The Myth of Lowering Swingweight

[travlerajm]

No, it's not possible to get a good estimate of SW based on weight and balance alone.

Some headlight racquets have weight concentrated in the butt cap, while other racquets have weight distributed fairly evenly along the handle. The weight and balance of these two types of racquets can be the same, but the racquet with the weight concentration in the buttcap will have have a much lower effective swingweight, and it will play with much less power and a lighter, whippier feel.

 

[skraggle]

Actually, I've figured out how to lower swingweight.

WORK OUT AND BECOME STRONGER! ;o)

 

[Duzza]

nah i know how to lower swingweight.
Steps:
1. Buy 60 grams of lead tape
2. Apply
3. Play for an hour
4. Take off lead tape
5. SW Lowered- CONGRATS

 

[woody6.1]

whoa . dont argue with don

 

[lioneldude]

So that means a N Six One TOUR is easier to swing compared to N Six One 95 because the TOUR is more headlight?

 

[Newberry]

If I toss my racquet in the air, spinning it head over handle, shouldn't it rotate at the MOI?

Just trying to figure a way to dynamically find the MOI, then possibly calculate the swingweight...

 

[irgi]

the myte of the lowering swing weight

No,gentlemen,i can't bieleve this!
Gaines Hillix,
in accordance with your formula,it is the same to put lead tape at the butt or 20 cm over.This is not possible,because the balance change and SW is proportional to W,b and l.
Furthermore your value is very little,in comparison with Rich's value.
kind Rich:
who can affirm a priori that the mass distribution in the customized racket is different in comparison with the prototype?There are not good phisicals reasons to say this.
Why after customizetion the balance don't play a role more?
But very funny is that:
we all know that everybody wishes racket with much power.OK:with my customizetion i have surpassed the Head engeneers,because i have found,with the same first Moment(i.e.the same maneuvrability or pick up weight)a very more powered frame(more SW,more power):367 kgcm^2.We must think that a n Code Six-One Tour 90 weight 360gr,has b=32cm and her SW is only(!) 334 kgcm^2!
I suppose that the reason of the myth ....can be that you cannot reduce the balance with added weight in order to compensate the weight increase,so that the result of the SW is alawys bigger.
Aber that must be demonstrated.Somebody can that practically?

 

[psp2]

What about this comparison (according to TW)

WILSON PROSTAFF 6.0 85
Strung Weight: 12.6oz / 357g
Balance: 8pts Head Light
Swingweight: 329

WILSON NCODE 6.1 95
Strung Weight: 12.2oz / 346g
Balance: 10pts Head Light
Swingweight: 330

The first PS 85 is heavier, head heavy and has less swingweight. How is this possible? Can anyone explain this?

I wouldn't trust these figures to be gospel. TW has the Babolat PS' SW incorrect as well. I'll trust my local shop's RDC machine to measure SWs of my racquets anyday over TW's figures.

 

[AlpineCadet]

What about this comparison (according to TW)

WILSON PROSTAFF 6.0 85
Strung Weight: 12.6oz / 357g
Balance: 8pts Head Light
Swingweight: 329

WILSON NCODE 6.1 95
Strung Weight: 12.2oz / 346g
Balance: 10pts Head Light
Swingweight: 330

The first PS 85 is heavier, head heavy and has less swingweight. How is this possible? Can anyone explain this?

That's an interesting question, and I hope someone can reply with factual answers

 

[morten]

It's how the weight is distributed that makes the difference. If you add weight at the farthest point from the axisis of rotation, meaning at the 12 o'clock position it will result in the biggest increase in swingweight. Think about leverage, you can lift something very heavy when it is close to to the pivot point when you are far on the other side of said point. Same principle applies here.

In this case it is the DISTRIBUTION of weight that mekes the difference.

very true indeed.

 

[haerdalis]

Well I think it has been explained in this thread already. The PS 6.0 is perhaps more head heavy but with the mass concentrated perhaps at 3 and 9 and the 6.1 higher up. Since it is m*d^2 all mass is not equal so to speak.
However what I would like to know is what is the advantage of a hig static weight? Just from looking at this it seems to me that the best racquet would be headlight with a low static weight and a high swingweight.
And this seems to be exactly what wilson have done with the n6.1 compared to the ps85.

 

[bsandy]

Moist is correct. It is physically impossible to lower dynamic swingweight without removing weight from the racquet. The most obvious method for reducing swingweight is to remove the bumper and replace with individual grommets. However, you'll lose protection of the head and likely void the warranty. Don/Tennis Warehouse

This is not true if you consider the axis of rotation 7 cm from the butt.

 

[BreakPoint]

What about this comparison (according to TW)

WILSON PROSTAFF 6.0 85
Strung Weight: 12.6oz / 357g
Balance: 8pts Head Light
Swingweight: 329

WILSON NCODE 6.1 95
Strung Weight: 12.2oz / 346g
Balance: 10pts Head Light
Swingweight: 330

The first PS 85 is heavier, head heavy and has less swingweight. How is this possible? Can anyone explain this?

Two words: WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION

Remember that weight distribution is not the same thing as balance. This topic has been discussed here many times before. If you do a search, I'm sure you'll find a lot of info about this.