The Official Angell Users Club

Madden

New User
Hi! Can anybody compare Angell rackets power, launch angle, sweet spot size with more popular tweeners?
I'm currently playing with dunlop cx200 - It suits me well. And vcore pro 97 - a little bit underpowered, but also good.
I'm struggling between tc97, tc101 and asl2. I guess asl2 will be ideal for me, but I like octane design much more.
 
Last edited:

flanker2000fr

Professional
Hi! Can anybody compare Angell rackets power, launch angle, sweet spot size with more popular tweeners?
I'm currently playing with dunlop cx200 - It suits me well. And vcore pro 97 - a little bit underpowered, but also good.
I'm struggling between tc97, tc101 and asl2. I guess asl2 will be ideal for me, but I like octane design much more.
I have tried to play with the Dunlop CX200 Tour 16x19 for several weeks at the beginning of this year, and I found that the launch angle was really low for a 16x19 pattern. I was hardly having any more net clearance than with a Prince Phantom 93P. The 16x19 on the Angell's, from my experience with the TC100, is very high due to their very open pattern (6 strings at the bridge vs. 8 for the Dunlop). I was missing in the top of the net a lot with the Dunlop, and tend to miss long with the TC100. So you would definitely need to adjust for this. I would expect the sweet spot on the TC101 to be similar to my TC100, which is markedly bigger than the Dunlop. Power level should also be higher, as the Dunlop is very low on that score.
 

Tezroza

New User
Question: What Angell frame plays nearest to the Prostaff K90?

Is it the TC95 or TC97? I read as much of this thread as I could.

I want to move to a more modern frame (ie not 90), but there are days when I struggle with the Yonex head shape & serving the way I want to.

Serving with it feels a little clunky/sluggish. Groundstrokes wise I might as well be playing like I'm drunk (I think I need more feedback on the ball?). My string wear patterns indicate my hitting is all over the place with the VCP HD. No issues with the K90 or Maxply.

A comparison between K90, VCP HD and said Angell frames would be much appreciated. I think I'm leaning towards the TC 97 16x19.
Give angell an email with this question, paul usually responds within a week. No one knows the frames more than him lol.
 

djNEiGht

Hall of Fame
So my TC95 16x19 63RA is under way, and I should get it tomorrow.

Quick question to those who have both the TC100 and the TC95 16x19: what tension do you use in each frame? I am now at 52/50 in a full bed of 4G on the TC100, and was thinking at dropping to 50/48 on the TC95 to have more or less the same feel. Does this make sense?
I was stringing the TC100 at 50 to 55 where as my tc95 I'm at 43 to 48
 

djNEiGht

Hall of Fame
That's a pretty steep drop in tension between the two, being 7lbs. Did you feel that the power level / sweet spot was markedly reduced on the TC95, that ou had to drop the tension as much?
yes it is a pretty steep drop. I found the mains on the TC100 really long so needed to tame the power. If it was a lively 17g string I would be up at 55 where as a 16g low powered was when I would bring it to 50.

For the TC95, I was playing at 48 for a while and have found myself moving lower down to 45. Rarely did I go down to 43 but it has happened.

Power level was very different to me between the two. The TC95 was no slouch though but had better control so I could afford to go lower on the tension.

Your experience between the two might be different but all the same...Hope this helps.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
yes it is a pretty steep drop. I found the mains on the TC100 really long so needed to tame the power. If it was a lively 17g string I would be up at 55 where as a 16g low powered was when I would bring it to 50.

For the TC95, I was playing at 48 for a while and have found myself moving lower down to 45. Rarely did I go down to 43 but it has happened.

Power level was very different to me between the two. The TC95 was no slouch though but had better control so I could afford to go lower on the tension.

Your experience between the two might be different but all the same...Hope this helps.
Thanks for the feedback. I'll start by dropping 2lbs on my current set-up, and if it plays too stiff / low powered, I'll drop it another 2.

Just received the TC95, which I have left to string. Very keen to hit with this frame.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Right, so I played 2 hours of doubles today with the TC95, and thought it would be interesting to report my impressions, especially how it compares to the TC100 I have been playing for the past 3 months.

Both racquets have a 16x19 pattern, 63RA, Octane paint, 310g unstrung, 315mm balance, and strung with a full bed of Luxilon 4G (2lbs less in the TC95). So they are perfectly matched, except for the hoop size.

First impression: the TC95 feels like it is swinging slightly heavier than the TC100. I wouldn't be surprised if the SW is 2-3 pts heavier, once Angell send me the exact specs of the frame. It might have to do with the same static weight concentrated on a slightly more compact frame.

Feel is fairly similar, both are very plush, comfortable racquets.

But it's really when taking big swings that differences appear:
1) the launch angle is not as extreme on the 95 as on the 100, but still gave me decent net clearance
2) power level is is not quite as high as with the TC100, but not miles off, subjectively maybe only -5%. Nonetheless, surprisingly good for a 95 sq.in.

The combination of 1) and 2) makes for a fairly different experience. With the TC100, I really have to put a lot of shape on my shots and dial up the top spin to keep the ball in court, while the TC95 fares much better when deciding to flatten a shot. Where the TC100 has more absolute power, I feel that the TC95 has more usable power, where the ball stays in court instead of flying long. It's as if this 5% drop in power I was alluding to above was translating into 20% more control, which is conducive to swinging more freely. The TC100 catapults the ball, where the TC95 just crushes it, and I understand the references to Thor's hammer a bit better now.

Actually, the TC95 reminds me a lot of the Prince Phantom 93P 18x20. Same plush feel, same plow through on hard, flat shots. Except that the TC95 is much easier to use (20g less static weight for the one I got), has a larger sweet spot, easier access to power and spin. I loved playing the 93P, but it's a very demanding racquet, and the TC95 is far more realistic. Comparing to another 95sq.in. in the Dunlop CX200 Tour 16x19, the TC95 is markedly more powerful and has a higher launch angle.

Spin, by the way, is about on par between the 100 and the 95, with maybe a slight edge for the 100.

Serves were great, I don't feel I miss anything switching from one to the other. I can hit my spots equally well, either sliced or kicked.

Returns: not my strongest suit at the best of time, but I was actually pretty good today. I think the 95 is much better in doubles, where the ball has to be kept lower, where the 100 has more tolerance and clearance, which is handier in singles.

It will also be interesting to see how much more mileage I can get from my strings in the TC95, as I am breaking them too quickly for my liking in the TC100.

I have a couple of more games this week, with a competitive singles game tomorrow where I'll be using the 95. If my impressions are confirmed, I'll be ordering a second TC95, and I'll be selling my 3rd TC100 to keep just two. I can see a scenario where I predominantly use the TC95, but want to keep the TC100 at hand for those days when the footwork is a bit slow and I need the extra tolerance.
 
Last edited:

flanker2000fr

Professional
For those still reading this, I received the specs of my TC95 from Angell: the unstrung SW is 303. Which is noticeably higher than the 297 unstrung SW I was given for the TC100.

Meaning that once strung, it should be at or slightly above 330. No wonder I was feeling this much plow through on flat shots, as this put it in the same bracket as the Prince 93P or 100P. Though it's probably the right thing on a 95 sq.in. frame, for it to have a good level of power. The CX 200 Tour 16x19, which came at a sub 320 SW, was substantially under powered, and would require a lot of weight to be added to correct it.

Still, I am surprised that 2 racquets with the exact same layup and specs, and only a difference in the head size would have a difference in SW of 6pts. I have asked Paul to explain why, and will report if / when I get an answer.
 
Last edited:

Gee

Hall of Fame
For those still reading this, I received the specs of my TC95 from Angell: the unstrung SW is 303. Which is noticeably higher than the 297 unstrung SW I was given for the TC100.

Meaning that once strung, it should be at or slightly above 330. No wonder I was feeling this much plow through on flat shots, as this put it in the same bracket as the Prince 93P or 100P. It's probably the right thing on a 95 sq.in. frame for it to have a good level of power, though. The CX 200 Tour 16x19, which came at a sub 320 SW, was substantially under powered, and would require a lot of weight to be added to correct it.

Still, I am surprised that 2 racquets with the exact same layup and specs, and only a difference in the head size would have a difference in SW of 6pts. I have asked Paul to explain why, and will report if / when I get an answer.
My TC95s (18x20 and 16x19 63RA) also have a high (>300) SW unstrung and I think these ones just feel and play better because of this.

I also owned 2 TC100s that felt a lot less maneuverable than my TC95s with a similar swingweight due to the bigger headsize.

Last times I played with a full poly stringbed (Pacific PolyPower Pro 1.25 mm at 24/22 kg) with my TC95 16x19 but next time I'll try a hybrid (Head RIP control 1.25 mm (mains) / Pacific PolyPower Pro 1.25 mm (crosses) at 26/22 kg) because I missed the touch/feel of the multi string. Besides it'll decrease the swingweight a little as well. We'll see how it performs.
 

Tezroza

New User
Been trying out Toroline Caviar in my tc97 18x20 comparing it to my usual alu power and I’m really impressed with the results. Similar pop and spin with more feel.
 

edelp

Semi-Pro
I have three TC95s, one with SW294, one with 299 and the third 300. FRames 2&3 I ordered later. I just got them restrung and one with a 1.25 gauge poli, one with a nat gut / 1.30 poli, the third full bed 1.30 poli. In frame 1 strings add 31 SW pts, gut / poli 35 pts and the 1.30 poli added 36 pts.

So I guess yours @flanker2000fr might end up to SW 340 SW in your 303 SW tc 95, if you put a 1.30 poli. (as a side note, my stringer´s SW machine always gives one point lower SW than what Paul shares)
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
I have three TC95s, one with SW294, one with 299 and the third 300. FRames 2&3 I ordered later. I just got them restrung and one with a 1.25 gauge poli, one with a nat gut / 1.30 poli, the third full bed 1.30 poli. In frame 1 strings add 31 SW pts, gut / poli 35 pts and the 1.30 poli added 36 pts.

So I guess yours @flanker2000fr might end up to SW 340 SW in your 303 SW tc 95, if you put a 1.30 poli. (as a side note, my stringer´s SW machine always gives one point lower SW than what Paul shares)
That's a pretty steep difference between the racquets you ordered. 299 vs. 300 is not a big deal, but 294 is a bit of an outlier. Did they all come with the same paint?

As fo strings, I always thought the added SW would be around 28-30, but I get than some strings, especially polys in thick gauges, could be more. I remember Solinco Revolution, for instance, adding quite a bit of weight / SW to the frames I put it in.
 

edelp

Semi-Pro
Well l bought the first frame long before and then asked for an additional pair. Not sure what happened then. I can only say that for me with a 1.30 gauge it is on the 300SW racquet quite the limit... I will try to go down to 1.25 (increase tension) to reduce 5 points SW strung (and might use the 1.30 gauge in the 294 SW one) to be at "my comfort max" of 330SW. So all would be strung at 330 approx.
Currently, as coincidence, the 1.25 gauge is on the low SW frame and strung at 325 and it is fun as it is easy to move I have to say...

All copper paint as Paul confirmed that the new Octane in average had 5 points higher SW
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
I would really need to get the strung SW measured on a machine. I might try to do this once I get the second TC95 I have just ordered.

Assuming it is 330 or slightly above, it's just about what I can manage on most days, so I'm glad to have the TC100 to switch to on off days.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Let us know how your strings hold up!
Will do. I only managed 2 hours of doubles and 1 hour of singles with it this week. I couldn't play as much as I wanted due to a minor Achilles discomfort. But I should resume on Monday with competitive doubles in the club's league, and probably a couple of singles hit later in the week.
 

krikamons

New User
Right, so I played 2 hours of doubles today with the TC95, and thought it would be interesting to report my impressions, especially how it compares to the TC100 I have been playing for the past 3 months.

Both racquets have a 16x19 pattern, 63RA, Octane paint, 310g unstrung, 315mm balance, and strung with a full bed of Luxilon 4G (2lbs less in the TC95). So they are perfectly matched, except for the hoop size.

First impression: the TC95 feels like it is swinging slightly heavier than the TC100. I wouldn't be surprised if the SW is 2-3 pts heavier, once Angell send me the exact specs of the frame. It might have to do with the same static weight concentrated on a slightly more compact frame.

Feel is fairly similar, both are very plush, comfortable racquets.

But it's really when taking big swings that differences appear:
1) the launch angle is not as extreme on the 95 as on the 100, but still gave me decent net clearance
2) power level is is not quite as high as with the TC100, but not miles off, subjectively maybe only -5%. Nonetheless, surprisingly good for a 95 sq.in.

The combination of 1) and 2) makes for a fairly different experience. With the TC100, I really have to put a lot of shape on my shots and dial up the top spin to keep the ball in court, while the TC95 fares much better when deciding to flatten a shot. Where the TC100 has more absolute power, I feel that the TC95 has more usable power, where the ball stays in court instead of flying long. It's as if this 5% drop in power I was alluding to above was translating into 20% more control, which is conducive to swinging more freely. The TC100 catapults the ball, where the TC95 just crushes it, and I understand the references to Thor's hammer a bit better now.

Actually, the TC95 reminds me a lot of the Prince Phantom 93P 18x20. Same plush feel, same plow through on hard, flat shots. Except that the TC95 is much easier to use (20g less static weight for the one I got), has a larger sweet spot, easier access to power and spin. I loved playing the 93P, but it's a very demanding racquet, and the TC95 is far more realistic. Comparing to another 95sq.in. in the Dunlop CX200 Tour 16x19, the TC95 is markedly more powerful and has a higher launch angle.

Spin, by the way, is about on par between the 100 and the 95, with maybe a slight edge for the 100.

Serves were great, I don't feel I miss anything switching from one to the other. I can hit my spots equally well, either sliced or kicked.

Returns: not my strongest suit at the best of time, but I was actually pretty good today. I think the 95 is much better in doubles, where the ball has to be kept lower, where the 100 has more tolerance and clearance, which is handier in singles.

It will also be interesting to see how much more mileage I can get from my strings in the TC95, as I am breaking them too quickly for my liking in the TC100.

I have a couple of more games this week, with a competitive singles game tomorrow where I'll be using the 95. If my impressions are confirmed, I'll be ordering a second TC95, and I'll be selling my 3rd TC100 to keep just two. I can see a scenario where I predominantly use the TC95, but want to keep the TC100 at hand for those days when the footwork is a bit slow and I need the extra tolerance.
Did you notice any marked difference in stability between TC95 and TC100?
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
Let us know how your strings hold up!
Yesterday I played with a fresh hybrid stringbed (Head RIP Control 1.25 / Pacific PolyPower Pro 1.25 at 26/22 kg) in my TC95 16m.

First 2 hours it felt too boardy and a bit underpowered as the strings weren't yet broken in but finally it was getting better and then I started to hit as well as I used to.

Compared to a full stringbed with Pacific PPP it feels much softer and more muted and I must admit the first strokes I had to get used to this softer muted feel again but that is not really an issue anymore. Especially my volleys feel more comfortable with more touch/feel.

The balance also feels now perfect to me because of the lighter multi strings. I just don't feel any weight drag into the tip anymore whereas I did with the full poly stringbed. With the hybrid I weighted my TC95 at 346 grams that is 2 grams lighter than with full poly.

All in all the TC95 16m continues to impress me how versatile it is. I can hit all my strokes with more ease again. It just feels like coming home to me!
 

galapagos

Semi-Pro
Yesterday I played with a fresh hybrid stringbed (Head RIP Control 1.25 / Pacific PolyPower Pro 1.25 at 26/22 kg) in my TC95 16m.

First 2 hours it felt too boardy and a bit underpowered as the strings weren't yet broken in but finally it was getting better and then I started to hit as well as I used to.

Compared to a full stringbed with Pacific PPP it feels much softer and more muted and I must admit the first strokes I had to get used to this softer muted feel again but that is not really an issue anymore. Especially my volleys feel more comfortable with more touch/feel.

The balance also feels now perfect to me because of the lighter multi strings. I just don't feel any weight drag into the tip anymore whereas I did with the full poly stringbed. With the hybrid I weighted my TC95 at 346 grams that is 2 grams lighter than with full poly.

All in all the TC95 16m continues to impress me how versatile it is. I can hit all my strokes with more ease again. It just feels like coming home to me!
told you it is worth the try ! :) I am still messing around with strings. Long journey. Long list :)
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
told you it is worth the try ! :) I am still messing around with strings. Long journey. Long list :)
Yeah,... we seem to have same taste regarding rackets. Your specs of the TC95 are also very similar to mine except I prefer a leather grip.

What about the feel of the different versions (v1, v2 and v3) of the TC95?
I have a TC95 v1 that has a bit higher swingweight (of ca. 300) that I actually like. I read that the swingweight with the last version (v3) is a little more consisent and a little bit below 300 SW and some people wrote the feel is also a little different from v1 and v2.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
told you it is worth the try ! :) I am still messing around with strings. Long journey. Long list :)
I am going to have to do this too. A full be of 4G is a bit too dead in the TC95. I am reading good things about Head Rip Control. I might try it as a cross in a hybrid.
 

galapagos

Semi-Pro
Yeah,... we seem to have same taste regarding rackets. Your specs of the TC95 are also very similar to mine except I prefer a leather grip.

What about the feel of the different versions (v1, v2 and v3) of the TC95?
I have a TC95 v1 that has a bit higher swingweight (of ca. 300) that I actually like. I read that the swingweight with the last version (v3) is a little more consisent and a little bit below 300 SW and some people wrote the feel is also a little different from v1 and v2.
Cooper PJ is a bit lower on average than previous version (black + silver its v1?) . I also think cooper plays a bit more stable. Octane PJ has bigger SW on average and more in par with the v1) but i havent tested the tc95 in than PJ as i am too much used to my current setup (295 SW). I will try tc95 octane soon 320g/305mm 300 SW .

I am going to have to do this too. A full be of 4G is a bit too dead in the TC95. I am reading good things about Head Rip Control. I might try it as a cross in a hybrid.
Me and Gee were both huge fans of tc95 18x20 and both eventualy ended with 16x19. I suggested him trying the 16m version. Once you get hooked to the tc95 feel its hard to use anything else... its that unique and special. But regarding strings I have to use 1.30 gauges to tame the launch angle and kinda push it a bit towards 18x20 brother. Perfect mix at least for me :)
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
Cooper PJ is a bit lower on average than previous version (black + silver its v1?) . I also think cooper plays a bit more stable. Octane PJ has bigger SW on average and more in par with the v1) but i havent tested the tc95 in than PJ as i am too much used to my current setup (295 SW). I will try tc95 octane soon 320g/305mm 300 SW .
Yes, I already understood that from this thread as well.

The v1 is the gunmetal pj and v2 is the black silver pj (that is my favourite one up to now).

I am still considering what sw is ideal for myself.
Earlier I owned a TC95 18x20 v1 with a 308 SW that I liked a lot. Especially that nice solid feel that comes from a sturdy swingweight.
However I also owned a pair of TC97 18x20 with a bit lower sw of 300 that played more maneuverable and therefore a bit easier (though I much prefer the feel of TC95 as you maybe already know ;-)). So all these frames I already sold except one TC95 18m v2.

I also still want to have measure the specs of my second-hand TC95 16m v1 by a local retailer that owns a RDC machine as this one feels great to me regarding total weight, balance and swingweight. As far as I know from the previous owner he ordered with a 320 grams - 10pts HL - synthetic base grip setup. He guesses a swingweight of 300 and I think it also feels like that to me.

Me and Gee were both huge fans of tc95 18x20 and both eventualy ended with 16x19. I suggested him trying the 16m version. Once you get hooked to the tc95 feel its hard to use anything else... its that unique and special. But regarding strings I have to use 1.30 gauges to tame the launch angle and kinda push it a bit towards 18x20 brother. Perfect mix at least for me :)
I agree. The 16m just feels a little more versatile than the 18m. Especially if you like to vary by different kind of strokes (flat, slice, topspin, etc. ) and you're an allcourt player. What really suprises me is that I can even hit flat and low strokes with the open pattern so easily.

To me the 18m just feels like more suited to an more one-dimensional baseline game. Players with really long (baseline) strokes will benefit from the more tamed control because of the denser string pattern.
I always felt I need to exaggerate some strokes with the 18m (for instance sharp slice serves, low approach shots and running lobs) whereas the 16m is a little more forgiving in these situations.

The D-beam design also feels more aerodynamic than the box-beam design of the Wilson UT.

Besides I also don't need to customize my TC95 16m with lead etc. as it is solid enough and it has more than enough power.

I use 1.20 (multi) and 1.18 gauges (poly) in my TC95 18m and 1.25 (multi and poly) that feels fine to me. I just prefer to use as thin as possible strings for the best touch/feel.
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
I am going to have to do this too. A full be of 4G is a bit too dead in the TC95. I am reading good things about Head Rip Control. I might try it as a cross in a hybrid.
Head RIP Control is my goto-string that I have been playing with for many years.

It is a great multi string in a hybrid with a copoly as it is a very low powered multi with very good control. It adds a lot of touch/feel compared to a full poly stringbed. Especially the thinner gauges (1.20 and 1.25). I tried the 1.30 once that had much less feel/touch and firmer but maybe you may like it if you think the thinner gauges are too soft and muted.

BTW most players use poly into the mains for more durability but I prefer RIP Control into the mains as the mains determine the feel more than the crosses and I seldom break strings (because I use to play on artificial grass). Even players like Federer use NG into the mains ;-)

Curious about your experiences!
 
Last edited:

Return_Ace

Hall of Fame
Got my new shiny earlier today, hopefully can get it strung before everything goes into lockdown over here.

TC95 | 18x20 | 63RA
Ordered specs: 310g | 9pts HL
Received specs: 309g | (didn't measure balance upon receipt)
After Overgrip: 313.5 | 10pts HL

Will update more when/if I get it strung, hopefully can get my 70RA 16x19 at the same time to compare.
 

Faris

Professional
Got my new shiny earlier today, hopefully can get it strung before everything goes into lockdown over here.

TC95 | 18x20 | 63RA
Ordered specs: 310g | 9pts HL
Received specs: 309g | (didn't measure balance upon receipt)
After Overgrip: 313.5 | 10pts HL

Will update more when/if I get it strung, hopefully can get my 70RA 16x19 at the same time to compare.
Congrats... Thats a nice stick!

By the way, you just gained 4.5g by adding an overgrip? Which one is that? I usually get 6 to 7g for adding an overgrip..
 

Return_Ace

Hall of Fame
Congrats... Thats a nice stick!

By the way, you just gained 4.5g by adding an overgrip? Which one is that? I usually get 6 to 7g for adding an overgrip..
Just found out they should be closing Tennis courts in Thursday, so won't be making much use of the new purchase :cautious:

Overgrip is Head XtremeSoft (Pink), I'll see if my measurement was out the next time i change it. Seem to recall the very first measurement being 314g, but then went back to it and it measures 313.5g.

I'm hoping strung weight will be around 330g, which means I'll have ~10g i can play around with lead if needed.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Head RIP Control is my goto-string that I have been playing with for many years.

It is a great multi string in a hybrid with a copoly as it is a very low powered multi with very good control. It adds a lot of touch/feel compared to a full poly stringbed. Especially the thinner gauges (1.20 and 1.25). I tried the 1.30 once that had much less feel/touch and firmer but maybe you may like it if you think the thinner gauges are too soft and muted.

BTW most players use poly into the mains for more durability but I prefer RIP Control into the mains as the mains determine the feel more than the crosses and I seldom break strings (because I use to play on artificial grass). Even players like Federer use NG into the mains ;-)

Curious about your experiences!
I'll definitely give it a go. I'm up to 5 hours of full bed of 4G in the TC95, and the notching looks moderate, so I am hoping I can get another 3-4 hours from this set-up. But next I will try 4G mains / RIP Control crosses. I do not mind the feel of a dead poly, so keeping it in the mains is not an issue, and my game benefit from the extra control and spin of the poly in the mains. But it would be nice to have a somewhat softer feel from the multi in the crosses, and I am also hoping that it will reduce the notching to the mains as well. I typically never, ever break a cross, so I don't think a round poly like 4G should do it too much damage.

A friend of mine highly recommend ALU Power Soft and ALU Power Rough. Is there anyone who's had much joy with it in either a TC100 or TC95?
 

Paulo Braz

Semi-Pro
For those who have played with the tc95 18x20 63ra, I have the following doubts:

1) Is the launch angle of the tc95 18x20 63ra too low? Very close to the k7 lime?

2) What are the advantages and disadvantages between tc95 16x19 63RA and 18x20 63RA? Is the comfort level and vibrations the same?

3) For those who have played with the dunlop cx200 tour 18x20, what are the main advantages and disadvantages in relation to the tc95 18x20 63ra?
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
3) For those who have played with the dunlop cx200 tour 18x20, what are the main advantages and disadvantages in relation to the tc95 18x20 63ra?
I have only played the TC95 16x19 63RA and the Dunlop CX200 Tour 16x19, but I would assume the same overall impressions would apply, except with less power / lower launch angle in both 18x20 versions.

In my book, there's literally no area where the Dunlop comes on top of the Angell. The latter has (much) better power and plow through, and a larger sweet spot, without losing the control you'd expect from a 95 sq.in. hoop. Not to say that the Dunlop is a bad racquet, it's actually pretty good if customized, but even then the TC95 comes ahead, at least for me.
 
Last edited:

what_army

Rookie
I'll definitely give it a go. I'm up to 5 hours of full bed of 4G in the TC95, and the notching looks moderate, so I am hoping I can get another 3-4 hours from this set-up. But next I will try 4G mains / RIP Control crosses. I do not mind the feel of a dead poly, so keeping it in the mains is not an issue, and my game benefit from the extra control and spin of the poly in the mains. But it would be nice to have a somewhat softer feel from the multi in the crosses, and I am also hoping that it will reduce the notching to the mains as well. I typically never, ever break a cross, so I don't think a round poly like 4G should do it too much damage.

A friend of mine highly recommend ALU Power Soft and ALU Power Rough. Is there anyone who's had much joy with it in either a TC100 or TC95?
I tried 4g 1.25 mains and multi feel 1.30 crosses on my tc95 16x19 and by the time the crosses broke (around 4h) the 4g was unscathed. RIP control is a bit harder than multi feel but I’m very sure that any notching on 4g will be kept to a minimum and that you will break RIP much much faster than 4g fb.

Pretty good combo aside from its duration, the multi locks the stringbed and it helped me tame the excess spin and high launch angle. I’ve been experimenting with poly/multi ever since.
 

Return_Ace

Hall of Fame
Does anyone have an Angell coupon code he would not mind sharing. Does he make any Black Friday deals?
I got a Coupon code with my last order, but I'm saving that in case I want to buy a second and/or third TC95 :-D

I think Black Friday last year was 20% off everything except Custom rackets... although who knows if it'll be the same this year with everything going on.
 

Return_Ace

Hall of Fame
I got a Coupon code with my last order, but I'm saving that in case I want to buy a second and/or third TC95 :-D

I think Black Friday last year was 20% off everything except Custom rackets... although who knows if it'll be the same this year with everything going on.
My bad, wasn't 20% off, was a sale with varying discounts, but still don't think it included any Custom rackets.

 

flanker2000fr

Professional
What's the unstrung SW range of a TC100, 70 RA, 27.5 in, 310 g/32 cm racquet? The PA+ is a great racquet but the stiffness worries me long term.
FWIW, one of my friends bought a TC100, 70RA, 27.25in, 310g/31.5cm, and he's complaining that it's hurting his arm. He's coming from a Prince Textreme Tour 100P (2015 version), and I suspect it's the result of the higher RA and SW (from higher static weight, foam filled construction and 0.25 extended length). He's now trying one of my TC100, 63RA, 27in, 310g/31.5cm to see if this fixes the issue.
 

Return_Ace

Hall of Fame
Got my new shiny earlier today, hopefully can get it strung before everything goes into lockdown over here.

TC95 | 18x20 | 63RA
Ordered specs: 310g | 9pts HL
Received specs: 309g | (didn't measure balance upon receipt)
After Overgrip: 313.5 | 10pts HL

Will update more when/if I get it strung, hopefully can get my 70RA 16x19 at the same time to compare.
Managed to fit in a Singles match just before lockdown yesterday and won comfortably with the new racket. Ironically, I was slightly missing the higher launch angle of the 16x19, but I was also loving the slightly more consistent feel of the string bed, and how low I was able to keep my slice approach shots.

Strung specs are currently at:
334g | ~7pts HL

Haven't bothered to measure the SW yet.

Based on how the racket "felt", I'll still probably add some weight somewhere to the hoop to bring it up to around 340g, 5-6pts HL since I want a bit more SW and less HL balance (which i had guessed I would need to do beforehand, so ordered lighter).

Didn't hit with the 70RA 16x19 at all yesterday, so can't give a direct comparison.

Hopefully I don't lose too much with the month off...
 
FWIW, one of my friends bought a TC100, 70RA, 27.25in, 310g/31.5cm, and he's complaining that it's hurting his arm. He's coming from a Prince Textreme Tour 100P (2015 version), and I suspect it's the result of the higher RA and SW (from higher static weight, foam filled construction and 0.25 extended length). He's now trying one of my TC100, 63RA, 27in, 310g/31.5cm to see if this fixes the issue.
I've used the PA+ for 3 hours now and I don't have any arm pain/tenderness; the added length or SW wasn't much of an adjustment but the stiffness is definitely noticeable. Given that your 95 came in at 303 SW unstrung, I wonder what a 27.5 inch racquet would come in at similar specs. If it's 310-320, then it's too heavy for me.
 

Return_Ace

Hall of Fame
I've used the PA+ for 3 hours now and I don't have any arm pain/tenderness; the added length or SW wasn't much of an adjustment but the stiffness is definitely noticeable. Given that your 95 came in at 303 SW unstrung, I wonder what a 27.5 inch racquet would come in at similar specs. If it's 310-320, then it's too heavy for me.
Can't hurt just to ask Paul what's the lowest SW he has in his stock to see if that's an option.
 

Sardines

Professional
I'm most curious about the SW. My PA was measured at 330 SW on an RDC and I like how it swings. I think a SW of 340+ would be too much for me which I'm afraid this racquet would measure at.
My TC100 27.5 70RA 310g/325mm had an unstrung unmodded gripped swing weight of 317 kg/m2. Assuming 15-18g of string will bring it into the 340+ range. I tested a 341 kg/m2 PA+ which was heavier than spec. What are you looking for? Better feel? Maneuverability? Power? You don't say what balance you like. A 8 pt hl frame will feel easier to swing than a 4 pt hl. If you like the PAwith a bit more power, look at the PA Tour version and also demo the PA+.
If you do want an Angell, I would suggest you try the 27.25" version, or better...

Maybe this is odd but I don't want to ask, possibly waste his time and not end up ordering.
... ASK ANGELL! ;) :laughing:
They're selling custom racquets, so if they don't list the relevant specs on the website, then they should answer if they want to make that £70+ per racquet. They also probably have a low swing weight TC100 lying around in the warehouse. It's called a custom racquet, know your specs and ask if they can fit your specs. That's probably why TW provides all this info, because there are people who want this info. The TC100 27.5 70RA isn't a very powerful racquet, but it has good power and plow. The PA, even the PA+ swings easier. The 27.25 will probably be around under 310 kg/m2, and swing easier.
As an aside, the TC100's egg shape hoop has a lowish sweetspot, so I had to put some weight in 10/11 and 1/2 area, which gave a bit better response in the upper 1/2 of the hoop.
 
My TC100 27.5 70RA 310g/325mm had an unstrung unmodded gripped swing weight of 317 kg/m2. Assuming 15-18g of string will bring it into the 340+ range. I tested a 341 kg/m2 PA+ which was heavier than spec. What are you looking for? Better feel? Maneuverability? Power? You don't say what balance you like. A 8 pt hl frame will feel easier to swing than a 4 pt hl. If you like the PAwith a bit more power, look at the PA Tour version and also demo the PA+.
If you do want an Angell, I would suggest you try the 27.25" version, or better...


... ASK ANGELL! ;) :laughing:
They're selling custom racquets, so if they don't list the relevant specs on the website, then they should answer if they want to make that £70+ per racquet. They also probably have a low swing weight TC100 lying around in the warehouse. It's called a custom racquet, know your specs and ask if they can fit your specs. That's probably why TW provides all this info, because there are people who want this info. The TC100 27.5 70RA isn't a very powerful racquet, but it has good power and plow. The PA, even the PA+ swings easier. The 27.25 will probably be around under 310 kg/m2, and swing easier.
As an aside, the TC100's egg shape hoop has a lowish sweetspot, so I had to put some weight in 10/11 and 1/2 area, which gave a bit better response in the upper 1/2 of the hoop.
I want a more comfortable PA+. I don't have any arm issues at the moment after around 3 hours with the racquet but the stiffness is noticeable and long term, I think this racquet will cause some issues. I'm using gut mains.

I'm after more power and the PA+'s power is most noticeable on the serve. Definitely more power and more action on second serves.

One thing that I'm curious about is the lead placed in the handle to alter balance and weight. Given that it's in the handle, I'm pretty sure that any change in SW is negligible. I used the (K) Tour many years ago for several years and I wonder if the same 290 g/335 mm TC100 will be easier to swing than a 310 g/315 mm TC100. I'm worried that a 340+ SW racquet is too much for me and I'd want to make it as maneuverable as possible.
 

Sardines

Professional
The TC100 I tried is NOT the 290 version. There is a certain amount of physics in determining the power available from a racquet. The TC100 specs implies it is less powerful than the PA+, and I feel that way too. I don't know how sensitive you are to balance changes, but I notice even ½ point changes. So if you want something that's around 330, check with Angell about the 27.25" TC100 or TC101 specs. I seriously doubt you will feel the same power as the PA+, but certainly better feel and comfort. Sorry I can't help much. If you know your specs, consult Angell and ask if they have something that matches. Or look to other brands like Yonex or Wilson's Blade range.
 

emhtennis

Semi-Pro
Hi guys,
I am back again to pick on my fellow racquetholic’s brains who have played with TC 97 and Babolat. I know for sure @haqq777 and @Power Player have this specific experience with Angells and Babolat, so guessing more of my fellow Angell players will be able to to answer my questions.


I have been playing with Angell TC 97 18x20 for about 6 months occasionally switching to a TC97 16x19 on and off and feel these racquets are very demanding. On my day, I am just ON and love playing with these frames but the frustration starts kicking in when I try to reproduce that level the next day or again later. I figured that I have to be really focused on my footwork and contact points to play well with the Angells. This has really helped me improve my game especially focusing on hitting through the ball more to get the depth I want.

So I casually tried a gen 3 pure strike 16x19 which came strung with hyperg and was pleasantly surprised with the level of controllable power. I was playing well with the PS from day 1 and felt so easy to play my shots. They had more or the same level of pace and spin as the TC 97s and control was phenomenal for a powerful frame like this. This is the first Babolat I have tried and was totally surprised since in my mind Babolats were spin machines with crazy uncontrollable power. I was happy to be wrong after trying the PS. The only thing lacking compared to the TC97 is the feel. The PS just feels too muted. I removed the dampener and played better since I got more feel this way. It felt a bit strange since I have always played with the dampener but I got used to it and I think I will play without one if I consider playing with the PS.

I never imagined playing with a Babolat as my main stick but I am seriously considering switching to the PS from the Angells. I actually have about 3 more PS 16x19, one Tour and one 18x20 on the way to try the entire PS line.

you guys have any feedback/advice for me?

I can share recent videos of me hitting with TC 97 18x20, 16x19 and PS 16x19 if that would help anyone advice on what racquet to commit to.
You sound almost exactly like me! I came to Angell from my modified Pure Strike v1's. I put a leather grip on my pure strikes and then 4in lead strips at 12,3,9 balanced out with an additional 6 4in strips under the leather grip to keep the balance point the same. After all that my Pure Strikes weigh 335g strung. Today I too play with a TC97 18x20 310g ordered with a synthetic grip, but switched to leather so balance point has gone more HL. It took several months of tinkering to finally settle into a string setup and frame setup, but I am loving my Angells even more now. String is BK 18g at 47lbs. String in the Strikes was Cyclone 1.25 at 49lbs.

Similar to yourself the Strikes were hard to leave because they gave such easy power in defensive situations. I could be out of position with poor footwork and still play deep defensive balls with decent pace. The Angell makes you work, but overall you play better for it. Power wise I feel I'm actually getting more out of the Angells now. The density of the frame coupled with the improvement in overall setup and technique of my shots means I am hitting better (bigger) balls. My serve is noticeably bigger with the Angell. I've been on Playsight courts where my avg first serve speed with the Strikes was around 105mph, avg with the Angell was close to 110mph.

I'm not going to get rid of my Strikes. I'll keep them dormant until one day when I am struggling a little too much I will bring them out of retirement. If I really do play easier with them it will probably push me to get the TC100. Or maybe by that time there will be a TC98 16x20 :D
 

emhtennis

Semi-Pro
Thanks for the feedback @haqq777 and @Tezroza I appreciate it. I started playing Tennis only in March 2018, so I always look for feedback and ways to improve my game. I do try my best to hit the ball in front of me as much as possible. Thats the one of the few things I focus on every hitting session. Clearly I am not doing this enough, I will remind myself to do this more.

@Tezroza No insults taken. Do you have any specific suggestion on what I can do more to address the issues you mentioned? In my mind, I do prepare my forehand with shoulder rotation and coiling the hips facing the right fence and then finish with my body at least somewhat facing the left fence. I do this on every single forehand to at least some degree and in my mind, this is the torso rotation. I have gotten feedback before asking me to face the left fence more when I finish my forehand. Especially the Open stance forehand, I am trying to incorporate that. If there is anything else I can do, please let me know, I will give it a shot.



@Hotpockets You made my day with your comment. FAA is my favorite next gen player and I love the way his forehand and backhand snaps into contact. I wish he will win his first title soon.

iphone has an app called swingvision, its a subscription based app. It edits the video for you and removes the dead time between points. Also it shows details like shot average speed, % past service line, where you made contact with the ball (Inside baseline, Inside service line or behind the base line and more). Its a great app if you ask me for $9.99/ month. If you are interested in trying out, here's a referral code that will give your one month free trial: 5ec4910b5d20013d

Here are the analysis details for the session I posted:

I think your strokes look great for only being 2 years old. Like a few others have commented, your stroke production on both sides looks good, but your weight transfer can get much better. There are some really good YouTube channels that can help with this. TopTennisTraining and TennisHaus are two that come quickly to mind. The main thing I would practice on your forehand is loading up weight on your back foot (which you do well), but then executing a full pivot thru the stroke where your right foot comes all the way past your left to at least a 45 degree angle. Sounds much more awkward to type, but basically your back (right) leg comes from behind and your right hip rotates and carries the leg all the way thru and past the left. If your left foot were on the baseline your right foot would go from behind to in front while your left foot stayed in place.
 
Top