Wilson BLX Six One Pro staff 95 or Dunlop Bio 200 lite?

[JAT]

Hi I am using Wilson ncode nsix-one at the moment and I need an upgrade.
I am tossing between Wilson BLX Six One Pro staff 95 or Dunlop Bio 200 lite.
However after reading this forum I got an impression that Wilson quality control is lacking.
So I am curious how Dunlop quality control compare to Wilson. Thanks for your feedback

 

[cknobman]

This is a tough choice. I demoed both of these racquets last year and my friend and I liked both racquets.

I chose the Dunlop Bio 200 lite.
He chose the Wilson Pro Staff 95.

Honestly they are very close to each other in terms of play and feel.

I bought 3 of the Dunlop Bio 200 lites and was very pleased with their quality. No huge variances in weight or balance. They can take quite a beating too, I am not kind to my racquets.

My friend bought 2 of the Wilsons and has been pleased with them. He is much kinder to his equipment than I am and still plays with his original 2 to this day. The only thing that I can say about his Wilsons is the red paint seemed to chip easy. We bought some red touch up paint and just fill it in as it chips.

 

[JAT]

Thanks for the feedback, I have demo the Wilson pro staff 95 and really like it.
I am still waiting to demo the Dunlop bio 200 light. Hopefully I will get it this Sunday.

Since you have 3 Dunlop how much variation in term of weight and balance between each racquet?

This is a tough choice. I demoed both of these racquets last year and my friend and I liked both racquets.

I chose the Dunlop Bio 200 lite.
He chose the Wilson Pro Staff 95.

Honestly they are very close to each other in terms of play and feel.

I bought 3 of the Dunlop Bio 200 lites and was very pleased with their quality. No huge variances in weight or balance. They can take quite a beating too, I am not kind to my racquets.

My friend bought 2 of the Wilsons and has been pleased with them. He is much kinder to his equipment than I am and still plays with his original 2 to this day. The only thing that I can say about his Wilsons is the red paint seemed to chip easy. We bought some red touch up paint and just fill it in as it chips.

 

[Rogael Naderer]

This is a tough choice. I demoed both of these racquets last year and my friend and I liked both racquets.

I chose the Dunlop Bio 200 lite.
He chose the Wilson Pro Staff 95.

Honestly they are very close to each other in terms of play and feel.

I bought 3 of the Dunlop Bio 200 lites and was very pleased with their quality. No huge variances in weight or balance. They can take quite a beating too, I am not kind to my racquets.

My friend bought 2 of the Wilsons and has been pleased with them. He is much kinder to his equipment than I am and still plays with his original 2 to this day. The only thing that I can say about his Wilsons is the red paint seemed to chip easy. We bought some red touch up paint and just fill it in as it chips.

I concur with the point about the toughness of Bios.

In terms of QC mine are always + or - 3 grams and 1cm balance.

 

[cknobman]

My variances are in line with Rogael Naderer.

I had 2 that were the exact same and 1 that was 3 grams lighter in the head. I just used a huge prince vibration dampner on the one that was a tad light in the head and it evened out.

 

[TimothyO]

I have used both. My son has one as a backup frame too.

Wilson PS 95: more comfortable initially but I developed extraordinary, disabling pain in my hand when using it. It appears that as part of their AmpliFeel technology they inserted metal shanks in the handle. Since AmpliFeel is intended to deliver more feel of the impact it makes sense that your hand feels more shock. Some other have reported similar experiences. Other than the AmpliShock problem it was a great frame. Less solid compared to the Bio 200 Lite but easier to maneuver. If the pain had not occurred after long term use I would have stuck with the PS 95.

Dunlop Bio 200 Lite: as I noted in previous posts the "Lite" is really misleading. It's a solid player's racquet. Extremely precise and surprisingly spin-friendly in spite of its 95" size. I tail-weighted my for extra mass and to make them more HL and added some mass in the head for plow. For comfort I'd give the edge to the PS 95 when it comes to initial feel but over the long haul the Bio didn't hurt my hand like the PS 95 did. Eventually with the PS 95 I literally could NOT close my hand in the morning after playing with it the night before. Never had that problem with the Bio 200 Lite. In any case the Bio 200 plays a little stiffer than its specs suggest but still very comfortable. A couple of years ago I had an undefeated singles season with this frame and only moved on as I was curious about trying larger heads for even more spin potential. Two years later I'm back for the control (and I found some locally very cheap for myself and my son as his backup racquet).

Power: Bio > PS (but not by much...it's like comparing a wet blanket and slightly less wet blanket...both are low powered)

Plow: Bio > PS

Stability: PS > Bio

Spin: Bio > PS (significant difference here and I don't know why)

Maneuverability: PS > Bio

Control: Bio = PS (slight edge to Bio but not enough to be a decider)

Feel: PS > Bio

Comfort: Bio > PS (darn Ampli-Shock!)

Both are solid, control oriented frames and I really enjoyed both. In fact, I'm using the 200L again since I enjoy its precision and spin so much. Normally those two elements are mutually exclusive: either you get a big, open, spin-friendly head that's hard to control or you get a tiny, dense, control-friendly head that's harder to generate spin with. The 200L provides both ample spin and control.

You really need to demo these head-to-head and strung the same way since they're so close together.

 

[TimothyO]

I concur with the point about the toughness of Bios.

In terms of QC mine are always + or - 3 grams and 1cm balance.

That's also true of their AG 4D line. Last I had one fly from my hand on a flat serve during the downward swing. It smashed into the court head-first and bounced high into the air. The top of the frame was clearly crumpled at the point of impact but otherwise perfectly fine. No crack, no performance issues. As been restrung a few times since.

 

[Lilguy1456]

Similar spec....go with the Bio at half the price!

 

[JAT]

Thanks for everyone feedback, looking forward to demo the bio 200 & 300 this weekend.
I wish in Australia they sell racquets as cheap as in USA.

I have used both. My son has one as a backup frame too.

Wilson PS 95: more comfortable initially but I developed extraordinary, disabling pain in my hand when using it. It appears that as part of their AmpliFeel technology they inserted metal shanks in the handle. Since AmpliFeel is intended to deliver more feel of the impact it makes sense that your hand feels more shock. Some other have reported similar experiences. Other than the AmpliShock problem it was a great frame. Less solid compared to the Bio 200 Lite but easier to maneuver. If the pain had not occurred after long term use I would have stuck with the PS 95.

Dunlop Bio 200 Lite: as I noted in previous posts the "Lite" is really misleading. It's a solid player's racquet. Extremely precise and surprisingly spin-friendly in spite of its 95" size. I tail-weighted my for extra mass and to make them more HL and added some mass in the head for plow. For comfort I'd give the edge to the PS 95 when it comes to initial feel but over the long haul the Bio didn't hurt my hand like the PS 95 did. Eventually with the PS 95 I literally could NOT close my hand in the morning after playing with it the night before. Never had that problem with the Bio 200 Lite. In any case the Bio 200 plays a little stiffer than its specs suggest but still very comfortable. A couple of years ago I had an undefeated singles season with this frame and only moved on as I was curious about trying larger heads for even more spin potential. Two years later I'm back for the control (and I found some locally very cheap for myself and my son as his backup racquet).

Power: Bio > PS (but not by much...it's like comparing a wet blanket and slightly less wet blanket...both are low powered)

Plow: Bio > PS

Stability: PS > Bio

Spin: Bio > PS (significant difference here and I don't know why)

Maneuverability: PS > Bio

Control: Bio = PS (slight edge to Bio but not enough to be a decider)

Feel: PS > Bio

Comfort: Bio > PS (darn Ampli-Shock!)

Both are solid, control oriented frames and I really enjoyed both. In fact, I'm using the 200L again since I enjoy its precision and spin so much. Normally those two elements are mutually exclusive: either you get a big, open, spin-friendly head that's hard to control or you get a tiny, dense, control-friendly head that's harder to generate spin with. The 200L provides both ample spin and control.

You really need to demo these head-to-head and strung the same way since they're so close together.

 

[Beejay]

I played both, and am keeping Pro Staff 95, and sold Dunlop Bio 200 lite. I like the classic controlling feel of thin flat beam and PS 95 provides it. Bio 200 lite feels good but too punch (less control than PS 95).

Power: Bio > PS
Control: PS > Bio
Strokes: PS = Bio
Volley: PS > Bio
Touch shot: PS > Bio
Serve: Bio > PS (not much though)

 

[Tennisradical6]

I had ordered two bio lite's and there was 2 grams difference which I guess is not bad

 

[tmc5005]

The Dunlop Bio 200 lite is a lot more flexible.

 

[JAT]

End up ordering 3x bio 300 :shock: