Which Babolat racket would be between a Pure Strike 98 and a Pure Drive, is it the Pure Strike 100 ?

[Jean-Thomas]

Hello everybody,
I've been reading a lot of posts on this forum, but this is my first message

I am 47 years old, started tennis more than 40 years ago, currently playing once a week. I would say I am a good intermediate / advanced player, I like to hit heavy groundstrokes with moderate spin.

I was playing for a long time with a Babolat Pure Drive Roddick, it was fine when i was younger. Then with time, i wanted more control and switched in 2015 to a Babolat Pure Strike 98 16x19 1st generation (the black one with red stripes). Now, getting closer to 50 I am looking for something a little more forgiving than a 98, with a tiny bit more power and easier on the elbow. What would be from the Babolat lineup the racket between a Pure Strike 98 and a Pure Drive? Am i right by thinking that the Pure Strike 4th Generation 100 would be that racket?

And probably the 100 16x19 is more powerful than the 100 16x20? I am still not sure what are the pros/cons of those 2 similar Pure Strike 100.

Thanks for your advices,
Jean-Thomas

 

[Trip]

Hi @Jean-Thomas,

Yes, the frame you're looking for probably would be the Pure Strike 100 16x19 Gen 4. At identical strung spec, it will be more powerful than the 100 16x20, due to having a bit more firm flex and one less cross string, which will allow for just a bit more trampoline per identical string bed tension and impact force.

That said, you may still want to demo the new Strike 98 16x19 Gen 4, just to confirm that you indeed want to move up to the 100. The sweet spot on the 98 is actually larger than the 100, so, higher swing weight aside, you may actually find it preferential enough to stick with the 98.

If you're willing to look outside the Babolat lineup, you might also consider other slightly denser-patterned tweener/pleener frames, such as the Dunlop CX 400/Tour, Head Instinct MP, Prince Warrior, etc.

 

[innoVAShaun]

My family and I use Babolats. At one point, we had a Pure Drive 2021, Pure Aero 2019, and Pure Strike 100 (3rd gen) at the same time. The Pure Aero actually felt right in the middle as far as power and control are concerned.

The PS felt a little too light without having to generate your own power. It also was pretty stiff on the joints. So to compromise, I strung it in the high 30s to low 40s (lb) range.

 

[Trip]

The PS felt a little too light without having to generate your own power. It also was pretty stiff on the joints. So to compromise, I strung it in the high 30s to low 40s (lb) range.

Versus the Gen 3, the Strike 100 16x19 Gen 4 has been softened in flex from 69 to 63RA, lowered in handle Hz from 155 to 141, and swing weight increased slightly (it would appear), so comfort should be improved and stock power potential perhaps slightly more on-par the the PA23, while being optimized for a more eastern/south-western swing path than the Aero, which is optimized for a more south-western/western.

 

[Jean-Thomas]

I would like to stay in the Babolat line... i just like them and been using them for a long time.
So the Pure Strike 100 looks like a good comprise it seems.

Why are most people excited about the new PS100 16x20 rather than 16x19 though?
I definitely want the more powerful of those 2, but maybe I'm missing something in the equation?

 

[yourtennisfit]

I would like to stay in the Babolat line... i just like them and been using them for a long time.
So the Pure Strike 100 looks like a good comprise it seems.

Why are most people excited about the new PS100 16x20 rather than 16x19 though?
I definitely want the more powerful of those 2, but maybe I'm missing something in the equation?

Because people want to have their cake and eat it

But in all seriousness, this is the new trend - finding a 100inch racquet, that still offers decent control and comfort.
Historically, the 100s were rather Tweener frames like the Pure Drive, that were pretty stiff and powerful

Head with its Speed Pro and Gravity line started it kind of, now you have quite a couple of these ambivalent frames
Percept 100D, Blade 100, Strike 100 16/20 etc

 

[TheBoom]

I would like to stay in the Babolat line... i just like them and been using them for a long time.
So the Pure Strike 100 looks like a good comprise it seems.

Why are most people excited about the new PS100 16x20 rather than 16x19 though?
I definitely want the more powerful of those 2, but maybe I'm missing something in the equation?

I think people like the 16x20 because it has a bit more control (string pattern) and comfort (slightly lower RA).
You're original post is correct that in theory, the PS 100 is the racket to pick, but always demo. I'd also throw in the new PS 98 though. I had the 1st and 2nd gen PS, and the 4th gen is different enough that I'd try it before switching to 100. You'll lose a lot of quickness through the air and maneuverability. The newer gen is fairly forgiving so I'd demo the two 100s and the 16x19 98 before committing

 

[Jean-Thomas]

mmmmmh @Trip & @TheBoom

You both say that the new PS98 has got a bigger sweet spot than the new PS100?
I wanted to go for a 100 for easiness, thinking the bigger head means more power and also a bigger sweet spot... how can a smaller head have a bigger sweet spot? I am not trolling, it's a real question

 

[BillKid]

mmmmmh @Trip & @TheBoom

You both say that the new PS98 has got a bigger sweet spot than the new PS100?
I wanted to go for a 100 for easiness, thinking the bigger head means more power and also a bigger sweet spot... how can a smaller head have a bigger sweet spot? I am not trolling, it's a real question

The difference will likely be minimal at best, so I would not bother too much about this.
Demoing would be the way to go but anyway all are solid choices with subtle differences. Actually spec variation within a given model may be as important as theoretical differences between these models…

 

[TheBoom]

mmmmmh @Trip & @TheBoom

You both say that the new PS98 has got a bigger sweet spot than the new PS100?
I wanted to go for a 100 for easiness, thinking the bigger head means more power and also a bigger sweet spot... how can a smaller head have a bigger sweet spot? I am not trolling, it's a real question

Take it with a grain of salt, it can be string-dependent and I had different strings in both. Both had poly's, but idk what they were, probably head hawk and some version of rpm if I were to guess.
I did feel the 100 had more dead zones than the 98, but it could be that I had an easier time swinging the 98 compared to the 100 and I was hitting the sweet spot more consistently. I tend towards < 100in frames anyway, so using a 100 is always out of my comfort zone

 

[Trip]

mmmmmh @Trip & @TheBoom

You both say that the new PS98 has got a bigger sweet spot than the new PS100?
I wanted to go for a 100 for easiness, thinking the bigger head means more power and also a bigger sweet spot... how can a smaller head have a bigger sweet spot? I am not trolling, it's a real question

A very legit question. Sweet spot size/concentration is influenced by a number of factors, mainly 1) the mold geometry (how do beam cross-section and hoop shape dictate where the natural sweet spot wants to be), 2) drill pattern coverage/uniformity (the more total face coverage of the string "rectangle" and the more uniform the cell sizing across the face, the more consistent the rebound response over that area, usually creating a larger sweet spot), 3) drilling directionality (the higher the percentage of parallel drilling, ie. parallel-drilled main/cross holes, typically the larger the sweet spot), and 4) layup variation, including mass distribution and flex at varying points along the hoop (the more the flex contributes to string bed forgiveness at the edges, and/or the more mass there is along the hoop to support higher consistency as you move away from true-center, the larger the sweet spot tends to be).

All of those items together help to explain why TWU measured a 16"-square sweet spot for the 100 16x19, 17" for the 100 16x20 and 18" for the 98 16x19 -- roughly, of course.

Specifically: all three use the same beam width and width-blending locations between neck and tip. The 100's use the same mold, while the 98 has its own, with a hoop that's almost as wide (between 9 and 3) but a bit shorter (between 12 and 6). The 100 16x19 has the lightest layup and is crispiest in the hoop (with the least mass there), plus has one less cross string, so has the most area to cover over that 100" with the fewest amount of strings, and basically does so with the same main spacing as the 100 16x20, but with one fewer cross and less total vertical areas covered by its crosses. Thus, it's no surprise that it has the smallest, most concentrated sweet spot. The 100 16x20 has 5g more in the layup, with a tiny bit more of that in the hoop, plus a bit softer flex in the hoop (allowing a bit more perimeter forgiveness) and the extra cross string with more vertical cross coverage, thus a bit bigger sweet spot at 17" (mostly in height). So what's with the 98 16x19 trumping both? Well, it has the smallest head size to cover with its 16x19, but the real kicker is it has extra mass in/along the hoop, creating a noticeably more meaty/thuddy/rubber-mallet kind of feel on contact, over a larger amount of relative face area. Those two things together make for the largest sweet spot of the three. So there's the full explanation, at least as well as I can make it.

All of that said, the 100's are still giving you 2" more hitting surface (mostly down towards 6 o'clock) and a bit more natural trampoline, so everything considered, they still might be the easier playing experience, sweet spots size/concentration notwithstanding.

 

[Fighting phoenix]

I was on a long racquet journey and really liked the PA98 and almost switched to that, but was a previous long time user of the PS98 16x19 gens 2 and 3. To me, the Pure Strike 100 16x20 was the perfect balance of forgiveness (PA98 I found to have a small sweet spot), slightly more power than the PS98 and the RA of 61 means it has a nice flex and feel to it. Launch angle is normal relative to the Pure Aeros, but still with ample spin and power, so to me it's the perfect middle ground now that I'm 52 (though still playing at a 4.5 level)

 

[SavvyStringer]

Hello everybody,
I've been reading a lot of posts on this forum, but this is my first message

I am 47 years old, started tennis more than 40 years ago, currently playing once a week. I would say I am a good intermediate / advanced player, I like to hit heavy groundstrokes with moderate spin.

I was playing for a long time with a Babolat Pure Drive Roddick, it was fine when i was younger. Then with time, i wanted more control and switched in 2015 to a Babolat Pure Strike 98 16x19 1st generation (the black one with red stripes). Now, getting closer to 50 I am looking for something a little more forgiving than a 98, with a tiny bit more power and easier on the elbow. What would be from the Babolat lineup the racket between a Pure Strike 98 and a Pure Drive? Am i right by thinking that the Pure Strike 4th Generation 100 would be that racket?

And probably the 100 16x19 is more powerful than the 100 16x20? I am still not sure what are the pros/cons of those 2 similar Pure Strike 100.

Thanks for your advices,
Jean-Thomas

Try the Strike 100 but also try the pure drive VS. 98 sq in with the pure drive beam but thinner. Will have more juice than the strike but also more control than the regular drive.

 

[yourtennisfit]

Try the Strike 100 but also try the pure drive VS. 98 sq in with the pure drive beam but thinner. Will have more juice than the strike but also more control than the regular drive.

I was close to recommending the Pure Drive 98 as well. Incredibly powerful, with more comfort than it gets credit for.
But still I think it feels kind of hollow and sharp to the arm, the PS 100 will surely give more comfort.

 

[socallefty]

Demoing is a waste of time unless you can restring with multiple stringjobs and check out a racquet - otherwise you are at the mercy of the unknown tension and age of the demo stringjob. Buy both the models you are interested in (98 16x19 and 100 16x20) strung identically with a stringjob you like and compare. Then keep the one you like, tweak its stringjob till it does what you want and sell the other one.

 

[Jean-Thomas]

@Trip brilliant explanations, you learn every day, thanks man!!
The 2" more hitting surface from the 100 is probably the most important advantage, but very interesting to read that the PS100 16x20 might be a better option than the PS100 16x19 for the sweet spot, your explanation makes a lot of sense... but you would loose a tiny bit power i guess.

@SavvyStringer oooh interesting as well, didn't think about going Pure Drive 98VS, nice call. But still thinking I might be better with a 100 head size.
And as @yourtennisfit mentions, I could really use some comfort

 

[Trip]

@Trip brilliant explanations, you learn every day, thanks man!!
The 2" more hitting surface from the 100 is probably the most important advantage, but very interesting to read that the PS100 16x20 might be a better option than the PS100 16x19 for the sweet spot, your explanation makes a lot of sense... but you would loose a tiny bit power i guess.

@SavvyStringer oooh interesting as well, didn't think about going Pure Drive 98VS, nice call. But still thinking I might be better with a 100 head size.
And as @yourtennisfit mentions, I could really use some comfort

Yeah, I think you should demo both the Strike 100 16x19 and 16x20, and see what you get on with better. There's something very nice about the 16x20; it's both well-composed in the flex and string bed, but also still thumpy, crisp and explosive, in the way that all Babolats kind of are (I think it has the most to do with their layups... very airy, crisp, snappy -- high energy return). Very nice sticks these new Strikes. And I'd agree with most reviewers, that the NF2 (flax) layups could quite possibly be their best since the raw/unfiltered days of the early-mid 2000's era layups.

 

[tennisreflectslife]

Hello everybody,
I've been reading a lot of posts on this forum, but this is my first message

I am 47 years old, started tennis more than 40 years ago, currently playing once a week. I would say I am a good intermediate / advanced player, I like to hit heavy groundstrokes with moderate spin.

I was playing for a long time with a Babolat Pure Drive Roddick, it was fine when i was younger. Then with time, i wanted more control and switched in 2015 to a Babolat Pure Strike 98 16x19 1st generation (the black one with red stripes). Now, getting closer to 50 I am looking for something a little more forgiving than a 98, with a tiny bit more power and easier on the elbow. What would be from the Babolat lineup the racket between a Pure Strike 98 and a Pure Drive? Am i right by thinking that the Pure Strike 4th Generation 100 would be that racket?

And probably the 100 16x19 is more powerful than the 100 16x20? I am still not sure what are the pros/cons of those 2 similar Pure Strike 100.

Thanks for your advices,
Jean-Thomas

My suggestion would be try the pure drive 98 and also the pure aero 100. They are both forgiving, with good maneuverability and not too tough on the arm.

 

[mad dog1]

Hello everybody,
I've been reading a lot of posts on this forum, but this is my first message

I am 47 years old, started tennis more than 40 years ago, currently playing once a week. I would say I am a good intermediate / advanced player, I like to hit heavy groundstrokes with moderate spin.

I was playing for a long time with a Babolat Pure Drive Roddick, it was fine when i was younger. Then with time, i wanted more control and switched in 2015 to a Babolat Pure Strike 98 16x19 1st generation (the black one with red stripes). Now, getting closer to 50 I am looking for something a little more forgiving than a 98, with a tiny bit more power and easier on the elbow. What would be from the Babolat lineup the racket between a Pure Strike 98 and a Pure Drive? Am i right by thinking that the Pure Strike 4th Generation 100 would be that racket?

And probably the 100 16x19 is more powerful than the 100 16x20? I am still not sure what are the pros/cons of those 2 similar Pure Strike 100.

Thanks for your advices,
Jean-Thomas

2022 Ezone 98 would fall between the Pure Drive and the Pure Strike 98.

 

[Dragy]

But in all seriousness, this is the new trend - finding a 100inch racquet, that still offers decent control and comfort.
Historically, the 100s were rather Tweener frames like the Pure Drive, that were pretty stiff and powerful

Head with its Speed Pro and Gravity line started it kind of, now you have quite a couple of these ambivalent frames
Percept 100D, Blade 100, Strike 100 16/20 etc

They have been using 100 sq.in. frames in pros a lot, actually, and achieved control by stringing poly in high 50s and 60s… plays great. The biggest issue with this stuff - you know, for both rec players and pro players, exposure to injury, surgery…

So yeah, once they found ways to make softer 100 sq.in. frames which were stable enough and controlled enough without 360 SW, it’s the new optimal for competitive players

 

[yourtennisfit]

They have been using 100 sq.in. frames in pros a lot, actually, and achieved control by stringing poly in high 50s and 60s… plays great. The biggest issue with this stuff - you know, for both rec players and pro players, exposure to injury, surgery…

So yeah, once they found ways to make softer 100 sq.in. frames which were stable enough and controlled enough without 360 SW, it’s the new optimal for competitive players

I wouldnt say it is the new optimal - there are still very good 98 frames and loads of people playing 95/97s.
But sure, the Technology helps with getting 100s out there, that fit a wider variety of players.

Has nothing to do with level in my opinion though. From the advanced level on, it is a lot about preference, too.
Between 95 and 102 is probably all fair game - I mean Moya, Roddick etc have been playing 100s forever. Agassi even played 107.
But for a lot of younger players, eg Lehecka or Cerundolo, they prefer a classic 95 and play pretty well with it.

 

[Dragy]

I wouldnt say it is the new optimal - there are still very good 98 frames and loads of people playing 95/97s.
But sure, the Technology helps with getting 100s out there, that fit a wider variety of players.

Has nothing to do with level in my opinion though. From the advanced level on, it is a lot about preference, too.
Between 95 and 102 is probably all fair game - I mean Moya, Roddick etc have been playing 100s forever. Agassi even played 107.
But for a lot of younger players, eg Lehecka or Cerundolo, they prefer a classic 95 and play pretty well with it.

I believe there’s no reason to play modern game with a 95, although they do and Novak does. Of course, personal preference and decades of grooving in are important.

98 frame used by likes of Alcaraz are great for pros as freaks of nature as they are. They are also good with low tensions for health for strong rec players.

But if competitive, I believe any should try and groove with 100 option, or maybe even some OS (there are no many OS frames designed for advanced players though, like some decades ago there were not many 100s for pros). They are just too good to ignore, being solid when in control, extra powerful when needed, and much helpful when on trouble… But of course there’s variety, like you don’t think Gravity Pro is much easier than Radical MP.

100s are worth trying to gel with for competitive rec player, mostly what I’m promoting. Maybe I change my mind if I switch to Blade or something later on, though…

 

[Hulger]

I want to make this clear: Pure Strike 100 is nothing like attacking frame like PS 98 16x19 nor Pure Drive 100. PS100 must be one of the worst racquets for flat shots, but the other fore-mentioned two handles them pretty well despite their spin-friendly characteristics. Because the stiffness is quite high in the 3rd iteration, I have concluded that it has to be related to open crosses + tight central mains combo. 4th generation even escalates the exclusivity of shot selection by introducing more flex compared to 3rd and bringing them closer to newest Speed MPs, which are also poor for attacking tennis. Also, overall PS 100 is clunky as hell, vague from the sweetspot and dead and unstable from edges - something that's only playable for a weak intermediate level defender/baseliner.
I haven't tried the new 16x20 version, which seems optimised for more aggressive baseline game on paper, but low flex ratings and that extra cross must make it very differen't from edgy and biting PS98 and PD100.

 

[Jean-Thomas]

@Hulger interesting point of view indeed.
I really like my first generation PS98 16x19... it gives me the control and power I need when properly centered, but it's getting hard on the arm from time to time when you miss that sweet spot. So in regards to my initial post, you think i should not go to a PS100 but stick to a PS98 16x19 4th generation? I want to have more comfort and a little more power than I have now.

 

[Hulger]

@Hulger interesting point of view indeed.
I really like my first generation PS98 16x19... it gives me the control and power I need when properly centered, but it's getting hard on the arm from time to time when you miss that sweet spot. So in regards to my initial post, you think i should not go to a PS100 but stick to a PS98 16x19 4th generation? I want to have more comfort and a little more power than I have now.

I’d primarily try the one you already have with softer or looser strings first. Also adding couple of grams distributed to 3 and 9 o’clock might help, or little less at 10 and 2 o’clock. Maybe silicone inside the handle?

Like some has mentioned above the new Pure Aero 100 is maybe ”easier”, but I think it is a bit too disconnected (especially comparing where you are coming from) and plays like the whole bed is one big sweetspot which takes its toll on directional control and the launch angle is actually pretty low which once again effects the versatility.
On the other hand PA98 is the ultimate race horse, and at the same time also relatively easy stick for any kind of shot, but you need to generate more or at least the same amount of power than with your Strike and the sweetspot is not necessarily big and easy for defending.

If you want to a versatile racquet that reasonably sacrifices some general accuracy for the ease of use, IMO customised Pure Aero Team (2019, 2019 Rafa and new one have the same mold and basic specs) is the best you can get practically from any brand.
You can easily carve the ball from the feet and at the net with minimal footwork and it also has high control over the shape the shot and you can take very aggressive cuts on the ball. Stability/weight and connection is great. For me it has been more consistent for flat than Pure Drive 2019 even though the PD has tendency to hit more linear ball. That might explain why PA16/19 mold is used on the ATP tour as a baseliner (Zandschulp) and s&v (Cressy) and doubles (Ram) racquet, which is kind of unique for such a profilic stick.
BUT after all, it could get harsh on the arm, so again; it's advised to modify practically any stick according to your preferences before judging it.

 

[Fighting phoenix]

I’d primarily try the one you already have with softer or looser strings first. Also adding couple of grams distributed to 3 and 9 o’clock might help, or little less at 10 and 2 o’clock. Maybe silicone inside the handle?

Like some has mentioned above the new Pure Aero 100 is maybe ”easier”, but I think it is a bit too disconnected (especially comparing where you are coming from) and plays like the whole bed is one big sweetspot which takes its toll on directional control and the launch angle is actually pretty low which once again effects the versatility.
On the other hand PA98 is the ultimate race horse, and at the same time also relatively easy stick for any kind of shot, but you need to generate more or at least the same amount of power than with your Strike and the sweetspot is not necessarily big and easy for defending.

If you want to a versatile racquet that reasonably sacrifices some general accuracy for the ease of use, IMO customised Pure Aero Team (2019, 2019 Rafa and new one have the same mold and basic specs) is the best you can get practically from any brand.
You can easily carve the ball from the feet and at the net with minimal footwork and it also has high control over the shape the shot and you can take very aggressive cuts on the ball. Stability/weight and connection is great. For me it has been more consistent for flat than Pure Drive 2019 even though the PD has tendency to hit more linear ball. That might explain why PA16/19 mold is used on the ATP tour as a baseliner (Zandschulp) and s&v (Cressy) and doubles (Ram) racquet, which is kind of unique for such a profilic stick.
BUT after all, it could get harsh on the arm, so again; it's advised to modify practically any stick according to your preferences before judging it.

Keep in mind @Jean-Thomas that you'll find a variety of opinions on these boards, and @Hulger is clearly knowledgeable and has used many frames. However, as a former PS98 Gen 2&3 98 user who developed arm issues with it, I found this V4 update to be an improvement in feel and comfort, and the 16x20 100 is the most flexy of the bunch, and I switched to it after trying many different racquets as I've found it to be the perfect middle ground between overly spin friendly/high launch angles of the aeros and more powerful and forgiving than traditional 98s. I really liked the 98 PS v4, but just wanted a little more forgiveness and power. BTW, I have no issues flattening the ball out with this stick at all.

 

[Jean-Thomas]

@Fighting phoenix and why the PS100 16x20 and not the PS100 16x19?

 

[Fighting phoenix]

@Fighting phoenix and why the PS100 16x20 and not the PS100 16x19?

I liked both - the 16x19 was a little firmer and more powerful, and I got more on my serve with it. However, they seem to be coming in with a lower SW and they are slightly lighter (300 vs 305 on the 16x20 unstrung) static, and I tend to like my sticks a little heavier. Just felt that I got a little more control with the 16x20, and with the lower flex I really loved the feel and makes me less worried about arm issues down the road. Either are great however, as is the PA98 and the PS98 v4 as mentioned. Really comes down to personal preference and playing style.

 

[J_Sneed]

I want to make this clear: Pure Strike 100 is nothing like attacking frame like PS 98 16x19 nor Pure Drive 100. PS100 must be one of the worst racquets for flat shots, but the other fore-mentioned two handles them pretty well despite their spin-friendly characteristics. Because the stiffness is quite high in the 3rd iteration, I have concluded that it has to be related to open crosses + tight central mains combo. 4th generation even escalates the exclusivity of shot selection by introducing more flex compared to 3rd and bringing them closer to newest Speed MPs, which are also poor for attacking tennis. Also, overall PS 100 is clunky as hell, vague from the sweetspot and dead and unstable from edges - something that's only playable for a weak intermediate level defender/baseliner.
I haven't tried the new 16x20 version, which seems optimised for more aggressive baseline game on paper, but low flex ratings and that extra cross must make it very differen't from edgy and biting PS98 and PD100.

To each’s own, obviously, but I recently switched from a TF40 305 to a PS 100 as my main racquet for matches, and I’ve found the PS100 addictive for aggressive baseline and all-court tennis (I’m a 4.0, not sure if that would count as “weak intermediate” or not). I’m moving over from a very control-oriented frame, so YMMV if you’re used to playing with something more powerful, but to me it offers a nice amount of free power on serves and groundies while still feeling easier to control than a PD100 or PA100, which are the other Babolat frames I’ve played with. I also think it’s great racquet for volleying. Haven’t noticed any issues with flatting the ball out, either.

I will say though, I did not like the PS100 out of the box. Too light, and then I strung it with Cyclone at 46 and it just felt like a rocket launcher—I couldn’t keep anything in the court. I’ve since added a leather grip, 10g to the handle, and 2g at 12, and string in the 53-55 range. Which feels great. But it may be a racquet that requires some customization.