Wilson Six-one 95 16x18 vs 18x20.

A

activentures

Rookie
I am a former ps85 user who like many has struggled to find a replacement, but who finds that racket too demanding now that I play less and weigh more. I currently have the n95 16x18 and like the racket in general but feel it is a bit too lively for me. although the 85 was a 16x18, given that it is 10 sq in larger, would the 95 18x20 be more similar to the ps85 in terms of string density. which would have the denser string pattern? I realise I won't replicate the same feel as the 85 but want something closer to it than the 95 16x18 is offering me. I didn't have any concerns about spin generation with the ps85 which I know is a criticism levelled by some at the 95 18x20.

A couple of points to add, I expect posters will tell me to demo and choose what I like best. I completely agree with this but do not live in the US and don't have practical access to a demo program so could do with some general pointers before I do anything. Secondly, I probably can't stump up the cash for some BLX's yet and the n95 18x20 is hard to come by, so I'd potentially be looking at some K95 18x20's. The impression I get having read other related threads is that the K range was a poor relation in the 6.1 family and that the n's and BLX's are considerably better. Is the difference significant enough to justify the extra cost (double) I'd need to get a BLX over a kfactor?

Thanks in advance.
 
yes, the 18x20 on a 95 is closer to a 16x18 on an 85, I was using a K90 (16x19) and I switched to the 95 and the 18x20 felt more like it.

You should demo the different 95's if at all possible. IMO the BLX's are way better than the K's, the K's didn't feel very solid in comparison to the BLX, I haven't tried the Ncode ones though so I can't comment on them
 
This is the progression i have made, used PS85 and don't have the footwork anymore for it. actually tried N 6.1 5 18x20 by accident and have fallen in love with it, one of the really solid frames out there. I ended up purchasing 2 of them. Much more forgiving than the PS85 and a seamless transition as well. you will love it. Old school feel, accurate control, still has the weight you are used to, very head light makes it easy to swing.
 
16X18 all the way. More pop and spin, but less control. You can use both. 18X20 probably better for matches for precision.
 
It depends on your playing style. If you like hitting flat shots, then go for 18x20. If you like to hit with a lot of topspin , then go for 16x18. I prefer 16x18, because it helps me serve with heavy kick on the ball.
 
I have a similiar story to yours. I played with the PS 85 in high school and than switched to the PSC 4.2 in college. I loved the PSC 4.2 had great feel, a little lighter than the PS 85 and a little more forgiving. If I could find more PSC 4.2's I would probably just stick with it. A few years ago I picked up a Ncode 95 16x18 and just like you I feel it is a bit too lively.

I am considering the BLX 95 16x18 and 18x20 and the BLX PS 90. I need to demo to see how I like them. Also I am thinking about picking up some PSC 6.1's but have never played with one and obviously I would not be able to demo. Can anyone that has played with both the PSC 6.1 and PSC 4.2 tell me how they compare to each other?
 
I've had the HyperProstaff 6.1 95 16x18 as my first "true" racket and loved it since I've had it. I also have a n6.1 16 x 18.

I've tried the denser string pattern versions in the recent BLX 2012. I personally enjoy the extra pop but it might be because I'm just so used to the open string pattern.
I guess it's very dependent on your style of play and just what you're used to; the 85. The blade 93 or 98 also might be worth considering as mentioned above too.
 
AYone said:
16X18 all the way. More pop and spin, but less control. You can use both. 18X20 probably better for matches for precision.
Click to expand...

And the extra spin prevents the balls from sailing long with full bed natural gut....

That's the main reason I've switched from 18X20 in the KFactors to the 16X18 in the BLX 95.
 
i need a racquet. Something with a little less power than the PDR and more control, with a more solid feel than the Prestige MP .

In a long match how is the Six.One 95 18x20 vs the PDR ? do you feel the extra weight ?

can the six one 95 18x20 be the one?
 
mirceam said:
i need a racquet. Something with a little less power than the PDR and more control, with a more solid feel than the Prestige MP .

In a long match how is the Six.One 95 18x20 vs the PDR ? do you feel the extra weight ?

can the six one 95 18x20 be the one?
Click to expand...

6.1 18x20 is less power than PDR for sure.
But 16x18, I heard it's a beast.
 
Last edited:
mirceam said:
i need a racquet. Something with a little less power than the PDR and more control, with a more solid feel than the Prestige MP .

In a long match how is the Six.One 95 18x20 vs the PDR ? do you feel the extra weight ?

can the six one 95 18x20 be the one?
Click to expand...

If you hit with spin go with the 16x18. The extra weight is easy to get used to. I experienced some adjustment period when I switched but now it's amazing. But the 18x20 has insane control I just didn't like the lack of spin potential I experienced. I also felt I had to muscle the ball more to hit it deep due to the denser pattern and smaller headsize, which I wasn't used to (my two previous racquets were a Prince Original Graphite OS Longbody and a Babolat Pure Drive Roddick GT+).

ALSO: Demo them! See which feels better! Nothing is worse than investing a few hundred on racquets and realizing how much you don't like it a few months later.
 
If you like the 16x18, I strongly recommend Head Intellitour strings. Works great in that frame, tames its power / liveliness and adds comfort.
 
thank you all.

i've tested one of my friends K Six One 95 16x18, fresh strung with polystar energy @ 55 lbs . One set with the Pure Drive Roddick GT , another set with the Six.One, 3 games with the PDR GT and another set with the Yonex Vcore Xi 98.


The switch from the PDR GT to the Vcore Xi 98 was easy . Probably because they have the same balance , 315 mm. One thing i had to adapt was the serve. I hit a more heavy serve with the PDR GT , the Vcore is more easy to swing and it took a little adaptation.

The Six.One 95 16x20 has less spin than the Yonex and Babolat and it feels more flexible . The ball had more peace than the Yonex and less than PDR but because of less spin it sails long.

Serving was easy , good power , very nice flat servers

It's a very nice stick but not what I want.

I will test the 18x20 at a lower tensions but I think i will stick to my babolats and yonex's .
 
I have the new Wilson Six.One 95 18 x 20 on the way. Just released yesterday in Europe. Will be equipped with full bed of Pacific Prime Gut string. Will post review some time late next week. Should be of interest to all those fancying
this racket.
 
activentures said:
I am a former ps85 user who like many has struggled to find a replacement, but who finds that racket too demanding now that I play less and weigh more. I currently have the n95 16x18 and like the racket in general but feel it is a bit too lively for me. although the 85 was a 16x18, given that it is 10 sq in larger, would the 95 18x20 be more similar to the ps85 in terms of string density. which would have the denser string pattern? I realise I won't replicate the same feel as the 85 but want something closer to it than the 95 16x18 is offering me. I didn't have any concerns about spin generation with the ps85 which I know is a criticism levelled by some at the 95 18x20.

A couple of points to add, I expect posters will tell me to demo and choose what I like best. I completely agree with this but do not live in the US and don't have practical access to a demo program so could do with some general pointers before I do anything. Secondly, I probably can't stump up the cash for some BLX's yet and the n95 18x20 is hard to come by, so I'd potentially be looking at some K95 18x20's. The impression I get having read other related threads is that the K range was a poor relation in the 6.1 family and that the n's and BLX's are considerably better. Is the difference significant enough to justify the extra cost (double) I'd need to get a BLX over a kfactor?

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

It's a matter of preference:
1. Kfactor have about 16g more swing weight then the latest BLX Amplifeel. The BLX models being more head light.

2. Kfactor vibrates more

3. I prefer 16X18 in the BLX and used 18X20 in the Kfactor.
Since I now string full bed natural gut I want to extra spin to help prevent the balls from sailing long.
 
Last edited:
I think the Wilson 6.1 BLX with the open string pattern is one of the best rackets produced in the last five years. I only switched because I am in my 40s and it is just too heavy at 12.2 oz. However, the manageable swingweight and the headlight nature of this frame makes it one of the better advanced players frames on the market. It also quite comfortable for a stiffer frame. The 18 x 20 version should only be used by those players that have true western grips and thus topspin is not an issue.
 
Fintft said:
It's a matter of preference:
1. Kfactor are about 14g lighter swing weight then the latest BLX Amplifeel. The BLX models being more head light.

2. Kfactor vibrates more

3. I prefer 16X18 in the BLX and used 18X20 in the Kfactor.
Since I now string full bed natural gut I want to extra spin to help prevent the balls from sailing long.
Click to expand...

I thought the SW on the K 6.1 was higher than other 6.1s?

On another note, can others also give their opinions on the K-Factor, BLX1 and BLX2 6.1s and how they compare to earlier models?

I use both the HPS 6.1 and n6.1 and I think I like my HPS a bit more than the ncode (maybe just because i've had the HPS longer).

I'm considering pickuping up a 6.1 95 BLX1(black/gold) since I'd like another 6.1 and I really like the PJ on the 2010 version but not too sold on if I'll like it or not.
 
One of my friends is seaking more control and low power - he is using now YT IG Speed Pro MP 315 with Sonic Pro and PD 2012 with Poly/Multi, so we are going to buy today the old 18x20 with NXT Tour 17 or even 18.
 
Imago said:
One of my friends is seaking more control and low power - he is using now YT IG Speed Pro MP 315 with Sonic Pro and PD 2012 with Poly/Multi, so we are going to buy today the old 18x20 with NXT Tour 17 or even 18.
Click to expand...

I've just hit with both last night and of course that the Wilson Six.One 95 has more control, but to me, I can actually hit harder with it (due to stability most probably) then with the Head IG Speed MP 315.
 
Phantasm said:
I thought the SW on the K 6.1 was higher than other 6.1s?

On another note, can others also give their opinions on the K-Factor, BLX1 and BLX2 6.1s and how they compare to earlier models?

I use both the HPS 6.1 and n6.1 and I think I like my HPS a bit more than the ncode (maybe just because i've had the HPS longer).

I'm considering pickuping up a 6.1 95 BLX1(black/gold) since I'd like another 6.1 and I really like the PJ on the 2010 version but not too sold on if I'll like it or not.
Click to expand...

Yes, I meant Kfactors had a higher swing weight, sorry!

Easy enough to check the specs on TW site:
Swingweight: 340 for Kfactor

Swingweight: 324 for the BLX Amplifeel

And 3g lower weight...

Your Black and Gold BLX is somewhere in between in SW (I'm still holding to 3 of those, but haven't used them at all in the last 1.5-2 years).

It may also be that more R&D has gone in the more recent models, since (at least to me), they swing better :D
 
Fintft said:
I've just hit with both last night and of course that the Wilson Six.One 95 has more control, but to me, I can actually hit harder with it (due to stability most probably) then with the Head IG Speed MP 315.
Click to expand...

We ended up buying the last edition of PS 6.1 95 - strung ATW with xcel 16 @ 62. Not bad so far. At least better than Head IG Speed MP 315 in terms of control and stable playability.
 
i've played with the BLX Six One 95 18x20. Is better than the K Factor 16x18 , less vibrations , more solid feel , feels like a rock. the balls have less spin than the Pure Drive Roddick and are more flatter trajectory .

in a long match the roddick is a more lethal weapon for the average player. and because of the spin i've hit balls that are more challenging to return.
 
mirceam said:
i've played with the BLX Six One 95 18x20. Is better than the K Factor 16x18 , less vibrations , more solid feel , feels like a rock. the balls have less spin than the Pure Drive Roddick and are more flatter trajectory .

in a long match the roddick is a more lethal weapon for the average player. and because of the spin i've hit balls that are more challenging to return.
Click to expand...

Good to know! It's been so long since I've demoed the Pure Drive Roddick (at the time I've settled on the AeroStorm Tour and bought one more APD for the family)...What about shock absorbing though? If that's important at all for you..Would the BLX > Pure Drive?
 
Fintft said:
Yes, I meant Kfactors had a higher swing weight, sorry!

Easy enough to check the specs on TW site:
Swingweight: 340 for Kfactor

Swingweight: 324 for the BLX Amplifeel

And 3g lower weight...

Your Black and Gold BLX is somewhere in between in SW (I'm still holding to 3 of those, but haven't used them at all in the last 1.5-2 years).

It may also be that more R&D has gone in the more recent models, since (at least to me), they swing better :D
Click to expand...
Sorry! Didn't mean to sound like I'm calling you out on that. :(

Thanks for the input! I've heard a lot of good things on the current amplifeel 6.1s but I'm not a big fan of the paintjob which is why I haven't considered picking one up.

Call me crazy but personally, I like the 2014 six.one 95 cosmetic more than the current blx2 one.
 
I'm still playing with the K 6.1 95 16/18 and I think the k-factor is the best of this line since the original. But that's just my opinion of course.

I played with the PS85 for about 12 years and then switched to the K. I started with the 18/20 but I always missed the upwards trajectory that the PS85 gave me. That's important for me, so I switched to the open pattern.

The open pattern doesn't offer as much control, but with, say Luxilon BB strings it's still great. Sometimes shots tend to sail a little, but nothing is perfect.

Serves are great, lots of power and also spin for the second serve, volleys are also great and even deep volleys seem easier, the additional power helps on the backhand side (I have a one-handed backhand) and whenever you're in the defense. But no doubt the dense pattern will give you more consistency and more control from the baseline. The rest won't be much of a difference.

It's totally up to you. You can't really go wrong with any of them in my opinion. Btw I totally forgot, I think the 18/20 felt a bit more dense than the PS85 pattern.
 
Fintft said:
Your Black and Gold BLX is somewhere in between in SW (I'm still holding to 3 of those, but haven't used them at all in the last 1.5-2 years).

It may also be that more R&D has gone in the more recent models, since (at least to me), they swing better :D
Click to expand...
I use the Black and Gold BLX 16x18 (former PS 85 user) and really like the way they hit (especially the volleys and return of serves). What do you like about the BLX with Amplifeel that caused you to make the switch?
 
Phantasm said:
Sorry! Didn't mean to sound like I'm calling you out on that. :(

Thanks for the input! I've heard a lot of good things on the current amplifeel 6.1s but I'm not a big fan of the paintjob which is why I haven't considered picking one up.

Call me crazy but personally, I like the 2014 six.one 95 cosmetic more than the current blx2 one.
Click to expand...

No, no, thanks for correcting my mistake(I've posted in a rush).

I don't worry too much about paint jobs, but would be interested in the 95s (the spinny one, I believe to be 18X16).
 
Hal said:
I use the Black and Gold BLX 16x18 (former PS 85 user) and really like the way they hit (especially the volleys and return of serves). What do you like about the BLX with Amplifeel that caused you to make the switch?
Click to expand...

No big difference, but:
1. More maneuverability(being more HL)?
2. I’m actually learning to generate more racquet head speed so the above helps.
3. Better shock absorption (the basalt being in the handle as well, not only in the frame)
4. Swings a bit better and maybe not only b/c of lower SW, but more work put by those engineers in R&D.
I’m still keeping 3 of the original BLXes in case I want to go back (i.e. for more power)….
 
Last edited:
Fintft said:
No big difference, but:
1. More maneuverability(being more HL)?
2. I’m actually learning to generate more racquet head speed so the above helps.
3. Better shock absorption (the basalt being in the handle as well, not only in the frame)
4. Swings a bit better and maybe not only b/c of lower SW, but more work put by those engineers in R&D.
I’m still keeping 3 of the original BLXes in case I want to go back (i.e. for more power)….
Click to expand...

The Amplifeel is actually LESS headlight (despite the advertised specs), but... swings a bit faster than the blx.

IMO it's because Wilson put less weight in the throat for this model. You can feel it in the amplifeel also by the somewhat more hollow feel (but still comfortable thanks to the amplifeel and blx technology). To me, the amplifeel is more maneuvrable and easier at the net. On the other hand, I prefer the blx because of the headsize, which is a tad larger (about a third of an inch). I know it's nothing, but I can feel the difference in net clearance. (This is confirmed by the TW racquet lab when looking at the spin window of the two models. The amplifeel feels more like a 93 in. to me, with the improved precision that comes with it.)

Many six one users here will say I'm crazy and the two models are the same, same mold, etc. But almost two years of figuring out which one I prefer taught me otherwise.
 
DonDiego said:
The Amplifeel is actually LESS headlight (despite the advertised specs), but... swings a bit faster than the blx.

IMO it's because Wilson put less weight in the throat for this model. You can feel it in the amplifeel also by the somewhat more hollow feel (but still comfortable thanks to the amplifeel and blx technology). To me, the amplifeel is more maneuvrable and easier at the net. On the other hand, I prefer the blx because of the headsize, which is a tad larger (about a third of an inch). I know it's nothing, but I can feel the difference in net clearance. (This is confirmed by the TW racquet lab when looking at the spin window of the two models. The amplifeel feels more like a 93 in. to me, with the improved precision that comes with it.)

Many six one users here will say I'm crazy and the two models are the same, same mold, etc. But almost two years of figuring out which one I prefer taught me otherwise.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks!
 
DonDiego said:
The Amplifeel is actually LESS headlight (despite the advertised specs), but... swings a bit faster than the blx.

IMO it's because Wilson put less weight in the throat for this model. You can feel it in the amplifeel also by the somewhat more hollow feel (but still comfortable thanks to the amplifeel and blx technology). To me, the amplifeel is more maneuvrable and easier at the net. On the other hand, I prefer the blx because of the headsize, which is a tad larger (about a third of an inch). I know it's nothing, but I can feel the difference in net clearance. (This is confirmed by the TW racquet lab when looking at the spin window of the two models. The amplifeel feels more like a 93 in. to me, with the improved precision that comes with it.)

Many six one users here will say I'm crazy and the two models are the same, same mold, etc. But almost two years of figuring out which one I prefer taught me otherwise.
Click to expand...
DonDiego said:
The Amplifeel is actually LESS headlight (despite the advertised specs), but... swings a bit faster than the blx.

IMO it's because Wilson put less weight in the throat for this model. You can feel it in the amplifeel also by the somewhat more hollow feel (but still comfortable thanks to the amplifeel and blx technology). To me, the amplifeel is more maneuvrable and easier at the net. On the other hand, I prefer the blx because of the headsize, which is a tad larger (about a third of an inch). I know it's nothing, but I can feel the difference in net clearance. (This is confirmed by the TW racquet lab when looking at the spin window of the two models. The amplifeel feels more like a 93 in. to me, with the improved precision that comes with it.)

Many six one users here will say I'm crazy and the two models are the same, same mold, etc. But almost two years of figuring out which one I prefer taught me otherwise.
Click to expand...

Great info! Thanks to both of you!
 
Fintft said:
Good to know! It's been so long since I've demoed the Pure Drive Roddick (at the time I've settled on the AeroStorm Tour and bought one more APD for the family)...What about shock absorbing though? If that's important at all for you..Would the BLX > Pure Drive?
Click to expand...

For me shock absortion is not important. I play with a rubber band or without a dampener when I'm to lazy to tie the rubber band.

BLX feels more solid than Pure Drive Roddick 2012 or the GT , less vibration. A Pure Drive with BLX Six One 95 feel would be a magic stick.

I think that in a match, balanced, with an opponent of similar level
  • on a clay court i think that the Babolat Roddick is more efficient . especially if the match is with long exchanges
  • On hard court i think that the flatter ball trajectory that the Six.One 95 would be better. Also the points are shorter and the extra weight is manageable

99% percent of time I play co clay . I think that Wilson should think of a lighter Six.One , 315-320 grams , and 310 balance. maybe the new 95S could be the one
 
Last edited:
mirceam said:
For me shock absortion is not important. I play with a rubber band or without a dampener when I'm to lazy to tie the rubber band.

BLX feels more solid than Pure Drive Roddick 2012 or the GT , less vibration. A Pure Drive with BLX Six One 95 feel would be a magic stick.

I think that in a match, balanced, with an opponent of similar level
  • on a clay court i think that the Babolat Roddick is more efficient . especially if the match is with long exchanges
  • On hard court i think that the flatter ball trajectory that the Six.One 95 would be better. Also the points are shorter and the extra weight is manageable

99% percent of time I play co clay . I think that Wilson should think of a lighter Six.One , 315-320 grams , and 310 balance. maybe the new 95S could be the one
Click to expand...

There is! There is a Six One 95L coming out. Not sure if this is replacing the Six One Team or is just another 95 version.
http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/Wilson_SixOne_95L/descpageRCWILSON-6195L.html
 
Question I have is -- how close can you get the string patterns to each other if, for example, you use an 18 gauge on the 16X18 and a 15 or 16 gauge on a 18x20? I'm considering trying an 18x20 to get more control and maybe going 18 or 19 to still maintain spin potential. Does that make any sense?
 
AYone said:
Question I have is -- how close can you get the string patterns to each other if, for example, you use an 18 gauge on the 16X18 and a 15 or 16 gauge on a 18x20? I'm considering trying an 18x20 to get more control and maybe going 18 or 19 to still maintain spin potential. Does that make any sense?
Click to expand...

It might have some effect. But not the same effect as having the other pattern.
 
Interested in the 2014 16x18 but not sure I'm at the level to get the best from it - equivalent to 4.0, 40-ish, ok fitness, mostly baseliner but transitioning to a more all-court game. Play equal amounts of doubles and singles. Currently using the Dunlop 400 Tour weighted to 350g and 325SW. Should I avoid completely or is it manageable for players at my level? Or maybe try the 95s instead?
 
Roland G said:
Interested in the 2014 16x18 but not sure I'm at the level to get the best from it - equivalent to 4.0, 40-ish, ok fitness, mostly baseliner but transitioning to a more all-court game. Play equal amounts of doubles and singles. Currently using the Dunlop 400 Tour weighted to 350g and 325SW. Should I avoid completely or is it manageable for players at my level? Or maybe try the 95s instead?
Click to expand...

If you are OK with Dunlop 400 Tour weighted to 350g and 325SW then you should have no issues with 6.1 which is a wonderful stick. Only issue I had with it was when I was tired at the end of the matches, serving gave me a wrist pain at times due to the twist and overall weight. I had leather grip though which adds another 10g.

I am curious about the 95S too. I am currently using Pro Staff 95. If 6.1 95S is the one between these two having the best of them, then I am sold.
 
Roland G said:
Interested in the 2014 16x18 but not sure I'm at the level to get the best from it - equivalent to 4.0, 40-ish, ok fitness, mostly baseliner but transitioning to a more all-court game. Play equal amounts of doubles and singles. Currently using the Dunlop 400 Tour weighted to 350g and 325SW. Should I avoid completely or is it manageable for players at my level? Or maybe try the 95s instead?
Click to expand...

16x18 is lively. I would go with 18x20. If you go 16x18, try poly mains or all poly and I suggest 16G strings. If you go with 18x20, you will have more string options available. You could go with 17G strings and you could do all poly or any hybrid combo (poly mains or crosses with a soft strings). 18x20 with 16G multi and a 17G or 16L poly cross would probably be sweet. Also, natural gut mains with a 17G or 16L poly cross would be bonafide.
 
@rolandg I happened to find a 95s cheap and couldn't resist the temptation. I already played a couple of times with it and I found it to be phenomenal racquet.
It's like a good blend of 6.1 95 and PS95. Control is amazing. I don't know what some people complain about. It has just enough power without losing control. Ground strokes and volleys were fantastic. I feel very connected to the racquet and I was able to do whatever I wanted to. I made some winners to the corners and it looked so much easier with this racquet.The only downside is it felt very different when I served and I served some weird sailing ones but when I dialed in, my serves were very good. Some of them were landing right on the line with penetration. Those could have been faults with other racquets. I will continue using it and see if it is honeymoon or not after a while. So far this looks like the racquet I've been looking for all year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TU87
BLX 6.1 95 16x18 vs 18x20
Replies
8
Views
2K
bluetrain4
B
M
nCode nSix-One 95 18x20 vs 16x18
Replies
8
Views
2K
Casco
C
A
String pattern 16x18 vs 18x20
Replies
29
Views
29K
rosheem
R
D
Types of Wilson BLX Six One 95
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tad-X
Tad-X
B
Wilson N6.1 95: 16x18 or 18x20?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Kick_It
K
Back
Top