Yonex VCore Tour G

So have you hit with the Vcore tour G either the 310 or 330 version and the AI 98 and can compare the head shape and racquets? I have the AI 98 and love the racquet so far but curious what the Vcore Tour G provides that the AI 98 doesn't. I notice with the AI 98 I get a lot of racquet speed but balls have a lower trajectory than my Graphene Speed Pro and wondering if Vcore Tour G will be somewhere in between the two.
I'll get you some comparison pics later today of the Tour 97 vs the Tour G.
 

zumzool

Semi-Pro
So have you hit with the Vcore tour G either the 310 or 330 version and the AI 98 and can compare the head shape and racquets? I have the AI 98 and love the racquet so far but curious what the Vcore Tour G provides that the AI 98 doesn't. I notice with the AI 98 I get a lot of racquet speed but balls have a lower trajectory than my Graphene Speed Pro and wondering if Vcore Tour G will be somewhere in between the two.

The Vcore Tour G (330) is plusher and has more feel. It's got more of a classic feeling racquet while the yonex AI98 will offer a more modern feel.
 
Last edited:

Chuonfood

Semi-Pro
Is anyone thinking of slappin' a leather grip on their 330? Was thinking this could add 28-32 grams and bring total strung weight ~378g = 13.3 ounces without a VD.
 

Matchball

Semi-Pro
Is anyone thinking of slappin' a leather grip on their 330? Was thinking this could add 28-32 grams and bring total strung weight ~378g = 13.3 ounces without a VD.
My frames are all below 370 grams with a Yonex leather grip (dampeners and overgrips included).
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
hmmm...based on one vs. 50 other views, I am still testing it...
ALL I am hoping is that the G is softer version of the VCT97. The (customized 310g version) VCT97 was the perfection minus the arm pains.
I didn't mean to offend; I tested the VCore Tour 97 and it didn't perform well enough for me. I found the IG Prestige Pro to be similar, but better suited to my game, so I didn't need or want the VCore Tour 97. Most people here have hit the VCore Tour 97 and thoroughly enjoyed it (except the flex). I do not belong to that group, so many of the positive reviews were hard for me to view as objective (can't really find the word to describe it... It's not objective, but for lack of a better term...). I hope you understand what I'm getting at :D
 

Matchball

Semi-Pro
Got my 330 Tour G this week, here is my take on it comparing to Wilson PS 95s and Prince Tour 98 Esp

First, just like to mention I have had VCT 89 for a year, so I am not unfamiliar to Yonex. After a season using it, I finally gave up on it due to the stiffness that led various aches and pains. Although I thoroughly enjoyed the racket, the stiffness eventually got to me. In its replacement I ended up going back to my Wilson BLX ps 90 2012. Much more comfortable, although I shank and spray more with it.

When I heard the new Tour G was softer and more flexible, not to mention Stan the Man winning AO, I could not resist.

Here is my 2 cents worth after a week of demo:

Not as stiff as it's predecessor. Comfortable but not as comfortable as Wilson PS. 95s or Prince Tour 98 esp.
The throat yield and flexes which gives a sense of delayed response, as if the dwell time/pocketing on the racquet is longer than usual. That can be both good or bad. Good if you intended it such as in power ground strokes when you have plenty of time to set up. Bad when you are doing reflex volleys.

So is the flexi throat a good thing or bad? I think it takes some getting use to. (It also loses some power.)

Unlike both Prince and Wilson spin monsters, the Tour G does not have a open spin pattern. 16x20 appears to be very dense especially where the sweet spot is. I suppose the manufacturer does not believe it is the open pattern that generates spin despite Yonex advertise itself "Spin it to Win it."
I do not find the Tour G to give any excessive or easy spin like other two racquets. In fact it is no different than it's pred VCT 97. Very conventional.

I do find it is much whippier than the VCT 97- maybe it's the anti drag matt paint-who knows.

I do find the new carbon composite generates more power than the pred.

So in conclusion, will I adopt this frame this season? Probably not. I will prob default to ps 95s or tour 98 esp. IMO, the Tour G update is not significant enough, rather this is not a game changer like so much of the spin racquets. Although Yonex got its stiffness rating down by making the throat more flexible, BUT this racquet still feels stiff. Finally, the overflexing of the throat, I am not sure this is entirely a good thing. Overall, I have to say, I am disappointed in this overly hyped model.
I do not think the Prince 98 ESP and the 6.1 95s are good candidates for comparison. Tour G became a bit hyped due to the many people that already played, or were somehow familiar with the regular version and found it to be an almost perfect stick.

Now, the flex is something that grows on you and you get to appreciate it, at least that's how I feel. If you like to finish your points early on and have a tendency to always go for winners, you might find some additional appeal with the red and white VCT, but the new one does help you open up the court. The way it works on the Tour G, you need to bring a truly full swing.

I have both the 98 ESP and the 95s and they represent a vastly different approach to spin production. It's harder to hit flat balls with the 98 ESP, but brushing the ball adequately you can get away with more compact strokes - this is probably the reason why this frame can be good for intermediate players, too. The Wilson is easier for all-around playstyles,probably a better fit for more advanced players, but you might still get some randomness (some sort of odd stroke) if you are used to traditional patterns. I would find it hard (not impossible) to commit to such a frame for the more competitive matches. Both of those sticks are also lighter to complete the argument about how comparing them to the VCT 330 might not be a good idea. No clue about the lighter version.

For players who are previous VCT users, we can indeed notice a different trajectory and comfort level. IMO these remarks proved Yonex is reliable with their claims. They have managed to create a frame with certainly above average spin, without alienating users who don't want to resort to the overly hyped open patterns, be forced to tinker with thicker strings and who generally find a more traditional feel to be their actual comfort zone.

Speaking about comfort, IMO there is comfort attributed to:

a) the strings/string pattern and
b) the kind of comfort which is (more fundamentally so) attributed to the frame.

The 98 ESP fits both categories, the 95s just the first one. I would never want to play with dead polyester on it, but I have done it e.g. on my Prince Rebel without any problems, which is quite remarkable. On this level of analysis, time will tell regarding the Tour G.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Speaking about comfort, IMO there is comfort attributed to:

a) the strings/string pattern and
b) the kind of comfort which is (more fundamentally so) attributed to the frame.

The 98 ESP fits both categories, the 95s just the first one. I would never want to play with dead polyester on it, but I have done it e.g. on my Prince Rebel without any problems, which is quite remarkable. On this level of analysis, time will tell regarding the Tour G.
I actually played with a full bed of Kirschbaum Black shark in my BLX Six.One ProStaff 95 for a while. Not uncomfortable in the slightest (I don't think there is a noticeable difference between the two racquets in that regard), however that is very subjective. Anyways, I think the actual issue is that this racquet is made for hybrids. Hybrid stringing makes use of the full potential of the racquet (especially gut main, poly cross). Unfortunately, that is very expensive in such a extreme pattern ^^
 

Matchball

Semi-Pro
I actually played with a full bed of Kirschbaum Black shark in my BLX Six.One ProStaff 95 for a while. Not uncomfortable in the slightest (I don't think there is a noticeable difference between the two racquets in that regard), however that is very subjective. Anyways, I think the actual issue is that this racquet is made for hybrids. Hybrid stringing makes use of the full potential of the racquet (especially gut main, poly cross). Unfortunately, that is very expensive in such a extreme pattern ^^
Hybrids may easily end in failed experiments, that's why it's been a long time since I gave up on them. ALL of this can be very subjective, true. Well, what can I say, the gut/poly option remains pure magic :)

I get what you are saying about the Black Spiky Shark, never found it to play stiff or uncomfortable, but others have. You say it's been there for a while, but you should probably not leave it lose all its resiliency before you cut it out. Just sayin' ;)
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
I get what you are saying about the Black Spiky Shark, never found it to play stiff or uncomfortable, but others have. You say it's been there for a while, but you should probably not leave it lose all its resiliency before you cut it out. Just sayin' ;)
Yeah, I find it weird that so many people call black shark stiff and it's not like I'm some kind of superhuman either :p
What I meant with "for a while" is that I used to play with such a set up. Now I'm playing a poly main, multi cross hybrid and I'm looking to test some gut main, (smooth) poly cross set ups next and possibly keep one I like as my personal choice :D I'll post my findings from testing in the strings section once I get the chance to actually get started on this project.
 

parasailing

Hall of Fame
The Vcore Tour G (330) is plusher and has more feel. It's got more of a classic feeling racquet while the yonex AI98 will offer a more modern feel.
I know the AI 98 feels like a modern racquet but the flex makes it a very plush racquet without the tinny or harshness feel of most modern racquets. All the reviews got me sold on this model but I am still debating whether to purchase the 310 or the 330 variant. And since a demo is not available to me, any suggestion on whether to go with the 310 or 330 would be helpful. Will I get the same feel from both racquet and only difference might be the 310 has a little less oomph but still same stability?

If either one of these has about the same plush, stability, and oomph as the AI 98 but has a higher ball trajectory, I am more inclined to go with the lighter 310. I love the AI 98 but I find that I hit a flatter ball with it and though I am not complaining since it has really increase the speed of my ground strokes, it would be nice to have some options. I plan on keeping both the AI 98 and either the 310 or 330 version.
 

zumzool

Semi-Pro
I know the AI 98 feels like a modern racquet but the flex makes it a very plush racquet without the tinny or harshness feel of most modern racquets. All the reviews got me sold on this model but I am still debating whether to purchase the 310 or the 330 variant. And since a demo is not available to me, any suggestion on whether to go with the 310 or 330 would be helpful. Will I get the same feel from both racquet and only difference might be the 310 has a little less oomph but still same stability?

If either one of these has about the same plush, stability, and oomph as the AI 98 but has a higher ball trajectory, I am more inclined to go with the lighter 310. I love the AI 98 but I find that I hit a flatter ball with it and though I am not complaining since it has really increase the speed of my ground strokes, it would be nice to have some options. I plan on keeping both the AI 98 and either the 310 or 330 version.
did you not ask "what the Vcore Tour G provides that the AI 98 doesn't." ?

Can't comment on the 310 G since I haven't tried it.
 

dr325i

Legend
I didn't mean to offend; I tested the VCore Tour 97 and it didn't perform well enough for me. I found the IG Prestige Pro to be similar, but better suited to my game, so I didn't need or want the VCore Tour 97. Most people here have hit the VCore Tour 97 and thoroughly enjoyed it (except the flex). I do not belong to that group, so many of the positive reviews were hard for me to view as objective (can't really find the word to describe it... It's not objective, but for lack of a better term...). I hope you understand what I'm getting at :D
Hey, totally cool. I respect your opinion. I am actually the opposite. I could not get along with then prestige Pro. On the other hand, always liked the prestige MP.
 
I do not think the Prince 98 ESP and the 6.1 95s are good candidates for comparison. Tour G became a bit hyped due to the many people that already played, or were somehow familiar with the regular version and found it to be an almost perfect stick.



I have both the 98 ESP and the 95s and they represent a vastly different approach to spin production. It's harder to hit flat balls with the 98 ESP, but brushing the ball adequately you can get away with more compact strokes - this is probably the reason why this frame can be good for intermediate players, too. The Wilson is easier for all-around playstyles,probably a better fit for more advanced players, but you might still get some randomness (some sort of odd stroke) if you are used to traditional patterns. I would find it hard (not impossible) to commit to such a frame for the more competitive matches. Both of those sticks are also lighter to complete the argument about how comparing them to the VCT 330 might not be a good idea. No clue about the lighter version.



For players who are previous VCT users, we can indeed notice a different trajectory and comfort level. IMO these remarks proved Yonex is reliable with their claims. They have managed to create a frame with certainly above average spin, without alienating users who don't want to resort to the overly hyped open patterns, be forced to tinker with thicker strings and who generally find a more traditional feel to be their actual comfort zone.



Speaking about comfort, IMO there is comfort attributed to:



a) the strings/string pattern and

b) the kind of comfort which is (more fundamentally so) attributed to the frame.



The 98 ESP fits both categories, the 95s just the first one. I would never want to play with dead polyester on it, but I have done it e.g. on my Prince Rebel without any problems, which is quite remarkable. On this level of analysis, time will tell regarding the Tour G.

I am fairly confused by what you are saying. Are you saying you have used the Tour G? And what you are saying is the result of your experience not some company (Yonex) brochure?

Just so you know I was comparing Yonex tour G to the Wilson PS 95s (not 6.1 95s) and Prince Tour 98esp racquets because Yonex's claim that the Tour G is capable of generating monster spins. I simply did not find this to be the case. In fact I found only moderate spin generation. Pretty much in line with many conventional player's racquet that are already on the market.

I have adjusted all 3 racquets to equal weight of 12.7 oz or 360g. I agree both the Wilson and Prince are easier to use and have more access to spin and power. The Tour G is cumbersome and require more set up time. If you consider both of those pluses, then I have a farm on Mars for sale.

In no way I am saying the Tour G is an inferior racquet, in fact I think in the hands of Stan the Man, it is a weapon. For mere mortals like myself, it requires too much work. Much like the ProStaff 85 or a woodie. Could I use it, betcha! Will it be a weapon or sledge hammer only capable of occasional winners?

FYI, I have both VCT 89 and 97 330 versions. Love the power and control, spin not so much. Stop playing with them due to high frequency vibration (often confused with stiffness) of the frames which have to led various aches and pains. Tour G with Carbon, IMO, has only made the frame to have higher frequency of vibration. Playing with it for a week, many aches returned.

Tour G is suitable for an advanced player that A. Has no problem with long term injuries caused by "stiff" or high frequency racquets. 2. Can forgo spin. 3. Willing to pay for the update when VCT 97 is virtually the same. (Minus the flexi throat.)
 

tistrapukcipeht

Professional
Tour G is very very comfortable, in fact that was too much flex to my taste, I will be selling the Tour G Lite and keeping the 11.6 one for now, but comfort is not something it lacks.

The spin to win it, I don't get it either , that racquet isn't made spinners, it is an advanced all around player's racquet.

I would not compare the Yonex quality and unique feel to Prince and Wilson, they just don't belong the same level, though matte finishes are more prone to chipping, the Wilsons if you look at them the worng way they can chip.
 

danbrenner

Hall of Fame
Sounds like this is a very plush players frame at the end of the day. A flat hitters dream. I'm a spin hound. I think I would be better off with the non g. ??
 
Peeps. Lot of you love Yonex. Just want say, I am not here to offend but to be objective about the racquets. Bought the Tour G without prior demo, so I can spend sufficient time testing it, hopefully to give an unbiased commentary.

As far as QC is concerned, I play hard so most racquets I own are chipped. If it is crappy when I bought it, I send it back. So QC has never been an issue with any brands.

I just think Yonex got caught up in the spin race, and misadvertised the Tour G as a spin racquet. A very good player's racquet it is, a spinner it is not.
 

Chuonfood

Semi-Pro
Straight-Arm, I just hit with the 2012 Wilson 6.1 95 16x18, it weighs the same at 330g and is plush. Do you think the 330g Tour G will play similar?
 

dr325i

Legend
Tour G is very very comfortable, in fact that was too much flex to my taste, I will be selling the Tour G Lite and keeping the 11.6 one for now, but comfort is not something it lacks.

The spin to win it, I don't get it either , that racquet isn't made spinners, it is an advanced all around player's racquet.

I would not compare the Yonex quality and unique feel to Prince and Wilson, they just don't belong the same level, though matte finishes are more prone to chipping, the Wilsons if you look at them the worng way they can chip.
Can you contact me at dradic011 hotmail com. I may be interested in the Lite G if L3 grip. Thanks
 
Straight-Arm, I just hit with the 2012 Wilson 6.1 95 16x18, it weighs the same at 330g and is plush. Do you think the 330g Tour G will play similar?

IMO, Ampilfeel is better than Yonex's 3d vector flexi throat. I prefer the plush feel and direct response over the "comfort" due to the throat flexing and delayed response of Yonex. (I found this to lose control for me.).

I also like to reiterate carbon frames were very popular back in the 80/90s for creating a very stiff frame=power=arm pain. It's popularity waned due to such. Surprised to see Yonex bringing back such failed material to its racquet technology.

At the end of the day, one has to ask what do they expect the racquet to improve in their game? Power, spin, feel, control? Tour G comparing to Wilson 6.1 95, excels in power but fair equal or worse in the other three departments.
 

corners

Legend
IMO, Ampilfeel is better than Yonex's 3d vector flexi throat. I prefer the plush feel and direct response over the "comfort" due to the throat flexing and delayed response of Yonex. (I found this to lose control for me.).

I also like to reiterate carbon frames were very popular back in the 80/90s for creating a very stiff frame=power=arm pain. It's popularity waned due to such. Surprised to see Yonex bringing back such failed material to its racquet technology.

At the end of the day, one has to ask what do they expect the racquet to improve in their game? Power, spin, feel, control? Tour G comparing to Wilson 6.1 95, excels in power but fair equal or worse in the other three departments.
I've read a couple of your posts in this thread and it's now clear to me that you don't have a clue what you're talking about. All of Wilson's racquets are made of carbon, as are all of Yonex's. Graphite is a form of carbon and every racquet currently in production is made with this stuff.
 
I've read a couple of your posts in this thread and it's now clear to me that you don't have a clue what you're talking about. All of Wilson's racquets are made of carbon, as are all of Yonex's. Graphite is a form of carbon and every racquet currently in production is made with this stuff.

Yes Graphite is a form of carbon. True. But then so is diamond. So is humans. There are many variations of carbon. In industry speak when manufacturer say carbon it does not refer to graphite but a higher modulus carbon. Operative word being A FORM of.
 
Graphite is one of the softest. Fullerene, used in VCT 97 and VCT 89, is stiffer. Carbon Nanotechnology used in current Tour G is the the stiffest. And yes they are all form of carbon. Google it.
 

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
It seems pretty clear to me that you were talking about the hyper carbon trend, or am I wrong?:

Question: What is Hyper Carbon?
Answer: Hyper Carbon is the name Wilson has given to a specific type of Ultra High Modulus Graphite.
Question: What is Ultra High Modulus Graphite?
Answer: Ultra High Modulus Graphite is the stiffest (and most expensive) grade of graphite. It is lighter and stiffer than standard graphite and titanium. The Modulus (stiffness) Value of Hyper Carbon is 63. Standard Modulus Graphite, which is the most common type found in tennis racquets has a Modulus Value of 30-39. The higher the Modulus Value, the stiffer the graphite is.
Question: How is it used?
Answer: Wilson puts layers of Hyper Carbon over layers of Standard Modulus Graphite (some frames also have High Modulus Graphite). The direction the Hyper Carbon fibers are placed on the frame determines the playing characteristics of the racquet. By using multiple layers of Hyper Carbon with the fibers facing different directions Wilson can create frames with varying stiffness and feel. Wilson varies the location of the Hyper Carbon and the direction of the Hyper Carbon fibers to create racquets that appeal to different types of players.
Question: Is Hyper Carbon better than graphite?
Answer: It's not better than graphite because it is graphite. Many people think of the word "graphite" as being a specific material but it's more like the word "wood"; there's many different grades: some stiff, some flexible, some hard, some soft. Graphite also reacts to stress and force like wood; the direction of the grain relative to the force makes a big difference (a log will split when hit from some directions but not others). The Hyper Carbon grade of graphite has particular properties that allow Wilson to do certain desirable things in tennis racquets.
Question: Is Hyper Carbon better than Titanium?
Answer: Hyper Carbon is 4 times stiffer, 4 times stronger, and 65% lighter than titanium in their raw states. However, a material's benefit in racquet design depends on how and where it is used on the racquet. Titanium tends to be used more to reenforce while Hyper Carbon is used to stiffen so the better/worse comparison depends on what it's used for.
Question: Why don't other companies use Hyper Carbon?
Answer: All the other racquet companies use various grades of graphite in their racquets. The particular grade Wilson uses, which they call "Hyper Carbon", is available only to them.
Question: Do other companies use Ultra High Modulus Graphite in their racquets?
Answer: Ultra High Modulus Graphite similar to Hyper Carbon can be found in some racquets. You won't find it in most racquets because the cost of Ultra High Modulus Graphite can be up to 50 times higher than Standard Modulus Graphite.
Question: What percentage of the racquet is Hyper Carbon?
Answer: The percentage of Hyper Carbon in the Hyper Carbon racquets ranges from 15% to 20% (See table below). while this percentage may seem low, it's a lot higher than the percentage of titanium in titanium racquets (Closer to 2% than 20%).

Hyper Carbon Racquet Composition Table
Hyper Sledge Hammer 2.0 Stretch
20% Hyper Carbon
40% High Modulus Graphite
40% Graphite

Hyper Hammer 2.3 Stretch
20% Hyper Carbon
40% High Modulus Graphite
40% Graphite

Hyper Hammer 5.3 Stretch
15% Hyper Carbon
85% Graphite

Hyper Pro Staff 5.0 & Hyper Pro Staff 5.0 Stretch
15% Hyper Carbon
10% High Modulus Graphite
75% Graphite
 
It seems pretty clear to me that you were talking about the hyper carbon trend, or am I wrong?:

Question: What is Hyper Carbon?
Answer: Hyper Carbon is the name Wilson has given to a specific type of Ultra High Modulus Graphite.
Question: What is Ultra High Modulus Graphite?
Answer: Ultra High Modulus Graphite is the stiffest (and most expensive) grade of graphite. It is lighter and stiffer than standard graphite and titanium. The Modulus (stiffness) Value of Hyper Carbon is 63. Standard Modulus Graphite, which is the most common type found in tennis racquets has a Modulus Value of 30-39. The higher the Modulus Value, the stiffer the graphite is.
Question: How is it used?
Answer: Wilson puts layers of Hyper Carbon over layers of Standard Modulus Graphite (some frames also have High Modulus Graphite). The direction the Hyper Carbon fibers are placed on the frame determines the playing characteristics of the racquet. By using multiple layers of Hyper Carbon with the fibers facing different directions Wilson can create frames with varying stiffness and feel. Wilson varies the location of the Hyper Carbon and the direction of the Hyper Carbon fibers to create racquets that appeal to different types of players.
Question: Is Hyper Carbon better than graphite?
Answer: It's not better than graphite because it is graphite. Many people think of the word "graphite" as being a specific material but it's more like the word "wood"; there's many different grades: some stiff, some flexible, some hard, some soft. Graphite also reacts to stress and force like wood; the direction of the grain relative to the force makes a big difference (a log will split when hit from some directions but not others). The Hyper Carbon grade of graphite has particular properties that allow Wilson to do certain desirable things in tennis racquets.
Question: Is Hyper Carbon better than Titanium?
Answer: Hyper Carbon is 4 times stiffer, 4 times stronger, and 65% lighter than titanium in their raw states. However, a material's benefit in racquet design depends on how and where it is used on the racquet. Titanium tends to be used more to reenforce while Hyper Carbon is used to stiffen so the better/worse comparison depends on what it's used for.
Question: Why don't other companies use Hyper Carbon?
Answer: All the other racquet companies use various grades of graphite in their racquets. The particular grade Wilson uses, which they call "Hyper Carbon", is available only to them.
Question: Do other companies use Ultra High Modulus Graphite in their racquets?
Answer: Ultra High Modulus Graphite similar to Hyper Carbon can be found in some racquets. You won't find it in most racquets because the cost of Ultra High Modulus Graphite can be up to 50 times higher than Standard Modulus Graphite.
Question: What percentage of the racquet is Hyper Carbon?
Answer: The percentage of Hyper Carbon in the Hyper Carbon racquets ranges from 15% to 20% (See table below). while this percentage may seem low, it's a lot higher than the percentage of titanium in titanium racquets (Closer to 2% than 20%).

Hyper Carbon Racquet Composition Table
Hyper Sledge Hammer 2.0 Stretch
20% Hyper Carbon
40% High Modulus Graphite
40% Graphite

Hyper Hammer 2.3 Stretch
20% Hyper Carbon
40% High Modulus Graphite
40% Graphite

Hyper Hammer 5.3 Stretch
15% Hyper Carbon
85% Graphite

Hyper Pro Staff 5.0 & Hyper Pro Staff 5.0 Stretch
15% Hyper Carbon
10% High Modulus Graphite
75% Graphite

You nailed it. There is trade name versus chemical compound. While manufacturers loosely throw words carbon and graphite in the same bag, average consumers get confused assume they are the exact same thing but they are not.

Current trend, at least with Head, Babalot and Yonex, seems to be pursuing higher modulus graphite/carbon racquets for more power. Higher modulus = stiffness = higher frequency of vibration. For many players this means arm pain.

FYI, in construction they use high frequency vibrator to loosen toughest dirt on buildings. So imagine your tendon, gelatine and muscle parting from your bone. :)
 

parasailing

Hall of Fame
did you not ask "what the Vcore Tour G provides that the AI 98 doesn't." ?

Can't comment on the 310 G since I haven't tried it.
Sorry for the confusion. Between posting in the other thread and this one, I got confused a bit :). Anyways, now that I now you hit with both the 330 Tour G and the AI 98 and you did use both, I wanted to know if you think the Tour G has a higher ball trajectory than the AI 98?

So far, after three outings with the AI 98, I seem to be hitting a flatter ball that is faster compared to the Graphene Speed Pro but wanted to know if the Tour G is going to offer me a bit more net clearance.

Also thanks Vegetable Lasagne for those awesome pics. That definitely will help clarify some things.
 
Last edited:

dgoran

Hall of Fame
Just some info that maybe belongs more in the ex pro player gear, but given the amount of yonex enthusiasts in this thread I'll post it here...

This racquet paint reminded me of ancic and his Rd ti-80. So I decided to watch some old YouTube videos of ancic come to find out he is now using ezone XI 98 wile hitting and helping his college tennis team... which I found strange since vcore 97 330 is closer to his actual pro stock yonex he was using while playing in the major league.
His pro stock Rd ti-80 specs were
Unstrung: 354g, 287sw, 30.5cm, 27 in., 67 RA, 16x19
 

GBplayer

Hall of Fame
Just some info that maybe belongs more in the ex pro player gear, but given the amount of yonex enthusiasts in this thread I'll post it here...

This racquet paint reminded me of ancic and his Rd ti-80. So I decided to watch some old YouTube videos of ancic come to find out he is now using ezone XI 98 wile hitting and helping his college tennis team... which I found strange since vcore 97 330 is closer to his actual pro stock yonex he was using while playing in the major league.
His pro stock Rd ti-80 specs were
Unstrung: 354g, 287sw, 30.5cm, 27 in., 67 RA, 16x19
XI98 is an excellent frame, my wife uses it. When I play matches with my vct97 and things are not clicking I have it in my bag, easily able to interchange between the two. Also when she plays matches, my wife has one of mine in her bag for the same purpose. The old saying, " A change is as good as a rest. " The XI98 has just a bit more pop to it and slightly different feel , other than that, easy to make the change in a couple of minutes.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah i will do the same with my ai98. Doubt ill lead it up much more past 340 grams, but im not getting rid of it even if i love the tour g.

Briefly Tried to track down a vcore tour g 330 in my area and they seem to all be gone now. Also seems like the flex on the 330 is less than the 310. Is that a tw error or is it correct?
 

zumzool

Semi-Pro
Sorry for the confusion. Between posting in the other thread and this one, I got confused a bit :). Anyways, now that I now you hit with both the 330 Tour G and the AI 98 and you did use both, I wanted to know if you think the Tour G has a higher ball trajectory than the AI 98?

So far, after three outings with the AI 98, I seem to be hitting a flatter ball that is faster compared to the Graphene Speed Pro but wanted to know if the Tour G is going to offer me a bit more net clearance.

Also thanks Vegetable Lasagne for those awesome pics. That definitely will help clarify some things.

I hit with both yesterday with your question in mind and I don't have a conclusive answer for you. With the Tour G, I notice that I can hit flat and drive the ball or brush it and get a little more clearance over the net. I think the dwell time/ feel make it easier to do that then the AI98. But at the same time, I think the Tour G is still a more demanding racquet and with a good string set up in the AI98, I'm not sure that you can't get similar results.

I'm definitely leaning toward the Vcore Tour G but will keep the AI98 around for those off days or when I want something less demanding. The more I hit with the Vcore Tour G, the more it reminds me of a weighted up Becker London with less power and not as much throat flex. It's also the racquet that's come closest to my beloved Super RD Tour that I've been trying to replace for years.
 

dgoran

Hall of Fame
Yeah i will do the same with my ai98. Doubt ill lead it up much more past 340 grams, but im not getting rid of it even if i love the tour g.

Briefly Tried to track down a vcore tour g 330 in my area and they seem to all be gone now. Also seems like the flex on the 330 is less than the 310. Is that a tw error or is it correct?
So eplace did not have it anymore?
I noticed difference in flex as well but I think Ra readings can change with weight added...
I was wondering myself why is everyone complaining about stiffness of vcore97 I find it firm but very comfy and plush...I do have vs/alu in it now so that might be the reason or is it because everyone else is using 310?
 

Dan Z

Semi-Pro
Over the course of the weekend I've played around 7 hours of tennis with the G and I'm surprised / thrilled / relieved to report I have zero elbow pain at all.
Have been using it with the factory strings (poly tour pro) so not tried with cyclone yet but had I played this much with my xi 100 there would be pain.
one thing that's missing is my slice - pretty terrible in comparison to the ai100 but apart from that finding it great.
 

corners

Legend
You nailed it. There is trade name versus chemical compound. While manufacturers loosely throw words carbon and graphite in the same bag, average consumers get confused assume they are the exact same thing but they are not.

Current trend, at least with Head, Babalot and Yonex, seems to be pursuing higher modulus graphite/carbon racquets for more power. Higher modulus = stiffness = higher frequency of vibration. For many players this means arm pain.

FYI, in construction they use high frequency vibrator to loosen toughest dirt on buildings. So imagine your tendon, gelatine and muscle parting from your bone. :)
Ah, so you meant "high-modulus graphite" but wrote "carbon" instead. I see.

Tennis Warehouse University measures the vibration frequency of nearly every racquet they sell. They haven't gotten to testing the Tour G models yet, but the Vcore 97 and Vcore 89 have been tested. You can see the vibration frequency data for these models here.

The Vcore Tour racquets do not have especially high vibration frequencies. In fact, they are in-line with racquets from other manufacturers with similar specs.. These frames fall into the 140-150Hz range, which is where the Wilson Pro Staffs also cluster.

The Tour G is less stiff than the Vcore 97 and will almost certainly have lower vibration frequency as a result. So if you're feeling these "high-frequency vibrations" when you hit the Tour G they must be coming from another source, perhaps your mind. Or, you might be feeling the cushioning effects of 16x15 and 16x16 patterns, or may have failed to drop enough tension in the Tour G to get a stringbed stiffness equivalent to those very open patterned racquets.

Yonex may or may not be using X-Fullerene and carbon nanotubes in their racquets, just as Head may or may not be using Graphene in theirs. In any case, as these data show, use of these materials is not producing "high-frequency vibrations." If you want to really feel those, you can try a Babolat Pure Drive or some other racquet that is truly stiff and vibrates at truly high frequencies (170+ Hz).
 
FYI, it says Carbon Nanotube on my Tour G.

Corners, instead of quoting the nonsense you just wrote which I assure you no one wants to read. Couple of things I want to point out.

1. Do you have a VCT 89, VCT 97, Tour G, and Wilson PS 95s (given your false speculations and lack of experience, I'd say no.)
2. Have tried them out extensively with different string patterns and tensions (again, I'd say you have not)
3. Why would manufacturers print material on the racquets if the racquets do not contain such (that would be called misrepresentation, again that's nuts if you think manufacturers are that whimsical and arbitrary as you are.)
4. Assuming TW specs and reviews to be accurate (mostly are not)

Problem, peeps are so brand blinded, they can't hear any "negative" criticisms. I get it, you love Yonex.
 

Matchball

Semi-Pro
I am fairly confused by what you are saying. Are you saying you have used the Tour G? And what you are saying is the result of your experience not some company (Yonex) brochure?
Which part got you confused? I hope I did not confuse everybody else and it is clear that I have used not only the Tour G, but also the regular VCT. And when I say used, I mean not for a week or so, but as my go-to, default frames. I had 4 VCTs and now 3 Tour Gs, which made it easier for me to additionally try different setups. I could care less about brochures, that's why I typically do not throw fancy names and materials in my discussion to corroborate my findings, or stress my arguments.

Just so you know I was comparing Yonex tour G to the Wilson PS 95s (not 6.1 95s) and Prince Tour 98esp racquets because Yonex's claim that the Tour G is capable of generating monster spins. I simply did not find this to be the case. In fact I found only moderate spin generation. Pretty much in line with many conventional player's racquet that are already on the market.
Apologies for bringing the 6.1 95S into the discussion by mistake. Yonex never used any such term as monster spin. Do you feel the need to say they did so? They also never marketed -so far- this racquet as their answer to offerings with extreme string patterns, e.t.c. As a matter of fact they emphasized trajectory, which I have found very accurate, especially in the context of the comparison between VCT and VCT Tour G, which has been what I also consistently centered around. For your reference, here's an excerpt from a Yonex representative I emailed several days ago:

"Neo CS Carbon Nanotube is used in the shaft of new VCORE Tour G, instead of X-Fullerene for the VCORE Tour 97. Thanks to this material, the VCORE Tour G allows players to generate even greater levels of spin for an aggressive bounce".

Leaving out the comments on materials used, what stands out for me here is that they seem to be using the regular VCT as a point for comparison (pretty safe and specific way to go) and they also refer to a different bounce. After playing with the actual racquet, I found they are accurate and consistent with their claims. Also, I do not know how close you are to this industry, but many pro shop owners will tell you that Yonex does not overuse marketing, in the broadest of senses, relatively to the majority of other brands.
 

Matchball

Semi-Pro
I have adjusted all 3 racquets to equal weight of 12.7 oz or 360g. I agree both the Wilson and Prince are easier to use and have more access to spin and power. The Tour G is cumbersome and require more set up time. If you consider both of those pluses, then I have a farm on Mars for sale.
I am glad we agree that the 95s and the 98 ESP are easier to use and I understand these racquets have easier access to spin. Never argued against that, but I would be very interested to discuss Mars real estate.

In no way I am saying the Tour G is an inferior racquet, in fact I think in the hands of Stan the Man, it is a weapon. For mere mortals like myself, it requires too much work. Much like the ProStaff 85 or a woodie. Could I use it, betcha! Will it be a weapon or sledge hammer only capable of occasional winners?
It has been discussed ad nauseam, I am afraid Wawrinka does not use VCT Tour G. I do not like ranking racquets, everything remains relative and subjective and I try to keep it like that to the degree possible. I still believe the 95s and 98 ESP are not the best options for direct comparisons with this frame. I generally prefer focusing on playstyles and desired characteristics and it helps to compare this frame to the regular VCT for the sake of having less parameters to consider.

FYI, I have both VCT 89 and 97 330 versions. Love the power and control, spin not so much. Stop playing with them due to high frequency vibration (often confused with stiffness) of the frames which have to led various aches and pains. Tour G with Carbon, IMO, has only made the frame to have higher frequency of vibration. Playing with it for a week, many aches returned.
It's good to know what does not work for you. With the aches you are describing, I am certain that the 98 ESP and the 95s will be very good choices, especially if you want excessive ball bite and spin.

Tour G is suitable for an advanced player that A. Has no problem with long term injuries caused by "stiff" or high frequency racquets. 2. Can forgo spin. 3. Willing to pay for the update when VCT 97 is virtually the same. (Minus the flexi throat.)
My view is you are being a little absolute here. The frame has above average spin and has its differences compared to the VCT 97. I can't argue about long term injuries, but again, compared to other frames you do not exactly call it uncomfortable, let alone stiff. I agree that the static weight and requirement for full and fast swings in order for the racquet to work properly, make it better suited to advanced players.
 

zumzool

Semi-Pro
Which part got you confused? I hope I did not confuse everybody else and it is clear that I have used not only the Tour G, but also the regular VCT. And when I say used, I mean not for a week or so, but as my go-to, default frames. I had 4 VCTs and now 3 Tour Gs, which made it easier for me to additionally try different setups. I could care less about brochures, that's why I typically do not throw fancy names and materials in my discussion to corroborate my findings, or stress my arguments.



Apologies for bringing the 6.1 95S into the discussion by mistake. Yonex never used any such term as monster spin. Do you feel the need to say they did so? They also never marketed -so far- this racquet as their answer to offerings with extreme string patterns, e.t.c. As a matter of fact they emphasized trajectory, which I have found very accurate, especially in the context of the comparison between VCT and VCT Tour G, which has been what I also consistently centered around. For your reference, here's an excerpt from a Yonex representative I emailed several days ago:

"Neo CS Carbon Nanotube is used in the shaft of new VCORE Tour G, instead of X-Fullerene for the VCORE Tour 97. Thanks to this material, the VCORE Tour G allows players to generate even greater levels of spin for an aggressive bounce".

Leaving out the comments on materials used, what stands out for me here is that they seem to be using the regular VCT as a point for comparison (pretty safe and specific way to go) and they also refer to a different bounce. After playing with the actual racquet, I found they are accurate and consistent with their claims. Also, I do not know how close you are to this industry, but many pro shop owners will tell you that Yonex does not overuse marketing, in the broadest of senses, relatively to the majority of other brands.
+1. I have owned both. Played with both and agree.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Straight arm, relax. Corners makes really vaild points, and the vibration chart is a great way to pick a racquet, since the plusher ones usually vibrate at 145 or less.

Also the spin racquets are an entirely different animal for a different style of play. I used the steam for a month and almost switched to it, but its just a different feel, string setup, everything. The tour g is a modern players stick weighted for attacking and all court tennis, and is probably going to excel for hitting big shots and coming in behind them to net.

The open pattern sticks are the opposite really. Stay back and grind with topspin, volleys are not nearly as easy, strings have to be full poly.

Just a tough comparison.

That vibe chart is such a great way to find a racquet with the feel you prefer. Its no coincidence all my favorite sticks are 145 or less.

Goran, if i get a night free to hit ill be in touch. I should hopefully have a tour g overnighted to me early this week. Fingers crossed there.
 
Which part got you confused? I hope I did not confuse everybody else and it is clear that I have used not only the Tour G, but also the regular VCT. And when I say used, I mean not for a week or so, but as my go-to, default frames. I had 4 VCTs and now 3 Tour Gs, which made it easier for me to additionally try different setups. I could care less about brochures, that's why I typically do not throw fancy names and materials in my discussion to corroborate my findings, or stress my arguments.







Apologies for bringing the 6.1 95S into the discussion by mistake. Yonex never used any such term as monster spin. Do you feel the need to say they did so? They also never marketed -so far- this racquet as their answer to offerings with extreme string patterns, e.t.c. As a matter of fact they emphasized trajectory, which I have found very accurate, especially in the context of the comparison between VCT and VCT Tour G, which has been what I also consistently centered around. For your reference, here's an excerpt from a Yonex representative I emailed several days ago:



"Neo CS Carbon Nanotube is used in the shaft of new VCORE Tour G, instead of X-Fullerene for the VCORE Tour 97. Thanks to this material, the VCORE Tour G allows players to generate even greater levels of spin for an aggressive bounce".



Leaving out the comments on materials used, what stands out for me here is that they seem to be using the regular VCT as a point for comparison (pretty safe and specific way to go) and they also refer to a different bounce. After playing with the actual racquet, I found they are accurate and consistent with their claims. Also, I do not know how close you are to this industry, but many pro shop owners will tell you that Yonex does not overuse marketing, in the broadest of senses, relatively to the majority of other brands.

First of all, there cannot be any objective understanding unless we are not brand loyal. FYI, I am not.
Kid me not, some Yonex's campaign are exaggerated, albeit not as much. (That is subjective.)

Secondly, carbon nanotube is used throughout the Tour G. Given the higher modulus of the material than the predecessor's fullerene, theoretically it should have a higher frequency of vibration and is stiffer, structural engineer speak wise. However it is not the case according to TW and Yonex. I can only postulate Yonex has put a break of material (a softer material-perhaps standard graphite) between the hoop and neck that cancels the possible higher frequency of the material so users feel the racquet is more comfortable, could also explains the dwell/hitch/pocketing of the Tour G vs VCTs.

Thirdly, despite TW rating, IMO, the frequency on the Tour G is still high, except there is a built in "dampener" if you will, in the racket.

Is it truly comfortable? Only time can tell.
 

corners

Legend
First of all, there cannot be any objective understanding unless we are not brand loyal. FYI, I am not.
Kid me not, some Yonex's campaign are exaggerated, albeit not as much. (That is subjective.)

Secondly, carbon nanotube is used throughout the Tour G. Given the higher modulus of the material than the predecessor's fullerene, theoretically it should have a higher frequency of vibration and is stiffer, structural engineer speak wise. However it is not the case according to TW and Yonex. I can only postulate Yonex has put a break of material (a softer material-perhaps standard graphite) between the hoop and neck that cancels the possible higher frequency of the material so users feel the racquet is more comfortable, could also explains the dwell/hitch/pocketing of the Tour G vs VCTs.

Thirdly, despite TW rating, IMO, the frequency on the Tour G is still high, except there is a built in "dampener" if you will, in the racket.

Is it truly comfortable? Only time can tell.
Maybe you're right that Yonex has inserted a "dampener", but I highly doubt it. The most effective dampener is the human hand, which is effective solely because it so heavy - more than 500 grams (18+ ounces!). By comparison, any amount of mass added to the frame is insignificant and will have a relatively insignificant effect on dampening - in this case, dampening being defined as a reduction in vibration frequency. Manufacturers have tried all sorts of tricks to minimize vibration, and marketed them vigorously, but a close look the TWU vibration frequency data shows that they are not successful. Vibration frequency correlates most closely with flex and more loosely with racquet mass. Any dampening attempts on the part of manufactures are hardly detectable in the TWU frequency data.

In other words, an objective measurement of vibration frequency at the handle trumps all speculation about dampening and makes any claim of "high frequency vibration" felt with a low-flex frame like the Tour G sound very dubious, IMHO. You claim "despite TW rating, IMO, the frequency on the Tour G is still high…" High based on what? The frequency is what is it is. Whatever you are feeling that is so unpleasant to you, it is not high-frequency vibration.
 
Last edited:

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
I still believe the 95s and 98 ESP are not the best options for direct comparisons with this frame. I generally prefer focusing on playstyles and desired characteristics and it helps to compare this frame to the regular VCT for the sake of having less parameters to consider.
I had hoped I would lose interest in this thread, as lately racquetholism is becoming a serious money eater for me, but it is impossible to suppress the urge it seems after looking at the racquets specs again.
Could you compare the Tour G with the IG Prestige Pro (my current racquet of choice)? Unless I have become a complete idiot thanks to my racquetholism, these two racquets should be direct contenders/great for comparisons.
 
Top