Wilson ProStaff 7.0 Lite Classic (steffi graf mid 90's)

[specialjustin]

Hi i have borrowed this racquet from a friend and would like some info on it.

Looks like this: http://80s-tennis.com/pages/wilson_prostaff-classic-lite.html (link is a little slow but does work)

What i do know is, its:

11.8oz strung
95sq/in head size
16x18 pattern
Recommended tension of 50-60lbs
12 points head light (give or take a point or 2)
Used by Steffi in the mid 90's

I would love to know on some of its play characteristics, flex/power/spin/arm friendly. I'm to new to be able to identify these things like you experts. Also a modern (currently available in shops) equivalent (or similar) recommendation would be fantastic.

Cheers, Justin

 

[specialjustin]

Well it seems this is a bit of a mystery racquet. So maybe someone could comment on what Wilson racquets were generally like in the early - mid 90's. Were they mostly stiff or was it just some of the ranges? It does appear to me (looking at current models) that Wilson do tend to fall on the stiffer side. If you were to hazard a guess, what would you say?

Really any hints of speculation would really help.

 

[auzzieizm]

I never tried the 95, but I did own the Prostaff 7.1 Lite oversize version for a month. It was a little too light for me, but regardless it was a solid hitting, good all around frame. Spin was good, and it was flexible and soft, but not noodley. Not that powerful, and decent control. The frame was supposed to be a flexier, lighter version of the Prostaff 6.1, I think. I messed around with lead placements, but couldn't get anything to really work for me. Thinking back, I probably should have given the frame more of a shot, and tried more setups.

 

[Bud]

Hi i have borrowed this racquet from a friend and would like some info on it.

Looks like this: http://80s-tennis.com/pages/wilson_prostaff-classic-lite.html (link is a little slow but does work)

What i do know is, its:

11.8oz strung
95sq/in head size
16x18 pattern
Recommended tension of 50-60lbs
12 points head light (give or take a point or 2)
Used by Steffi in the mid 90's

I would love to know on some of its play characteristics, flex/power/spin/arm friendly. I'm to new to be able to identify these things like you experts. Also a modern (currently available in shops) equivalent (or similar) recommendation would be fantastic.

Cheers, Justin

Being 7.0 si, the frame is a bit more flexible than the PS Classic 6.1. The playing characteristics are very similar to the 6.1. However, it's more maneuverable, being about a half-ounce lighter.

When you see the frame you automatically think chick-stick, based on the pastels (pinks, violets, etc.)

 

[specialjustin]

Thanks chaps. I must say i was expecting you say it was stiff as a board, as my arm is not so keen on it! Well that's what i was guessing from using it. It's very possible the strings are not helping either, very old Babolat Challenge 15L...

Yes Bud, it is indeed a chick i borrowed it off.

I have tried some other (friends) racquets and plan to demo more. There is something i really like about this racquet but i don't know what it is. I just feel so much more confident using it. Anybody have any suggestions at some current models i could look at, but nothing that is going to kill my arm.

 

[PBODY99]

The flex of the 7 series Wilson was softer than the others with a lower SI of the same construction. there was also a 4 Si Pro Staff that I found to be a great hitter, but the 6 level sticks never worked for me.

Try to find a frame with a 50 to low 60 RDC numbers, HL of course.

 

[specialjustin]

The flex of the 7 series Wilson was softer than the others with a lower SI of the same construction. there was also a 4 Si Pro Staff that I found to be a great hitter, but the 6 level sticks never worked for me.

Try to find a frame with a 50 to low 60 RDC numbers, HL of course.

Lower SI of the same construction?

If i understand there was 7.x and 7.x SI racquets. I have just searched a little, and see there were many SI racquets across the whole prostaff ranges. Having said that, SI does not appear anywhere on the racquet i have, although i'm still intrested to know what it stands for. So many variations of the same models is making my head spin:???:

 

[PBODY99]

Swing Index = length of swing with Wilson. The more flexible frames with thinner beams had the higher SI. A 7.0 vs &.5 could mean a softer flew, thinner beam or some combo of the two.
I would just restring at mid tension with something non-poly that you use and enjoy.

 

[specialjustin]

Swing Index = length of swing with Wilson. The more flexible frames with thinner beams had the higher SI. A 7.0 vs &.5 could mean a softer flew, thinner beam or some combo of the two.
I would just restring at mid tension with something non-poly that you use and enjoy.

Thanks, that explains alot and is really helpful. I may well get this "chick stick" re-strung as a thank you for her loaning it to me. BUT i do have to give it back. That's why i was looking for something comparable in the current Wilson range.