Discussion in 'Racquets' started by Duzza, Sep 26, 2006.
Come on guys...
Yet to be build: DNX11
Try these two:
1. http://tennis.about.com/gi/dynamic/...://www.usatt.org/rackets/LT/LTWireStrung.html or
http://tennis.about.com/library/weekly/aa082001a.htm (more info)
2. http://cgi.*********/Wilson-tennis-...ryZ22716QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem or
Hope this helps!
Yeah might skip number 1 there lol..... the T3000 how thick was it?
This has come up in similr threads before. For example, http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=60237&page=1
I remember seeing this frame about 5-10 years ago and I would say it the thinnest I've ever seen....
Wilson Hammer Spin 5.5
Thanks winks! LOL at TennisD and Lakoste fight
im actually stringing 2 of these for my friend right now (the 5.5 spin)
so, how thin is it?
I have a wilson avenger from the beginning of the eighties or so at home. It has the same shape as the ps 85 but a thinner graphite/fiberglass beam, probably 15 or 16 mm. It is like a flexier heavier version of the ps 85. Quite cool actually.
It looks so thin you could probably snap it in half if you tried really hard!
The Pro RD-70 long, the all-burgundy frame that Hingis and Kournikova used, was 16mm.
YAMAHA VINO 125 SPECIFICATIONS
Here's the only image I could find:
you have to put e-b-a-y in it, without the dashes.
I'll put some pictures up tomorrow of the Avenger. Should be as thin as the Yonex I think. I remember hitting with that Yonex, had it been 27 inches I would have liked it more.
My Wilson Sting Mid (85) has a 15mm beam its pretty darn thin.
Any pictures? I'm yet to see a beam thinner than 17mm on Wilson PS 85 or Ncode 6.1 Tour
That wilson 5.5 spin is thinner. I know a player who uses it and it is hands down the thinnest i've ever seen.
The POG is 19mm for your information there.
That's better. SO how thin is the Hammer?
im guessing somewhere in between 15-18mm
The Hammer 5.5 "spin" now i hate hammer style racquets but, I would certainly give this one a try.
EVEN THINNER then that man...i used babelfish to translate the pase...this is what it said:
"As for hammer spin, certain frame thick 14 mm."
os its 14!!!!!
This is a comparison shot. The Yonex RD70 Pro mentioned before is the red one. It measures 16mm across. The Max 200G is there for comparison. The top frame is the Rossignol Graphite 200 - which is less than 14mm across.
imo the nxg is one of the thinnest
On the Wilson T2000, I don't have calipers to get an exact measurement, but eyeballing it with a ruler I see it at no more than 15mm and possibly 14mm. (The slightly rounded chrome edges make the exact edge a bit difficult to find, though, when holding a ruler up to it.) But I think I'm pretty close on the 14-15mm figure.
Ha, I've got an old Pilot wire-strung tennis racquet with a beam of 10mm. No kidding. Don't know how old it is, but I'm guessing about 100 years (more?). The "strings" are actually very fine, twisted metal wire (at least, that's the way it looks and feels). Don't know much about this history of this racquet, but want to find out more eventually.
LOL yeah dude definitely....
Well, I did some measurement at home. I actually have Lacoste version of that famous racquet, along with a few more old racquets. As I don't have any precise instrument to measure with I had to use my daughter's ruler and beam width was 13,5 mm. Since the strings are suspended on steel wires I measured the width of frame plus wires and it read 16,5 mm. I'm pretty sure that those wires do not have almost any effect on frame's performance so frame width is actually 13,5 mm.
Hope this helps!
Well, I re-measured the Wilson T2000 and T3000 with a cheap, plastic vernier caliper and got a 13mm width on both. On the old wire-strung Pilot racquet the width came out to 9mm. (Can't verify how accurate a cheap vernier caliper will be, but I bet it's pretty close.)
I'll have to post some photos comparing beam with of those with some other racquets.
Since I'm sitting around nursing a calf injury and not playing tennis, I've got time for some silly stuff like that. Not happy about it, but do have the extra time on my hands (well...sort of, anyway).
I measured the thinnest and fattest racquets I could get my hands on for beam width.
A very old Wright & Ditson steel racquet (circa 1920?) measured 9mm in beam width.
A Wilson Hyper Hammer 3.3 measured 30mm at its broadest point in beam width.
Since the width of the Wilson varied, depending on where it was measured, I gave the broadest measurement. At it's narrowest point, it was about 25mm.
Separate names with a comma.