The Official Angell Users Club

bkfinch

Semi-Pro

Holy moly, you really find that 1g like that makes a difference? I've never seen lead placement like that (!)

Still playing really well with my Pro Tour 630s, but am really intrigued by the TC95 for its low flex option, despite people here comparing the PT closer to the TC97.
I generally have quite a bit of lead in the upper hoop on my racquets, at least compared to the above image ! :D
 

rock76251

Rookie
Holy moly, you really find that 1g like that makes a difference? I've never seen lead placement like that (!)

Still playing really well with my Pro Tour 630s, but am really intrigued by the TC95 for its low flex option, despite people here comparing the PT closer to the TC97.
I generally have quite a bit of lead in the upper hoop on my racquets, at least compared to the above image ! :D
Wrong forum I know, but what is the classic Head racquet that everyone compares the Tecnifibre Tfight 315 16m to? Just curious, cause I really didn't like hitting with the Tecnifibre.
 
Holy moly, you really find that 1g like that makes a difference? I've never seen lead placement like that (!)

Still playing really well with my Pro Tour 630s, but am really intrigued by the TC95 for its low flex option, despite people here comparing the PT closer to the TC97.
I generally have quite a bit of lead in the upper hoop on my racquets, at least compared to the above image ! :D
I used to play the igpMP and yeah it helps


the Tc95 is a very different than a prestige. more like the ps85 crossed with a max 200g but with immense spin potential and an Mp's forgiveness... its unique and i just never really got on with higher than ra60 frames
 

scf

Semi-Pro
Guys with silverstring, what tension do you use? Seeing in the TWDB it loses 50% after stringing, I've strung it at 27/26kg in TC100 and I think it's kinda stiffish.
 

bkfinch

Semi-Pro
70Q8j

Been trying different lead placements, overall sw is pretty much the same- one on right has under the bumper, it's a bit under spec so needed more at 12:00.

I used to play the igpMP and yeah it helps


the Tc95 is a very different than a prestige. more like the ps85 crossed with a max 200g but with immense spin potential and an Mp's forgiveness... its unique and i just never really got on with higher than ra60 frames

I used to play with the ps85 until I realized that it didn't exactly help me to win matches (lol). Was 10 years ago when I was playing high school varsity tennis when I lost a match to a guy with one of the lightest Babolats on the market at the time that I got angry with myself for being such a racquet snob about using the ps85. But then the only racquet I found which was an improvement in terms of match playability/while keeping similar feel was the then-new MG Prestige mid. I was able to beat the same guy in later rematches :cool: Some years later I found some PT630s and haven't generally looked back. It was the only midplus racquet I ever played with that basically felt like a mid, but with all the benefits of a bigger head- I did try some of the Prestige MPs over the years, definitely weren't the same ballpark for me in terms of feel and performance. But I always appreciated the feel of the ps85, with full natural gut it's very special. With midplus I can use full poly and wack the **** out of the ball, with ps85 I felt poly never worked and so I was breaking multis all the time and always feeling that loss of control/predictability as the string deteriorated.

I suppose if you were a Prestige user who made the switch it's not so inconceivable that another pseudo Prestige user could do the same, lol

It is indeed the PT280/630/PT57A that people compare to the Tecnifibres. I never played with the Tecnifibres so I wouldn't know personally.
 

Power Player

Bionic Poster
Holy moly, you really find that 1g like that makes a difference? I've never seen lead placement like that (!)

Still playing really well with my Pro Tour 630s, but am really intrigued by the TC95 for its low flex option, despite people here comparing the PT closer to the TC97.
I generally have quite a bit of lead in the upper hoop on my racquets, at least compared to the above image ! :D

You could try the TC95 18x20. Apparently that feels close to a PT630. My TC97s felt like my PT630 which I still have. I have some classics that I will never sell - the PT630, Tec 315, Radical Trysis - all awesome to have. The 630 does really well with full poly. Just a great frame, but I have been going back to stiffer racquets now for a while and seeing a lot of benefits. The next Angell I would get would probably be something near 70 and 27.5 in length.
 

CosmosMpower

Hall of Fame
Please note that the TC100 Pro has a RA of 67, because it's measured with the grip already installed. After all, it's a TC100 70RA with given specs.

The TC100 63RA offers about as much power as the Ai100 and a lot more than the Ai98. However, feel, control, serve and volley are superior to the Ai100 and it's not as muted as the Ai98. A great stick, that is still very maneuverable despite it's greater swing weight.

Are you saying the TC100 Pro is the exact same frame as the TC100 Custom 70RA except the handled is molded on instead of pallets?
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
Holy moly, you really find that 1g like that makes a difference? I've never seen lead placement like that (!)

Still playing really well with my Pro Tour 630s, but am really intrigued by the TC95 for its low flex option, despite people here comparing the PT closer to the TC97.
I generally have quite a bit of lead in the upper hoop on my racquets, at least compared to the above image ! :D
I have both the TC95 18x20 and TC97 18x20 strung with Silverstring (22/21 kg) and I can confirm the TC97 feels noticeably stiffer.
 
Last edited:

Gee

Hall of Fame
Holy moly, you really find that 1g like that makes a difference? I've never seen lead placement like that (!)

Still playing really well with my Pro Tour 630s, but am really intrigued by the TC95 for its low flex option, despite people here comparing the PT closer to the TC97.
I generally have quite a bit of lead in the upper hoop on my racquets, at least compared to the above image ! :D
I have both the TC95 18x20 and TC97 18x20 strung with Silverstring (22/21 lg and I can confirm the TC97 feels noticably stiffer than the TC95.
Guys with silverstring, what tension do you use? Seeing in the TWDB it loses 50% after stringing, I've strung it at 27/26kg in TC100 and I think it's kinda stiffish.
That seems a way too high tension to me. I would recommend 24/23 kg in the TC100.
 

beltsman

G.O.A.T.
Anyone have experience with these specs in the 95? How would it woke out? Unstrung

32 cm balance
300 g
287 SW

Edit: I'm also really torn on 70 vs 63 stiffness on the 100. I want to return to my 1HBH but I'm afraid of tennis elbow returning. But even with 63 RA it's probably a bad idea given that I use full poly and don't restring often.

Otherwise, touch and slice and dropshots are really important to my game. Does the increased touch of the 63 outweigh the power of the 70?
 

Lord Anomander

Professional
Anyone have experience with these specs in the 95? How would it woke out? Unstrung

32 cm balance
300 g
287 SW

Edit: I'm also really torn on 70 vs 63 stiffness on the 100. I want to return to my 1HBH but I'm afraid of tennis elbow returning. But even with 63 RA it's probably a bad idea given that I use full poly and don't restring often.

Otherwise, touch and slice and dropshots are really important to my game. Does the increased touch of the 63 outweigh the power of the 70?

The numbers you gave above are for the 70RA version? It must be a long wait to get such a low SW on 63 RA, I can imagine. I'd say that the 63 RA frames play very plush and comfortable, but the string plays a big part in comfortability, so if you want to avoid TE, you might want to spend more money and go with gut or restring regularly.

Also I don't see why the 63 would have less power than the 70. Its higher SW surely helps to generate power (while it's still quite easy to swing). I would go with the 63 RA if your concern is comfort. The touch with the 63 is amazing, but I've never used a 70, so I wouldn't know the difference.

Maybe @topspn can help you out. :)
 

topspn

Legend
The numbers you gave above are for the 70RA version? It must be a long wait to get such a low SW on 63 RA, I can imagine. I'd say that the 63 RA frames play very plush and comfortable, but the string plays a big part in comfortability, so if you want to avoid TE, you might want to spend more money and go with gut or restring regularly.

Also I don't see why the 63 would have less power than the 70. Its higher SW surely helps to generate power (while it's still quite easy to swing). I would go with the 63 RA if your concern is comfort. The touch with the 63 is amazing, but I've never used a 70, so I wouldn't know the difference.

Maybe @topspn can help you out. :)
Comfort is not an issue with 95s or 100s in either RA. Although I think the 63RA is more string sensitive. Also, for similar specs 63 RA does seem to have a bit more power. But it's not pure drive power and you need to hit good developed strokes to tap into the full extent of the power. Stay low tension around 50lbs for TC100 and 47 for 63 RA. All great frames!
 

Don't Let It Bounce

Hall of Fame
took some time away from my TC97 to do a play test. I got back on the Angell today and just gelled with it quickly. I hope to get another one/two. I'm going to move 2 of my Redondo 98s and my TC100 to help me get some spending money and room in the bag
djNEiGht, what was it that led you to prefer the Angells to the Redondos?

(If you've already posted a comparison elsewhere, let me know and I'll track it down.)
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
So, for those of you who have experimented with some lead at 3 and 9 on TC95 63RA. How much lead would you suggestion each side? I was thinking each side 1/2gm or less.
I personally placed 5g total (2.5g on each side). Was plenty.

I'd say it depends on the specs you can tolerate, but I'd go for 2g and then perhaps lower if you find the racquet to swing too slowly. I personally find that the TC 95 swings very quickly in general however, so the added weight didn't bother me at all.
 

bkfinch

Semi-Pro
It's a personal preference, of course. I have both with the same specs/patterns/lead installed and I much prefer the 97.

Joohan, have been reading your posts about both racquets: seems that you admit to be able to play very well with the TC95 but you prefer the 97 nonetheless. Being used to the really flexy feel of the Head Pro Tour, when I've hit recently with racquets say... 62 RA + I do feel the extra stiffness and I'm not quite sure if I like it. I play as well with a solid 8-10g of lead in the upper hoop (nothing lower than 3/9, so some twistweight but not crazy crazy, counterweight in handle) so when I read that some people feel the 95 needs some lead in the hoop to 'complete' the frame, I mean, I'm going to add lead in any case to bring the spec to how I like. I suspect a main difference between the two frames could be the feel of the different beams- the 97 seems to be flat, and the 95 has that unique rounded beam. I enjoy flat beams but admit that more rounded beams seem to go through the air better. Maybe better for OHBH acceleration? I'll probably go for one or the other once the outdoor season starts here when I'm playing more every day rather than just a few times a week. Shame there is no demo system but most people seem really satisfied no matter their first purchase.

General comment: don't get how you guys can play with 100" open pattern racquets with low tensions. I can't keep the ball in with those kind of racquets(!)
 
J

joohan

Guest
Joohan, have been reading your posts about both racquets: seems that you admit to be able to play very well with the TC95 but you prefer the 97 nonetheless. Being used to the really flexy feel of the Head Pro Tour, when I've hit recently with racquets say... 62 RA + I do feel the extra stiffness and I'm not quite sure if I like it. I play as well with a solid 8-10g of lead in the upper hoop (nothing lower than 3/9, so some twistweight but not crazy crazy, counterweight in handle) so when I read that some people feel the 95 needs some lead in the hoop to 'complete' the frame, I mean, I'm going to add lead in any case to bring the spec to how I like. I suspect a main difference between the two frames could be the feel of the different beams- the 97 seems to be flat, and the 95 has that unique rounded beam. I enjoy flat beams but admit that more rounded beams seem to go through the air better. Maybe better for OHBH acceleration? I'll probably go for one or the other once the outdoor season starts here when I'm playing more every day rather than just a few times a week. Shame there is no demo system but most people seem really satisfied no matter their first purchase.

General comment: don't get how you guys can play with 100" open pattern racquets with low tensions. I can't keep the ball in with those kind of racquets(!)

I prefer the 97. Boxier beam and lower powered nature (compared to 95) seems to be the tipping point. Slices and volleys are 11/10 for me with 97, with 95 it's 2-3 points lower. That being said, you can't really go wrong even if you won't get a 100% fit with your first Angell purchase.
 

djNEiGht

Legend
djNEiGht, what was it that led you to prefer the Angells to the Redondos?

(If you've already posted a comparison elsewhere, let me know and I'll track it down.)

The Angell I have is a 310 but I added a leather grip so it prob weighs more now. The Redondo 98s that I'm selling are just too high in swing weight for me, especially on long days. I am keep one though forever :) The balance and SW on the one I'm keeping is more to my liking. What is odd is that the x3 that I have are all stock but the SW and balance is off. The one I am keeping is very headlight where as the two I will sell seem to be 6 pts at most. I really enjoy the Redondo, don't get me wrong. Both Angell and PK both play to my liking. Flexible, comfortable, control.
 

sma1001

Hall of Fame
I see Paul has posted a video on his FB page demonstrating the 1g of lead at 12 increases SW by 6 points. Very interesting that.
 

ByakuFubuki

Semi-Pro
Joohan, have been reading your posts about both racquets: seems that you admit to be able to play very well with the TC95 but you prefer the 97 nonetheless. Being used to the really flexy feel of the Head Pro Tour, when I've hit recently with racquets say... 62 RA + I do feel the extra stiffness and I'm not quite sure if I like it. I play as well with a solid 8-10g of lead in the upper hoop (nothing lower than 3/9, so some twistweight but not crazy crazy, counterweight in handle) so when I read that some people feel the 95 needs some lead in the hoop to 'complete' the frame, I mean, I'm going to add lead in any case to bring the spec to how I like. I suspect a main difference between the two frames could be the feel of the different beams- the 97 seems to be flat, and the 95 has that unique rounded beam. I enjoy flat beams but admit that more rounded beams seem to go through the air better. Maybe better for OHBH acceleration? I'll probably go for one or the other once the outdoor season starts here when I'm playing more every day rather than just a few times a week. Shame there is no demo system but most people seem really satisfied no matter their first purchase.

General comment: don't get how you guys can play with 100" open pattern racquets with low tensions. I can't keep the ball in with those kind of racquets(!)
I prefer the 97. Boxier beam and lower powered nature (compared to 95) seems to be the tipping point. Slices and volleys are 11/10 for me with 97, with 95 it's 2-3 points lower. That being said, you can't really go wrong even if you won't get a 100% fit with your first Angell purchase.
Are you referring to a Custom 97 or to Tour/Pro? Because I see the Custom is declared as "20mm Tapered Beam" like the 95.

By the way I already asked about it, but I don't really get what they mean with giving only a measure of thickness to Tapered Beams.
 

ONgame

Semi-Pro
Do Angell leather grips weigh heavier than Angell synthetic grips? If so, how does Paul handle it?
How do Angell leather grips compare to other leather grips like Wilson or TW?

Thanks!
 
J

joohan

Guest
Are you referring to a Custom 97 or to Tour/Pro? Because I see the Custom is declared as "20mm Tapered Beam" like the 95.

By the way I already asked about it, but I don't really get what they mean with giving only a measure of thickness to Tapered Beams.

Custom. Cross section of 97 beam is more boxy than ovalish shaped beam of 95.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
I see Paul has posted a video on his FB page demonstrating the 1g of lead at 12 increases SW by 6 points. Very interesting that.

More than interesting. It makes me question...the whole SW measurement system applied ;)
Because if this was actually true then whole SW increase calculation system by using tools and formulas would be meaningless, together with physics formula applied.
I saw the vid. But all I can think of is that measurement on this vid is wrong. Why, I would not know.

EDIT:
Anyone wants to question physics formulas?
Try TWU tool:
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/customizationReverse.php

According to TWU tool, adding 1 gram on the inner side at 12 o'clock (I entered 67.5 cm for a center of mass) increases SW by 3.3 units, not by 6.
 
Last edited:

realplayer

Semi-Pro
I bought a tc97 and tried it out for the first time today. Already have a tc95 and strung it with the same string and tension. Both rackets have a lot of similarities but it seems that the tc95 has a more softer impact. I thought that it would be the other way around because of the flexible head of the tc97. Maybe this will change as the racket was freshly strung.
I like the racket so far and it seems slightly more forgiving vs the tc95. I measured the headsize very accurately because some posters said that both headsizes are the same but the tc97 headsize is in fact just a fraction wider and longer.
 

Gee

Hall of Fame
I bought a tc97 and tried it out for the first time today. Already have a tc95 and strung it with the same string and tension. Both rackets have a lot of similarities but it seems that the tc95 has a more softer impact. I thought that it would be the other way around because of the flexible head of the tc97. Maybe this will change as the racket was freshly strung.
I like the racket so far and it seems slightly more forgiving vs the tc95. I measured the headsize very accurately because some posters said that both headsizes are the same but the tc97 headsize is in fact just a fraction wider and longer.
I completely agree.
 

zalive

Hall of Fame
Can anyone compare TC97 18x20 to some good Radical of older generation (and relatively similar specs: Tours - Bumblebee, Zebra, Candycane, LM, MG)?
 
J

joohan

Guest
Hey joohan, can you describe a bit more detailed what's better with TC97 regarding volleying?

For me, everything. I guess 97 fits better(or the best) with my natural volleying technique. With 95 I often mishit a bit or simply don't find the sweetspot plus I guess with 95 being more powerful makes it harder for me to have an ultimate control over my volleys. With 97 I can do almost anything off of the air. After a month hitting exclusively TC97 18x20, I picked my Bio 300Tour back home since I've left my 97s in London. Feel and overall performance extremely similar and I like volleying with Bio300T more than with the TC95 as well.

Edit: it very well may be the beam cross section difference between the two. Bio 300T is 97s sibling and their beams/feel I get from it is much sweeter and confidence inspiring for me. 300T is strung with 1.20 RS Lyon. I'm off on a holiday in a month and I'll string one of my 97 with VS/RPM hybrid, the other one with RS Lyon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

zalive

Hall of Fame
Or it's the specs combination that is different...if you mishit with TC95 often, I bet something in its specs combination is not similar to what you're used to, simply because it swings differently...
 

bkfinch

Semi-Pro
Can anyone compare TC97 18x20 to some good Radical of older generation (and relatively similar specs: Tours - Bumblebee, Zebra, Candycane, LM, MG)?

I'd be curious to read one as well- though some of those radicals can be rreeeaaallyyy different...
 
Top