made_in_austria
New User
hi,
has anybody some information about the Wilson GTX 2000 racquet?
can not find anything on the net.
thx
has anybody some information about the Wilson GTX 2000 racquet?
can not find anything on the net.
thx
Wilson GTX-2000 Racquet?
- Thread starter made_in_austria
- Start date
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Just picked one up in very nice condition. My specs are 354g, 31.25 balance (10pts HL) strung., 16/19. Seems to be about an 85 sqi head. Comes with a very nice Wilson leather grip, vinyl cover and has a 17.5mm constant beam. Flex feels about mid-50s. In hand it is lovely with quality gloss paintwork and minimalist design. This must have been a mid-range stick, but I similarly can't find any information.
Was it a poor-man's PS 6.0 sold at the same time, or does it pre-date the PS? I note is says 'Graphite Composite' but I think that comes from the days (early 1980s) when they admitted that all Graphite is a composite, rather than the late 80s when that indicated some fibreglass or other additions. Really hoping there are some Wilson experts who know about this, which I hope to hit with shortly.
Was it a poor-man's PS 6.0 sold at the same time, or does it pre-date the PS? I note is says 'Graphite Composite' but I think that comes from the days (early 1980s) when they admitted that all Graphite is a composite, rather than the late 80s when that indicated some fibreglass or other additions. Really hoping there are some Wilson experts who know about this, which I hope to hit with shortly.
Last edited:
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Quick picture. Feels remarkably solid despite the flexion in the back-yard.
kevin qmto
Hall of Fame
Interesting. In my searching of old frames on the auction site, I’ve never stumbled across that stick before. I’m also curious to its backstory and when/where it was made. Also confused how they could use the name GTX when Adidas was selling their racket of the same name at the same time. Maybe the ‘2000’ got them around that?
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Yeah I thought that about GTX. At 17.5mm beam, it does remind me of a Black Ace V2. Need to get an early 80s Wilson catalogue. The white buttcap with red W has an SJO code.
Sanglier
Professional
Looks like an "Odyssey Comp" minus the PWS. This could be an SMU, or a Euro-only release, hence the relative obscurity and scarcity.
"SJO" indicates 1986 manufacture, by SanHoSun.
"Composite" has always indicated a combination of dissimilar materials. Its earliest usage was for wood+plastic, metal+plastic frame construction. The first all-plastic frames from the early '70s were not categorized as "composite", because they only had fiberglass reinforcement in their layup, and did not contain wood or metal. When carbon fiber (graphite) came along in the mid '70s, "composite", "fiberglass", and "graphite" were treated as three distinct categories in racquet reviews. That distinction didn't last long however, as graphite/fiberglass, graphite/kevlar, graphite/boron, fiberglass/kevlar, fiberglass/boron frames became common, while wood+plastic, metal+plastic frames gradually disappeared. From then on, the term "composite" was repurposed to mean plastic frames that didn't claim to be 100% graphite-reinforced. There was a large price and prestige gap between the two categories.
No "100% graphite" Wilson offering was ever marketed as "graphite composite". Even the kevlar-containing PS series opted to say "graphite kevlar" on the frame rather than "graphite composite". In practice, the latter designation was reserved for layups that contained more than 20% fiberglass, the arbitrary threshold between a proper/real/serious graphite frame and a recreational pretender. Indeed, there was a Sting Mid derivative from that time period that was simply called "80/20".
"Odyssey Comp" was one of the smoothest and most comfortable frames I've ever tried; If this "GTX 2000" really is a PWS-less clone, it should play very nicely as well.
"SJO" indicates 1986 manufacture, by SanHoSun.
"Composite" has always indicated a combination of dissimilar materials. Its earliest usage was for wood+plastic, metal+plastic frame construction. The first all-plastic frames from the early '70s were not categorized as "composite", because they only had fiberglass reinforcement in their layup, and did not contain wood or metal. When carbon fiber (graphite) came along in the mid '70s, "composite", "fiberglass", and "graphite" were treated as three distinct categories in racquet reviews. That distinction didn't last long however, as graphite/fiberglass, graphite/kevlar, graphite/boron, fiberglass/kevlar, fiberglass/boron frames became common, while wood+plastic, metal+plastic frames gradually disappeared. From then on, the term "composite" was repurposed to mean plastic frames that didn't claim to be 100% graphite-reinforced. There was a large price and prestige gap between the two categories.
No "100% graphite" Wilson offering was ever marketed as "graphite composite". Even the kevlar-containing PS series opted to say "graphite kevlar" on the frame rather than "graphite composite". In practice, the latter designation was reserved for layups that contained more than 20% fiberglass, the arbitrary threshold between a proper/real/serious graphite frame and a recreational pretender. Indeed, there was a Sting Mid derivative from that time period that was simply called "80/20".
"Odyssey Comp" was one of the smoothest and most comfortable frames I've ever tried; If this "GTX 2000" really is a PWS-less clone, it should play very nicely as well.
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Thanks for the Wilson details. Any more on the Odyssey specs? I also noticed a similarity to the Graphite Force pictures being also 16x19 and its description in another thread, except GF was 20mm. I would guess this GTX sat between that and the PS85 if they were contemporaneous, GTX being 17.5mm.
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Checking the Odyssey threads shows that that frame is thicker (20mm?) compared to GTX. Minimalist design seems most similar to Graphite Force or Sting (midsize no crossbar version). I wonder if it's a Walmart special! Did they do 340g frames in the 80s?
Sanglier
Professional
My "Odyssey Comp" has an 18mm beam, weighs 368g strung, is 8 pt head light, with a measured flex of 59 RA. The string pattern is identical to the one on your "GTX 2000".
There were many Wilson frames in the 354g strung weight range, namely the "Reflex", the "Sting Mid", the "Ceramic", and any number of generic "graphite composite" models. Don't forget that within any given model, the difference in weight between individual examples can be as much as 10g.
Beam thickness aside, the overall shape of the Odyssey is quite distinct from that of the Force or the Sting/PS series - the throat opening is noticeably smaller, and the head is more rounded. It is not possible to see these things clearly from the angle of your photo due to perspective distortions, so my guess may well be off. A side-by-side comparison is required for confirmation one way or the other, but these are not identical frames anyway, so there is no real point for the exercise. The Odyssey was made by at least three different Taiwanese contractors, but (surprisingly) never by SanHoSun. All examples I've come across were made in 1988. They were among the last bumperless frames produced for/by Wilson. If the "GTX 2000" and "Odyssey Comp" turn out to be related, then it's more likely that the latter was a derivative (improvement?) of the former, rather than a contemporary clone.
There were many Wilson frames in the 354g strung weight range, namely the "Reflex", the "Sting Mid", the "Ceramic", and any number of generic "graphite composite" models. Don't forget that within any given model, the difference in weight between individual examples can be as much as 10g.
Beam thickness aside, the overall shape of the Odyssey is quite distinct from that of the Force or the Sting/PS series - the throat opening is noticeably smaller, and the head is more rounded. It is not possible to see these things clearly from the angle of your photo due to perspective distortions, so my guess may well be off. A side-by-side comparison is required for confirmation one way or the other, but these are not identical frames anyway, so there is no real point for the exercise. The Odyssey was made by at least three different Taiwanese contractors, but (surprisingly) never by SanHoSun. All examples I've come across were made in 1988. They were among the last bumperless frames produced for/by Wilson. If the "GTX 2000" and "Odyssey Comp" turn out to be related, then it's more likely that the latter was a derivative (improvement?) of the former, rather than a contemporary clone.
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Thanks again. Interesting. Odyssey Comp in this thread: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/wilson-odyssey-comp-midsize.242657/
looks more chunky, but who can tell with the pics. I would say my GTX is the most svelte and elegant frame I've seen. Peculiarly very light on graphics. Nothing in the throat at all. Wondering if it's a bit earlier like late 70s \ early 80s.
looks more chunky, but who can tell with the pics. I would say my GTX is the most svelte and elegant frame I've seen. Peculiarly very light on graphics. Nothing in the throat at all. Wondering if it's a bit earlier like late 70s \ early 80s.
Sanglier
Professional
Zero chance that it was made in any other year than 1986. The butt cap code doesn't lie.
The only graphite frame made by Wilson in the late '70s was the original standard-head Ultra. It was joined by the oversize Galaxy in 1981. The small Made in Chicago product line was supplemented by a number of California-produced frames in 1982, along with the first of the SanHoSun-made brace-less Sting Mid (Euro/UK/Japan only). 1983 saw further evolution and expansion of the Ultra line, but it wasn't until 1984 that things really took off.
Everything Wilson made prior to 1984 is well known, because there were not that many models to keep track of!
From 1978 onward, all Wilson products were stamped with a letter code, indicating year and lot, with a contractor code added in 1983. No guessing is required when dating these racquets if everything is original.
I wouldn't get too hung up on cosmetics; they are extremely easy to change and cost virtually nothing to update (so manufacturers love to change them to make old products 'new' again). Using cosmetics to identify a post-1978 Wilson product is like using paint color to identify a vehicle that has a visible VIN.
Last edited:
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
'along with the first of the SanHoSun-made brace-less Sting'.
Great, as I mentioned above the braceless Sting looks similar to me in the bay pictures I've seen, and you confirmed the factory code, so it looks like a Euro only paintjob update of the Euro only Sting version. Makes sense 3 years after Sting Euro.
Great, as I mentioned above the braceless Sting looks similar to me in the bay pictures I've seen, and you confirmed the factory code, so it looks like a Euro only paintjob update of the Euro only Sting version. Makes sense 3 years after Sting Euro.
Sanglier
Professional
The braceless "Sting Mid" really was just a normal "Sting Mid" without the brace. You can see in this side by side comparison of your GTX 2000 with a braceless "Sting" (picture is borrowed from listing 224680592692 on the auction site) and an "Odyssey" (from listing 224480224987) that the throat opening is noticeably wider and longer on the "Sting" than on the "GTX 2000" (resulting in a shorter handle); whereas the one on the "Odyssey" looks more similar in size. This was the main reason I suspected your GTX was related to the "Odyssey" rather than the "Sting". But again, there are lots of distortions in these photos, making them less than reliable for dimensional comparison. However, the normal "Sting" is very common and inexpensive. You can easily do a direct comparison to verify your hypothesis.
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Thanks, yes they were some of the listings I was looking at too.
I do agree on the similarity of the throat to the Odyssey, being thin with a long handle extension and 3 double grommets. When you look at that listing, a light grey Pro 200 also comes up, which seems to be similar as well. The difference remaining the PWS bulges on these two.
Were Odyssey and Pro Comp 200 also SanHoSun factory?
Coming back to the Sting braceless, the first picture does look like the bridge is wider, but the subsequent pictures are not so different to the GTX. There are similar 3x2 grommets, and the first picture is deceptive because the top paint in mid-grey ends before the throat paint in black starts. So the throat looks wider from the top, but the angled views in pictures 2 & 4 the throat looks similar width. The Sting also has the gentle curving starting from the handle, we can't see the full length of above the handle because of the plastic protection, the rounded grommet strip ends are the same, mains 7&8 start at the same point relative to the throat, and of course is also without PWS, like the GTX. The last couple of Sting listing pictures also show the head is fairly oval like the GTX. So I'm seeing the GTX as clearly not an Odyssey nor a Sting direct copy, but somewhere in between.
Another thing to check will be when the Adidas GTX came out as presumably Wilson had to stop their GTX shortly after that if it existed then.
Anyway, what I also noticed on the Sting listing was the accurate definition of the construction, before Composite got misused as to only mean Graphite with another reinforcement of the epoxy. Well done Wilson. From the side of the Sting braceless: '100% graphite reinforced epoxy resin composite. Polyurethane foam molded pallet. Zytel Nylon grommet strip.' That must be the only truly correct description of a racket's construction in history! Since most threads describe the Sting as '100% graphite', it does appear that there was a period where Wilson included the term composite accurately, albeit not in the racket's title.
Some more GTX pics, apologies for the orange OG!
Side view compared to 400i 19mm and 200G 20mm
One problem of the glossy piano black paint is fingerprints!
Nice even stringbed.
I do agree on the similarity of the throat to the Odyssey, being thin with a long handle extension and 3 double grommets. When you look at that listing, a light grey Pro 200 also comes up, which seems to be similar as well. The difference remaining the PWS bulges on these two.
Were Odyssey and Pro Comp 200 also SanHoSun factory?
Coming back to the Sting braceless, the first picture does look like the bridge is wider, but the subsequent pictures are not so different to the GTX. There are similar 3x2 grommets, and the first picture is deceptive because the top paint in mid-grey ends before the throat paint in black starts. So the throat looks wider from the top, but the angled views in pictures 2 & 4 the throat looks similar width. The Sting also has the gentle curving starting from the handle, we can't see the full length of above the handle because of the plastic protection, the rounded grommet strip ends are the same, mains 7&8 start at the same point relative to the throat, and of course is also without PWS, like the GTX. The last couple of Sting listing pictures also show the head is fairly oval like the GTX. So I'm seeing the GTX as clearly not an Odyssey nor a Sting direct copy, but somewhere in between.
Another thing to check will be when the Adidas GTX came out as presumably Wilson had to stop their GTX shortly after that if it existed then.
Anyway, what I also noticed on the Sting listing was the accurate definition of the construction, before Composite got misused as to only mean Graphite with another reinforcement of the epoxy. Well done Wilson. From the side of the Sting braceless: '100% graphite reinforced epoxy resin composite. Polyurethane foam molded pallet. Zytel Nylon grommet strip.' That must be the only truly correct description of a racket's construction in history! Since most threads describe the Sting as '100% graphite', it does appear that there was a period where Wilson included the term composite accurately, albeit not in the racket's title.
Some more GTX pics, apologies for the orange OG!
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
First 1hr hit with the GTX-2000 today. It's mostly as expected. Not a rock like a 6.0 85, but has that very pleasant solid feeling, with flex at the same time. Guessing 20-40% fibreglass. Large sweetzone. Control is good thanks to mass. Fairly open stringbed (1.325cm2 average cell size) gives easy depth, and surprising spin. Slices also very good with the 17.5mm beam. Power is definitely low, but I don't think too low if you're an reasonable player.
Comparing to my 300i, which is similar weight (362g vs 356g), the GTX is less powerful and the sweetzone is middle to low on the stringbed, unlike the 300i which is uniformly sweet. GTX is better for slices and gets more spin on baseline rallying. 300i better for flat serves and drive BH. About equal on volleys. Block returns and half-volleys, 300i is imperious, but GTX fine.
In all, just another amazing mid-80s frame that is totally usable today.
Comparing to my 300i, which is similar weight (362g vs 356g), the GTX is less powerful and the sweetzone is middle to low on the stringbed, unlike the 300i which is uniformly sweet. GTX is better for slices and gets more spin on baseline rallying. 300i better for flat serves and drive BH. About equal on volleys. Block returns and half-volleys, 300i is imperious, but GTX fine.
In all, just another amazing mid-80s frame that is totally usable today.
Sanglier
Professional
As I mentioned in post #9 above, there were at least three Taiwanese contractors making the "Odyssey" for Wilson in 1988, but apparently not SanHoSun. This doesn't mean much, as there was a lot of subcontracting between these companies, most of which were located in the same city. They were all interconnected in some way.
That "Pro 200" you pulled up appears to have an "SJ_" butt cap code as well, so it was made more or less alongside your "GTX", maybe using the same batch of molds, as it does appear to have that same/similar shortish pinched open throat.
It's really difficult to judge head shapes using these photos due to all the lens distortions. Depending on how the racquets were strung, whatever small differences there may have been between the unstrung shapes could be obscured by tension artifact. Only the difference in the throat area is unambiguous. In this respect, your "GTX" is definitely more similar to the "Odyssey" (and "Pro 200") than to the "Sting", based on the size and shape of the opening and limb curvature. As you can see below, you can comfortably fit the "Odyssey" throat opening inside that of the "80/20" (a braceless "Sting Mid" with 20% of its graphite layup replaced by fiberglass) when you stack them on top of each other.
But again, the "GTX" is clearly not the "Odyssey", and many racquets that shared the same mold had little in common under the skin, so the question of lineage is impossible to address meaningfully based on appearance alone. These mid-range '80s Wilsons were all competent racquets for sure, but they are not historically significant per se, other than as examples of Taiwanese conquest of the global racquet supply chain. There is little to be gained by digging any deeper than this, unless one is interested in researching the history of specific Taiwanese racquet makers.
Grafil Injection
Hall of Fame
Yes, there do seem to be quite a few similar Wilsons. I noticed the Reflex Midsize (white), Graphite Matrix and Matrix Pro all have the same long thin throat and 3 double grommets as well. The most similar style-wise seems to be the Pro 200, being very minimalist. But the Matrix Pro and Graphite Matrix without PWS look the most similar frames overall to me now. They are also described in threads with similar 12.5oz weight and 17.5mm beams. Those two are shown together in a Flickr post:
What remains interesting is that the GTX-2000 isn't mentioned anywhere. I have to try to resist buying one of the other ones now just to check!
