but I like the concept of a low stiffness racquet that is easy on the arm but also has properties similar to the stiff frames. Also, when I tried the Pure Drive several years ago, it felt like cheating! I could be between courts on the run and whip crosscourt forehand winners. I never felt such easy power! But then the arm died and I went back to the RF Auto, then the Pure Strike due to time away and wanting to go with a little lighter frame (with a little added weight). So, hopefully, I can dial the Clash Tour in. I'm going to try different poly and tensions between 48 - 55 lbs. -A 98 version of the Tour might be better. The Prince Phantom 100 also sounds like a good frame with very low stiffness. The last Prince racquets I used were CTS Lightning 90 frames (free to USPTA pros at the time). Forgot I played with those. lol. Those were odd sticks as they had rubber grip pallets.
Yes definitely try it, it checks all the boxes for me a senior 4.5 tournament player..Easy power, spin, but most of all comfort on my nerve damaged wrist which allows me to play longer...Even my control is decent..I string it with Luxilon 17g natural gut/Ashaway Zx pro 17g 58-55
 
#25
If you're a players racquet diehard, you will probably not like the Clash. I used to play with players frames like prestiges and pure controls/storms because they were softer and offered feel for the ball. Those things were important to me. I usually played well, probably better, with Pure Drives and other similar frames, but I missed the comfort and feedback of my other frames. I could find an adequate balance of control, spin, and easy depth from a couple other frames, but I usually ended up with arm pain.

The Clash remedies some of the disadvantages of typical tweeners for me. I can make it through multiple hours of play in a day pain-free with full polyester strings. Most importantly, I feel like I know what the ball is going to do off of the strings once I hit and can adjust from there. With Pure Aeros, Ultras, Radicals, etc., I get a vague sense of accuracy and how the ball will come off of my strings. That makes me feel like I can't trust the racquet in pressure situations. This is significantly better for me with the Clash.

While the Clash doesn't have PT57A-like feel and control, it delivers much better feel for the ball than a typical chunky tweener frame. I finally feel like I can play with a frame that suits my game rather than one that I like the feel of and is comfortable enough for my arm.

TLDR: Pure Drive/APD style frames are best for my game but players sticks give me comfort and feel that I prioritize. The Clash partially remedies the negative aspects of traditional tweeners, and I like that.
 
#26
Was watching our top 3.5 ladies team battle league last night. Most of them are in their 50s and 60s. All of them appeared to be using the Clash, un-modified and without lead tape. Wilson is winning the war.

The sheer amount of Clash threads here and on MTF proves this theory.

Clash is the future in this post modern new wave world.
 
N

Nashvegas

Guest
#27
Some comments above about the Ultra being in the Babolat realm of arm-unfriendliness. I’ve been thinking of ditching my Pure Strike due to some mild (but new) elbow irritation. I thought the Ultra was fairly easy on the arm... not true?

Pro Kennex has one I like but I’m still trying out options. Plan to try the Clash as well.
 
#28
I hit with it again both versions ..
The tour is better for me . But what I can’t get over is the launch angle . The exact same swing with my racket . I forehand topspin roll from my baseline , over the net and bouncing into the oppositions service boxes. So a short roller with my racket .. now if I try to do that with either clash the ball goes to the baseline with the intention of landing in the service box .
To me that creates anxiety and fear .
To me it feels like a flexible vOlkl V1 with Babolat pure drive super oversize power..
so it scares me .
Which is interesting as it’s the same feeling I got when I first hit with a Babolat pure drive in 2004 .
 
#29
I just had to come out of self imposed exile to report on the worst frame every promoted. Yes the clash was so TRASH I could not even begin to write a review. Anyone comparing it flex to that of PT630 or PT57A is clueless. They are not even close. The Clash is a lobotomy on its own. ANYONE BUYING THIS FRAME IS IN FOR A SURPRISE............ THE FIRST generation blades silver and black that break easily are long gone...... good luck Wilson. Yonex with it Vcore is not stable yes it is spiny but not stable.... The Prestige Pro XT is still king if you know how to reduce the SW ( i know how ) other than that I have nothing else to say...........
So... Do you have a pt 57a/pt360 in 295g or 310 unstrung?
 
#31
I hit with it again both versions ..
The tour is better for me . But what I can’t get over is the launch angle . The exact same swing with my racket . I forehand topspin roll from my baseline , over the net and bouncing into the oppositions service boxes. So a short roller with my racket .. now if I try to do that with either clash the ball goes to the baseline with the intention of landing in the service box .
To me that creates anxiety and fear .
To me it feels like a flexible vOlkl V1 with Babolat pure drive super oversize power..
so it scares me .
Which is interesting as it’s the same feeling I got when I first hit with a Babolat pure drive in 2004 .
It was funny I had that experience yesterday. Playing against my wife who has a Clash. Asked to borrow it for a game and she went back to her old SW Blade 104. First serve return with the racket I launched to the fence with my normal swing. I lol'd so hard. She yelled over the net, "You can keep playing with that if you want." I had been crushing her with my POG107 up to that point.

Crazy high launch angle with the Clash, especially coming from Phantom series.
 
#34
If you're a players racquet diehard, you will probably not like the Clash. I used to play with players frames like prestiges and pure controls/storms because they were softer and offered feel for the ball. Those things were important to me. I usually played well, probably better, with Pure Drives and other similar frames, but I missed the comfort and feedback of my other frames. I could find an adequate balance of control, spin, and easy depth from a couple other frames, but I usually ended up with arm pain.

The Clash remedies some of the disadvantages of typical tweeners for me. I can make it through multiple hours of play in a day pain-free with full polyester strings. Most importantly, I feel like I know what the ball is going to do off of the strings once I hit and can adjust from there. With Pure Aeros, Ultras, Radicals, etc., I get a vague sense of accuracy and how the ball will come off of my strings. That makes me feel like I can't trust the racquet in pressure situations. This is significantly better for me with the Clash.

While the Clash doesn't have PT57A-like feel and control, it delivers much better feel for the ball than a typical chunky tweener frame. I finally feel like I can play with a frame that suits my game rather than one that I like the feel of and is comfortable enough for my arm.

TLDR: Pure Drive/APD style frames are best for my game but players sticks give me comfort and feel that I prioritize. The Clash partially remedies the negative aspects of traditional tweeners, and I like that.
I had the sae experience. Long time Pure Drive player and the few hours I played with Wilson Clash (both 295g and 310g) I found more control with adequate power. Less power than with Pure Drive 2018.
However I am pretty sure it depends on string tension. Clash 100 test racket was strung with Luxilon smart at 25 kg (55 lbs)
 
#35
It was funny I had that experience yesterday. Playing against my wife who has a Clash. Asked to borrow it for a game and she went back to her old SW Blade 104. First serve return with the racket I launched to the fence with my normal swing. I lol'd so hard. She yelled over the net, "You can keep playing with that if you want." I had been crushing her with my POG107 up to that point.

Crazy high launch angle with the Clash, especially coming from Phantom series.
You might be onto something with the launch angle...I have had some success lowering it slightly with different string tensions and it certainly doesn't seem as "powerful" as the launch angle is lowered. I am now adding more lead at 12 to compensate.

I don't want to sound too critical though...I think Wilson have indeed provided a racket with an exceptionally high comfortable to power ratio.
I can use full poly no problems at all.
So is it perfect? - No, but I can use the strings I want and get some of the benefits without arm pain.

If my arm wasn't a problem, I wouldn't use it.
 
Last edited:

Roland G

Hall of Fame
#37
I have not tried the Clash. But I find it funny that for the last 25 years anyone could walk into a Big5 and find a wall full of flexible widebody open-pattern frames, often for $50 or less when on sale; now Wilson is telling us that this is a revolutionary concept?
QZX C HUGH prOMO
 

TagUrIt

Professional
#38
I have not tried the Clash. But I find it funny that for the last 25 years anyone could walk into a Big5 and find a wall full of flexible widebody open-pattern frames, often for $50 or less when on sale; now Wilson is telling us that this is a revolutionary concept?

Why not try demoing it before you form an opinion? You might be surprised with how it plays. :unsure:
 
#44
I tried out the non-tour Clash, the pre-release version with the white/black camo paintjob -- my club's pro is endorsed by Wilson. Anyway, yes it's soft, but didn't feel much softer than any other mid-to-low 60s RA racket. Beyond that, it felt like a junior or ladies racket. Way, way too light compared to my Radical Pro. I don't even think the Tour version would be hefty enough. Pass....
 

dman72

Hall of Fame
#45
The Clash is transforming the recreational 3.5 pro tour in my country into GOAT level NTRP flex league dominance.

So much Clash that Babolat is losing millions everyday. It’s over for many monolithic racket companies.

The Clash is like the Compact Disc taking over the cassette and 8 track recording industry. It cannot be stopped. They tried the do the same to R. Kelly’s libido with pills and surgery. Good luck with that.
Here we go again.
 
#49
My new Clash tour 4 3/8 with tounagrip and 16 gauge string weighs in at 11.8 ounces. Perfect weigh for a 5.0 tweener like me. Switched from the blade 98's 18x20 pattern and so far no wrist our shoulder problems. With the blade, over the years have developed sore shoulders and wrist pains. Could play every other day singles, but very sore after each match. I too welcome the softer frame. Lets a person play tennis without creating injuries. After playing stiff for 10 or so years, nice to have a change. Still get equal power and control to the blade without the harshness.
If you are like me, that enjoys playing 4 times a week, give it a try. Your joints will appreciate it. And if I continue to play 4 times a week competitive singles without injuries, then it was worth the change!
 
#50
So this has become an everybody come to trash the Clash racquet thread?
Seems like the right spot. Save the revolution for the official Wilson Clash thread.

I firmly believe there is no such thing as a perfect racket and that every racket has it's pros and cons and you have to see how things fit into your game and style. For me playing with the Clash is like putting a square peg into a round hole. But for my wife it has far more features to help her game.

The major flaws I find is the lack of ball feel and the overly high launch angle. Neither work at all for my predominantly doubles based game. Not sure if string changes could improve that but the last thing I want is to be forced to put in a stiff high tension poly to tame the racket.
 
Top