Hi all,

i just came back from the gym. a friend of mine brought back a MP100 from HK recently so i tried it out for 10mins. what a great racket!

disclaimer before i post this review: the MP100 it was strung with bg65 at some high-ish tension, probably 23-24lb. prior to testing, i have been using my Iso600 with bg85 at 24lb. obviously strung by a different stringer. so this is not a scientific comparison.

the racket has a very nice (<b>BIG</b>) sweet spot, it is a long shaft, heavy head racket, but overall not as heavy as the Iso600 (more on that). the shaft is stiff, though not as stiff as the Iso600. the paint job is absolutely beautiful. he says he got it for HK$1000 but he has seen it as low as HK$950.

the feel of the racket is very <i>snappy</i>. very little vibration but at the same time, the racket gives a lot of feel. control at the net is excellent, i have no problem controlling the net shots.

so, about the <i>secret</i>. Yonex is marketing the Muscle Power Frame as the new feature of the racket. i have not seen anyone explain what makes it so revolutionary, other than the fact that the strings are routed over the bumps. but i believe that's not the main reason for it, so here is my take on it...

a couple of years ago, Yonex came up with the Iso900 with the Swing Power technology, which is basically putting weight at the tip of the racket, so swinging the racket is very easy, yet the momentum is at the head, where it hit the bird, and where weight really counts. this is similar to swinging a hammer. a hammer has a heavy metal head with a light wooden shaft. the head is where the nail get hit, and that's where the weight should be.

the MP frame is a natural progression of that. this time, Yonex put even more weight at the tip of the racket, when i swung the MP100, i definitely feel that the racket weight distribution is all the way to the head. how did they do that? those <b>bumps!</b> they need to find a place to put the material. and what's better than putting some bumps there? it is killing two birds with one stone, the string sits better, potentially give it longer lifetime, and at the same time, they get to put more weight there without affecting the aerodynamics of the racket... so the result is a head heavy racket, but overall the weight is still medium-heavy. the speed of the head is very fast, outcomes power.

i hope you followed my analysis.

anyway, i am impressed with the racket. it really does feel very good. power, control, design. a bit expensive, hopefully the price will come down a bit.

cheers,
kwun

your analysis is very good, kwun. IMO, the bumps on the MP frame is helpful for high tension string but only slightly. We all know that people have strung their old 'non MP frame' racquets at high tension too and the string lasted just as long.

I think the vibration reduction of the mp100 composite is an real improvement, small but still a progressive improvement by yonex.

I wonder whether yonex can patent it mp frame. Well, we will know soon when yang yang, winex, prokennex, proace, mizuno, black knight, etc come out with similar frame but call it differently . A poster here had said yonex will be 2 other mp rackets in the US this spring/summer.

cooler,

i tried searching for "yonex" in the us patent database, and there were 5 patents, but they all have to do with gold clubs. it appears that yonex never filed any badminton racket patents.

cheers,
kwun

that can't be unless yonex is under a holding company. Surely the one piece joint by yonex is patentable and should come up in your database search. this is weird.

Hi cooler,

i only searched the US patent office database, it could be they didn't file the patent in the US.

does Yonex own the patent for the one piece joint? does that mean all other companies license the technology from Yonex?

cheers,
kwun

this is filed with the Japan patent office, the date of the patent is 09/06/1991, and the owner of the patent is Nippon Carbon Co Ltd.

this seems to be an alternative to the Yonex method, which does use a T-shaped joint.

-----

PURPOSE:To obviate the need of a T-figure-shaped joint and connect a frame and a shaft to each other in simple manner by inserting the shaft made of carbon fiber reinforced composite material into a part of the frame and connecting both the parts and hoop-winding a carbon prepreg sheet from over the connection part and integrally molding them.
CONSTITUTION:A part for the insertion of a shaft 3 is previously formed by a divided mold, on a frame part 1 which is obtained by molding a hollow pipe made of carbon fiber reinforced composite material and the hollow pipe. Then, the shaft 3 made of the carbon fiber reinforced composite material applied with an adhesive is inserted into the part. Further, a prepreg sheet made of carbon fiber is hoop-wound 5 from over the frame part 2 and the connection part 4 of the shaft. The molded body thus shaped is introduced into the mold and hardened, and a badminton racket which is formed integrally with the frame part 1 and the shaft part 3 can be manufactured.

I don't recall other badminton racket manufacturer came out a piece graphite racket before yonex. Also back in the mid 80's, yonex is very dominance in the badminton market unlike nowadays where clones are everywhere. You could be right, yonex could have patented their key invention in japan. Golf is more dominance in north america and maybe that's why u see patents for gold club in the USA

I found the original Yonex T-joint patent. it is a 10page detailed document, patent
number US4575084, dated 03/11/1986. you can view the patent from <a href="http://l2.espacenet.com/dips/viewer?PN=ZA8405176&CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPD">here</a>. the abstract is as follows:

-----------------------
Badminton racket having novel throat connection

A badminton racket comprises a tubular shaft and an oval shaped frame internally connected to the shaft by a T-shaped joint including a pair of horizontal extensions and a vertical extension. The frame has opposite end portions with opened end faces, each of which is recessed at the lower side thereof in a semi-circular shape, and abutted against each other except at the recessed portions. The horizontal extensions of the joint are fitted in the end portions of the frame while the vertical extension is fitted in the upper end of the shaft. The junction area of the racket is coated with FRP layers to provide external connection.

nice fine kwun. Looks like Nippon Carbon patented the one piece technology. I should have known. Carbon fiber supplier like nippon spent the research $ to find ways to add value to their product. Yonex is no carbon fiber expert, they are just a sport company who knows more about marketing than material science. Yonex must got an exclusive license for a fixed number of years from nippon before other can jump in. That's smart for yonex.

I remember one lone racket reseller pushing some nippon badminton rackets in the late 80's or early 90's. He claimed that his nippon badminton rackets are made from the same machine and material as yonex. Who cares was the attitude at that time or can i trust you?. It goes to show how successful yonex had marketed their badminton rackets even when the exclusivity (IMO) period ended, nippon, the inventor, can't muscle in.

Nice find kwun, it helped me to connect the dots.

another nice find kwun. You are a good researcher.
I think my picture is clearer now.
Nippon invented a way to mold carbon fiber frame and shaft in one piece.
Since yonex knows more about badminton physics, they put the t-joint inside the
frame to shaft connection to make the connection stronger than nippon patent. It is a no brainer to move the outside t-joint (cab 8) and to inside the t-connection (cab20). And the rest are histories. IMO off course.

it is possible that the MP frame is patent pending and won't be in the patent database.

cooler,

yeah. agreed. that'd be an interesting read when it comes out.

it'd be really interesting to dig out other badminton related patents, too. but then, i really should go back to work.

cheers,
kwun

Hi Kwun
Thanks for the sharings on the secret of Muscle Power Frame.
By any chance do you also know someting of this new racket Mizuno Mystic Power that we don't know ??????
Nothing much had been discuss since the last time brought up by Ricky.
I had contemplate between this and Cab 23 for my next purchase.
Any advices/sugesstions most welcome.
Thanks

no. i have never seen that racket before......