Wilson x RF Aug 8, 2024

FrankyRelax said:
It's born to be erratic. Just look at that string bed. So dense in the middle and wide open everywhere else. Maybe if you're fed and hit the middle everytime it could work. But I don't even think the shank master tsitsipas himself could tame it
Click to expand...

There have been rackets in the past that have similar or even more inconsistent looking beds (16x18 6.1 95) and were far from erratic... The whole idea is off center shots launch higher and keep depth more similar. One person erraticness is another person's forgiveness.
 
coolbh6 said:
There have been rackets in the past that have similar or even more inconsistent looking beds (16x18 6.1 95) and were far from erratic... The whole idea is off center shots launch higher and keep depth more similar. One person erraticness is another person's forgiveness.
Click to expand...
Fair enough
 
coolbh6 said:
You will have to try for yourself. I learned not to trust reviews from TTW or anywhere else a long time ago. If the racket "speaks to you" - demo it OR buy and resell for a $50 or so loss in case doesnt work. Some of the reviews are SUPER SUSPECT - both the overwhelming positive and negative ones. Some reviewers are trying to make a "name" for themselves using the RF as a vehicle seems like, with margin technique and even more suspect word choices

Roger is not going to attach his name to a POS, that I am sure. No Im not buying an RF01.

5dbwxl.jpg
Click to expand...
My review was overwhelmingly positive. I don't hit w/ heavy racquets normally, so I was pleasantly surprised when the RF 01 Pro felt so natural. Maybe it's just the honeymoon phase or I have my RF blinders over my eyes.

I'm staring right now at my Shift 99 Pro string bed, and even though the 18x20 pattern is much more consistent throughout, when I shank with this, it's still a shank. Definitely feels more forgiving than the RF 01 Pro, but I didn't think the RF was erratic. The sweet spot was definitely small, but the response was consistent. And as I said, when I shank, it was a shank regardless of racquet, but definitely my fault.
 
IMO the complaints about it being erratic are overblown and probably more mental than anything. The 6.1 95s had insanely variable string beds and no one complained about them being erratic. The RF01 is a player's stick. You are supposed to hit it in the middle of the string bed. It's no PA98 where you can willy-nilly smack the ball anywhere you want and get the same response. It's a player's racquet and you are supposed to find the centre and build the point like a gentleman.

"Some player's grow up and play like that... they all just start slapping shots... I never play that way" -Roger Federer, 2011
 
coolbh6 said:
There have been rackets in the past that have similar or even more inconsistent looking beds (16x18 6.1 95) and were far from erratic... The whole idea is off center shots launch higher and keep depth more similar. One person erraticness is another person's forgiveness.
Click to expand...
Well except the fact that every review brings up the erraticness off center. It appears to be a feature of the racquet and not something that varies much from player to player. I think it comes down to the ability of the player and consistency in strokes that make this more friendly to advanced players.
 
Fighting phoenix said:
Played some dubs with the RF01 last night - because it came in under-spec at 311sw, I added lead at 10 and 2 to get it up to 320, and 4 grams of putty under the butt cap to get the balance to around 32cm or 7 pts head light. I will say that I enjoyed it more than I did the Pro version (which was also underspec at 320sw but I didn't modify that one) - easier to maneuver and it felt good in the hand. Some thoughts:
  • spin was easy, and depth was okay but I felt the power was still underwhelming
  • stability and forgiveness on off center shots was better than the pro I used
  • serves were just okay - I had to work pretty hard to get the same level of power and spin I can get with the blade
  • comfort - the RA is lower than the pro, and I could feel the difference in flex, I felt that this took away from the directness and power that I was expecting, and after a two hour session my arm was a little sore, probably due to having to work harder to compensate for the lower power/flex
I do like the feel of these racquets, and I'm sure I could get it to work (at least the RF01 I could - the pro was too cumbersome and lacked maneuverability, stability, and forgiveness for me), but I don't see this as a big upgrade from something that's just easier to play with, like the Blade v9 98 16x19, which to me offers easier depth, spin, comfort, and stability. I'm sure some will love it, but it isn't the game changer it's hyped to be.
Click to expand...
What are specs on your Blade V9 16x19 and mods compared to mods on Rf 01?
 
z00 said:
What are specs on your Blade V9 16x19 and mods compared to mods on Rf 01?
Click to expand...
My blades are all on spec - 322sw, forgot what I wrote down relative to balance, but all of them came in on spec and are what I'm looking for w/r to sw at least. I got my RF01 to 319 sw, and probably is more head light than my blades - I might change that and add a little weight in my blades under the butt cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: z00
dr. godmode said:
IMO the complaints about it being erratic are overblown and probably more mental than anything. The 6.1 95s had insanely variable string beds and no one complained about them being erratic. The RF01 is a player's stick. You are supposed to hit it in the middle of the string bed. It's no PA98 where you can willy-nilly smack the ball anywhere you want and get the same response. It's a player's racquet and you are supposed to find the centre and build the point like a gentleman.

"Some player's grow up and play like that... they all just start slapping shots... I never play that way" -Roger Federer, 2011
Click to expand...
I don't think it's erratic, but I do think it's pretty unforgiving and a "players stick" as you're saying. However, I wouldn't say the feel is as mesmerizing/raw graphite as you and Luca (maybe more Luca, these videos are starting to blur) described it. It has a similar muted feel as the Shift, and at least relative to the Shift Pro (what I have the most experience with) not nearly as forgiving or stable on off center shots.

I also think objectively both the Pro and regular 01 are very good sticks and really unique - I just don't think they work for me. The Pro in particular I found to be a little more club-like and difficult to wield, even at a below spec 320sw.
 
Fighting phoenix said:
I don't think it's erratic, but I do think it's pretty unforgiving and a "players stick" as you're saying. However, I wouldn't say the feel is as mesmerizing/raw graphite as you and Luca (maybe more Luca, these videos are starting to blur) described it. It has a similar muted feel as the Shift, and at least relative to the Shift Pro (what I have the most experience with) not nearly as forgiving or stable on off center shots.

I also think objectively both the Pro and regular 01 are very good sticks and really unique - I just don't think they work for me. The Pro in particular I found to be a little more club-like and difficult to wield, even at a below spec 320sw.
Click to expand...
I agree the feel is quite muted. In the feel range of a Gravity Pro. Still I think the feel is muted-graphite, not muted-elastomer/plasticky like some other brands.
 
dr. godmode said:
IMO the complaints about it being erratic are overblown and probably more mental than anything. The 6.1 95s had insanely variable string beds and no one complained about them being erratic. The RF01 is a player's stick. You are supposed to hit it in the middle of the string bed. It's no PA98 where you can willy-nilly smack the ball anywhere you want and get the same response. It's a player's racquet and you are supposed to find the centre and build the point like a gentleman.

"Some player's grow up and play like that... they all just start slapping shots... I never play that way" -Roger Federer, 2011
Click to expand...
The 6.1 95s 18x20 have a perfect string bed response. Talking of the 6.1, I would love to see a 98 release one day. I bet it would be much better than any existing Wilson 98 racquet.
 
jlouie said:
My review was overwhelmingly positive. I don't hit w/ heavy racquets normally, so I was pleasantly surprised when the RF 01 Pro felt so natural. Maybe it's just the honeymoon phase or I have my RF blinders over my eyes.
Click to expand...

For the REC player

If it looks right, feels right, play right, creates the right emotions and inspires the right amount of confidence - that is all matters - and that is how a tennis racket selection should be made. Always.

IMHO.
 
Under 14TW stock of course off center hits are gonna sail. I don’t think the problem is all in the string bed.

But I have racquets over 15TW and if you hit off center enough the ball will sail.

This will be even worse with the non-pro versions. So watch out who is writing the review. Is it the pro or regular, is it a less advanced player etc.

As others have said the 6.1 95 was as open but heavier (that does help with stability as well) and I don’t remember reading about any launching problem. I have one at home, I will measure the TW to see how it compares.
 
coolbh6 said:
For the REC player

If it looks right, feels right, play right, creates the right emotions and inspires the right amount of confidence - that is all matters - and that is how a tennis racket selection should be made. Always.

IMHO.
Click to expand...
Ahhh It's beautiful to put it that way... But as soon as I try to confidently hit a FH with an Aero the ball start to sail 3 metters behind the baseline and my technique trown out of the window, that beauty starts to fade and comes the cold understanding that looks, emotions and inspiration from any of my favorite player is not enough. So ALWAYS is important to share and give honest impressions about racquets (In particular) to not get lost in the "RF thing"
 
AMGF said:
Under 14TW stock of course off center hits are gonna sail. I don’t think the problem is all in the string bed.

But I have racquets over 15TW and if you hit off center enough the ball will sail.

This will be even worse with the non-pro versions. So watch out who is writing the review. Is it the pro or regular, is it a less advanced player etc.

As others have said the 6.1 95 was as open but heavier (that does help with stability as well) and I don’t remember reading about any launching problem. I have one at home, I will measure the TW to see how it compares.
Click to expand...
I think the 6.1 95 can hide that situation by being a "difficult" racquet to play with properly. So in case the racquet was/felt launchy can be considered a user issue and not a racquet problem. In this case the Pro being 13gr lighter unstrung, Wilson really widen the range of players able to use it and thats why the mixed reviews and expectations with this frames
 
RNBABOLAT said:
Ahhh It's beautiful to put it that way... But as soon as I try to confidently hit a FH with an Aero the ball start to sail 3 metters behind the baseline and my technique trown out of the window, that beauty starts to fade and comes the cold understanding that looks, emotions and inspiration from any of my favorite player is not enough. So ALWAYS is important to share and give honest impressions about racquets (In particular) to not get lost in the "RF thing"
Click to expand...

So it DOESNT play right... and DOESNT inspire the right confidence....not the racket for you. Same reason why I dont play power frames. The Wilson Ultra Pro keep my errors in the court and give me a workable high enough quality ball for the level I play. Would never recommend it to others looking for forgiveness BUT as far as I am concerned it is amazingly forgiving since it keeps the ball in the court.
 
RNBABOLAT said:
I think the 6.1 95 can hide that situation by being a "difficult" racquet to play with properly. So in case the racquet was/felt launchy can be considered a user issue and not a racquet problem. In this case the Pro being 13gr lighter unstrung, Wilson really widen the range of players able to use it and thats why the mixed reviews and expectations with this frames
Click to expand...
Yes, but that being said, what's the point in adding 10 g + to the Pro to unlock its full potential?! I would rather have something solid without playing around too much with lead. Maybe I am just tired to do so over the decades. ;)

Once I will have the racquet in my hand in autumn, the first thing I would do is to add lead at 12 from the second main string until the second-last string as Roger was doing. Can anyone try that and report back? :notworthy:
 
TNNSDR said:
Yes, but that being said, what's the point in adding 10 g + to the Pro to unlock its full potential?! I would rather have something solid without playing around too much with lead. Maybe I am just tired to do so over the decades. ;)

Once I will have the racquet in my hand in autumn, the first thing I would do is to add lead at 12 from the second main string until the second-last string as Roger was doing. Can anyone try that and report back? :notworthy:
Click to expand...
Again, as some other mentioned... You are not Wilson demographic for this racquet, you still want something close the RFA97 and can weild it properly, the new RF will probably bring something to the table but in a modern/ updated way that classic players might not like (ALA PA98)
 
RNBABOLAT said:
I think the 6.1 95 can hide that situation by being a "difficult" racquet to play with properly. So in case the racquet was/felt launchy can be considered a user issue and not a racquet problem. In this case the Pro being 13gr lighter unstrung, Wilson really widen the range of players able to use it and thats why the mixed reviews and expectations with this frames
Click to expand...
I got to agree with you on this.
 
RNBABOLAT said:
Again, as some other mentioned... You are not Wilson demographic for this racquet, you still want something close the RFA97 and can weild it properly, the new RF will probably bring something to the table but in a modern/ updated way that classic players might not like (ALA PA98)
Click to expand...
I don't want to be a Wilson demographic! I have other priorities in life. I am just lazy adding a bunch of lead to my frames nowadays. Those who don't want to do that, it's fine of course. They can play with a more accessible racquet.
 
might be putting myself in the minority here but much to my disappointment the RF Pro was not my cup of tea. I was shocked that it was such a high RA. I felt like it was far lower powered than its RA would indicate yet on certain less than perfect swings I did feel the harshness of certain contacts.

I’ll measure it when I get home but I wouldn’t be slightly suprised if my demo comes in very low on the swing weight spectrum. I felt like it desperately needed some more hoop weight. But at a spec stock weight, any added weight is going to make this thing unwieldy to my more whippy forehand.

I typically like my racquets 300-310 static with a mid to higher RA, almost always a little lead at 12 to help with swingweight without that overall big mass increase. Like that polarized feel.
 
Curtennis said:
might be putting myself in the minority here but much to my disappointment the RF Pro was not my cup of tea. I was shocked that it was such a high RA. I felt like it was far lower powered than its RA would indicate yet on certain less than perfect swings I did feel the harshness of certain contacts.

I’ll measure it when I get home but I wouldn’t be slightly suprised if my demo comes in very low on the swing weight spectrum. I felt like it desperately needed some more hoop weight. But at a spec stock weight, any added weight is going to make this thing unwieldy to my more whippy forehand.

I typically like my racquets 300-310 static with a mid to higher RA, almost always a little lead at 12 to help with swingweight without that overall big mass increase. Like that polarized feel.
Click to expand...
All opinions are valuable!! Every player is different!! :)
 
socallefty said:
Is it? With its light weight and 23mm beam? Is it a player’ stick because it has the RF brand?

What is the definition of player’s racquet these days?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say it’s light. Mine is 323g, 5 pts HL, and 321 SW strung with OG and damp, no other mods. Has very nice specs and the portions of the racquet that are 23mm don’t even look thick. We’re talking 1-1.5mm difference in thickness from a blade, which is barely noticeable unless you hold them next to each other to compare.
 
mk3alex10 said:
I wouldn’t say it’s light. Mine is 323g, 5 pts HL, and 321 SW strung with OG and damp, no other mods. Has very nice specs and the portions of the racquet that are 23mm don’t even look thick. We’re talking 1-1.5mm difference in thickness from a blade, which is barely noticeable unless you hold them next to each other to compare.
Click to expand...
If those are strung specs, that seems too light to be a players stick for me. But I know racquets are getting lighter these days and I wonder what the current definition is.
 
mk3alex10 said:
I wouldn’t say it’s light. Mine is 323g, 5 pts HL, and 321 SW strung with OG and damp, no other mods. Has very nice specs and the portions of the racquet that are 23mm don’t even look thick. We’re talking 1-1.5mm difference in thickness from a blade, which is barely noticeable unless you hold them next to each other to compare.
Click to expand...
1 - 1.5 mm beam width makes a big difference in feel and power IMO. The trend is indeed going towards 22 mm + beams to compensate for the lower weight. I think that a lighter racquet is overall fine, but you need a frame with a SW of 330+ to be considered as a player's racquet. Otherwise, you will be pushed around too much.
 
I guess my real question is if the Pro is an easier to use Prestige 18x20 or RF97 in terms of playability and if it suits those types of long strokes? I have one on the way after thinking it would be what I have been looking for, but these mixed reviews are making think I should just return it, but it also seems everyone is just talking about the regular 01 instead of the Pro so I don't know how much if these reviews translate to the Pro.
 
AMGF said:
Under 14TW stock of course off center hits are gonna sail. I don’t think the problem is all in the string bed.

But I have racquets over 15TW and if you hit off center enough the ball will sail.

This will be even worse with the non-pro versions. So watch out who is writing the review. Is it the pro or regular, is it a less advanced player etc.

As others have said the 6.1 95 was as open but heavier (that does help with stability as well) and I don’t remember reading about any launching problem. I have one at home, I will measure the TW to see how it compares.
Click to expand...
Replying to myself to put the measurements of my Classic 6.1. Stock frame overgrip and damper:

-367g
-14,5TW
-345SW
-31,4cm

Of course this is a stable frame despite the string pattern. All that mass, SW and TW this frame is as stable as it gets for a stock frame I can't believe I played with that as a teen.
 
Couple of cool numbers as I had time to look at my database, as set up, my RF Pro with 5g at 3/9 has the same moment of inertia, same SW and same mgri as the RF97A. But with 20g less to carry around. That does make sense as a successor to the RF97A when looking at it this way.
So with only a few grams (on paper at least), you get a very similar frame to the RF97A but in a lighter easier to swing package. I twill not be as stable as the RF97A because of the lighter weight, but the trade off is in theory: faster swings, more spin and more power. And with the weight at 3/9 you get to around 14TW which is a nice spot in terms of stability/maneuverability.

Edit to add: my frame needed some lead to bring the sw up a bit. The lead doesn’t need to be specifically at 3/9. But the bump to 14TW is an added bonus.
 
Last edited:
trc_han said:
I guess my real question is if the Pro is an easier to use Prestige 18x20 or RF97 in terms of playability and if it suits those types of long strokes? I have one on the way after thinking it would be what I have been looking for, but these mixed reviews are making think I should just return it, but it also seems everyone is just talking about the regular 01 instead of the Pro so I don't know how much if these reviews translate to the Pro.
Click to expand...
There is nothing similar between RF Pro and RF97. Different line, different feel, different response, different balance, different weight.
 
Icsa said:
There is nothing similar between RF Pro and RF97. Different line, different feel, different response, different balance, different weight.
Click to expand...
Funny that you say that 2 posts after my post where I put the data in and realized that the RFPro and RF97 have almost identical:
-mr^2
-moment of inertia
-sw
-tw
-mgri
-ra

Of course there are differences, it’s a different frame. But to say there is nothing similar… it’s a bit of stretch.
 
SamBruin7 said:
If you add lead tape to the prestige pro at 3 and 9 to make it swing around 340, it has more power than the six one.
Click to expand...
Interesting... Thanks, worth give it a try then! Currently love the Gravity Pro, which a kind of modern 6.1 95 merged with a PT280/630. Only downside, the maneuverability for a OHBHer! Best complete racquets for me so far: PS90, 6.1 95s, VCore95D, the RF97 , and somewhat the Blade (V3 & V4)... Maybe the RF01 Pro.
 
AMGF said:
Couple of cool numbers as I had time to look at my database, as set up, my RF Pro with 5g at 3/9 has the same moment of inertia, same SW and same mgri as the RF97A. But with 20g less to carry around. That does make sense as a successor to the RF97A when looking at it this way.
So with only a few grams (on paper at least), you get a very similar frame to the RF97A but in a lighter easier to swing package. I twill not be as stable as the RF97A because of the lighter weight, but the trade off is in theory: faster swings, more spin and more power. And with the weight at 3/9 you get to around 14TW which is a nice spot in terms of stability/maneuverability.

Edit to add: my frame needed some lead to bring the sw up a bit. The lead doesn’t need to be specifically at 3/9. But the bump to 14TW is an added bonus.
Click to expand...
If you mention 5 g at 3 and 9 o clock, do you then mean 2.5 grams at each site?
Which brand lead tape do you use for this?
 
Update:
Added 1g at 3 and 9. Makes a huge difference. I'm switching to the RF01 Pro from my PS97 v14. Racket is way more stable after the lead, the stringbed response isn't horrible with the lead when you hit outside of the sweet spot. On the fh just gotta let the racket do the work instead of supplying it with power like with the PS97.

Final spec:
345.7g
330 SW
31.5cm balance
 
Last edited:
Just hit with the RF Pro after being a longtime Prestige and Pro Staff type of player. I was really impressed by the specs when it first came out and thought it would be a more modern version of the sticks I normally gravitate toward.

No lie I was a little disappointed on my first few hits.

The feel just was not there, but I could very well have been hitting outside of the sweet spot. It does swing pretty fast and hits a deep ball, but I had a hard time getting over how muted it felt.

It was only about half an hour of hitting, so I’ll experiment more for a longer session, then on another session I’ll try some minimal lead at 3 and 9 to open up the sweet spot a little bit.
 
skip11 said:
Update:
Added 1g at 3 and 9. Makes a huge difference. I'm switching to the RF01 Pro from my PS97 v14. Racket is way more stable, the stringbed response isn't horrible with the lead when you hit outside of the sweet spot. On the fh just gotta let the racket do the work instead of supplying it with power like with the PS97.

Final spec:
345.7g
330 SW
31.5cm balance
Click to expand...
Looks like some very Specs there! Any weight added to the handle?
 
Two things that came to mind.

Lather grip on the RF Pro model actually suits it really well. I've tried a leather grip on the Ultra Pro, Six.One, and Blade Pro, and I didn't like it on any of them. Somehow, it was better on this one than the Pro Performance. I can't explain why, but the response was better.

And I do agree that both the 300g and 320g versions are equipped with slightly too low twistweight. In fact, I'm thinking of trying to add lead, trimmed to one-third of the normal width, and applying it from 8 to 11 and from 1 to 4 o'clock.
 
Felippe said:
Two things that came to mind.

Lather grip on the RF Pro model actually suits it really well. I've tried a leather grip on the Ultra Pro, Six.One, and Blade Pro, and I didn't like it on any of them. Somehow, it was better on this one than the Pro Performance. I can't explain why, but the response was better.

And I do agree that both the 300g and 320g versions are equipped with slightly too low twistweight. In fact, I'm thinking of trying to add lead, trimmed to one-third of the normal width, and applying it from 8 to 11 and from 1 to 4 o'clock.
Click to expand...
you may already be aware, but you will get more bang for your buck in terms of TW if you just put it at 3 and 9
 
TNNSDR said:
1 - 1.5 mm beam width makes a big difference in feel and power IMO. The trend is indeed going towards 22 mm + beams to compensate for the lower weight. I think that a lighter racquet is overall fine, but you need a frame with a SW of 330+ to be considered as a player's racquet. Otherwise, you will be pushed around too much.
Click to expand...
The general construction makes power and feel. The beam itself has nothing to do with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lulo
Wilson Blade 2024
2 3
Replies
123
Views
12K
Mischko
M
Aestheticsaboveallelse
2024 Speeds released
Replies
8
Views
2K
Regord
R
Jakester119
RF 97 question
Replies
12
Views
1K
Terminetters
Terminetters
Dennis Chan
Can the Pure Strike 97 (2024) grommets be applied on a Pure Strike VS (2022)?
Replies
1
Views
564
Dae18
Dae18
Crocodile
Wilson RF $249 v PK Redondo MP $129 ?
Replies
29
Views
2K
Crocodile
Crocodile
Back
Top