The Official Angell Users Club

Hi everyone!
I Have a question and would be very interested in your thoughts.
Been playing with Vantage and Angell frames for over 10 years now. At first the TC95 16/19 63RA. A short stint with a TC95 18/20 70 RA and then f
or many years with a TC100 70RA.
Definately played my best Tennis with the TC100 (played at a Top20 D1 College and got a decent national ranking in Germany), but restringing and a slight lack of control because of the super wide string pattern got to a point where I want to make a switch. 1.35mm poly strings last for about 2-3 hours and the playability is only good for 1 hour really tension wise..

I've asked Paul a couple of times if there was a TC100 18/20 in the cards, but now that there is the TC99 18/19 its pretty mich my dream racket except for the 64RA :(
I have tried the React99 and didnt like the high flex and feel of the frame, played good tennis with it and liked that it has more control than the TC100 but at the top end it was missing power that I feel like is 'absorbed' by the frame at a certain threshold.

Could anybody that has experienced both frames compare the flex and powerlevel of the TC99 and React99? I try to figure out if it is more the material composition of the react that saps the power at the top end or if its more due to the low flex in general and would be the same story with the TC99..

A comparison between the TC99 and a TC100 70RA would also be very interesting for me!

Thanks
 
moii said:
Hi everyone!
I Have a question and would be very interested in your thoughts.
Been playing with Vantage and Angell frames for over 10 years now. At first the TC95 16/19 63RA. A short stint with a TC95 18/20 70 RA and then f
or many years with a TC100 70RA.
Definately played my best Tennis with the TC100 (played at a Top20 D1 College and got a decent national ranking in Germany), but restringing and a slight lack of control because of the super wide string pattern got to a point where I want to make a switch. 1.35mm poly strings last for about 2-3 hours and the playability is only good for 1 hour really tension wise..

I've asked Paul a couple of times if there was a TC100 18/20 in the cards, but now that there is the TC99 18/19 its pretty mich my dream racket except for the 64RA :(
I have tried the React99 and didnt like the high flex and feel of the frame, played good tennis with it and liked that it has more control than the TC100 but at the top end it was missing power that I feel like is 'absorbed' by the frame at a certain threshold.

Could anybody that has experienced both frames compare the flex and powerlevel of the TC99 and React99? I try to figure out if it is more the material composition of the react that saps the power at the top end or if its more due to the low flex in general and would be the same story with the TC99..

A comparison between the TC99 and a TC100 70RA would also be very interesting for me!

Thanks
Click to expand...
i think you should try react mpp with some lead. About the comparison tc99 vs tc100, the tc100 has more power and Spin, tc99 has more control and lower launch angle. You definitely could try the tc99, since its more powerful than the react and has a similar feeling to the tc 100
 
zeneto1234 said:
i think you should try react mpp with some lead. About the comparison tc99 vs tc100, the tc100 has more power and Spin, tc99 has more control and lower launch angle. You definitely could try the tc99, since its more powerful than the react and has a similar feeling to the tc 100
Click to expand...
well I have played with the React mpp for a year now 315g with about 7g at 3&9. So that didnt work unfortunately.
But thanks a ton for the comparison between tc99 and react99. Good to hear that TC99 is more powerfull than react99 and leans more towars the feel of the TC100 even though it has a softer flex.

Any more info is appreciated!
 
moii said:
Hi everyone!
I Have a question and would be very interested in your thoughts.
Been playing with Vantage and Angell frames for over 10 years now. At first the TC95 16/19 63RA. A short stint with a TC95 18/20 70 RA and then f
or many years with a TC100 70RA.
Definately played my best Tennis with the TC100 (played at a Top20 D1 College and got a decent national ranking in Germany), but restringing and a slight lack of control because of the super wide string pattern got to a point where I want to make a switch. 1.35mm poly strings last for about 2-3 hours and the playability is only good for 1 hour really tension wise..

I've asked Paul a couple of times if there was a TC100 18/20 in the cards, but now that there is the TC99 18/19 its pretty mich my dream racket except for the 64RA :(
I have tried the React99 and didnt like the high flex and feel of the frame, played good tennis with it and liked that it has more control than the TC100 but at the top end it was missing power that I feel like is 'absorbed' by the frame at a certain threshold.

Could anybody that has experienced both frames compare the flex and powerlevel of the TC99 and React99? I try to figure out if it is more the material composition of the react that saps the power at the top end or if its more due to the low flex in general and would be the same story with the TC99..

A comparison between the TC99 and a TC100 70RA would also be very interesting for me!

Thanks
Click to expand...
How many strings have you tried? I've started to dive deeper into round poly because my swing shape is finally producing very good spin without the extra help of a shaped string.

I myself am on the hunt for a more powerful string because I like to have as much top end gas as possible.

So far, the two best I've played are Head Hawk 1.30 and Big Banger Original 1.30. When I'm playing well they are both superb all around strings that add power while still giving you the ability to maintain control of your game.
 
I tried a lot.
There is nothing on the market that is durable enough for extending the string life beyond 3-4 hours in the TC100. And in the React99 I went way down in tension and tried some pretty powerfull strings but couldnt dial the feel in to a point where I liked playing with the racket, even though the results were fine I guess. But yeah, the React is just too dampened and flexible in that strange way that it gets more and more noticable the harder I hit :(
I would say if I play at around 70% its fine, but if I try to play faster its almost not even worth it, because of diminishing returns somehow. Looser tension and softer more powerfull strings help somewhat but never quite fixed it for me.
Thats why I wonder if it would be more of the same with the TC99 or if its the Kevlar layup of the React that is not for me?

With you one the round string team by the way! I dont like that shaped polys loose their texture so quickly and change characteristics in addition to loosing tension, to me the window where the shape adds something seems too small to justify adding another variable to the whole thing. There are great shaped polys too though, of course.
I like the Isospeed Baseline Long Life 15l/1.35mm the best at the moment. I loved the black Prince Tour XC in 1.35mm before it was discontinued. Also played for a long time with Weiß Canon Scorpion 1.33mm which is very dependable and solid I think.
Since you asked for Power maybe Signum Pro Firestorm is an option, loses tension a bit too quickly for my taste but I've always felt that its the fastest poly out there.
 
moii said:
I tried a lot.
There is nothing on the market that is durable enough for extending the string life beyond 3-4 hours in the TC100. And in the React99 I went way down in tension and tried some pretty powerfull strings but couldnt dial the feel in to a point where I liked playing with the racket, even though the results were fine I guess. But yeah, the React is just too dampened and flexible in that strange way that it gets more and more noticable the harder I hit :(
I would say if I play at around 70% its fine, but if I try to play faster its almost not even worth it, because of diminishing returns somehow. Looser tension and softer more powerfull strings help somewhat but never quite fixed it for me.
Thats why I wonder if it would be more of the same with the TC99 or if its the Kevlar layup of the React that is not for me?

With you one the round string team by the way! I dont like that shaped polys loose their texture so quickly and change characteristics in addition to loosing tension, to me the window where the shape adds something seems too small to justify adding another variable to the whole thing. There are great shaped polys too though, of course.
I like the Isospeed Baseline Long Life 15l/1.35mm the best at the moment. I loved the black Prince Tour XC in 1.35mm before it was discontinued. Also played for a long time with Weiß Canon Scorpion 1.33mm which is very dependable and solid I think.
Since you asked for Power maybe Signum Pro Firestorm is an option, loses tension a bit too quickly for my taste but I've always felt that its the fastest poly out there.
Click to expand...
Your level of play is superior to 99.99999% of people here and dare I say it your needs and wants are going to be very different.

I don’t have a tc99 myself but it could be worthwhile finding out (from Paul or others here) whether the tc99 has the same D beam construction as the tc 100. If it does you’d think it will maintain the 100s DNA with a smidge smaller head size. If it’s good enough for Donald Young that’s not a bad benchmark.

Or you could just go and grab a Babolat
 
Has anyone ever played with the new K Seven 98 or 100 ? Is there a review of those rackets somewhere (I can't find any...) ?
 
Gee said:
I just replaced the Angell leather with (an used) Prince Resitex Tour a hybrid pu/leather grip.
That grip is as heavy as a regular leather but with the thickness of a synthetic base grip.
Now it feels a tad better to me. So I'll order a few new ones as a backup.

The TC99 plays powerful like the TC95 16x19 but with a tamed control because of the denser 18x19 string pattern.
That's why I switched from TF Multifeel 1.25 to MSV CoFocus 1.18 as I was holding back my strokes a bit with TF Multifeel.
Feel is what you may expect from a foam filled 64 RA frame. Nice soft comfortable and solid feel. I even have no arm issues anymore with copoly strings (at 21/20 kg tension).
I ordered a TC99 with 27.25 length and 305 sw unstrung that gives a nice plowthrough with my groundstrokes and serves.
Click to expand...
Does the tc99 have the 97 beam or tc95 beam?
 
tele said:
two tt member reviews on p. 552 of this thread. I have been hoping for at least a tennisnerd review, but have not seen anything.
Click to expand...
Same here ! He is the only one on youtube that sometimes reviews Angell rackets. Anyway, thanks a lot for your answer ;)
 
maksp said:
Why is it called tc99 then?
Click to expand...
as far as I can tell its the React mold, which is not much different from the tc95 and tc100 mold, but without the dampening material in the carbon fibre (that is only used in the K series and React) and its foam filled instead like all the TC models.
To me TC just means its regular carbon and foam filling, as there were differences in the mold between box beam and round throat area before too.

The difference in headsize between my react99 and TC100 is neglectable in my opinion. Its basically the same just a slightly revamped throat design an a new string pattern.
What doesnt make sense to me is why they chose to make it 64RA and not 70, if there was only to be one option, because there is the low flex option already in the react99 with the same mold..
I think the 70RA number might scare some people off but it still plays super comfortable, has nice touch and I really dont see a downside to it.
 
moii said:
as far as I can tell its the React mold, which is not much different from the tc95 and tc100 mold, but without the dampening material in the carbon fibre (that is only used in the K series and React) and its foam filled instead like all the TC models.
To me TC just means its regular carbon and foam filling, as there were differences in the mold between box beam and round throat area before too.

The difference in headsize between my react99 and TC100 is neglectable in my opinion. Its basically the same just a slightly revamped throat design an a new string pattern.
What doesnt make sense to me is why they chose to make it 64RA and not 70, if there was only to be one option, because there is the low flex option already in the react99 with the same mold..
I think the 70RA number might scare some people off but it still plays super comfortable, has nice touch and I really dont see a downside to it.
Click to expand...
Does the tc99 react mold seem more rounder head shape then the tc100?
 
From what I have found, the twist weight is low on all of Angell's models. Does this make their sweet spot small? I haven't seen any issues with it being too small, but the sweet spot and twist weight sounds a bit contradictive as far as my knowledge goes. Any input on this? Do they need lead at 3 & 9 if I need a more forgiving racquet?
 
ockelito said:
From what I have found, the twist weight is low on all of Angell's models. Does this make their sweet spot small? I haven't seen any issues with it being too small, but the sweet spot and twist weight sounds a bit contradictive as far as my knowledge goes. Any input on this? Do they need lead at 3 & 9 if I need a more forgiving racquet?
Click to expand...
Where have you found the TW for Angell racquets, please share.

I have a lot of different TC models and they seem very stable and no need for lead at 3 & 9 same for K7 Lime.
 
Happi said:
Where have you found the TW for Angell racquets, please share.

I have a lot of different TC models and they seem very stable and no need for lead at 3 & 9 same for K7 Lime.
Click to expand...

The are one or two mentions in this thread. Then I’ve seen some on YouTube, such as


I have the TC97 and I found that quite unforgiving despite the foam filling. This one is already too heavy so I can’t add any lead. I also have the react MPP and found that more forgiving, even though they both seem to be just above 13.

I recently went to Blade 100 v9 and absolutely loved it. But my wrist can’t handle it for some reason so I’m going back to react. I’be tried to mimic the blade 100 by adding some weight at 3&9. Gonna try it out tomorrow to see what happens. I just want some confirmation bias at this point I guess.
 
My preference with Angell frames has always been to take a low balance point and a weight that leaves a little room to add lead to 3/9. With this setup there is no lack of twistweight whatsoever with Angell frames in my opinion. On the contrary, sometimes I think its borderline cheating the combination of stability, sweetspot and controlable power the TC line has :) especially with the TC100 that is
 
TC100 is very stable and rock solid if SW is higher than 295. I have no issues with sweet spot, however, I use 1,25 and low tension, it should make it more forgiving.
 
Carreau said:
TC100 is very stable and rock solid if SW is higher than 295. I have no issues with sweet spot, however, I use 1,25 and low tension, it should make it more forgiving.
Click to expand...
IDK about TC 100, but on TC 101 the sweet spot is really large. Very surprising.
 
moii said:
Hi everyone!
I Have a question and would be very interested in your thoughts.
Been playing with Vantage and Angell frames for over 10 years now. At first the TC95 16/19 63RA. A short stint with a TC95 18/20 70 RA and then f
or many years with a TC100 70RA.
Definately played my best Tennis with the TC100 (played at a Top20 D1 College and got a decent national ranking in Germany), but restringing and a slight lack of control because of the super wide string pattern got to a point where I want to make a switch. 1.35mm poly strings last for about 2-3 hours and the playability is only good for 1 hour really tension wise..

I've asked Paul a couple of times if there was a TC100 18/20 in the cards, but now that there is the TC99 18/19 its pretty mich my dream racket except for the 64RA :(
I have tried the React99 and didnt like the high flex and feel of the frame, played good tennis with it and liked that it has more control than the TC100 but at the top end it was missing power that I feel like is 'absorbed' by the frame at a certain threshold.

Could anybody that has experienced both frames compare the flex and powerlevel of the TC99 and React99? I try to figure out if it is more the material composition of the react that saps the power at the top end or if its more due to the low flex in general and would be the same story with the TC99..

A comparison between the TC99 and a TC100 70RA would also be very interesting for me!

Thanks
Click to expand...
Poli degradation is fast, in general. Polis lose their elasticity way before breaking. Pick up a good multi. Or natgut if you can afford it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gee
I tend to agree that all Angells I have tried especially TCs were solid, stable and good size sweet spot. If you get unlucky with an unusually low SW then maybe TW will also be low but I haven't had one yet. Old K7 red first gen was also stable. All TCs I've ever had were over 295SW unstrung.
 
I recently purchased my tenth Angell, and each one has felt so stable and solid that it didn't require any lead at the 3 and 9 positions. However, my TC Angells had a swing weight over 300 unstrung, whereas for the K7 Limes, I had to add a significant amount of lead to customize them to my desired specifications.
 
Gee said:
I recently purchased my tenth Angell, and each one has felt so stable and solid that it didn't require any lead at the 3 and 9 positions. However, my TC Angells had a swing weight over 300 unstrung, whereas for the K7 Limes, I had to add a significant amount of lead to customize them to my desired specifications.
Click to expand...
Which TC angells do you have
 
Can the Angell experts break down the custom silos, what they are supposed to bring and target player demographic?

Tc95/100: D beam.
Tc 97/101: box beam
React series:?
 
landcookie said:
Can the Angell experts break down the custom silos, what they are supposed to bring and target player demographic?

Tc95/100: D beam.
Tc 97/101: box beam
React series:?
Click to expand...
React is not foam filled, so if you've felt a TC was sluggish thru the air, the React may fit your game better.
 
Ive played the tc95 (64 and 71RA) tc97 very briefly tc100 (70RA) and React99 18/19.
To me the difference between tc95 and tc97 was that tc97 had a bit stiffer throat than the 64RA TC95. In the hoop they felt the same to me and headsize was also very close to each other.
I like the uniform flex of the 70RA TC95 and TC100 more and also think they are a tad faster through the air. But its mostly personal preference for feel when holding the racket in hand and on impact.
Between all of the TCs I think its no major difference and they share the same DNA.

The React is another story. Not foam filled and much more muted feel, similar to the flexible Kseries Frames (red and green).
They also have a lighter swingweight. Personally I think the TC line is better in general, except maybe if you have a really sensitive arm or if you want to play extended length but keep the SW below 340ish.
 
moii said:
Ive played the tc95 (64 and 71RA) tc97 very briefly tc100 (70RA) and React99 18/19.
To me the difference between tc95 and tc97 was that tc97 had a bit stiffer throat than the 64RA TC95. In the hoop they felt the same to me and headsize was also very close to each other.
I like the uniform flex of the 70RA TC95 and TC100 more and also think they are a tad faster through the air. But its mostly personal preference for feel when holding the racket in hand and on impact.
Between all of the TCs I think its no major difference and they share the same DNA.

The React is another story. Not foam filled and much more muted feel, similar to the flexible Kseries Frames (red and green).
They also have a lighter swingweight. Personally I think the TC line is better in general, except maybe if you have a really sensitive arm or if you want to play extended length but keep the SW below 340ish.
Click to expand...
Thank guuys. What about performance?

Power, spin, consistency etc vs ease of use, for example. Is one aimed at performance players vs the average tennis joe ?
 
landcookie said:
Thank guuys. What about performance?

Power, spin, consistency etc vs ease of use, for example. Is one aimed at performance players vs the average tennis joe ?
Click to expand...
thats all in the specs. Knowing what you want from the frame and then pick specs that align.
The smaler flexier ones will be more demanding and when you enter the 99/100 sqin range it will be easier to use. And to be honest, I see very little downsides and just a lot of help with power, spin, etc..
Between React/TC (box beam or otherwise) I dont think there is a definite divide in terms of the categories you mentioned
 
Really enjoyed a recent hit with the TC100, really liked it.
Am thinking if I should get another V2 TC100, but I think they aren’t available much these days.
Wrapped the grey sides with carbon fibre films to give it a more stealthy look, and to bump up the SW and TW at the same time. lol
 
moii said:
thats all in the specs. Knowing what you want from the frame and then pick specs that align.
The smaler flexier ones will be more demanding and when you enter the 99/100 sqin range it will be easier to use. And to be honest, I see very little downsides and just a lot of help with power, spin, etc..
Between React/TC (box beam or otherwise) I dont think there is a definite divide in terms of the categories you mentioned
Click to expand...
Surely there’s more to it than that. Otherwise why the different construction / silos?
 
esm said:
Really enjoyed a recent hit with the TC100, really liked it.
Am thinking if I should get another V2 TC100, but I think they aren’t available much these days.
Wrapped the grey sides with carbon fibre films to give it a more stealthy look, and to bump up the SW and TW at the same time. lol
Click to expand...
V2 Angells have significantly higher SW fyi
 
  • Like
Reactions: esm
landcookie said:
Surely there’s more to it than that. Otherwise why the different construction / silos?
Click to expand...
well as i said, the react line has lower SW (more manoeuvrable) and very muted feel.
Paul made the Kseries out of the dampened Graphite stuff and I think React series brings this to the slightly updated TC Frame geometry. The TCs were criticized for having very high SW especially with extended length due to their foam filling and this way the Reacts can remain very arm friendly but dont need foam. It makes the rackets super muted though and there are no options with a higher flex so its not for everybody.
But its true that the Angell silos are not as clear cut into distinct characteristics as in some other brands (for example like Pure Drive for power, Aero for Spin, Strike for control). You can make a very spin friendly frame in the TC line as well as in the React line, depending on what specs you choose and its the same with power, control and so on.
 
I recently bought a lightly used React MPP 99 and was happy to find the strung swing weight was 324, right where i like it. After a few weeks i fitted new grommets and restrung with the same strings, now it's 330, the same as my TC100 V4
:confused:
 
guando said:
I recently bought a lightly used React MPP 99 and was happy to find the strung swing weight was 324, right where i like it. After a few weeks i fitted new grommets and restrung with the same strings, now it's 330, the same as my TC100 V4
:confused:
Click to expand...
It is weird, weight difference of the grommets can’t be so high. Even different color grommets were 1g apart (weighted static weights earlier).
Are you sure that gauge of the strings is the same?
 
guando said:
I recently bought a lightly used React MPP 99 and was happy to find the strung swing weight was 324, right where i like it. After a few weeks i fitted new grommets and restrung with the same strings, now it's 330, the same as my TC100 V4
:confused:
Click to expand...
why did a lightly used racquet need new grommets? were there pieces missing?
 
Last edited:
Measuring error is the only thing I can think of. Or the stringing error that caused elongation of the racket head.

If you have retained your old grommets you simply can weight and compare them before your next string job.
 
guando said:
It had a few scratches on the head guard but the frame was spotless so I fitted new grommets to make it look brand new.
Click to expand...
gotcha. I was wondering if some chunks out of the headguard might explain the significant discrepancy in sw.
 
Last edited:
Carreau said:
Measuring error is the only thing I can think of. Or the stringing error that caused elongation of the racket head.

If you have retained your old grommets you simply can weight and compare them before your next string job.
Click to expand...
I have a Briffidi and I'm a stringer so i'd like to think it's pretty accurate, the next time i restring i'll remove and weigh the two head guards (I have a bad habit of keeping old grommets)
 
Yeah, I keep the old ones too for mix and match purposes in case I'll need them later on.
Let us know - I'm very curious to see if there is a manufacturing deviation in case of these grommets.
 
It was a sunny afternoon today. Both my tc100s (my usual stick) are at the stringers. Got asked to hit with someone a little lower in level.

Got out the TC95.

The thunderous crackles which ensued - forehands backhands and serves, and knifed slices and volleys. I felt like a god on a tennis court toying with a hapless mortal.
 
guando said:
I have a Briffidi and I'm a stringer so i'd like to think it's pretty accurate, the next time i restring i'll remove and weigh the two head guards (I have a bad habit of keeping old grommets)
Click to expand...
I have changed grommets many times on my TC Racquets and they are pretty accurate in weight within less than 1g. Perhaps a Briffidi error on mounting the racquet or calibration would be my best bet.
 
Happi said:
I have changed grommets many times on my TC Racquets and they are pretty accurate in weight within less than 1g. Perhaps a Briffidi error on mounting the racquet or calibration would be my best bet.
Click to expand...
I'll be sure to weigh, recalibrate and test again on the next restring, will report back
 
@Trip got me thinking about the TC99 (18 x 19) or the React MPP 99 (18 x 19) a fair bit. I am interested in both. Currently I float between a PAVS and a Dunlop CX 200+. I enjoy the CX 200+ but it has been discontinued. I have been trying to find out if the CX 200+ is foam filled in the hoop but can't find that information. This might be a longshot but has anyone on here ever played a CX 200+? If so, where would you lean towards - TC99 or React MPP 18 x 19? I understand that the CX 200+ is a 16 x 19 but I still find it has a low launch due to the tighter pattern in the middle and I like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top