Twist weight for Vcore 98 2023 VS Ezone 98 2022

[fnick851]

I am using a Briffidi SW1 and the twist weight adapter to measure twist weights.

The twist weight of my Ezone 98 2022s (I have two) strung and in stock form is about 13.3 to 13.4.
But the twist weight for my new Vcore 98 2023 strung with same string in stock form is only 12.7.

That seems quite low for the Vcore. Based on the Tennis Warehouse Twist Weight database, the Vcore 98 should have a similar twist weight as the EZ98: https://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/twistweight.cgi, though I am aware the Tennis Warehouse database's measuring method is not quite accurate: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ts-make-a-briffidi-users-tw-data-base.747507/

So is the Vcore supposed to have a much lower twist weight? Or do I have one with bad QC?

Does any one own a Vcore 98 2023 & can measure its swing weight with Briffidi?

Thanks.

 

[AMGF]

Thank you for the Briffidi measurement of the new VCore 98 TW. Makes all the promo stuff about the new VCore being super stable a bunch of bs. My feeling is that the VCore line is super great at attacking but is bad on defense/volley/off centered shots due to low TW.

I got rid of my old VCores98+ because of low TW. The TWU TW specs for the new VCore looked promising, but it is way off the mark once again.

TWU should just start using the Briffidi1 for TW and put an asterisk next to all previously tested racquets that their TW numbers were measured using taro cards and astrology. Actually I'd take taro cards guessed TW numbers over whatever method TWU is currently using.

 

[fnick851]

taro card and astrology, haha

 

[AMGF]

taro card and astrology, haha

Yeah imagine my surprise when I measured the Prince Beasner that is supposed to be 14.9 to actually be in the 12s.
I mean seriously how are they measuring their TW? I asked how they measure it and all I got were crickets.

 

[ZeroandOne]

I think it boils down to qc lottery. Everyone gets a different frame, these days we are just buying paintjobs

 

[fnick851]

My experience with Yonex QC has been quite good. That’s why I mostly buy from them since it’s easier to match rackets. If this is QC issue then it’s really sad.

 

[AMGF]

I think it boils down to qc lottery. Everyone gets a different frame, these days we are just buying paintjobs

Yonex is notorious for probably the best QC in the market today.

TWU has the Vcore 98 at 13.9TW. No way quality control is so bad a frame has 1.2TW less than specced. That’s a lot lower. A few tenths sure, but not a whole point.

If we had more people with Briffidi and Vcore98 we could see what’s going on. My guess is that the Vcore really is a sub 13TW racquet.

 

[HitMoreBHs]

Don’t have a Vcore 98 to hand, but I’ve got a couple of Vcore 100’s (2023) that my son has been playtesting. The Briffidi measured twistweights for the Vcore 100’s are 13.1 and 13.2. TWU has that racquet at 14.86!

I don’t trust the twistweight numbers in the TWU database. Every racquet I own measures at least 1 lower in twistweight on the Briffidi than the number cited on TWU. Often, it’s more than 1.5 different!

I’d say your Vcore 98 twistweight of 12.7 is likely representative. Twistweight appears to have much less QC variance in comparison with swingweight.

 

[fnick851]

Don’t have a Vcore 98 to hand, but I’ve got a couple of Vcore 100’s (2023) that my son has been playtesting. The Briffidi measured twistweights for the Vcore 100’s are 13.1 and 13.2. TWU has that racquet at 14.86!

I don’t trust the twistweight numbers in the TWU database. Every racquet I own measures at least 1 lower in twistweight on the Briffidi than the number cited on TWU. Often, it’s more than 1.5 different!

I’d say your Vcore 98 twistweight of 12.7 is likely representative. Twistweight appears to have much less QC variance in comparison with swingweight.

Thanks for sharing.

If Vcore 100 has 13.1 and 13.2 TW, then 98 having 12.7 TW makes sense.
It seems like Yonex QC is still good. It's just the Vcore line has a low twist weight by design being a spin oriented racket.

 

[Yamin]

Yeah imagine my surprise when I measured the Prince Beasner that is supposed to be 14.9 to actually be in the 12s.
I mean seriously how are they measuring their TW? I asked how they measure it and all I got were crickets.

It is well known that the metrics aren't comparable between the tool you're comparing and the TW numbers. Their numbers are good relatively

 

[aaron_h27]

I am using a Briffidi SW1 and the twist weight adapter to measure twist weights.

The twist weight of my Ezone 98 2022s (I have two) strung and in stock form is about 13.3 to 13.4.
But the twist weight for my new Vcore 98 2023 strung with same string in stock form is only 12.7.

That seems quite low for the Vcore. Based on the Tennis Warehouse Twist Weight database, the Vcore 98 should have a similar twist weight as the EZ98: https://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/twistweight.cgi, though I am aware the Tennis Warehouse database's measuring method is not quite accurate: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ts-make-a-briffidi-users-tw-data-base.747507/

So is the Vcore supposed to have a much lower twist weight? Or do I have one with bad QC?

Does any one own a Vcore 98 2023 & can measure its swing weight with Briffidi?

Thanks.

13.3-13.4 is my sweetspot with Yonex frames. Not too high to slow down the frame but also not too low to be unstable.

Anything under 13 is too unstable on court IMO.

 

[AMGF]

It is well known that the metrics aren't comparable between the tool you're comparing and the TW numbers. Their numbers are good relatively

Total bs. Twistweight is not an obscure measure. It should be the same with whatever method assuming your method is precise and consistent. Two calibrated Briffidi machine will get the same measurements for SW and TW for any racquet. Just like two calibrated scales will get the same weight for the same racquet.

Plus you wouldn’t know if their numbers are good because they never released their method so we can’t see how they get their TW numbers. Many asked they always refused to say how they get them. So unless you know something no one on TT knows, just take for granted that TWU’s numbers for TW are based on speculation at best.

On the other hand, Briffidi gets the TW number based on actual TW and the numbers match the actual theoretical numbers for known objects.

 

[Yamin]

Total bs. Twistweight is not an obscure measure. It should be the same with whatever method assuming your method is precise and consistent. Two calibrated Briffidi machine will get the same measurements for SW and TW for any racquet. Just like two calibrated scales will get the same weight for the same racquet.

Plus you wouldn’t know if their numbers are good because they never released their method so we can’t see how they get their TW numbers. Many asked they always refused to say how they get them. So unless you know something no one on TT knows, just take for granted that TWU’s numbers for TW are based on speculation at best.

On the other hand, Briffidi gets the TW number based on actual TW and the numbers match the actual theoretical numbers for known objects.

Idk man. I have no horse in the race but I don't know why everyone thinks this new tool is the end all of measurement tools. Or why it even really matters. Even stringing machines are relative

 

[HitMoreBHs]

Idk man. I have no horse in the race but I don't know why everyone thinks this budget new tool made in a basement or whatever is the end all of measurement tools. Or why it even really matters. Even stringing machines are relative

Because it was designed and built by an engineer who is an avid tennis player himself, and provided video evidence demonstrating the exceptional accuracy and precision of the machine.

Calling the Briffidi SW1 a “budget new tool made in a basement or whatever” is just your backhanded and ungracious way of denigrating what is a truly well designed (and more than a little ingenious) machine built on sound physics and engineering principles. You don’t care, that’s fine. But your opinion simply evidences your ignorance of science and math.

 

[Soundbyte]

Because it was designed and built by an engineer who is an avid tennis player himself, and provided video evidence demonstrating the exceptional accuracy and precision of the machine.

Calling the Briffidi SW1 a “budget new tool made in a basement or whatever” is just your backhanded and ungracious way of denigrating what is a truly well designed (and more than a little ingenuous) machine built on sound physics and engineering principles. You don’t care, that’s fine. But your opinion simply evidences your ignorance of science and math.

Well said. Brian has shared his math and calculations. 3d printing made the possibility of producing such a device a reality.

Short of my stringing machine, it's my favorite tennis purchase

 

[Yamin]

Because it was designed and built by an engineer who is an avid tennis player himself, and provided video evidence demonstrating the exceptional accuracy and precision of the machine.

Calling the Briffidi SW1 a “budget new tool made in a basement or whatever” is just your backhanded and ungracious way of denigrating what is a truly well designed (and more than a little ingenious) machine built on sound physics and engineering principles. You don’t care, that’s fine. But your opinion simply evidences your ignorance of science and math.

It's not really a big deal, I have nothing against the tool. Just stating that people don't have to get all bent out of shape for a number that's likely going to do nothing for them when you don't have hundreds of other data points. What good is the Briffidi twist weight when you have nothing to compare it to? For matching where the absolute number doesn't matter.

It's not always right but If you're interested in twist weight you should at least be able to read through the TW data and have an idea how it translates from your own experience.

 

[Power Player]

I have been pleasantly surprised by how easy it is to defend with my Vcore 98 Tour. Maybe the twistweight is higher but probably not by much compared to the regular 98. I have a regular 98 coming this week that I should be able to get a match in with by next weekend.

I may have to grab the briffidi TW measurer at some point. That may help me figure out where to place lead on the VC98 if I decide I want it a touch heavier.

 

[aaron_h27]

Idk man. I have no horse in the race but I don't know why everyone thinks this budget new tool made in a basement or whatever is the end all of measurement tools. Or why it even really matters. Even stringing machines are relative

Extremely disrespectful comment.

People have no class on the internet, really sad.

 

[Yamin]

Extremely disrespectful comment.

People have no class on the internet, really sad.

Didn't know it was so sensitive. Fixed for you. Just meant compared to the machines that cost over 1k. This is a model that is affordable.

Don't need to read into it too hard.

 

[AMGF]

It's not really a big deal, I have nothing against the tool. Just stating that people don't have to get all bent out of shape for a number that's likely going to do nothing for them when you don't have hundreds of other data points. What good is the Briffidi twist weight when you have nothing to compare it to? For matching where the absolute number doesn't matter.

It's not always right but If you're interested in twist weight you should at least be able to read through the TW data and have an idea how it translates from your own experience.

No offense taken on my side. Modern cell phones and 3D printing makes this machine affordable. An all incorporated machine would probably be close to 2k$ and would not be more accurate. I think you missed the fact that the machine will precisely measure twistweight of a known object. Take it as if Briffidi with the use of a cell phone could precisely measure the weight of something as well as a 1k$ scale. Only it is measuring twistweight and not weight.

Your last sentence is where you get it all wrong. The TWU database for twist weight is so out of spec, so all over the place you can’t possibly have any idea how to translate it into useable info. Some frame are under, some over, the data is totally useless. It’s basically what we’re trying to say.

Being almost impossible to measure up to now, twistweight has been overlooked over the years. Yet twistweight is playing a huge part on how a racquet will perform. Testing pros racquets with the Briffidi showed that as well.

 

[Yamin]

No offense taken on my side. Modern cell phones and 3D printing makes this machine affordable. An all incorporated machine would probably be close to 2k$ and would not be more accurate. I think you missed the fact that the machine will precisely measure twistweight of a known object. Take it as if Briffidi with the use of a cell phone could precisely measure the weight of something as well as a 1k$ scale. Only it is measuring twistweight and not weight.

Your last sentence is where you get it all wrong. The TWU database for twist weight is so out of spec, so all over the place you can’t possibly have any idea how to translate it into useable info. Some frame are under, some over, the data is totally useless. It’s basically what we’re trying to say.

Being almost impossible to measure up to now, twistweight has been overlooked over the years. Yet twistweight is playing a huge part on how a racquet will perform. Testing pros racquets with the Briffidi showed that as well.

Maybe we're looking at the TW DB in different ways. In my experience (unless the racket itself measured is an outlier):

13s - Not stable unless it's an old config racket (high static weight usually polarized)

14s- Mid 14s is where maneuverability and stability are usually at a good intersection for most

15s- usually stable at the expense of maneuverability

The are other considerations too when it comes to how that twist weight is achieved though. Yonex puts weight at the top handle area while Babolat puts at 3 and 9. Will obviously have different effect on court.

I'm a big proponent of looking at twist weight and glad there's a more accessible way for people to get measurements now. A lot of misinformation about swing weight over these years on the forum that is actually a repercussion of twist weight. Matching rackets without twist weight also ends with two completely different performing rackets for myself.

 

[AMGF]

Maybe we're looking at the TW DB in different ways. In my experience (unless the racket itself measured is an outlier).

13s - Not stable unless it's an old config racket (high static weight)

14s- Mid 14s is where maneuverability and stability are usually at a good intersection for most

15s- usually stable at the expense of maneuverability

Your target numbers for twistweight are good. That’s pretty accurate how twistweight correlates to stability.

However the TW data base for twistweight is not accurate at all. I don’t know how else I can tell you this.

What you think is 15 from the TWU database can be either 13 or 16 (or 12 or 14). Their numbers are all over the place and not by a constant variable, but randomly dispersed both up and down as myself and others with a Briffidi machine have been able to measure. Again the TWU numbers are not off by a constant margin, they are off both up and down, there are no way for you to know the stability of a frame based on TWU numbers.

The professor never told how he gets the twistweight numbers and likely never will because it is obvious by now that his numbers are pure bs. He probably developed a way to guesstimate a number and has been using it wrongly for years. It would take a very humble person to admit he’s been wrong all those years and by the look of it he won’t. And that’s sad, because he did do his best, he’s been right on a lot of things, just not that particular metric. No one would actually be mad if he just admit it and start using the Briffidi from now on for both swingweight and twistweight numbers.

Now what makes the Briffidi so good? Well if you have a known object with a known twistweight number and put it in a calibrated Briffidi machine anywhere in the world, you would get accurate, precise and repeatable twistweight number for that object. That’s why we are defending the basement made 3D printed machine. Because it works, contrary to what TWU does. No beef against the professor, just that his twistweight data is useless.

 

[TysonMcMuffin]

I am using a Briffidi SW1 and the twist weight adapter to measure twist weights.

The twist weight of my Ezone 98 2022s (I have two) strung and in stock form is about 13.3 to 13.4.
But the twist weight for my new Vcore 98 2023 strung with same string in stock form is only 12.7.

That seems quite low for the Vcore. Based on the Tennis Warehouse Twist Weight database, the Vcore 98 should have a similar twist weight as the EZ98: https://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/twistweight.cgi, though I am aware the Tennis Warehouse database's measuring method is not quite accurate: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ts-make-a-briffidi-users-tw-data-base.747507/

So is the Vcore supposed to have a much lower twist weight? Or do I have one with bad QC?

Does any one own a Vcore 98 2023 & can measure its swing weight with Briffidi?

Thanks.

Do you know Swingweight of the Ezone 98 and Vcore 98 respectively? I think I might know why your TW measurement is wacky

 

[HitMoreBHs]

Now what makes the Briffidi so good? Well if you have a known object with a known twistweight number and put it in a calibrated Briffidi machine anywhere in the world, you would get accurate, precise and repeatable twistweight number for that object. That’s why we are defending the basement made 3D printed machine. Because it works, contrary to what TWU does. No beef against the professor, just that his twistweight data is useless.

The Briffidi SW1 with twistweight adapter is the only machine currently available that measures twistweight directly. All other machines approximate twistweight from measuring Spinweight and than subtracting Swingweight, which introduces the potential for all sorts of errors.

Accuracy of Spinweight measurements are highly dependent on absolutely accurate horizontal mounting of the racquet face. And then there’s the error from buttcaps that are not perfectly perpendicular to the racquet axis. None of these issues apply to the SW1.

The TWU twistweight database is so imprecise and variable that it’s just one big source of misinformation.

 

[fnick851]

Do you know Swingweight of the Ezone 98 and Vcore 98 respectively? I think I might know why your TW measurement is wacky

I have two EZ98 2022 (one blue, one black), and one VC98. All three are strung with Grapplesnake Tour M8 1.25mm.

Blue EZ98 strung swing weight: 319
Black EZ98 strung swing weight: 316
VC98 strung swing weight: 318

So why the TW measurement is wacky?