Who has received his/her pre-ordered RF 97 AUTOGRAPH?

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
Cry babies are those who want a Pro Staff but can't handle an 85 or a 90 square inch head.
I do believe Federer couldn't handle the 85 or 90 sq in head. Once he got over his idealism, his rankings shot up to.... #2 now. The gap to #1 has drastically reduced to about 1.1k ATP points. Used to be 8k points.

Let the babies cry over "box beam" and "braided graphite" and "85 sq in."
 
I do believe Federer couldn't handle the 85 or 90 sq in head. Once he got over his idealism, his rankings shot up to.... #2 now. The gap to #1 has drastically reduced to about 1.1k ATP points. Used to be 8k points.

Let the babies cry over "box beam" and "braided graphite" and "85 sq in."
None of us are returning 120mph+ serves, dealing with neck high topspin on a daily basis, and hitting 15-25balls blistering rallies. Most of us are playing against dinkers. So yeah, 85 and 90 is enough for me.
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
None of us are returning 120mph+ serves, dealing with neck high topspin on a daily basis, and hitting 15-25balls blistering rallies. Most of us are playing against dinkers. So yeah, 85 and 90 is enough for me.
So some of us can do a little more, so we worry more about creating those high kickers, 120+ mph serves, dead slices, wide angles, and precision. We could care less about some stupid box beam.

The 90 generates the greatest kick serve of all my rackets, but it's hard to break 110mph on the serves. And I didn't particularly like the top of the frame being dead, probably its greatest flaw.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
I do believe Federer couldn't handle the 85 or 90 sq in head. Once he got over his idealism, his rankings shot up to.... #2 now. The gap to #1 has drastically reduced to about 1.1k ATP points. Used to be 8k points.

Let the babies cry over "box beam" and "braided graphite" and "85 sq in."
Huh? Federer is still ranked #3 and is about 4,000 points away from #1.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx

And as a reminder, he was #1 longer than anyone else in history when he used his Tour 90.
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
Huh? Federer is still ranked #3 and is about 4,000 points away from #1.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Singles.aspx

And as a reminder, he was #1 longer than anyone else in history when he used his Tour 90.
He's #2 on these pages.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Rankings-Home.aspx

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/YTD-Singles.aspx

I don't really care what happened in history. I'm not one of those nostalgic players yearning for the classic feel of yesteryear. I evaluate rackets based on the quality of shots produced.
 
Anyway, I'm not bashing this frame, I too would like to try it sometimes too.

I just think the premise of this thread is idiotic, based on people who purchased and seemingly switched to a new, previously unreleased frame without a proper playtest. That's all.
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
What really sucks is when, on a good day, you hit the ball in the dead spot, and the ball just dies. Doesn't even clear the net. Then you switch over to the Blade Tour, and your best shots just got better. Serves got faster. Forehand on fire. Backhand slice dies. ...That's when I don't really miss the kevlar in my 85 from when I was in high school.
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
Anyway, I'm not bashing this frame, I too would like to try it sometimes too.

I just think the premise of this thread is idiotic, based on people who purchased and seemingly switched to a new, previously unreleased frame without a proper playtest. That's all.
I feel the same way.

I also feel you did the same thing with the 6.1 95 16x18. A harsh decision based on poor string choice, too low a tension, and awkward lead setup. I would never have used that setup on that particular frame.
 

Geoff

Hall of Fame
I got my pair of RF 97A today. Both were L3.

With plastic on grips only: one was 339g and the other was 343g. So they are both below spec. I think that would be alright. I would prefer them on the lighter side than overweight...

Gonna string them up this weekend.
Samster, looking forward to your review! What setup are you going to use?
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
Anyway, I'm not bashing this frame, I too would like to try it sometimes too.

I just think the premise of this thread is idiotic, based on people who purchased and seemingly switched to a new, previously unreleased frame without a proper playtest. That's all.
I bought one, had it strung the way I like it, and tried it out. Ordered a couple more. I appreciate what Wilson is doing in terms of releasing a frame so close to pro specs, and I want that to be a success for them. I vote with my wallet.

Will the frame work out for me in the long run? Won't know for a couple months yet. I'm very happy with the TF 315 16, particularly after leading it up after my experience with the RF97A. Right now the TF is "my" frame.
 

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
I bought one, had it strung the way I like it, and tried it out. Ordered a couple more. I appreciate what Wilson is doing in terms of releasing a frame so close to pro specs, and I want that to be a success for them. I vote with my wallet.

Will the frame work out for me in the long run? Won't know for a couple months yet. I'm very happy with the TF 315 16, particularly after leading it up after my experience with the RF97A. Right now the TF is "my" frame.
As I recall, TF315 Ltd is nowhere as HL as RF97A. Where did you put the lead?
Also, the TF is <60RA, RF97A is >70RA...interesting comparison.
 

cmendez79

Semi-Pro
Mine came in today and took them straight out for a hitting session. My thoughts mirror a lot of what's already been said. Heavy, stable, good at net, love hitting 1hbh with it.



So far, so good. I am a 4.5 with pretty standard technique (not sure how it will fare for guys who like to hit like they're trying to tear a ligament). I think I will keep my six.one 95s' in the bag for a while.



Weight as they showed up from TW (L4 grip). I did request a matched pair and the other was 359 grams.





With a super grap overgrip, band, and vibe damp. Ready to hit.





Looking goooood. Of course I had to get one strung up with champion's choice at 59/56 just like the golden eagle himself.


Is there a way you could get your balance?
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
As I recall, TF315 Ltd is nowhere as HL as RF97A. Where did you put the lead?
Also, the TF is <60RA, RF97A is >70RA...interesting comparison.
After I put power pads, string, overgrip, and a dampener on the RF97A, it was ~371g and 6pts HL.

In general, I like this frame a lot. What I have noticed is that I can't flick the ball with a short angle on the FH side as easily as I could with a lighter frame. Maybe I'll get better, but in the meantime...

...on the 315 I put 13g on the handle and 5g at 3&9. After power pads, string, overgrip, and a dampener it's ~5pts HL and ~350g.

Not trying to match the RF97A, I'm using what I like about the RF97A to incrementally customize the TF. Even at this relatively early stage, I like the TF immensely more (and I already liked it a ton).
 
Last edited:

Sander001

Hall of Fame
Anyway, I'm not bashing this frame, I too would like to try it sometimes too.

I just think the premise of this thread is idiotic, based on people who purchased and seemingly switched to a new, previously unreleased frame without a proper playtest. That's all.
Not idiotic in the slightest. Pick frames based on specification, have done this with great success previously.

Bought a Yonex ti-80 just based on the specs and played with it for years. Excellent racquet.
Did the same with Yonex 001 Midsize. Played with them for 6 or 7 years, one of the greatest racquets I ever touched.
Recently bought 5 IG Prestige Mids without ever hitting with one. Playing perhaps the best tennis of my life now.

Doesn't always work out, like when I bought an RDX500 Midsize, but it was still a very good racquet that I played with for a season.
 

coloskier

Legend
After I put power pads, string, overgrip, and a dampener on the RF97A, it was ~371g and 6pts HL.

In general, I like this frame a lot. What I have noticed is that I can't flick the ball with a short angle on the FH side as easily as I could with a lighter frame. Maybe I'll get better, but in the meantime...

...on the 315 I put 13g on the handle and 5g at 3&9. After power pads, string, overgrip, and a dampener it's ~5pts HL and ~350g.

Not trying to match the RF97A, I'm using what I like about the RF97A to incrementally customize the TF. Even at this relatively early stage, I like the TF immensely more (and I already liked it a ton).
Your comment about not being able to flick the forehand is something that almost everybody is finding out. Not near the control compared to the 90. It may be that people are stringing too high and are not getting the ball pocketing needed for sharp angles. Even Fed dropped to 52-54 at the USO from 56-59 at Cinci, as was reported by Jim Courier after he talked to P1 during the Open.
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
Your comment about not being able to flick the forehand is something that almost everybody is finding out. Not near the control compared to the 90. It may be that people are stringing too high and are not getting the ball pocketing needed for sharp angles. Even Fed dropped to 52-54 at the USO from 56-59 at Cinci, as was reported by Jim Courier after he talked to P1 during the Open.
I didn't hit with the 90 -- I tried / hated the nCode version of it, and never tried another one -- so comparisons to the 90 don't mean much to me.

The specific shot I missed was a sharp angle to attempt to pass someone at net, in doubles. I was pressed on the shot and could have missed it no matter what frame I used. I just remember thinking "hmmm - that feels different" right after I tried and missed it.
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
I just think the premise of this thread is idiotic, based on people who purchased and seemingly switched to a new, previously unreleased frame without a proper playtest. That's all.

Are you upset that now I play just like Federer? The only thing missing was this racquet, blessed by the golden eagle himself. And now I have it. Feels so good in my hands.
 
Are you upset that now I play just like Federer? The only thing missing was this racquet, blessed by the golden eagle himself. And now I have it. Feels so good in my hands.
Whatever floats with your imagination, sure.

I don't need to wait for a "bigger" Pro Staff to come around just so I can tell people I use a Pro Staff. They were fine to begin with.
 
I feel the same way.

I also feel you did the same thing with the 6.1 95 16x18. A harsh decision based on poor string choice, too low a tension, and awkward lead setup. I would never have used that setup on that particular frame.
You clearly have not read what I wrote in my reviews and why I set up my particular racquets the way I did.

I set up that Six.One 95 16x18 to have identical strings/tension/weight/balance as my PS 6.0 85 so I can see the qualities that is inherent to the frame, and not due to the strings/tension/weight/balance. That's how I playtest frames and see if I like its inherent qualities, and then I'll make subtle changes if need be.

I don't just switch frames overnight for no reason at all and without a thorough playtest.
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
You clearly have not read what I wrote in my reviews and why I set up my particular racquets the way I did.

I set up that Six.One 95 16x18 to have identical strings/tension/weight/balance as my PS 6.0 85 so I can see the qualities that is inherent to the frame, and not due to the strings/tension/weight/balance. That's how I playtest frames and see if I like its inherent qualities, and then I'll make subtle changes if need be.

I don't just switch frames overnight for no reason at all and without a thorough playtest.
Who's switching frames? They all bought the racket, strung it up, played with it, and gave their feedback. (If they like it, they'll keep it. If not, they'll likely sell it off.) That's the exact same thing you did, but you're giving them grief for it.

Many of us just don't have the idealism of the "85," and we move on once we realize the shortcomings of the 90 deadspot. If you insist on using the 90, cool beans. I really don't care. It's your leisure time, and you spend it using whatever you want. I really don't care what racket or strings others use. Only a real narcissist would get that involved in other peoples' equipment choice.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
You clearly have not read what I wrote in my reviews and why I set up my particular racquets the way I did.

I set up that Six.One 95 16x18 to have identical strings/tension/weight/balance as my PS 6.0 85 so I can see the qualities that is inherent to the frame, and not due to the strings/tension/weight/balance. That's how I playtest frames and see if I like its inherent qualities, and then I'll make subtle changes if need be.

I don't just switch frames overnight for no reason at all and without a thorough playtest.
But that doesn't make sense. If you were to playtest a Big Bubba, would you still string it at the same tension as your PS 6.0 85? Different racquets are meant to be strung at different tensions for a good reason. And at the same specs, a bigger racquet will be harder to swing than a smaller racquet so you need to adjust the specs for that.
 

idono1301

Semi-Pro
Picked mine up today. I went through at least 20 frames to find one that was around the unstrung specs (342g/11pts head light with the plastic still on the handle). Two frames were lighter, 334g and 338g. Every other frame was way above, 350g+. That QC is pretty surprising.

Gonna string it up tonight and hopefully hit with it tomorrow. I also hope that it is a fun frame to mess around with.
 

yangster007

Professional
Picked mine up today. I went through at least 20 frames to find one that was around the unstrung specs (342g/11pts head light with the plastic still on the handle). Two frames were lighter, 334g and 338g. Every other frame was way above, 350g+. That QC is pretty surprising.

Gonna string it up tonight and hopefully hit with it tomorrow. I also hope that it is a fun frame to mess around with.
It's the legendary Wilson QC, second to none !!! :twisted:
 

idono1301

Semi-Pro
It's the legendary Wilson QC, second to none !!! :twisted:
Yes indeed, I have had variances with Babolat frames (my pure storms are off by a few grams from each other), but this was a very large range.

Actually, I wished the frame I received was on the upper end of the spectrum!
Why so? Just curious. I always aim for at the manufacturer specs or below, that way I get a small bit of room for customization. But in the case of this frame, not a lot of room to go higher! haha
 

ShooterMcMarco

Hall of Fame
Why so? Just curious. I always aim for at the manufacturer specs or below, that way I get a small bit of room for customization. But in the case of this frame, not a lot of room to go higher! haha
Heh, I understand your approach, however I find that there is no substitute for inherent mass in the frame.
 

joshtige600

New User
I just got mine. a little on the heavy side (not heaviside...) 342.4g with a balance point of a little less than 31cm

I was hoping for less than 340; guess I should have specified!
 

samster

Hall of Fame
Samster, looking forward to your review! What setup are you going to use?
I think I will use the same set up as my other former Fed sticks for comparison purposes:

Gut mains and Isospeed professional crosses. I suspect I will need to go up in tension to control the larger sweetspot.
 

Biogenic

Rookie
Regarding Wilson's QC Does a 4 gram difference really make such difference? For example i ordered 2 and the one was 339 and other was like just 345. That wont make such a difference right? Sorry I'm just a beginner :(
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
Regarding Wilson's QC Does a 4 gram difference really make such difference? For example i ordered 2 and the one was 339 and other was like just 345. That wont make such a difference right? Sorry I'm just a beginner :(
People on here can't even tell when their strings are dead. Or the difference between 51 lbs and 52 lbs tension.

6g of weight is a 2% difference. The player can't tell, but because an electronic scale can, it becomes a terrible issue!
 

idono1301

Semi-Pro
Regarding Wilson's QC Does a 4 gram difference really make such difference? For example i ordered 2 and the one was 339 and other was like just 345. That wont make such a difference right? Sorry I'm just a beginner :(
If you're just a beginner, then it won't matter. Even advanced players probably won't feel it too much. They'll be able to hit their shots, it just might be a little different between rackets. We aren't pros so small differences shoudln't matter.

My two pure storms are off by a bit and it's totally fine
 

Biogenic

Rookie
People on here can't even tell when their strings are dead. Or the difference between 51 lbs and 52 lbs tension.

6g of weight is a 2% difference. The player can't tell, but because an electronic scale can, it becomes a terrible issue!

Exactly because i've been reading here lately and almost everyone wanted a perfectly matched frame. But from where I am it's kinda hard to get a matched one.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
Regarding Wilson's QC Does a 4 gram difference really make such difference? For example i ordered 2 and the one was 339 and other was like just 345. That wont make such a difference right? Sorry I'm just a beginner :(
It depends on where that 6g difference is located. If it's near the handle or butt cap, you probably won't notice it much. But if it's closer to the top of the hoop, an experienced player will most likely be able to tell.
 

Biogenic

Rookie
It depends on where that 6g difference is located. If it's near the handle or butt cap, you probably won't notice it much. But if it's closer to the top of the hoop, an experienced player will most likely be able to tell.

How will i know where it's located. hehe. Sorry for the noob questions
 

UCSF2012

Hall of Fame
You won't know where the 6g is, because it's no where. This isn't 6g of lead. It's 6g of graphite/manufacturing variance that's evenly spread out throughout the entire racket.
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
You won't know where the 6g is, because it's no where. This isn't 6g of lead. It's 6g of graphite/manufacturing variance that's evenly spread out throughout the entire racket.
The way to be sure would be to compare the balance to spec, wouldn't it ?
 

asifallasleep

Hall of Fame
It depends on where that 6g difference is located. If it's near the handle or butt cap, you probably won't notice it much. But if it's closer to the top of the hoop, an experienced player will most likely be able to tell.
This is what happened to me. The +6 gram difference is in the throat/head area and it drastically effects the SW negatively. If it were in the handle area it'd be less of a concern or problem for me.
 

stronzzi70

Professional
None of us are returning 120mph+ serves, dealing with neck high topspin on a daily basis, and hitting 15-25balls blistering rallies. Most of us are playing against dinkers. So yeah, 85 and 90 is enough for me.
Well , I did playing against Berdych ( 120 mph maybe , I dont know) .
 
Top