The Official Angell Users Club

B

Blahovic

Professional
Blahovic said:
The past 2 days I've played with the Angell TC95 v4. Specs are 27.25 inches long, 315g unstrung, 310 balance and 16x19.

This racquet is really cool. Monster on serves when I get my timing right. Forehand is nice, but racquets never bother me too much on my forehead. Slice is good. Backhand is up and down but that's more because of me than the racquet. I don't personally feel a huge lack of control, although I play with relatively high tension poly. Ball maybe sails slightly on really flat shots.

The D beam is notably helpful for swinging through the air faster and generating slice of topspin.

I'm interested to try a non-extended version now + a TC100.
Click to expand...
I've been using the TC95 16x19 for a little while now and I think I'm seeing what people have said about it being a bit wild.

Today I was missing long quite a lot. I switched to the TC97 16x19 (which I also bought and haven't used much), and instantly found I was getting a more reliable response and was able to swing more freely.

I was curious to try moving away from a box beam and generating more topspin and height over the net, but maybe it's just not my game. The TC97 is a nice feeling racquet. It would be nice if this one works well for me as it's easy to stock up on and I like the paint job.
 
ollinger

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
I've seen a few mentions of the copper effect paint on the V3 models coming off, ? flaking. Is this true? Sounds like what I experienced years ago with Wilson frames, but I had no expectation of quality with those.
 
jangotango

jangotango

Semi-Pro
ollinger said:
I've seen a few mentions of the copper effect paint on the V3 models coming off, ? flaking. Is this true? Sounds like what I experienced years ago with Wilson frames, but I had no expectation of quality with those.
Click to expand...
They're pretty easy to chip. Some of the copper part in the upper inside hoop where the grommets are came off/flaked when I strung my TC95
 
RoarTT

RoarTT

Semi-Pro
ollinger said:
I've seen a few mentions of the copper effect paint on the V3 models coming off, ? flaking. Is this true? Sounds like what I experienced years ago with Wilson frames, but I had no expectation of quality with those.
Click to expand...
My V3 TC97 flaked of a bit with the finishing tape of the grip above the handle. I was surprised to see that. Never happened on any other racket and didn’t really expect it from an Angell.
 
E

ed70

Professional
Blahovic said:
I've been using the TC95 16x19 for a little while now and I think I'm seeing what people have said about it being a bit wild.

Today I was missing long quite a lot. I switched to the TC97 16x19 (which I also bought and haven't used much), and instantly found I was getting a more reliable response and was able to swing more freely.

I was curious to try moving away from a box beam and generating more topspin and height over the net, but maybe it's just not my game. The TC97 is a nice feeling racquet. It would be nice if this one works well for me as it's easy to stock up on and I like the paint job.
Click to expand...

I needed a dead round poly strung under 50lbs with the TC95 16x19, or if you play a good standard the 18x20's a really sweet frame that doesnt really get enough time on here, i guess 95's & 18x20 are not so "fashionable" these days.

TC97 16x19 is underrated too on here, though not a true box beam the frame has an open look to the stringbed but plays kind of inbetween an 18x20 & 16x19, good at everything a unique frame for someone who mixes up their shots & gets into the net.
 
J

Jocko

Rookie
ed70 said:
Firstly congrats on playing into your 70's, you have obviously looked after yourself or have great genes! I'm 51 & as i have some right inner knee arthritus i've also transitioned into more doubles, infact i dont play singles matches at all now.
I presume you add weight to the K7? The good thing about the 97&101 with doubles play are the lower launch angle of both, kind of inbetween an 18x20 & 16x19. Also really good stability, no extra weight in head is needed.
Not sure about extended length frames of a quarter inch, but it always surprised me how much increase in SW with extended length, i've his with a few 27.5's out of curiosity & they just felt odd.
Click to expand...
Thanks much. Been lucky to bounce back pretty well from injuries over the years and do take off-court training & nutrition seriously. I don’t add weight to the K7 Red…though I did to other racquets over the years…the K7 Red just feels so good! I’m also only 5’6 and, though I like to think I get pretty good pop on my shots, placement and movement have always been more my game. Very much appreciate your comment re extended length racquets…I wondered about that…so good to hear your thoughts on the added swing weight. I try to focus on swing speed as I get older and certainly do not need anything slowing it down!
But I will confess to the “grass is greener” syndrome occasionally as relates to larger head-size racquets…especially in doubles. I tried a Dunlop CX 200 OS as I read terrific things about it…and it certainly is a seeming anomaly…a ‘players’ oversize (105)…but it just didn’t feel right…too head heavy…even with tape & overgrip to counter balance…
Your mention of the 101 is very intriguing…
Like maybe ‘more of the same’ in regard to the K7 Red…best of the Red but making things a bit easier…
Anyway, thanks again!
 
flanker2000fr

flanker2000fr

Hall of Fame
Picking this thread's collective brains: I am currently playing the TC95 18x20 with 310g / 315mm specs, which I like very, vey much. But I sometimes wish I had a bit more mass coming through the ball while remaining reasonable maneuvrable. With Angell now proposing 5g static weight increments, I am toying with the idea of ordering it in 315g / 310mm specs. I wrote to Paul to ask what to expect in terms of swing weight for those specs (the 310g / 315mm is around 303 SW unstrung), but I am curious what the consensus here would be if I changed to this slightly heavier / more headlight version. Any idea?
 
O

ockelito

New User
I would guess you get the same swing weight. And that you would get the same result by adding 5 g to the handle on your current racquet. But you might want a second opinion on that.
 
flanker2000fr

flanker2000fr

Hall of Fame
ockelito said:
I would guess you get the same swing weight. And that you would get the same result by adding 5 g to the handle on your current racquet. But you might want a second opinion on that.
Click to expand...

You're probably right, though it's a bit unconvenient to weight the handle of an Angell dur to the absence of a trap in the butt cap,
 
Carreau

Carreau

Semi-Pro
You may add 5 grams on the top of the handle - this modification is quite popular.
It works well for my TC100 310g/315mm version.
 
O

ockelito

New User
You could also remove the pallets to add the weight beneath:

New Angell TC97!

What is your problem? Do you have some kind of axe to grind here? Some kind of personal thing with Angell? He take your lunch money at school or something? Oh no - cause that means you'd be old enough to know better and figure some stuff out for yourself. You know zero about what you are...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com tt.tennis-warehouse.com
 
djNEiGht

djNEiGht

Legend
flanker2000fr said:
You're probably right, though it's a bit unconvenient to weight the handle of an Angell dur to the absence of a trap in the butt cap,
Click to expand...
that's interesting...all my Angells have trap doors. Granted you have to work with/against the foam on some of the models. I added putty in one just above the foam. On another, I pushed in weight into the foam.
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
Finally part of the club, got a copper TC 95 320g/310mm, 16x19.

Have to say, the string pattern is very open, haven't played with a string pattern that open in a while. After using mainly 18x20 or 18x19 in the last year or two it's quite a change.
Feel and stability are nice, quite a lot of power as well, more than I had expected from a 20mm beam.
First impression is really good, I'll have to try with different strings as well and see how I can adapt to the pattern/launch angle.
 
E

emhtennis

Professional
Did anyone else get Angell Racket Sacs when they got their frames? Now that I've had them awhile I don't understand why other brands don't offer them and why they (the Racket Sacs) aren't a bigger thing?
 
R

Rysty

Rookie
emhtennis said:
Did anyone else get Angell Racket Sacs when they got their frames? Now that I've had them awhile I don't understand why other brands don't offer them and why they (the Racket Sacs) aren't a bigger thing?
Click to expand...
I did. I use them when I travel (don't want to have the racquet bag with me, just one suitcase) and they are fine, light and room-saving, but I had to wash them a few times, because when they were new, they stained my white overgrips a little.
 
flanker2000fr

flanker2000fr

Hall of Fame
djNEiGht said:
that's interesting...all my Angells have trap doors. Granted you have to work with/against the foam on some of the models. I added putty in one just above the foam. On another, I pushed in weight into the foam.
Click to expand...

My bad - the racquets do have a trap door - I just checked. I think I confused it with my previous racquet, which is the PCG100, that doesn't have one.

Paull just wrote back to me, and basically advised to keep the same balance while increasing the static weight. This should make for a more stable frame, with a bit more plow through.
 
E

ed70

Professional
been playing some more with my TC101, I'm not sure how popular this release has been i find in my playing circle there appears to be a reluctance to play 100 square inch or larger, even with some quite average club players. Have a few playing 100sq inch head speeds with 18x20 patterns, but mainly 95-98 head sizes.
The actual difference in head size is so small between the TC97 & 101, my regular playing partners havent even noticed i've a new frame (octane)
I think this is quite a unique frame a 101 thin beam players frame with ample power, control & stability in stock form. With good spin when you brush up on ball & laser like flat shots. Really is a great allround racquet.
 
Mkiske

Mkiske

Semi-Pro
ed70 said:
been playing some more with my TC101, I'm not sure how popular this release has been i find in my playing circle there appears to be a reluctance to play 100 square inch or larger, even with some quite average club players. Have a few playing 100sq inch head speeds with 18x20 patterns, but mainly 95-98 head sizes.
The actual difference in head size is so small between the TC97 & 101, my regular playing partners havent even noticed i've a new frame (octane)
I think this is quite a unique frame a 101 thin beam players frame with ample power, control & stability in stock form. With good spin when you brush up on ball & laser like flat shots. Really is a great allround racquet.
Click to expand...
Tc101 is a right choice for those who want a good racquet in all aspects and for those who like racquets with 100" headsize.
Medium power, good control, helps in defense, great for creating angles and building plays, good volley and serve. Low launch angle. I have confidence and control in the forehand and the flat backhand. My slice is ok (my fault) It will deliver more control than too much power.
My specs: 300g, stock form, 32mm unstrung

Strung: Kirschbaum PL Evolution 1.25mm 47 lbs
333g
32,5 balance
 
Last edited:
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
Been testing more with the TC 95, finally got some match play.
Serving is fantastic with this racquet, very easy to change direction and place first serves. Overspinning the kick serves a bit sometimes but that's just about getting used to the open pattern.
 
B

Blahovic

Professional
veelium said:
Been testing more with the TC 95, finally got some match play.
Serving is fantastic with this racquet, very easy to change direction and place first serves. Overspinning the kick serves a bit sometimes but that's just about getting used to the open pattern.
Click to expand...
It's definitely a great racquet on serves, don't think I've played with a racquet better on that front.
 
flanker2000fr

flanker2000fr

Hall of Fame
ed70 said:
technifibre ice code works in open 16x19's
Click to expand...

I concur with this. Round polys are the way to go with the 16x19 patterns at Angell. It's such an open pattern that an aggressively shaped string will break very quickly due to the string movement. Plus, shaped poly tend to provide a higher launch angle, that's really not required in a very open 16x19 pattern, at the risk of having all the balls flying long.

Besides Ice Code, I have found 4G / 4G Soft to work very well.

Also a thick gauge is a good idea to improve the durability of the string.
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
Went to the closest shop, since I'm in head country they only have head strings (and gear). So I went with hawk 17 gauge at 23/22kg.

flanker2000fr said:
I concur with this. Round polys are the way to go with the 16x19 patterns at Angell. It's such an open pattern that an aggressively shaped string will break very quickly due to the string movement. Plus, shaped poly tend to provide a higher launch angle, that's really not required in a very open 16x19 pattern, at the risk of having all the balls flying long.

Besides Ice Code, I have found 4G / 4G Soft to work very well.

Also a thick gauge is a good idea to improve the durability of the string.
Click to expand...
Agree, all good points.

Still curious to try ice code, maybe because of the cool name.
I'm generally a fan of round polys, the stringbed just feels more consistent, especially in such an open pattern.
 
S

Spoonerie

New User
Sorry if it's been repeated ad nauseam here, but what's the difference between the TC95 and the TC97 - is there anything that's different apart from the head size?
Which one would feel most like the Head Prestige but with more free power + forgiveness?
Tx!
 
R

Rysty

Rookie
Spoonerie said:
Sorry if it's been repeated ad nauseam here, but what's the difference between the TC95 and the TC97 - is there anything that's different apart from the head size?
Which one would feel most like the Head Prestige but with more free power + forgiveness?
Tx!
Click to expand...
Profile and flex profile. TC 95 = D-beam, flexes evenly. TC 97 = box beam and has flex in the hoop. Angell doesn't copy anyone, but yes, the TC 97 feels very much like old Prestiges.
 
G

GermanBeast

New User
I am also very interested in the same request as Spoonerie.
I am looking for a 360+ Prestige pro with more forgiveness, a bit more power and a higher trajectory. Could be the TC95 16x19 the right one or rather TC 97 16x19?
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
The TC95 checks the boxes on a higher trajectory (more open 16x19 pattern) and (slightly) more forgiveness imo. Not sure about power but the tc95 is quite powerful for how thin the beam is.
I haven't played enough with the prestige pro to comment on the feel.

Haven't tried the TC97, quite happy with the TC95.
 
G

GermanBeast

New User
I think, I have to try the TC95 in 16x19. It sounds great, what I've already read about it.
What specs should I choose, If I like a swing weight in the range of 327-332?
I thought 310g/315 mm could be a good match?
 
E

emhtennis

Professional
GermanBeast said:
I think, I have to try the TC95 in 16x19. It sounds great, what I've already read about it.
What specs should I choose, If I like a swing weight in the range of 327-332?
I thought 310g/315 mm could be a good match?
Click to expand...
SW unstrung will be ~295. This will not change with your weight/balance choices. When trying to decide, just remember that strings will add 20g plus anything else you put on. For me, strings, overgrip, dampener all together add about 25g to the unstrung weight.

I play best when my fully ready-to-play frame is between 330-335g. Any more than that and my racket head speed drops off after about an hour.
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
GermanBeast said:
I think, I have to try the TC95 in 16x19. It sounds great, what I've already read about it.
What specs should I choose, If I like a swing weight in the range of 327-332?
I thought 310g/315 mm could be a good match?
Click to expand...
Maybe write an email before you order but that sounds good. I have 320g/310mm and it’s quite nice. The prestige pro is 315g/315mm right?
 
flanker2000fr

flanker2000fr

Hall of Fame
GermanBeast said:
I think, I have to try the TC95 in 16x19. It sounds great, what I've already read about it.
What specs should I choose, If I like a swing weight in the range of 327-332?
I thought 310g/315 mm could be a good match?
Click to expand...

I have exchanged a bit with Paull Angell on that matter. The V4 paint is lighter than the paint on the V3 Octane, translating in a lower SW at comparable specs.

My V3 Octane TC95's with a 310g / 315mm specs had an unstrung SW of 303. Strings add 25-30 points of SW (depending on material / gauge), so this would bring it around 330.

But when considering the V4 TC 95, he told me that the unstrung SW would be in the range of 293-298, and that to target a SW around 330 strung, I should consider a 315g / 315mm specs.
 
ChrisG

ChrisG

Professional
I have bought 3 prestige pro (graphene touch) last year and barely hit with them. Sweetspot feels smaller than TC95, not as quick through the air, and a tighter 16x19. Good frames but nothing the TC 95 doesn’t already do better (serves and power shots are really something). Slice and control are maybe better, but I personally don’t need it in my game right now as much as I need the raw power and ability to shape the ball (I’m a flat hitter with a very open pattern frame so I’m really enjoying the variety in my game).
I use to lead up my frames but now I just put a leather grip and an over grip and that’s it (starting with 300g /325mm, it comes near to 310g / 315mm).
my level of play would be the equivalent of 5.0 I guess
 
G

GermanBeast

New User
Yes, the prestige pro has 315g/315mm and that feels very good and whippy. I read about the TC95 that because of foam filling it has more weight and a higher SW. That is why I thought, 310/315 would be the right combination. But as I can see, what flanker2000fr has written, it relates to V3 and V4 is even lighter.
So, probably would be 315/315 better with V4.
I will contact Paul and ask him directly, which combination he recommends for me.
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
Anyone playing the tc95 without a vibration dampener?

Not sure if it's the string(job) but I get a lot of vibrations and a very pingy sound. Not in an uncomfortable way, more in a distracting way.
 
RF_PRO_STAFF

RF_PRO_STAFF

Professional
veelium said:
Anyone playing the tc95 without a vibration dampener?

Not sure if it's the string(job) but I get a lot of vibrations and a very pingy sound. Not in an uncomfortable way, more in a distracting way.
Click to expand...
I have the exact same experiences. I'm a dampener user myself but even with a dampener I can feel it vibrating somewhat. I had a friend try my TC95 16x19 and he hates dampeners. Well, he immediately asked if I could borrow a dampener because the immense vibrations totally threw him off his game. That made me try it without a dampener too and I've never felt anything like it before. With a dampener there's no problems though.

I have the V3 copper TC95 and have had multiple different string jobs in it, all poly though.
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
RF_PRO_STAFF said:
I have the exact same experiences. I'm a dampener user myself but even with a dampener I can feel it vibrating somewhat. I had a friend try my TC95 16x19 and he hates dampeners. Well, he immediately asked if I could borrow a dampener because the immense vibrations totally threw him off his game. That made me try it without a dampener too and I've never felt anything like it before. With a dampener there's no problems though.

I have the V3 copper TC95 and have had multiple different string jobs in it, all poly though.
Click to expand...
Good to know.

Didn't feel like that when the strings were fresh but wasn't sure if I was using a dampener or not.
I'm also using the copper one with full poly (head hawk).

Would be interesting to know why that's happening, never felt it that much with any other racquet/brand.
 
ChrisG

ChrisG

Professional
It can be the string job, usually I use a dampener but I occasionally tried without one and sometimes it was unbearable, and other it wasn’t that bad .
the only frame I’ve tried without dampener that felt good was my pt630
 
V

veelium

Hall of Fame
Well, usually with other frames I played without a dampener because it wasn't too much of a difference.
I don't mind to use one, just find it strange.
 
djNEiGht

djNEiGht

Legend
I was recently gifted a racquet that Rafter endorsed...Prince Precision Ti. I strung it up with a various string to just get rid of...Tourna Deuce. It had a lot of vibration and I was surprised because this had the DB and even a dampener. I felt the string was a bit "launchy" too. I had placed Deuce before in another racquet and didn't like it...however I don't recall the vibration. I changed out the string to another (pros pro hex multi/dunlop hex fiber clone) and also added 5g of silicone. I wanted to make it a bit more HL anyways.

significant change. In hindsight I should have just done the string and then the silicone...

I never really noticed vibration in my tc95 v1&v2 without a dampener but more of just the ping.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top