Why do all good frames have so many strings??

TennsDog

TennsDog

Hall of Fame
I just did a racket finder search on TW with the following required specs:
Head size: 85-95
Length: 27-27.25
Weight: 12.3-13
Swingweight: 325-400
Stiffness: 59-65
Balance: -12pts- -5pts

This search returned 5 results...but they were all 18x20 patterns. Why can they not make a racket with these specs, but with a 16x18 (or more open) pattern? I want to use something along the lines of the LM Prestige mid, but I cannot use such a small frame with such a dense string pattern. It does not make sense that there would be NO rackets like this with a more open pattern. How come someone can't get a racket offering little power, great control, AND great spin?? This is discrimination, I say!

Oh, and by the way, don't try telling me that the LM Prestige or any other 18x20 frame gives good spin. I have played with the mp version and it had very little spin, so the mid will have even less.
 
Open your parameters a little bit. Find a player's frame that meets your requirements, and lead it up to the weight you want. That's what customization is for, it's hard finding exactly the specs you want straight from stock.

You may have to settle for a headsize of up to 100, as well.

On another note, it seems like the ProStaff Tour 95 fits all your specs, except it's only 11.5oz strung. Lead that up a little.
 
You just have to drop the weight a bit and be prepared to add some lead to the grip and the head, like All Court suggested. Tons of racquets will fit your specs that way and many of them will have 16x18 or 16x19 string patterns.
 
TennsDog -- the Prestige Mid and Prestige MP share only a name and a paint job. They are two completely different racquets -- different flex, balance, beam with, head size, etc. Having said that, if you are accustomed to 16 mains, it would take time to adjust to 18, so there may be no point in giving it a go.

Perhaps the only tlhing for you to do is to put weight on the Wilson and Yonex offerings that meet most of your criteria, except for weight. I think an Estusa Pro or Braided might be very close to your specs. Did you run the search allowing the database to return out of production racquets?

Personally, I would love to hit with Prestige mid set up just like it is, except for a 16X19 string pattern.
 
I won't deal with a racket under 12oz. Less than that and it needs too much lead. I prefer to play with a frame that needs no customization, and then add come lead to fix a specific problem I have with it rather than just making it playable. Also, I prefer a head size under 95, but I won't go above 98. I just don't like the bulky, springy feel of larger head sizes (which the dense string pattern on the LM Prestige mp more than takes care of).
 
The nSix-One Tour 90 fits all your specs except for stiffness. The TW site lists it as a 16x19 string pattern, as well.
 
flexy frames have 18x20 to stiffen them up. stiff frames have 16x19 to soften them up. you won't find many flexy 16x19 frame.
 
I don't really call 65 "flexy". My nCode 6.1 satisfies these two specs.
Also, I just did a search to include old models. A very irritating trend appeared: every current model had 18x20 strings, while every old model had a more open string pattern (16x18, 16x19, or 16x20). Wow, apparently today's players like a firmer feel and denser pattern. I'll just have to wait until Head makes a 16 mained Prestige...
 
What about the Head Flexpoint Radical Tour?

Extremely flexy, 58 stiffness and an open string pattern as well. 12oz, 324 swingweight (one under your specs, lol), and 8 points headlight.

But the problem is the 100 sq. inch headsize, i guess.

I think the nSix-One Tour 90 is the closest thing you're going to get. Have you at least demoed the frame yet though?
 
No, the n6.1 is the first real player's frame I have ever bought, so I didn't know so specifically what I wanted. I was comparing the 90 vs. 95 specs on TW reviews, and noticed that the 95 was much more balanced in the categories and seemed like a more overall good and stable frame...so I went with that. I just posted, though, a wanted ad in the classified section here for a cheap nCode Tour 90.
 
I agree with AllCourt. I tried finding a very similar racquet to the one you spec'd out, and I thhkn the Flexpoint Tour is a good fit. I wish the head were slightly smaller, but a little lead tape made it feel perfect.
 
Apperently people are not paying attention. I will not even consider any head over 98" (already said above), and I already use the n6.1 (see signature).
 
RDX500 mid. Very open string pattern, high flex too. Excellent racquet. n6.1 90 is a good frame too.
 
TennsDog said:
I just did a racket finder search on TW with the following required specs:
Head size: 85-95
Length: 27-27.25
Weight: 12.3-13
Swingweight: 325-400
Stiffness: 59-65
Balance: -12pts- -5pts

This search returned 5 results...but they were all 18x20 patterns. Why can they not make a racket with these specs, but with a 16x18 (or more open) pattern? I want to use something along the lines of the LM Prestige mid, but I cannot use such a small frame with such a dense string pattern. It does not make sense that there would be NO rackets like this with a more open pattern. How come someone can't get a racket offering little power, great control, AND great spin?? This is discrimination, I say!

Oh, and by the way, don't try telling me that the LM Prestige or any other 18x20 frame gives good spin. I have played with the mp version and it had very little spin, so the mid will have even less.
Click to expand...


why dont u just try a ps 6.0 85 / st. vincent/ chicago/ taiwan / china and call it the day.
 
heaveir frames seem to have 18x20 patterns in general. not all, but in general this holds true. by the same token lighter frames, have 16 mains patterns for the most part.
 
head premier tour is 16x18 20 mm beam 60 ra and 93 sq in , is similar a prestige with open string pattern but this stick is very hard to find
 
Maybe your lack of spin production isn't in the racquet, but in technique. Most of the heavier racquets are for players that are highly skilled and can produce a lot of spin with densely patterned racquets. Unless you are having arm problems or the players you are playing are hitting balls extremely heavy, perhaps you should try a lighter frame with more open pattern (i.e. Dunlop 300g/mfil).
 
I currently use the nCode 95 with lead tape because the 300G was just too light. I can produce spin just fine. My coach used to tell me I needed to flatten out my shots more because they were sort of easy to return. I just don't like the feel of a dense string pattern. Anyway, this is becoming a moot point, as I am staying with the n6.1 for the next 4 years (through college) and I am playing very well with it.
 
Isn't it a relatively easy choice?

The POG midplus is the only one I can think of that matches every aspect apart from being 0.2 ounces lighter and 1 point extra flex than your stated ideal.
 
I would recommend the POG mid. It didn't show up in your search because it weighs 12.1 oz according to TW and the stiffness is 66 i believe. You could also look into the Diablo mid which I believe is quite similar to the POG mid.
 
POG 93 is great in many respects. The only drawback is that its very open 14x18 stringbed is a string eater (if you're using multis such as NXT 17 as I do).
 
TennsDog said:
Oh, and by the way, don't try telling me that the LM Prestige or any other 18x20 frame gives good spin. I have played with the mp version and it had very little spin, so the mid will have even less.
Click to expand...


I've played with the LM Prestige midplus and had no trouble generating spin, 18 x 20 string patterns are very sensitive to tension and string choices, might want to string a few pounds lighter than normal.

If you are having trouble generating spin with the LM prestige MP, you will have more trouble with the ps 85, and some of the other frames that you mentioned.

Vantage makes a 90 & 95 head with a choice of flex and string patterns.
 
My first thought was a Vantage custom frame... you can have a 90" or 95" with open pattern, and pretty much as heavy as you like... with either 62 flex, which is not as flexy as a prestige but its more flexy than a Diablo Mid which was my second thought.
 
PS 6.0 95 is very close...though swing weight is a bit low, stiffness a bit high (but it plays flexier than its rating). Worth a look. As for the 85, unless you're very Federer-esque, the PS 6.0 85 is going to be challenging racquet to bring to battle against someone pounding balls w/a modern racquet.

Yonex RDX 500 Mid is close...though swing weight and static weight are both too low for your specs...so even though I want to recommend it, I won't. :-)
 
Try the Estusa PBB if you can find one - pretty close to your specs (sw not quite there) and just such a solid frame. I didn't like the LM prestige either. The other way to go is with a Vantage frame. You might try a demo of the 90 16x18 stock racquet they make and then you can adjust your specs from what you feel. I've let several people hit with mine - not one has disliked it and two have decided to order their own - albeit changing the specs slightly. Good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Lm Prestige For $60!?!
Replies
3
Views
623
Champion
C
kerplunker
Yet Another Thread Seeking YOUR Help...Yes All You Experts
Replies
11
Views
765
Jack Romeo
J
iradical18
18x20 Patterns with good spin potential
Replies
8
Views
1K
DANMAN
D
M
i.Prestige or LM Prestige?? Why??
Replies
5
Views
1K
babar
babar
racketspec
LM Prestige - why all the fuss??
Replies
27
Views
2K
omktid
O
Back
Top