The Official Angell Users Club

[Backhanded Compliment]

Just received my TC95 16x19 63 RA from the one and only BHBH. The racquet's fit and finish is amazing. Like a fine new Porsche. I can't wait to hit some balls with it tonight. It's strung with a full bed of Volkl V Pro. I'm having some pretty severe elbow issues so I'll be interested in how I'll feel after a few hundred balls tonight. I'm hoping the V Pro will be soft enough but I'll probably end up with a gut/poly hybrid. I'm planning on a Gosen OG and Silverstring combo.

That should be pretty plush... I play full RSLyon with lowish tension (strung at 45 but it stabilizes at about 39lbs and feels more plush than my taiwan PS85 strung with gut)

As to string patterns many have reported that there isnt that much of a spin potential loss by going with the 18x20 but I play the 16x19.

 

[John Z.]

The RA63 model will have unstrung SW around 300. And will be around 330-335 strung. If you look for a whippier frame, get RA70. Still very comfortable frame and strung SW is around 320.

Thanks, very useful info. Does that mean that the same weight/balance specs on the TC97 would give a SW ~325 given it has RA66 ?

I'm assuming this has to do with how much foam there is in those frames...

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

Thanks, very useful info. Does that mean that the same weight/balance specs on the TC97 would give a SW ~325 given it has RA66 ?

I'm assuming this has to do with how much foam there is in those frames...

or more correctly how thick the layup of graphite is... the RA63 (58 strung) frames have more layers of graphite and therefore more mass and higher swingweights than the RA70 and RA66 unstrung frames.

 

[Holliman]

Just got back from my first hitting session. Damn what a racket! I know I'm at the very beginning of a honeymoon phase but that was one fun racquet to hit with. The rewards from solid sweet spot contact was unreal. However, my miss hits felt horrible. I've got some adjusting to do. Much like the Pro Staff Classic, you better keep your eye on the ball with the TC 95. I've never hit with a Head Prestige but now I think I know the meaning of plush. It's hard to explain but the Angell is like no other tennis racquet I've ever played with. It felt like the difference between a Toyota and a Lexus. Luxury in comfort, style, and performance. The Toyota (Wilson) is tried and true. Reliable. A solid asset. A Lexus (Angell) however is all that and more. The 16x19 63 RA wasn't overly powerful. The amount of spin was crazy. My balls were diving into the court without any change in my mechanics. I was worried about the lack of control but it was like a scalpel. The best part...I hit 300+ balls and my elbow feels the same as when I left the house. I can't believe a bed of poly hit that soft. Strung at 55 no less. That Volkl V Pro is awesome. I can't believe they are discontinuing it. If the Angell will let me hit without elbow pain then I'd pay twice what they go for new. BHBH sent it to me with his customized specs and I'm not changing a thing. I had so much more control and whip. I didn't get to volley so I'm interested in how stable it will be at the net. The bar is set pretty high with the PSC I've been using. I also didn't get to serve tonight but hopefully soon. All in all, I'm stoked I found this forum and even more so this thread. This racquet is going to be a game changer for me. I've got a local tournament this weekend and my confidence is going to be higher than it's been in awhile. Can't wait.

 

[Subaruvich]

Thanks, very useful info. Does that mean that the same weight/balance specs on the TC97 would give a SW ~325 given it has RA66 ?

I'm assuming this has to do with how much foam there is in those frames...

Yes, if you go with 16x19. Mine was 326 strung with poly. But 18x20 333.

And as BC mentioned, it's not the foam, it's the additional graphite layers that lower the flex but increase the SW.

 

[ed70]

There is usually 13-15 points SW difference between RA63 and RA70, yes. RA70 will be around SW320 strung, easier to swing for sure.
Actually from my 3 TC95 only one was RA63, the other two are RA64 and RA65 unstrung(I measure all my frames on RDC), which leads to slightly lower SW. You can ask Paul to pick for you the frame with lower SW, if he has one.

Worth talking to Paul about the TC 95 63 RA swingweights, I believe the latest TC's will have lower swingweight's, at least this is what they are working on achieving...i have just received my TC95 63RA, 9pts headlight 315g unstrung...will be about 330 swingweight (16x19) about 5 higher than my TC97.

 

[ed70]

Sorry lower swingweights just for the TC95 63ra.

 

[sma1001]

I expect this has already been addressed, but can any TC97 18/20 users comment on how tight the 18/20 pattern is compared to say a Prestige MP? I ask as i understand some 18/20s are actually quite open (Textreme 100P, Speed 100), while some older school bats are very closed in the middle. Any thoughts appreciated.

PS: the genesis of the question is the usual trade off between spin/launch and control. in particular whether the 18/20 will allow me to hit aggressively on low short balls without hitting long.

 

[zalive]

I believe the latest TC's will have lower swingweight's, at least this is what they are working on achieving

Oh no...that smells like thinner layup as well, I'm afraid...

 

[ed70]

Oh no...that smells like thinner layup as well, I'm afraid...

I don't know, but I presume a number of people who ordered a 300g tc95 63ra, or 300g tc100 63ra may have struggled to swing them.

 

[DJ-]

Let's hope @Racketdesign can chime in on this part. I will order a tc97 soon, but if that means a thinner layup I might rethink... Maybe there will be options for the two layups ?

 

[zalive]

I don't know, but I presume a number of people who ordered a 300g tc95 63ra, or 300g tc100 63ra may have struggled to swing them.

So they had other options.
Part of TC95 charm is that it's a racquet ready to play for players who appreciate such a swing weigh.
It's ridiculous to me to remove single such offer from Angell racquet program, so you need to lead up. Where's then the point of a custom programme?

Besides, there's something else: what about players who like TC95 the way it is now? Does that mean they lose their racquet model, in a manner big manufacturers change their models and make them disappear?
I though Paul Angell was different. If he wants to create different racquet or another SW option, he should make another model. Say, TC96. Or, say, TC95 RA 65.
Changing current TC95 63 RA as such makes no sense. Same goes for any current model.
And as for other TC's, their SW is not even big...lowering it further? Is this a joke?

 

[ed70]

Let's hope @Racketdesign can chime in on this part. I will order a tc97 soon, but if that means a thinner layup I might rethink... Maybe there will be options for the two layups ?

Did any one mention a thinner lay up on the tc97??? I think not. All I heard was that the 63ra tc 95 originally had a real high swingweight, I presume this may suit a small proportion of people, but not everyone wants a real high swingweight. So it's worth asking the question when ordering rather than going by someone else's racquet bought a year or so ago!!!!

 

[zalive]

Did any one mention a thinner lay up on the tc97??? I think not. All I heard was that the 63ra tc 95 originally had a real high swingweight, I presume this may suit a small proportion of people, but not everyone wants a real high swingweight. So it's worth asking the question when ordering rather than going by someone else's racquet bought a year or so ago!!!!

If you want a lower SW with the same weight, you must redistribute the hoop mass.
That means thinner layup at 12 o'clock, but thicker somewhere else.
That means actually creating a different racquet.

I presume this may suit a small proportion of people,

Please do not presume.

 

[ed70]

So they had other options.
Part of TC95 charm is that it's a racquet ready to play for players who appreciate such a swing weigh.
It's ridiculous to me to remove single such offer from Angell racquet program, so you need to lead up. Where's then the point of a custom programme?

Besides, there's something else: what about players who like TC95 the way it is now? Does that mean they lose their racquet model, in a manner big manufacturers change their models and make them disappear?
I though Paul Angell was different. If he wants to create different racquet or another SW option, he should make another model. Say, TC96. Or, say, TC95 RA 65.
Changing current TC95 63 RA as such makes no sense. Same goes for any current model.
And as for other TC's, their SW is not even big...lowering it further? Is this a joke?

Once again who mentioned lowering swingweight on other TC's?? You are jumping the gun. Also where is swingweight actually mentioned on the custom build site?? So you can choose swingweight on the site? I didn't see this part when ordering my racquets!
I'm sure you can have what you like if you ask Angell, I'm just saying there may be tweaks being made, best ask rather than think your getting the same frame a a guy on the internet who bought his 2 years ago and lives the other side of the world

 

[ed70]

If you want a lower SW with the same weight, you must redistribute the hoop mass.
That means thinner layup at 12 o'clock, but thicker somewhere else.
That means actually creating a different racquet.



Please do not presume.

I'll presume all I like, plenty of Angell frames end up in for sale section for one reason or another... and I'm no racquet design expert so hopefully someone who's in contact with Angell can chime in with a more constructive post than mine on any changes to the layup.

 

[zalive]

Once again who mentioned lowering swingweight on other TC's?? You are jumping the gun. Also where is swingweight actually mentioned on the custom build site?? So you can choose swingweight on the site? I didn't see this part when ordering my racquets!
I'm sure you can have what you like if you ask Angell, I'm just saying there may be tweaks being made, best ask rather than think your getting the same frame a a guy on the internet who bought his 2 years ago and lives the other side of the world

Then ask someone like @Backhanded Compliment, who counts on using an identical racquet (which is TC95 63 RA in its current form) for the next 10 years, what he thinks about changing specification or layup ('tweaks') on a racquet he uses, and about lowering its current SW.

I'll presume all I like, plenty of Angell frames end up in for sale section for one reason or another... and I'm no racquet design expert so hopefully someone who's in contact with Angell can chime in with a more constructive post than mine on any changes to the layup.

FInd me a single racquet which doesn't or didn't end in sale sections. I don't understand your claims, really. Do you think any racquet should suit everybody's game? That's impossible.
Here some people consider PT57's best racquets ever made. Does it mean PT57 will suit any player?

 

[o0lunatik]

I'll presume all I like, plenty of Angell frames end up in for sale section for one reason or another... and I'm no racquet design expert so hopefully someone who's in contact with Angell can chime in with a more constructive post than mine on any changes to the layup.

It goes with the change of the season. Spring is approaching and our comrades are looking for something new for the year. That's the trend I've noticed selling frames over the years. I currently have 5 and truly appreciating and liking these fine crafted Angell frames.

Every Angell frame put up for sale sells quickly and above any of the currently, popular frames market price as well. So keep on selling!

 

[ed70]

Then ask someone like @Backhanded Compliment, who counts on using an identical racquet (which is TC95 63 RA in its current form) for the next 10 years, what he thinks about changing specification or layup ('tweaks') on a racquet he uses, and about lowering its current SW.



FInd me a single racquet which doesn't or didn't end in sale sections. I don't understand your claims, really. Do you think any racquet should suit everybody's game? That's impossible.
Here some people consider PT57's best racquets ever made. Does it mean PT57 will suit any player?

What I'm saying is there are people who have bought a 63ra tc 95 in the past who can't swing it. Of course all brands of frame end up for sale for 1 reason or another.
Secondly you still haven't pointed out the part of the Angell site where it gives detailed swingweights for all of the custom options?

 

[ed70]

It goes with the change of the season. Spring is approaching and our comrades are looking for something new for the year. That's the trend I've noticed selling frames over the years. I happened to pick up a couple of those TC100 pros that were for sale. Now have 5 and truly appreciating and liking these fine crafted Angell frames.

Every Angell frame put up for sale sells quickly and above any of the currently, popular frames market price as well. So keep on selling!

Ihave 2 angells neither will be getting sold

 

[zalive]

What I'm saying is there are people who have bought a 63ra tc 95 in the past who can't swing it. Of course all brands of frame end up for sale for 1 reason or another.
Secondly you still haven't pointed out the part of the Angell site where it gives detailed swingweights for all of the custom options?

They didn't care to ask what was the swing weight of their custom racquet?
Or they don't know which swing weight they can handle, but order a custom racquet?

All I wanted to say is: you don't change racquets and call it a same model. TC95 63 RA should stay as is now. No one has nothing against creating additional models, or additional specification options.

 

[o0lunatik]

Posting two TC100 Pros for sale today if anyone is interested. I've purchased a few new in smaller grip size as I wanted.

 

[ed70]

They didn't care to ask what was the swing weight of their custom racquet?
Or they don't know which swing weight they can handle, but order a custom racquet?

All I wanted to say is: you don't change racquets and call it a same model. TC95 63 RA should stay as is now. No one has nothing against creating additional models, or additional specification options.

 

[ed70]

My point is that there is no mention of the actual swingweight of the frame when you custom order, you pick the static weight and balance...its a question I had to ask when ordering my frames and I'm extremely happy with them. Now as for backhanded compliments racquets, I don't know his specs swingweights etc, but what I'm saying is if his frames are somehow made by god himself, id just make sure they can be replicated before you order.

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

They didn't care to ask what was the swing weight of their custom racquet?
Or they don't know which swing weight they can handle, but order a custom racquet?

All I wanted to say is: you don't change racquets and call it a same model. TC95 63 RA should stay as is now. No one has nothing against creating additional models, or additional specification options.

yeah the TC 95 63 ra is a special frame and it's not for everybody. I'm very strong though and bigger than most tennis players (soderling-ish nordic) but I train so I can handle this frame... I'm not a triathlete so I don't think you have to being ridiculous shape to use it.

as far as the specific swing weights Paul repeatedly has mentioned that he can pick out lower or higher swing weights within the same production frame. Correctly, he considers this variance a feature not a flaw. That way if you ask for a lower swing weight tc 95 63 ra he can get you one but there is only so much variance. The reason he doesn't list the actual swing weight is there is some variance and you can ask for that that's part of the custom experience

Myself I like my frames to be very consistent from one to the next and because Paul has worked with so many professionals who are even more demanding than I am I trust that he can produce similar results over and over again.

the other thing is I don't actually try to match swing weights I always do customization after I get a frame. I tweak them throughout the year depending on conditions and all my frames are slightly different from one another... but close. I like it that way. There's always one racket that I go to more than another than all the others too... my arm seems to be the thing that I measure everything by and I always end up around 12.7 ounces 9 points headlight. The nine points headlight aspect is probably more important than the actual static weight. moving around tiny amounts of weight throughout the year is just part of the sport for me. I can tell if conditions are a little slower that I need to have things a little bit more polarized... plus a little more thump on the racket because air slows everything down in heavy conditions.

 

[tennisnut1]

Just got back from my first hitting session. Damn what a racket! I know I'm at the very beginning of a honeymoon phase but that was one fun racquet to hit with. The rewards from solid sweet spot contact was unreal. However, my miss hits felt horrible. I've got some adjusting to do. Much like the Pro Staff Classic, you better keep your eye on the ball with the TC 95. I've never hit with a Head Prestige but now I think I know the meaning of plush. It's hard to explain but the Angell is like no other tennis racquet I've ever played with. It felt like the difference between a Toyota and a Lexus. Luxury in comfort, style, and performance. The Toyota (Wilson) is tried and true. Reliable. A solid asset. A Lexus (Angell) however is all that and more. The 16x19 63 RA wasn't overly powerful. The amount of spin was crazy. My balls were diving into the court without any change in my mechanics. I was worried about the lack of control but it was like a scalpel. The best part...I hit 300+ balls and my elbow feels the same as when I left the house. I can't believe a bed of poly hit that soft. Strung at 55 no less. That Volkl V Pro is awesome. I can't believe they are discontinuing it. If the Angell will let me hit without elbow pain then I'd pay twice what they go for new. BHBH sent it to me with his customized specs and I'm not changing a thing. I had so much more control and whip. I didn't get to volley so I'm interested in how stable it will be at the net. The bar is set pretty high with the PSC I've been using. I also didn't get to serve tonight but hopefully soon. All in all, I'm stoked I found this forum and even more so this thread. This racquet is going to be a game changer for me. I've got a local tournament this weekend and my confidence is going to be higher than it's been in awhile. Can't wait.

I had tennis elbow for 2 years, bought my TC 105 and in 2 months my tennis elbow was gone, adious baby

 

[CosmosMpower]

Looking for some feedback on which Angell might work best for me.

I'm a mid 4.0 level player that mostly plays recreational doubles these days. I have a fairly flat forehand with just enough spin to get over the net. I like hitting flat serves mostly but sometimes throw in a slice from out wide to pull opponents off court. I do like to take fuller cuts at the ball on the forehand side but have a more compact 2hbh and sometimes use a backhand slice.

I like softer feeling racquets with a fairly low swing weight and head light balance. I currently use a Blade 104 which is around 320 grams and about 5.5 pts head light and those specs feel good but I'd like a smaller headed racquet. I bought a blade 98 18x20 looking for a smaller headed control oriented racquet but it is too head heavy. I've also previously used and liked my Head Youtek IG Prestige pros (6-7 points head light) except those were around 347 grams strung with an overgrip and dampener and too heavy on longer matches.

Should I be looking at a TC95, 97 or 100? Should I go for the 18x20 since I don't hit massive top spin?

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

Looking for some feedback on which Angell might work best for me.

I'm a mid 4.0 level player that mostly plays recreational doubles these days. I have a fairly flat forehand with just enough spin to get over the net. I like hitting flat serves mostly but sometimes throw in a slice from out wide to pull opponents off court. I do like to take fuller cuts at the ball on the forehand side but have a more compact 2hbh and sometimes use a backhand slice.

I like softer feeling racquets with a fairly low swing weight and head light balance. I currently use a Blade 104 which is around 320 grams and about 5.5 pts head light and those specs feel good but I'd like a smaller headed racquet. I bought a blade 98 18x20 looking for a smaller headed control oriented racquet but it is too head heavy. I've also previously used and liked my Head Youtek IG Prestige pros (6-7 points head light) except those were around 347 grams strung with an overgrip and dampener and too heavy on longer matches.

Should I be looking at a TC95, 97 or 100? Should I go for the 18x20 since I don't hit massive top spin?

Definitely go 18x20 so Tc 97... I dont think the TC100 comes in anything but a 16x19 and youll probably start adding more spin over time... TC97 wont be deficient there either. But talk to paul the Tc100 could work if you want more power.

 

[sma1001]

Paul repeatedly has mentioned that he can pick out lower or higher swing weights within the same production frame. Correctly, he considers this variance a feature not a flaw

Precisely. He can give an indicative range for SW, and then seek out within that range. That doesn't mean a TC95 63RA can be supplied with a SW of 280 (unstrung - strings add c30 SW points). The range will be more like 300-310. This is a tight tolerance by industry standards, but within that range it helps people customise to desired specs.

 

[zalive]

Precisely. He can give an indicative range for SW, and then seek out within that range. That doesn't mean a TC95 63RA can be supplied with a SW of 280 (unstrung - strings add c30 SW points). The range will be more like 300-310. This is a tight tolerance by industry standards, but within that range it helps people customise to desired specs.

If Paul decides to change specs of TC95 63 RA, let no one be surprised if SW's of 280-290 (unstrung) might occur. But it's not just about SW. Playing properties are determined by mass distribution and layup thickness at certain spots (and these two are directly connected). I don't understand the need to change a model (TC95 63 RA) which so many players praise as the one that has something special in it.

A bit of support here against this possible change might help send the message to Paul not to touch current TC95 63 RA, but rather leave it as it is now. Because certain qualities of this racquet are thanks to current layup, and also thanks to current SW as well. To lower its SW but expect it to retain all its present qualities and oomph...this is illusional.

And if anyone wants another TC95 option (or range of options), this deserves the introduction of another option. Not discontinuing current options/model. I think we can all agree that players want Angell to stand out as it stands out now and to be different to big manufacturers principles of continuous discontinuation of all the models, including beloved ones and classics. But this means he should not discontinue any of his racquets, for the sake of all the players who like them. And I believe there is significant number of such - otherwise all the praise for TC95 we can read on this thread would be a lie.

 

[treblings]

If Paul decides to change specs of TC95 63 RA, let no one be surprised if SW's of 280-290 (unstrung) might occur. But it's not just about SW. Playing properties are determined by mass distribution and layup thickness at certain spots (and these two are directly connected). I don't understand the need to change a model (TC95 63 RA) which so many players praise as the one that has something special in it.

A bit of support here against this possible change might help send the message to Paul not to touch current TC95 63 RA, but rather leave it as it is now. Because certain qualities of this racquet are thanks to current layup, and also thanks to current SW as well. To lower its SW but expect it to retain all its present qualities and oomph...this is illusional.

And if anyone wants another TC95 option (or range of options), this deserves the introduction of another option. Not discontinuing current options/model. I think we can all agree that players want Angell to stand out as it stands out now and to be different to big manufacturers principles of continuous discontinuation of all the models, including beloved ones and classics, But this means he should not discontinue any of his racquets, for the sake of all the players who like them. And I believe there is significant numbers of such - otherwise all the praise for TC95 we can read on this thread would be a lie.

this is one of the main attractions of the Angell line for me. the ability to buy the same racquet in years to come. plus new grommets if necessary.

 

[joohan]

Looking for some feedback on which Angell might work best for me.

I'm a mid 4.0 level player that mostly plays recreational doubles these days. I have a fairly flat forehand with just enough spin to get over the net. I like hitting flat serves mostly but sometimes throw in a slice from out wide to pull opponents off court. I do like to take fuller cuts at the ball on the forehand side but have a more compact 2hbh and sometimes use a backhand slice.

I like softer feeling racquets with a fairly low swing weight and head light balance. I currently use a Blade 104 which is around 320 grams and about 5.5 pts head light and those specs feel good but I'd like a smaller headed racquet. I bought a blade 98 18x20 looking for a smaller headed control oriented racquet but it is too head heavy. I've also previously used and liked my Head Youtek IG Prestige pros (6-7 points head light) except those were around 347 grams strung with an overgrip and dampener and too heavy on longer matches.

Should I be looking at a TC95, 97 or 100? Should I go for the 18x20 since I don't hit massive top spin?

TC97 310/305. Not sure about string pattern and haven't hit w/ 16x19 but 18x20 TC97 is one sweet hit.

 

[Georgo]

A bit of support here against this possible change might help send the message to Paul not to touch current TC95 63 RA, but rather leave it as it is now.

Agree. We should all send a message to Paul as a feedback to this.

 

[mr.torrence]

....paul...you up?

 

[rlau]

This is what Paul posted today on Facebook: "We have been asked by a couple of customers if there is any truth that we are making some changes to the TC series. We are happy to
Confirm there are no planned changes to the construction of any custom frames in our range. During production, we produce a range of SW from low to high. To meet customer demands, we are now producing a higher percentage of frames with the lower SW. This is achieved by fine tuning our moulding process and not by any alteration of the construction or materials used. All variances of our frames will still be available as previously."

 

[joohan]

This is what Paul posted today on Facebook: "We have been asked by a couple of customers if there is any truth that we are making some changes to the TC series. We are happy to
Confirm there are no planned changes to the construction of any custom frames in our range. During production, we produce a range of SW from low to high. To meet customer demands, we are now producing a higher percentage of frames with the lower SW. This is achieved by fine tuning our moulding process and not by any alteration of the construction or materials used. All variances of our frames will still be available as previously."

Thanks a lot.

Can we tune the hysteria down now, please?

 

[zalive]

Thanks a lot.

Can we tune the hysteria down now, please?

Hysteria was only part of your perception

 

[joohan]

Hysteria was only part of your perception

Doubt it. Moving on...

 

[ed70]

Ok So if a customer just goes on the website and orders a TC 95 63RA 310g 9pts headlight, what does he/she get with regard to swingweight? the way I read it chances are they get a lower swingweight than previously, unless they stipulate they want a higher swingweight frame...and how would they actually know there was a differing scale of swing weights available during the order process?

 

[zalive]

Doubt it. Moving on...

All you ever have, when reading sentences of persons you actually never see and never get the non-verbal content, is your projection and imagination
However, what you know well is your own emotional state

 

[joohan]

All you ever have, when reading sentences of persons you actually never see and never get the non-verbal content, is your projection and imagination
However, what you know well is your own emotional state

Excellent point, Dr.Freud. Never too late to learn...

 

[tennisnut1]

Looking for some feedback on which Angell might work best for me.

I'm a mid 4.0 level player that mostly plays recreational doubles these days. I have a fairly flat forehand with just enough spin to get over the net. I like hitting flat serves mostly but sometimes throw in a slice from out wide to pull opponents off court. I do like to take fuller cuts at the ball on the forehand side but have a more compact 2hbh and sometimes use a backhand slice.

I like softer feeling racquets with a fairly low swing weight and head light balance. I currently use a Blade 104 which is around 320 grams and about 5.5 pts head light and those specs feel good but I'd like a smaller headed racquet. I bought a blade 98 18x20 looking for a smaller headed control oriented racquet but it is too head heavy. I've also previously used and liked my Head Youtek IG Prestige pros (6-7 points head light) except those were around 347 grams strung with an overgrip and dampener and too heavy on longer matches.

Should I be looking at a TC95, 97 or 100? Should I go for the 18x20 since I don't hit massive top spin?

Looks like the TC 97 18X20 would be magic in your hands

 

[CosmosMpower]

Looks like the TC 97 18X20 would be magic in your hands

Thanks for the suggestion, any idea on which weight, balance and RA I should choose?

 

[Ft.S]

Thanks for the suggestion, any idea on which weight, balance and RA I should choose?

I also agree that the TC97 18x20 would be a good choice, probably starting out with 310 gm and 315mm balance, or 320 gm and 310 mm might work for you as well. With 320 gm it would be difficult to go down on weight, but with 310 gm not only you have room to up, but changing balance along the way would not be too challenging either. In terms RA, I'd recommend sticking with 66.

 

[joohan]

Thanks for the suggestion, any idea on which weight, balance and RA I should choose?

There's only one RA option. I have a 320/310 option which swings very light and fast but if you ask for it, 310/310 or even 310/305 should not be impossible to build. Then you can add weight where you need it.

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

Thanks for the suggestion, any idea on which weight, balance and RA I should choose?

I wont venture to suggest, other than give yourself room to change if you want. Topspin really makes a difference in your game and as you incorporate it more into your game you may find that your balance needs also change. Me I'm an extreme contrast player I go from very flat to very topspinny... power to touch. Paul's frames are very multidimensional, remarkably so and the comfort factor is more than worth it. Just make certain you leave yourself some room.

 

[ed70]

I actually would prefer the 16x19 if I was mainly playing doubles, very easy to hit low and flat with the tc97 16x19

 

[Backhanded Compliment]

I actually would prefer the 16x19 if I was mainly playing doubles, very easy to hit low and flat with the tc97 16x19

Its true my 16x19 tc95 does hit flat very well... but it is a spinny beast too. For most players the TC97 is going to be the more popular choice though. The tc95 is in many ways the midplus version of the ps85 lineage with elements of other classic mids like the Max 200g and the Fischer vacuum pro as well in a MP massive power when called for package. I guess that makes it its own thing. Cant wait for my second one to arrive. Weather is getting better here so Ill likely play outside this weekend.

 

[Doc Hollidae]

Does anyone know if the TC100 is made with High modulus carbon construction like the TC95? In looking at their info sheets, the TC95 mentions High Modulus Carbon Construction, but not the TC100.

 

[RGT]

Well got my tc95 in the mail yesterday, strung it up and had a light hit today! Takes a bit to get used to but I think it's a very sweet frame. Strung it up with msv focus hex at 22/23 kg but the string felt more stiff then usual. Can it be due to the smaller headsize compared to my ai98, and therefore should I go lower in tension? Also, any people who used some lead on 3 and 9? Tomorrow the second hit, can't wait!

Verstuurd vanaf mijn HUAWEI VNS-L31 met Tapatalk