Volkl DNX9 vs. C10 Pro (ping Ericsson, Rabbit, etc.)

[rlau]

Hi there,

I currently play with the DNX9, but may be getting a second-hand C10 Pro just for fun.

If you have played with these two frames, how would you compare them? From what I've read so far, I know they have have the same string pattern (16*19) and head size (98 sq.in.), but the C10 Pro is just a tad heavier, more head light and more flexible (especially in the upper hoop).

How would you rate them regarding baseline vs. net play, comfort, sweet spot, etc.? Any observations are welcome.

Best regards,

rlau

 

[danix]

They are quite different in almost every way, starting with stiffness.

 

[Rabbit]

i agree. i demoed the DNX9 a long time ago. i remember hitting a couple of balls with it and not liking it too much..however...i probably wouldn't mind trying it again

it doesn't have the same feel as the c10, not that the dnx 9 is a bad racquet, but it is different

 

[rlau]

They are quite different in almost every way, starting with stiffness.

I'm aware the C10 Pro is more flexible, but would you care to elaborate in which (other) ways they're different?

BTW, do you still play with Volkls or did you switch to Dunlop?

 

[rlau]

i agree. i demoed the DNX9 a long time ago. i remember hitting a couple of balls with it and not liking it too much..however...i probably wouldn't mind trying it again

it doesn't have the same feel as the c10, not that the dnx 9 is a bad racquet, but it is different

I assume the C10 Pro as more "feel" or "touch" because of its higher flex?

 

[Rabbit]

Well I think what danix was saying, and I'm working from a brief hit with the 9 some time ago, they're just different frames. The C10 is very flexy and the DNX9 is not. The 9 is more mainstream. That's not to say it isn't comfortable, but it is stiffer than the 10 and plays more like other frames.

The 9 is more powerful than the 10 (but not by much), it is lighter, and it is more maneuverable. It lacks the plow of the 10. Compared to the C9 which is its antecedent, it is stiffer.

You're going to make me demo it....

Touch? Well both have it, but they are different.

 

[Lefty78]

I've not got too much experience with the DNX 9, but I play almost daily with my C 10 Pro's.

My biased opinion is that if you like racquets loaded with feel, and you can supply your own power, there is no comparison.

 

[rlau]

I've not got too much experience with the DNX 9, but I play almost daily with my C 10 Pro's.

My biased opinion is that if you like racquets loaded with feel, and you can supply your own power, there is no comparison.

Thanks, Lefty78. I saw on http://www.racquetsportsindustry.com/issues/200804/200804racquet_list.html that the C10's power rating is indeed pretty low, but I should be able to adapt to that. We'll see.

 

[fuzz nation]

The C10's are a nice option if you have an affinity for 12+ oz. heft along with significant head-light balance in your frames. Heavy enough to be nicely stable, soft enough to be forgiving with some nice control for groundstrokes if you use a full swing, but they can run from more plush feeling to more crisp depending on how you string them. These run in the same company as the Wilson 6.1 95's (which are typically more stiff) and the Yonex RDS 002 Tour.

I consider the DNX 9 to be a superior alternative to frames like the LM Radical mp and the Dunlop 300's. While I prefer the C10's these days, I've knocked around with the lighter (and less head-light) DNX 9 and was surprised with how civilized it was for me. Not too twitchy or overly powerful, but I like some more heft and stability in my gear, especially up at the net.

One more note on the C10: Some flexible racquets I've tried were very low powered. Not the case for me with the C10. It has some flex which has been helpful for my consistency, but I can murder a ball just fine with these frames. Volleys and serves have lots of pop - not always the case with some frames that have more flex than these. Getting their strings right for you can certainly take a few tries - there's a broad personality spectrum in the C10 depending on your setup.

 

[LafayetteHitter]

i agree. i demoed the DNX9 a long time ago. i remember hitting a couple of balls with it and not liking it too much..however...i probably wouldn't mind trying it again

it doesn't have the same feel as the c10, not that the dnx 9 is a bad racquet, but it is different

I think Rabbit nail it. If one likes the C10 they will probably not like the DNX9. I had one for two weeks and probably only hit a few dozen rallies with it because I just did not care for it at all. It had a certain metallic/ping to it that is uncharacteristic of the normal Volkl feel. It does not have much plow through for it's static weight either. Now with that said I have a buddy who is a coach here that really likes it so it's all in the users hands I suppose.

 

[Rabbit]

The C10's are a nice option if you have an affinity for 12+ oz. heft along with significant head-light balance in your frames. Heavy enough to be nicely stable, soft enough to be forgiving with some nice control for groundstrokes if you use a full swing, but they can run from more plush feeling to more crisp depending on how you string them. These run in the same company as the Wilson 6.1 95's (which are typically more stiff) and the Yonex RDS 002 Tour.

I agree. Since returning to the C10 and upping the tension to 61, I've noticed they play firmer. I enjoy the feeling and am just getting once again used to the heft of them.

One more note on the C10: Some flexible racquets I've tried were very low powered. Not the case for me with the C10. It has some flex which has been helpful for my consistency, but I can murder a ball just fine with these frames. Volleys and serves have lots of pop - not always the case with some frames that have more flex than these. Getting their strings right for you can certainly take a few tries - there's a broad personality spectrum in the C10 depending on your setup.

Again, nailed. The C10 is much more powerful than the AG100 or the Dunlop 300T. You can murder the ball. The sweetspot in this frame will reward you, I think hitting toward the top of the frame loses a great deal of pace.

I think Rabbit nail it. If one likes the C10 they will probably not like the DNX9. I had one for two weeks and probably only hit a few dozen rallies with it because I just did not care for it at all. It had a certain metallic/ping to it that is uncharacteristic of the normal Volkl feel. It does not have much plow through for it's static weight either. Now with that said I have a buddy who is a coach here that really likes it so it's all in the users hands I suppose.

Thanks! I really wish Volkl had not done away with the C9's configuration. Lighter than the C10 and a little (tiny) bit stiffer, but an all around great frame. I wish this heritage had come forward to today as it would probably be my racquet of choice.

 

[dora_75]

I really wish Volkl had not done away with the C9's configuration. Lighter than the C10 and a little (tiny) bit stiffer, but an all around great frame. I wish this heritage had come forward to today as it would probably be my racquet of choice.

Same here, I am very pissed I sold 10 years ago the C9s just because I thought C10s will be better (no demo at the time). I never ever got the same grove with C10 as with C9. Recentlty I got a C10 mid (93sqi) in very good condition but is no C9, it feels heavy and hard to maneuver, my timing is off on my 1hbh ... but at the same time I'm really out of shape . Did you try the C10mid Rabbit?

 

[fuzz nation]

Same here, I am very pissed I sold 10 years ago the C9s just because I thought C10s will be better (no demo at the time). I never ever got the same grove with C10 as with C9. Recentlty I got a C10 mid (93sqi) in very good condition but is no C9, it feels heavy and hard to maneuver, my timing is off on my 1hbh ... but at the same time I'm really out of shape . Did you try the C10mid Rabbit?

If you've never tried adding lead to the handle of a racquet to make it more head-light and easier to handle, you might want to see if it helps with your mid. I tried it a while back with a pair of LM Prestige mids that were just about useless for me in stock layout. With a good shot of lead tape under their grips, I got their balances up to around 10 points HL. Their static weights were a good deal higher, but the handling was much improved, including with my one handed backhand.

 

[Rabbit]

Same here, I am very pissed I sold 10 years ago the C9s just because I thought C10s will be better (no demo at the time). I never ever got the same grove with C10 as with C9. Recentlty I got a C10 mid (93sqi) in very good condition but is no C9, it feels heavy and hard to maneuver, my timing is off on my 1hbh ... but at the same time I'm really out of shape . Did you try the C10mid Rabbit?

You know, a buddy of mine showed up at the courts a couple of years ago sporting 3 C10 Pro Mids...the bumblebee 93's. The guy who owns the complex said he passed on them because they were a real piece of lumber. Anyway, the friend of mind played with them for about 3 months and I never asked about them because at the time I was using the Cat 8. He sold them and now plays the Cat 10. I wished I had bought them.

Long story short, no, i've never hit with it. I really would like to, but the C10 Pro is probably as good as it gets for me now.

I agree. When I changed to the C10, I remember posting an e-mail to Volkl complaining that the C10 was nowhere near as spin friendly as the C9. I wish I could hit with a stock C9 now.....as I can spin a C10 as well as anybody hitting the Hawaiiian grip.

The C9 may have been the perfect club players racquet, for any level between 3.0 and 5.0. Had it not been butt ugly... Seriously, had Volkl put the C10 cosmetics on it.....it may have still been in the inventory.

 

[hoosierbr]

The DNX9 is a nice frame but doesn't have the same buttery feel of the pre-DNX Volkl racquets. DNX, in my mind, forever changed Volkl and did away with its key asset - the great feel.

The C10 is a legend and still a legitimate racquet to use if you can handle the weight. The DNX has room for customization and is easier to swing over a long period of time. Also depends on your style - the C10 does everything well whereas the DNX 9 isn't, to me, great in touch/feel department.

 

[rlau]

Thanks for sharing your opinions Rabbit, Lafayettehitter, Fuzz Nation, Hoosierbr, etc.

I do not think the C10's static weight and swing weight is dramatically higher than the DNX9's, but I guess I will have to try it and see for myself.

I'm thinking of stringing the C10 with some Singum Pro Poly Plasma (1.18mm / 17 gauge) or MSV Focus Hex (1.23mm / 17 gauge), perhaps combined with Wilson Ultra Synthetic Gut (1.35mm / 15L) for the crosses. My favorite is a full bed of SPPP. What do you guys think-- what would be best and what tension?

 

[Rabbit]

Thanks for sharing your opinions Rabbit, Lafayettehitter, Fuzz Nation, Hoosierbr, etc.

I do not think the C10's static weight and swing weight is dramatically higher than the DNX9's, but I guess I will have to try it and see for myself.

I'm thinking of stringing the C10 with some Singum Pro Poly Plasma (1.18mm / 17 gauge) or MSV Focus Hex (1.23mm / 17 gauge), perhaps combined with Wilson Ultra Synthetic Gut (1.35mm / 15L) for the crosses. My favorite is a full bed of SPPP. What do you guys think-- what would be best and what tension?

When I used poly in the C10, I strung it at 54. I probably could have gone lower. I wouldn't go over that.