Why n-code? Why Liquid Metal?

E

Eli Weinstein

Guest
What is all the hype about these new materials? Why do the racquet manufacturers come up with this stuff? It all started with Head introducing Titanium, then it was Intelligence and extra Intelligence (wow, real creative!), and now Liquid Metal is the best thing since sliced bread. Wilson is the latest example of how consumers are being taken for ride with their new “n-code material” story! Why do they do that? Are consumers really that naïve to believe everything that they are told? What happened to incorporating REAL technologies, technologies that you can see and that actually make sense and the racquet better?. We all know that there was only one thin stripe of Titanium on the original TiS6, and how did that improve the performance of the racquet? What about the Intelligence racquets? Those racquets were all just equipped with stickers indicating a new revolutionary material! And now what is Liquid Metal? Why do these manufacturers spend millions of advertising dollars to communicate something that is NOT inside the racquet, instead of coming up with visible technologies. Why don’t the other racquet manufacturers sue these guys for false advertising? By the way, what was Hyper Carbon? Another invented word for graphite!?!

I am sick of always being lied to by these racquet manufacturers. But why do they continue to do it? Because we want to be lied to?! We want to hear that there is something in this racquet so that we are more willing to spend the 200 bucks. But there is NOTHING new. Don’t get me wrong, I do think that these new racquets play well and perform, but definitely NOT because of the new revolutionary material story, because there NEVER is any new material in these racquets. All racquets are predominantly made of graphite (maybe some fibreglass as well), its always the same stuff, they just like to give them different names. What has happened to real technologies? TRIAD is real, Rollers were real, Catapult is real, Triple Threat is real, the AREO technology is real.
But consumers are supporting these gimmicks. The Liquid Metal Radical is the best selling racquet and in 6 months the new n-codes by Wilson will be selling like hot-cakes. Why don’t we start supporting racquet manufacturers that spend their money in coming up with REAL Technologies!
My 2 cents …
 

rooski

Professional
Eli....clearly you don't work in the sales/marketing field. Most consumer markets by definition are driven by marketing. Its all about "branding" and "exposure". The reality is that a majority of racket sales are to the masses (beginner to intermediate). The companies appeal to these ppls senses to sell rackets by coming up with gimmicks. The ppl that know better look past the nonesense and gather data (like this board) and see what works for them. The scary thing is that Joe of the masses will buy a racket off the rack because he's seen Andre play with it or he's seen the advertising. Thats how a majority of the volume is done. Many club players will buy the latest generation of a racket purely as a status symbol.

I agree there are few "real tech breakthroughs" but the racket companies have to sell rackets and gain market share or they go away. Just look past all the nonesense and play with what works best for you.....even if it's a 10 year old racket.

I just switched to an LM Prestige from my 4 yr old HPS61's. Who am I kidding...they got me too :lol:
 
H

hoggie

Guest
Is it why i still play with PS. I dont like to by two or threee new rackets each year at a cost of 500 bucks. I rather invest in better strings. I totally agree that it is status symbol at the clubs to have the pros racket or the latest high tech weapon. I saw same people (geat customers) buy racket after racket just to have the latest.

just my opinion.
 

andreh

Professional
Comming up with new stuff is how economics work, no need to get upset about it. Do you get upset when Colgate introduces a new toothbursh with diagonal straws that reach in the back, and stuff like that (even though they introduced one last month with the same damn straws just leaning the other way). This is how the market produce new stuff. Consider it a trial and error process, some is crap, some is good. But without the process -- no goods at all. I'd say it's a waste of energy to get upset about it.

The market sorts out what's good anyway. Look at all the crap tech over the years that came and went and compare with what's still around, i.e., braided graphite/kevlar and PWS in the PS 85, and so on. In the long run consumers seem to know whats good.
 

ptuananh

Rookie
You could check for more information about Liquidmetal at www.liquidmetal.com.
If you could show the proof that there is no liquidmetal in Head LM rackets, you will be rich. :D I think the manufacture is smart enough to make sure they will not be sued.
 

Swan Song

Professional
Real technology: cross-bar stabilizer, graphite, fiberglass, ceramic, braided technology, and PWS.

Fake technology: Air handle, Rollers

I mean, gimme a break, if you're going to make good technology, racquet manufacturers, please make something that really works so we would buy it :lol: .
 

007

Professional
IMO Kinetic is the best and most beneficial example of racquet technology since graphite was introduced. While not visible, it is audible and produces real benefits/effects.
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
In ONE word: MARKETING!!!!

A graphite racquet that is not abused can last well over 10 years. If the racquet manufacturers don't constantly come up with gimmicks to get consumers to keep buying new racquets every year or two, they will probably go out of business since they will only be able to sell to new players picking up the sport who don't already own a racquet. And since tennis is not exactly a growing sport (probably more people quitting the game than entering it as of present), they wouldn't be able to sell enough racquets to justify the R&D, marketing, and manufacturing costs. Yes, they can save R&D, and marketing costs by making the same old racquets forever, but most people already have them and it just becomes a 10-year replacement cycle business - not very profitable.

It's the same reason that clothing manufacturers keep changing fashions all the time. Most people have enough clothes in their closets to keep them from being naked for many, many years. The only way to get people to buy new clothes is to convince them that what they own now is out of fashion and they need to be wearing the latest, hottest thing. Don't you see how tennis pros change their clothing styles every season? That's how they get people to buy more even though what they have already is still perfectly functional. Same with racquets, many people get sucked into wanting to look cool by using the same racquets that the pros use and wearing the same clothes that the pros wear, although neither will improve their tennis game.

If people didn't buy new racquets and clothes all the time, these companies would likely go out of business.
 

Craig Clark

New User
I'd just like to add that 'visible' or 'tangible' no more imply 'effective' or 'desirable' than 'invisible' or 'abstract' NECESSARILY imply 'ineffective' or 'gimmick'.

Visible, tangible technologies such as 'rollers' or 'catapults' clearly do something to a frame's playability.....the question is what and is that 'what' desirable.

Invisible, abstract technologies, or their application, such as 'liquid metal' or 'nano-technology' certainly COULD influence playability. I for one find the LM Prestige MP 'feels' completely different than the i Prestige. Is this b/c of LM technology? I have no idea. But I like it!!

In many ways the real issue is who will use the device, what their various needs may be, and how sensitive/insensitive they are to various subtle changes in the frame's response.

Mind you this shouldn't be confused w/ how good a player they may be! In fact one of the best players I know never plays the same frame two days running-he just picks up whatever is lying around. And some lesser skilled people are VERY sensitive to changes in the head shape, flex, grip size, etc.

Remember though, Bobby Riggs used to kick peoples tails w/ a broom........while wearing scuba flippers.......and carrying an umbrella.......in a dress....... :)

CC
 

Steve Huff

G.O.A.T.
If you think it all started when Head introduced the "Titanium" line, you haven't been playing long. I can remember when wood rackets had new technologies introduced that supposedly made them play better. Davis had the thin, flat shaft to get that flexible "feel". Bancroft came up with the very thin, bamboo shafts. Snauwaert made a more "egg" shaped head. Then, someone, Spalding or Snauwaert, introduced (or reintroduced) the open throat for more stability. The Boron was added to the wood to stiffen them up (Snauwaert and Spalding I think). Garcia added graphite overlays to their traditional shaped wood. Then Head opened the throat and added graphite with the Vilas. Prince and ProKennex followed with the Woodie and the Golden Ace. Wilson even introduced a midsize Chris Evert wood. And all of these technologies were late in the wood racket's life span.
 

David Pavlich

Professional
hoggie said:
Is it why i still play with PS. I dont like to by two or threee new rackets each year at a cost of 500 bucks. I rather invest in better strings. I totally agree that it is status symbol at the clubs to have the pros racket or the latest high tech weapon. I saw same people (geat customers) buy racket after racket just to have the latest.

just my opinion.

I find it to be just the opposite. Most of my customers could care less if they are playing with Roddick's racquet or Davenport's racquet. Sure, there's a few that come in and ask for the Agassi racquet, but it's very few. Now I do have a lot of customers that read and when they find a positive racquet review, I get a lot of calls. But it's not because it's a pro's racquet, it's because experienced players said racquet A or B is a good racquet.

A lot of the stuff the manufacturers come up with may be to add to the hype such as nCode. However, a lot of the stuff actually improves the playability. I've witnessed a lot of people demo racquets that are amazed at the impoved feel or control or power that they've gained.

Take nCode for example. The fancy name is nothing more than the marketing hook. However, what the process is all about is the nano-technology binds the carbon fibres tighter enhancing strength and stability while retaining the same flex. Does it work? I guess we'll find out when it hits the market in ernest and we get a lot of players that have a chance to whack away with it.

I've also had many customers that really like the way the LM line of racquets feel. Now, if only Head can get their production lines to produce more frames.

From my perspective, all this new stuff is a pain in the neck, but for different reasons than you may have. Will it end? No. It would be just like trying to tell Ford to keep the same body style of the Mustang for 20 years. Ain't gonna' happen.

David
 

BreakPoint

Bionic Poster
David Pavlich said:
It would be just like trying to tell Ford to keep the same body style of the Mustang for 20 years. Ain't gonna' happen.

Guess what? The new 2005 Mustang is based on the '67-'69 Mustang fastback (like the one Steve McQueen drove in "Bullitt") and have similar styling cues as the almost 40 year old models. The body styles look very similar to me.

However, I know what you mean. Although these cars will have similar styles, the technology underneath will be completely modern and different...thank goodness! :)
 

Deuce

Banned
"The ppl that know better look past the nonesense and gather data (like this board)"
Truth is, most people who contribute to this board change racquets about every 12 months - just as the racquet companies ask them to do.

'Research and Development' (R&D) does not exist. All the money that is claimed to have been spent on R&D is actually spent on marketing. The only actual research the racquet companies do is in the area of marketing.

People buy racquets so frequently, and generally 'believe' newer racquets play better simply because that is what consumers have been told for decades about every product imaginable. People equate Newer with Better, because they are so conditioned. The fact is that newer is merely different. It can be better for some, and worse for others. All it is in the end is different that that which preceded it.

But saying merely that something is different won't win any marketing awards - because such a statement contains too much truth and fact.
 

David Pavlich

Professional
Deuce said:

'Research and Development' (R&D) does not exist. All the money that is claimed to have been spent on R&D is actually spent on marketing. The only actual research the racquet companies do is in the area of marketing.

All the money? I will assume that you have insiders at Wilson, Prince, Head, Babolat, Volkl, Dunlop, Kennex, Yonex, etc. that will verify your claim.

I suppose Volkl just stuck those little graphite springs under the grommets and did a dance to the grommet gods that those little suckers wouldn't fly apart. And I'm sure there were no beta racquets at Babolat when they decided on the woofer grommets. Just put 'em in the PD and sent them to market. Indeed.

David
 

Dranguyengon

New User
I believe that all of this tech is working, whether in a good way or bad way. Like liquidmetal. The reason why they named it that is supposebly they made the metal structurly different at the atomic level. I guess the metal would be like Mercury since that metal is liquid at room temp, however it isn't Mercury, it maybe just acts a little bit like it. And hypercarbon is the worst tech. Basicly its just super light, super stiff carbon.
 
Top