The Official Angell Users Club

ChrisG said:
TC95 is a very fast racquet, but high Sw (mine is 351) means that you need a good form to play to its full capacity.
I was playing very good lately, swinging the frame very easily, but stopped for 2-3 weeks due to snow and bad weather.
I started playing again this week and the frame feels heavy and slow. My drop in physical form means that the frame is suddenly not as effective as it was.
Same with my I.prestige. I can’t play with them right now because I could not train properly this winter due to lockdown, so the frame is just too much for me, while it wasn’t at other period when there’s were competitions and trainings all week.
Click to expand...
Yesterday I also had such a (bad) day with my TC95 16x19. Probably due to the following reasons:
  1. Last 2 months I played with my Wilson Ultra Tours with a lower swingweight because my TC95 couldn't be strung with new strings as my local stringer had to close his shop due to COVID rules
  2. Last few weeks I also wasn't able to practice a lot due weather (snow and frost) and lockdown
  3. My hitting partner used to play his best tennis the first time after a longer break time
  4. I was often late with my strokes due to the higer swingweight of my TC95
  5. I played too crampaingly
  6. All these many (more than usual) errors were driving me crazy
After such a match I can feel so bad and unsure about my rackets while everybody says it is not due the racquet but my skills (technique, footwork and rhythm) and I should keep playing with with one particular racket but still... My volleys and flat serves have too much power. Maybe I should try a thicker 16 gauge string in my TC95.

However I still remember how great I played the first times with my TC95 16x19. Though I played mostly doubles those times.
 
Gee said:
Yesterday I also had such a (bad) day with my TC95 16x19. Probably due to the following reasons:
  1. Last 2 months I played with my Wilson Ultra Tours with a lower swingweight because my TC95 couldn't be strung with new strings as my local stringer had to close his shop due to COVID rules
  2. Last few weeks I also wasn't able to practice a lot due weather (snow and frost) and lockdown
  3. My hitting partner used to play his best tennis the first time after a longer break time
  4. I was often late with my strokes due to the higer swingweight of my TC95
  5. I played too crampaingly
  6. All these many (more than usual) errors were driving me crazy
After such a match I can feel so bad and unsure about my rackets while everybody says it is not due the racquet but my skills (technique, footwork and rhythm) and I should keep playing with with one particular racket but still... My volleys and flat serves have too much power. Maybe I should try a thicker 16 gauge string in my TC95.

However I still remember how great I played the first times with my TC95 16x19. Though I played mostly doubles those times.
Click to expand...
Thicker gauge string will add more sw,why to do that?Whats your level?
 
Nick777 said:
Thicker gauge string will add more sw,why to do that?Whats your level?
Click to expand...
Yes that is true. Maybe not the right solution. I just want to tame the power of my TC95 16m as my volleys are too much of catapult and not as precise as my UTs and TC95 18m. On the contrary I like the more forgiveness of the open pattern.

My level is about 4.5-5.0 but yesterday it was more like 4.0 :-(
You can see me here hitting against the wall.
 
Gee said:
Yes that is true. Maybe not the right solution. I just want to tame the power of my TC95 16m as my volleys are too much of catapult and not as precise as my UTs and TC95 18m. On the contrary I like the more forgiveness of the open pattern.

My level is about 4.5-5.0 but yesterday it was more like 4.0 :-(
You can see me here hitting against the wall.
Click to expand...
I dont know if thats 4.5-5.0 but if you hit with tc95 you need better footwork and faster strokes with spin a little bit to tam the power,you can try string 1 kg higher than usual and dont change racket too often.As for the sw its a combination of fitness and techniques,hit the gym!
 
Nick777 said:
I dont know if thats 4.5-5.0 but if you hit with tc95 you need better footwork and faster strokes with spin a little bit to tam the power,you can try string 1 kg higher than usual and dont change racket too often.As for the sw its a combination of fitness and techniques,hit the gym!
Click to expand...
Yes, yes, and yes.
I used to go to the fitness 3 times a week (following synergy, bootcamp and gritt strength lessons) but now they are closed due to lockdown.
Since a few weeks I'm doing these workouts from youtube (but I need to do that more often). So I am working on it. I also try to play more often tennis matches instead of only practising my strokes.
 
Gee said:
Yes, yes, and yes.
I used to go to the fitness 3 times a week (following synergy, bootcamp and gritt strength lessons) but now they are closed due to lockdown.
Since a few weeks I'm doing these workouts from youtube (but I need to do that more often). So I am working on it. I also try to play more often tennis matches instead of only practising my strokes.
Click to expand...
You dont need the gym,it was a matter of speaking,i never go there.For me great exercises to strengthen the arm-rotator cuff and prevent or get over injuries is "throwers ten exercises" look it up in the internet,plus you must find good exercises for legs.That video wont help your upper body-arm much if any.. Sorry for my English
 
Last edited:
Nick777 said:
You dont need the gym,it was a matter of speaking,i never go there.For me great exercises to strengthen the arm-rotator cuff and prevent or get over injuries is "throwers ten exercises" look it up in the internet,plus you must find good exercises for legs.That video wont help your upper body-arm much if any.. Sorry for my English
Click to expand...
Thanks for your tips (and I understand your English well enough!) :)
These kind of exercises we also used to do during synergy and bootcamp lessons at my fitness club. During bootcamp we also do a lot of leg exercises like squats, lunges, sprints and wall sitting. More than enough I would guess. I really miss these lessons.
 
Nick777 said:
I actually dont care about the bigger headsize,i tried a lot of Angells and the one thing i didn't like was the high sw especially at tc series, couldn't gel with k7 red either , put some weight in the handle because i didn't like the balance and some on the hoop for stability but then turned out to be slow for my standards
Click to expand...
Pretty easy to get a Tc v3 with unstrung specs of 290-295 easily keep under 325 strung with 17g strings. Thin beam aerodynamic anyone under 14 who finds them heavy needs to go to a gym lol.
 
ed70 said:
Pretty easy to get a Tc v3 with unstrung specs of 290-295 easily keep under 325 strung with 17g strings. Thin beam aerodynamic anyone under 14 who finds them heavy needs to go to a gym lol.
Click to expand...
Owned both v2 and v3,they were both 330+ sw , tc95 needs at least 1gr at 3-9 or 10-2 for stability,maybe i will try again when Paul decides 8 mains in the throat and lower SW!
 
Gee said:
Yes that is true. Maybe not the right solution. I just want to tame the power of my TC95 16m as my volleys are too much of catapult and not as precise as my UTs and TC95 18m. On the contrary I like the more forgiveness of the open pattern.

My level is about 4.5-5.0 but yesterday it was more like 4.0 :-(
You can see me here hitting against the wall.
Click to expand...
I hear you. I too once struggled with taming the power of tc95 16m. What ultimately worked for me was hybriding round poly mains and multi (or syngut) crosses. That multi cross is heaven because it basically kills the spin (as the higher friction doesn’t allow for the main to slide as easily) and lowers the launch angle a little bit. It also softens the stringbed without adding too much power.

It’s a subtle change in paper but noticeable when hitting, give it a try and let us know if it worked!
 
Nick777 said:
Owned both v2 and v3,they were both 330+ sw , tc95 needs at least 1gr at 3-9 or 10-2 for stability,maybe i will try again when Paul decides 8 mains in the throat and lower SW!
Click to expand...
It’s still possible to get under 325Sw even with 2g lead in head. Doubt the 8 mains in throat will lower the SW either! TBH my 97’s are around 325SW really swing fast & feel lighter than their SW,even to point that I double checked SW.
 
ed70 said:
It’s still possible to get under 325Sw even with 2g lead in head. Doubt the 8 mains in throat will lower the SW either! TBH my 97’s are around 325SW really swing fast & feel lighter than their SW,even to point that I double checked SW.
Click to expand...
Yes probably you can..
The 8 mains in throat definitely wont give lower sw but better control..
You mean TC 97 with 325sw?
 
what_army said:
I hear you. I too once struggled with taming the power of tc95 16m. What ultimately worked for me was hybriding round poly mains and multi (or syngut) crosses. That multi cross is heaven because it basically kills the spin (as the higher friction doesn’t allow for the main to slide as easily) and lowers the launch angle a little bit. It also softens the stringbed without adding too much power.

It’s a subtle change in paper but noticeable when hitting, give it a try and let us know if it worked!
Click to expand...
I already did this last week (referring to bold phrase above).

The first times with my TC95 16m I played with a fullbed Pacific Poly Power Pro at 24/22 kg that lacked feel to my taste. Especially my volleys felt too boardy.

That's why I had it strung with a hybrid the next time with the multi Head RIP Control into mains and Pacific PPP as crosses that felt better. However that setup didn't last long as the multi broke very soon.

So I had my TC95 16m strung with Pacific Poly Power Pro 1.25 mains and Head RIP Control 1.25 crosses at 24/22 kg.

First time I hit against the wall that felt pretty nice to me. The second time I practiced my serves at the court. That also went great. After a warmup periode I was hitting very fast flat serves, curvy slice and kick serves. So serving is no problem with the TC95 16m :)

However last time I played 2 sets against one of my teammates that went horrible but that is mainly due to the great form of my hitting partner. He always used to play his best tennis after a long break. However after a few hitting sessions his level will decline to his average form while I just need to grow with plenty of practice.

Regarding the strings I'll try it at a little higher tension (1 or 2 kg) next time.
 
Last edited:
Gee said:
The first times with my TC95 16m I played with a fullbed Pacific Poly Power Pro at 24/22 kg that lacked feel to my taste. Especially my volleys felt too boardy.
Click to expand...
Gee said:
So I had my TC95 16m strung with Pacific Poly Power Pro 1.25 mains and Head RIP Control 1.25 crosses at 24/22 kg.
Click to expand...
If you’re happy with 24/22 multi/poly, perhaps start at 22/24 poly/multi.

I went from 25/23 multi/poly to 24/25 poly/multi (and it still feels boardy for the first hour, then the tension drops to a comfortable level and settles until the cross breaks - usually around 6-8h).

I am also using either 1.25-1.30 on the poly and 1.30-1.35 on the multi crosses.
 
Jocko said:
Anyone have experience with the K7 Red XL?
Especially compared to the regular K7 Red?
Thanks much!...
Click to expand...
Tennisnerd just reviewed the Cyan XL and gave it a top notch review. The RA is 67 unstrung and his frame came in about 330 grams strung with a 339 SW. I am also curious about the Red XL since I prefer an RA below 64 strung.
 
tennis347 said:
Tennisnerd just reviewed the Cyan XL and gave it a top notch review. The RA is 67 unstrung and his frame came in about 330 grams strung with a 339 SW. I am also curious about the Red XL since I prefer an RA below 64 strung.
Click to expand...
Yes, thanks, I watched the vid. He does a terrific job.
I played for years with a slightly weighted-up ProStaff Six One BLX 100...1/4 in. extended...then switched to the ProStaff 97 (non CV) but an off-court arm injury (and the pandemic layoff) makes me uncertain about its relative stiffness & weight...
The K7 Red seemed very intriguing and a perfect compromise.
Then, after the TennisNerd review and his revelation as to extended length racquets, I’m really confused.
Especially since no demos are available from Angell.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated...
 
Jocko said:
Yes, thanks, I watched the vid. He does a terrific job.
I played for years with a slightly weighted-up ProStaff Six One BLX 100...1/4 in. extended...then switched to the ProStaff 97 (non CV) but an off-court arm injury (and the pandemic layoff) makes me uncertain about its relative stiffness & weight...
The K7 Red seemed very intriguing and a perfect compromise.
Then, after the TennisNerd review and his revelation as to extended length racquets, I’m really confused.
Especially since no demos are available from Angell.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated...
Click to expand...
Talk to Paul Angell
 
Jocko said:
Yes, thanks, I watched the vid. He does a terrific job.
I played for years with a slightly weighted-up ProStaff Six One BLX 100...1/4 in. extended...then switched to the ProStaff 97 (non CV) but an off-court arm injury (and the pandemic layoff) makes me uncertain about its relative stiffness & weight...
The K7 Red seemed very intriguing and a perfect compromise.
Then, after the TennisNerd review and his revelation as to extended length racquets, I’m really confused.
Especially since no demos are available from Angell.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated...
Click to expand...
If you can handle the high SW and looking for a 100 sq XL frame then I would recommend buying one. At this point in my tennis career, this SW is out of my wheelhouse otherwise I probably would have purchased one. Definitely looks like a great all around racquet !
 
what_army said:
If you’re happy with 24/22 multi/poly, perhaps start at 22/24 poly/multi.

I went from 25/23 multi/poly to 24/25 poly/multi (and it still feels boardy for the first hour, then the tension drops to a comfortable level and settles until the cross breaks - usually around 6-8h).

I am also using either 1.25-1.30 on the poly and 1.30-1.35 on the multi crosses.
Click to expand...
Thanks. In general I would agree with stringing the multi a few kg higher than the poly but Head RIP Control is a very low powered multi. That's why I would string this one like a poly.
 
skfx said:
Is anyone here playing w extended Angell frames? Im considering getting 27.25" was wondering if anyone could share their experiences.
Click to expand...
I hit with a 27.25” before & couldn’t even tell difference, of course there’s people on forums playing 3 -3.5 level who can tell a half pound difference in tension or who’s games are totally disrupted by a couple of points SW.

27.5 makes a difference tho Having hit with a few yonex 27.5’s my only real plus point was 2 handed backhand. Volleys were biggest drawback & forehand, I guess I didn’t like the sweetspot being further away. Lad at club plays extended length & it improved his serve but I struggled with the extra SW on serve.
 
Paulo Braz said:
Have you received the k7 cyan? Could you do a review?
Click to expand...
Paulo Braz said:
Have you received the k7 cyan? Could you do a review?
Click to expand...
I have received the K7 Cyan standard length. I have been playing with the TC105 27.25 which allows non returnable balls but lack of finesse at the net, harder on the elbow and transitioning from compact to full stroke is now too much racquet. Spoke with Paul and we decided I should try out the K7 Cayan. I play mostly doubles as all court and strong at the net. It's been strung with Wilson spin effect 17 at 55 lb. Paul went through his inventory for a racquet that measures 126 SW after strung which is the same SW as my TC105. I also have an ASL3 that I only use for light play with JD or feeding balls. It's has more power than the K7 Cyan and for me that's not good.
I've used it in a 90 minute clinic, so I can't give a full review. However, spin is easy was able to swing big and not worry about it sailing out. Control is good and overheads are wonderful - a lot of spin + accuracy. Easy on the joints and maneuverable at net.
 
Racquet Geek said:
I have received the K7 Cyan standard length. I have been playing with the TC105 27.25 which allows non returnable balls but lack of finesse at the net, harder on the elbow and transitioning from compact to full stroke is now too much racquet. Spoke with Paul and we decided I should try out the K7 Cayan. I play mostly doubles as all court and strong at the net. It's been strung with Wilson spin effect 17 at 55 lb. Paul went through his inventory for a racquet that measures 126 SW after strung which is the same SW as my TC105. I also have an ASL3 that I only use for light play with JD or feeding balls. It's has more power than the K7 Cyan and for me that's not good.
I've used it in a 90 minute clinic, so I can't give a full review. However, spin is easy was able to swing big and not worry about it sailing out. Control is good and overheads are wonderful - a lot of spin + accuracy. Easy on the joints and maneuverable at net.
Click to expand...
Paul's connection with customers and willingness to go out of his way to find the perfect racquet for each person is commendable. The sheer passion shown at Angell makes me want to stick with them as a brand, let alone the quality of there racquets (which is also superb btw)!
 
Anyone has switched from 16x19 to 18x20 and stayed with it ? I hit super flat even w 16x19 unless Im in trouble (4.5 player). Havent hit w 18x20 in too long of a time was wondering if Ill be hitting the tape w it ?
 
Last edited:
skfx said:
Anyone has switched from 16x19 to 18x20 and stayed with it ? I hit super flat even w 16x19 unless Im in trouble (4.5 player). Havent hit w 18x20 in too long of a time was wondering if Ill be hitting the tape w it ?
Click to expand...

I've switched... I love the 18x20 versions much more. Still can put any sort of spin on the ball that I require... I just get a much higher level of consistency and precision. I have both the TC97 and TC95 in both string patterns, and it's the TC95 that has the higher launch angle of the two. What I'm trying to say is that the TC97 18x20 is the racquet with the lowest launch angle of the bunch... so if you're worried about hitting the tape perhaps try this one last.

Hope this helps.
 
skfx said:
Is anyone here playing w extended Angell frames? Im considering getting 27.25" was wondering if anyone could sha loare their experiences.
Click to expand...

I've thought about it a lot lately. But chances are I'll stick with the standard length for one main reason....The TC95 16x19 hits such massive serves for me that I just can't see any benefit. I am getting great net clearance on my 2nd kick serves, and it really does hit a huge ball on forehands and backhands. I thought about it for a minute, if anything going with a 27.25 in would probably not be noticeable or obtrusive....while still probably getting a minor benefit.
 
Last edited:
skfx said:
Anyone can comment on the difference between tc95 18x20 and tc97 18x20?
Click to expand...
tc95 feels more whippy with the same specs. tc97 a bit more power and stability. Also slightly stiffer and different feel (tc95 has uniform flex - you have same feedback everytime you hit where with tc97 you can get that slight sensation of capping the ball and launching it with slightly more power) . Both really good racquets :) matter of preference.
 
skfx said:
Anyone can comment on the difference between tc95 18x20 and tc97 18x20?
Click to expand...

TC95 18x20 - Uniform Flex (from just past the handle to the tip), lower RA (starts off at 63RA Vs 66 for the TC97 - this is prior to handle, grip, and strings being put on - ends up being 60-61RA strung), slightly higher launch angle, lots of power, D-Beam throat design (has rounded feel in off-hand for OHBH people Vs more boxy feel of the TC97)

TC97 18x20 - Flexes in the Head (like a Head Prestige) and is stiff in the throat, RA is slightly higher (66RA which is measured prior to the handle, grip, and strings - this ends up being around 63RA strung), lower launch angle (probably lowest of any Angell Racquet - not sure about K7 Lime though as I haven't tried this one), still can hit all the shots though and impart spin, the throat of the racquet is more squared off and therefore feels a bit thicker in the off-hand... nothing bad just different to the TC95 which feels thinner and nicer (to me).

It comes down to how one prefers their racquet to flex and the stiffness one prefers. Both are plush, but the TC95 is softer. I like the TC95 63RA 18x20 more, but have both and won't get rid of either.
 
Classic-TXP-IG MID said:
TC95 18x20 - Uniform Flex (from just past the handle to the tip), lower RA (starts off at 63RA Vs 66 for the TC97 - this is prior to handle, grip, and strings being put on - ends up being 60-61RA strung), slightly higher launch angle, lots of power, D-Beam throat design (has rounded feel in off-hand for OHBH people Vs more boxy feel of the TC97)

TC97 18x20 - Flexes in the Head (like a Head Prestige) and is stiff in the throat, RA is slightly higher (66RA which is measured prior to the handle, grip, and strings - this ends up being around 63RA strung), lower launch angle (probably lowest of any Angell Racquet - not sure about K7 Lime though as I haven't tried this one), still can hit all the shots though and impart spin, the throat of the racquet is more squared off and therefore feels a bit thicker in the off-hand... nothing bad just different to the TC95 which feels thinner and nicer (to me).

It comes down to how one prefers their racquet to flex and the stiffness one prefers. Both are plush, but the TC95 is softer. I like the TC95 63RA 18x20 more, but have both and won't get rid of either.
Click to expand...
k7 lime feels like a middle ground between tc95 18x20 and tc97 18x20 . It shares the feel of tc95 with the performance a bit towards tc97 with a softer impact. great stick ! k7 lime to me is closer to prestige than tc97...tc97 felt more like a radical to me... but all of them offered something else and prestige will still be prestige and its a good thing to have those options.
 
galapagos said:
k7 lime feels like a middle ground between tc95 18x20 and tc97 18x20 . It shares the feel of tc95 with the performance a bit towards tc97 with a softer impact. great stick ! k7 lime to me is closer to prestige than tc97...tc97 felt more like a radical to me... but all of them offered something else and prestige will still be prestige and its a good thing to have those options.
Click to expand...

The K7 Lime sounds great... I tried the K7 Red and didn't prefer it to the Custom Line, so I'm hesitant to get the K7 Lime (plus I like the TC95). Would you say you prefer the K7 Lime or the TC95 18x20?
 
Classic-TXP-IG MID said:
The K7 Lime sounds great... I tried the K7 Red and didn't prefer it to the Custom Line, so I'm hesitant to get the K7 Lime (plus I like the TC95). Would you say you prefer the K7 Lime or the TC95 18x20?
Click to expand...
I played with K7 Lime (but sold it lately) and I also have TC95 18m as you may know.
The feel of K7 is much more muted than the TC line because of the aramid fibres. Very similar feel as the Völkl C10 Pro.
 
Gee said:
I played with K7 Lime (but sold it lately) and I also have TC95 18m as you may know.
The feel of K7 is much more muted than the TC line because of the aramid fibres. Very similar feel as the Völkl C10 Pro.
Click to expand...

Now you're causing some serious itching of my trigger finger... stop it man!... stop it! :giggle: ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gee
thanks for the input guys!!! Would you say tc97 is a tad more forgiving due to slightly larger head or they are on par pretty much?
 
skfx said:
thanks for the input guys!!! Would you say tc97 is a tad more forgiving due to slightly larger head or they are on par pretty much?
Click to expand...

In real life, I cant see any difference in head size between the two, think they also share the same gromments
 
Classic-TXP-IG MID said:
The K7 Lime sounds great... I tried the K7 Red and didn't prefer it to the Custom Line, so I'm hesitant to get the K7 Lime (plus I like the TC95). Would you say you prefer the K7 Lime or the TC95 18x20?
Click to expand...
K7 red and k7 lime are totally different racquets. I have No idea how and why. I liked tc95 in both patterns, tc97 in both patterns , tc100 and k7 lime. K7 red is the only racquet that i didnt like. Maybe because of the specs.. i dont know. I still prefer tc95 for its solid feel but i could see myself playing with k7 lime as well. They would need different strings to shine i would say...even more - i think that k7 lime is more towards tc95 fans than tc97 :) i wish it was thinner. I got so used to the feeling of tc95. Its hard to replace it. Not Just the performance. The way it feels in hands... amazing
 
skfx said:
thanks for the input guys!!! Would you say tc97 is a tad more forgiving due to slightly larger head or they are on par pretty much?
Click to expand...
Is a tad stiffer and more stable and therefore some might find it more forgiving. But the difference is so minimal that it shouldnt be the thing determing your choice...
 
I actually read in this thread that Paul once shared the real measures. So tc95 is 95,5 and TC97 96,9, and they share same grommets ... so minimal differences in head size. More a feeling due to what @galapagos is describing. I have a 18x20 tc97 and TC95 16x19 does not feel at all "smaller".
 
esm said:
They do. I think the TC97 is just “1/2 a hair” longer towards the throat end.
Click to expand...

I know, but it’s really difficult to see in real life if you put them on top of each other. So headsize should not matter when choosing betweenTC95 and TC97.
 
Happi said:
I know, but it’s really difficult to see in real life if you put them on top of each other. So headsize should not matter when choosing betweenTC95 and TC97.
Click to expand...
Yep. That is true. I have tried many times and gave up. Unless using a precision tool, then it’d be difficult to find the actual difference.
(I think I read once that Paul had listed the actual headsize for the TC95 and TC97.... but can’t remember where.. lol)
 
esm said:
Yep. That is true. I have tried many times and gave up. Unless using a precision tool, then it’d be difficult to find the actual difference.
(I think I read once that Paul had listed the actual headsize for the TC95 and TC97.... but can’t remember where.. lol)
Click to expand...
I actually read in this thread that Paul once shared the real measures. So tc95 is 95,5 and TC97 96,9, and they share same grommets ... so minimal differences in head size.
 
edelp said:
I actually read in this thread that Paul once shared the real measures. So tc95 is 95,5 and TC97 96,9, and they share same grommets ... so minimal differences in head size.
Click to expand...
Yep that’s it. Thank you for this. Just couldn’t remember which post and Paul’s actual figures.
(I realised the other day that Paul no longer sells those green grommets...)
 
esm said:
Yep that’s it. Thank you for this. Just couldn’t remember which post and Paul’s actual figures.
(I realised the other day that Paul no longer sells those green grommets...)
Click to expand...

Just measured my TC 95 and Lime (98) and the Lime is 1mm longer and 0.5 mm wider - so almost not visible between 95 and 98. I don't have my TC 97 anymore but I guess it would be about the same, so very little difference.
 
Happi said:
Just measured my TC 95 and Lime (98) and the Lime is 1mm longer and 0.5 mm wider - so almost not visible between 95 and 98. I don't have my TC 97 anymore but I guess it would be about the same, so very little difference.
Click to expand...
Actually, I recall fitting a red grommet from TC95 to K7 Red... so very little difference too. Lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top