Vortex SB Grommet Question

[Don't Let It Bounce]

I am a grommet replacement n00b. It isn't something I ever needed to do for students, and I always replaced my racquets fast enough not to worry about it. Now, however, enamored as I have become in the last two years with older racquets, it matters.

I just spent a couple hours wrestling with a Prince Vortex SB Oversize and its new grommet strip, and mentally using foul language. I finally gave up on the first side strip, without even getting to the (according to a nice YouTube instructional vid) more challenging bumper guard, and stopped to compare the new grommet strip to the old one.

They are almost identical, and I'm not experienced enough to know if that's close enough. The new one is slightly wider, so it doesn't quite seat into the grommet groove on the outside of the frame. It has a round "Vortex" symbol on it; the original had a Prince "P". The individual grommets correspond almost exactly, but a couple of the grommets on the new one have to bend a little to reach the outer hole, and the bend takes away enough length for them not to reach through the inner hole.

So, I ask the pro shop wizards of the early 90's (Coach Rick? Others?) ...

• Which, if any, of the straight-beam Vortex racquets (Vortex SB, Vortex Lite, maybe the Precision Vortex and/or any later models with which I am unfamiliar) used the same grommet/bumper strips? In particular, did the SB and the Lite use the same grommets? (I've located a source for "Prince Vortex Lite/SB Bumper Guard & Grommets", but one can't assume anything about an 18-yr-old product on the internet.)
• Assuming my new grommet strip is not for the Vortex SB, which model might it be for?
• If there are no suitable grommets to be found, would strategic cutting of the grommet strips I do have (to make them fit each hole) hurt anything?

Thanks for whatever wisdom you have to share...

EDIT: The original throat grommet is two 4-hole pieces; the replacement is three or four (I have three but may have lost one) 2-hole pieces. (They slipped my mind when I decided not to replace the original throat grommets.) That seems to settle the question of whether I was sold the correct replacement grommet set, but the three questions above still apply.

 

[coachrick]

I am a grommet replacement n00b. It isn't something I ever needed to do for students, and I always replaced my racquets fast enough not to worry about it.
So, I ask the pro shop wizards of the early 90's (Coach Rick? Others?) ...
[/I]

I think the middle sentence covers it for me. I know there are folks on TT that really like the Vortex but I don't remember a single customer playing with it long enough to replace the bumper and grommets! The Vortex series came and went in a hurry in the shops where I worked; the Gamma version didn't last much longer.

Likely the set you have would fit the original Vortex. The Lite and SB compatibility sounds reasonable but I'm not sure.

Maybe vsb or one of the others can help. My apologies. CR

 

[Virginia]

I have a midplus Vortex, which I bought when I had an elbow problem. The only thing I didn't like about it was its thick beam. There's no vibration whatsoever with this frame and it really does what it's supposed to do, which is to protect your arm. Pretty good all round actually.

I don't play with it any more, because I now have the absolutely fabulous and sadly under-rated Chris Competition (of which I have three). Best racquet I've ever come across!

I also have two other Chris models - two new Avengers (50/50 graphite/fibreglass) and the Boron model, whose name I forget.

 

[coachrick]

I
I don't play with it any more, because I now have the absolutely fabulous and sadly under-rated Chris Competition (of which I have three). Best racquet I've ever come across!

I also have two other Chris models - two new Avengers (50/50 graphite/fibreglass) and the Boron model, whose name I forget.

I agree about the Chris. I played it for a while...it had a bit of a cult following in Atlanta. Mine was white but I can't recall the model.

 

[Virginia]

That would have been the Competition. A cult following in Atlanta, eh?

 

[coachrick]

That would have been the Competition. A cult following in Atlanta, eh?

Well, not a 'cult' cult. But, you had to have strong feelings for the design to put up with the attention the racket garnered. There were a few key teaching pros who pushed the line for a year or so. Shame it died out. Maybe TW could buy the rights to the mold and reintroduce it!

 

[Virginia]

I have the patent - maybe I should! :evil:

 

[joe sch]

I have the patent - maybe I should! :evil:

The "new vortex" or extreme spin racket produced by Vortex in San Clemente has a frame design much like the Chris. Vortex has added some improvements (IMO) with the longer handle and sparse string pattern (14x16). I think that both original Prince Vortex players and Chris players would both love this new spinner design.

 

[scotus]

I have a midplus Vortex, which I bought when I had an elbow problem. The only thing I didn't like about it was its thick beam. There's no vibration whatsoever with this frame and it really does what it's supposed to do, which is to protect your arm. Pretty good all round actually.

I don't play with it any more, because I now have the absolutely fabulous and sadly under-rated Chris Competition (of which I have three). Best racquet I've ever come across!

I also have two other Chris models - two new Avengers (50/50 graphite/fibreglass) and the Boron model, whose name I forget.

You are so right about Vortex not having vibration.

To me, in terms of shock/vibration/arm-friendliness, it is superior to Dunlop Max 200G (Both are supposed to have graphite injection molding technology, right?)

 

[PBODY99]

No, the 200g has a "lost mold: type of construction, the Vortex had a visoelastic layup along with the staggered string pattern.

 

[Don't Let It Bounce]

Yes! The Dunlop injection-molded frames and the Prince Vortex frames have in common a visco-elastic, thermoplastic (suddenly I feel like I'm about to start rapping about tennis racquets) resin in which carbon fibers are imbedded. These resins are not strong enough for either racquet line to have worked with a thin beam. Almost everyone else used/uses a thermoset resin, so their unusual kinship has sometimes been oversimplified into both being injection-molded.

However, my understanding (which as always might be flawed) is that the carbon fibers in the Dunlop are very short, chopped up so that they will flow through the nozzle of an injection device. The fibers in the, uh, Vortices (laid up and molded normally, as PBody noted) were the usual length for early 90's frames, and I assume that's the main factor in the difference in stiffness: RA 68 for the original Vortex OS vs. a wide range of very low flex ratings for the Dunlops.

I really like the Vortex feel and elbow-friendliness, and the paint jobs work for me too. I've sometimes wondered if, had market variables been different, they might have found a long-term audience based on that feel (like Fischer, for example). Their price was undoubtedly an obstacle – wasn't it $345 for the original Vortex? – and maybe it took a lot more sales for Prince to justify keeping a line than for a smaller company like Fischer.

And now I have three Vortex SB OS's whose grommets I've removed, and I can't find grommets anywhere, not even for rip-off prices at The Bay. Grrr....