Thanks for visiting us!

Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.

Click here for a FREE account!

APACS fan club

Discussion in 'Badminton Rackets / Equipment' started by clearng, Dec 13, 2006.

  1. demolidor

    demolidor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    10,545
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    @Hollanti
    That probably means Ti-10 was too much to handle ;), rather than these rackets being "better" ...
    Better suited is more like it and nothing 'wrong' with that [​IMG]
     
  2. jerby

    jerby Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,040
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    EU
    I think the T500 belongs in that category as well, but maybe that's just me.
    The T300 and L70 have the same boxframed rackethead and a 7.0mm stiff shaft, the T500's frame differs only in the shaft: it tapers towards the head giving it a more flexible feeling that the other two. The Slayer 99 is the odd one out with it's bizar frame construction, however it's very fast for a 2U.

    The T300 is a solid even balanced racket, probably the fastest of the 3 (300/500/70). The L70 is almost the same racket, but a much more head-heavy racket. Both the T300 and L70 have that rock-solid feeling to them.
    The T500 is just as headheavy as the L70, but more of a medium-stiff feeling. It's not as rock solid, but feels a bit more forgiving compared to the other 2.

    I could never really get used to the Slayer 99, it's 2U even balanced with a diamond-shape (Bravesword-like) frame. It's heavy and still so fast, I broke a lot of strings on mishits with the Slayer 99.
    However, if you can get used to it, it's most like the T300. Maybe it's slightly faster and more powerfull, it's also slightly less solid as the T300. But maybe that's just my perspective.
     
  3. BBEdrummerAK

    BBEdrummerAK Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Warehouse schlub
    Location:
    Anchorage, ALASKA, United States
    Demolidor, you're probably right. It's just that the NFS722, on 'paper', sounds like a racket that will work for me now days. I'm older, though not "old" (turning 35 this year), and I just can't play like I did in my 20's. It doesn't help that there was good number of years where no place was available to play badminton, so my arm just isn't in the shape it once was.
    My interest in the NFS722 is due to wanting a lighter racket, something that won't require a ton of effort to wield. I notice now, even though my game is coming back nicely, my shoulder and wrist are just getting tore up using a heavier overall and head heavy racket, even if my technique is sound. And besides that, I'm not at a level of play a lot of you guys are in this Forum. I only get to play one day a week currently, until our group can get larger and show badminton is legit again for Anchorage, Alaska. I do get to play with people that have played (and done well!) in tournaments down in the states, and one of them even getting to go as far as playing in an Olympic qualifying tournament for the US.
    ANYWAY, this racket just sounds ideal for me, was just looking for some more feedback on it. :)
     
    #5263 BBEdrummerAK, Apr 17, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2013
  4. Shinichi

    Shinichi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,451
    Likes Received:
    2
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Brunei Darussalam
    can anyone answer this
     
  5. phaaam

    phaaam Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    So I have the T200 (identical to the T300) and the L60/70.

    T200/300: even balanced, 3U, stable frame. It's good at defending smashes and doing drives. The only issue I had is it's not as good for smashing from the rearcourt. I mean it's still good for smashing just not as powerful from the rearcourt. Great singles racket since you do more clearing and less smashing from the rearcourt (at least I do), good all-around for doubles as well. Many people on the forum enjoy its all-aroundness.

    L60/70: head heavy, 3U, very stable frame. It's really good at defending smashes, a little slower with drives. Good smashes from all around the court. It's also a good singles racket since there are fewer fast exchanges like drives compared to doubles, while your clears and smashes are powerful. For doubles, it's a little harder to defend with since it is a little heavier, but it's countered by a powerful smash.

    These rackets really depend on your strengths and weaknesses. So this is my play style:
    -Defense: I'm good at defending smashes both backhand and forehand, so I was fine with both rackets
    -Drives: I'm about average with these, so the T200 was a little better for me since it's more meaneuverable.
    -Clears: L60/70 were better for clears, since they're more HH it went further and it was especially useful when you're out of position or doing a punch (attacking) clear. T200 was still good and went the distance but just requires a little more effort.
    -Smashes: I like to make those big smashes to win the point or to set up a netkill. I would say L60/70 was better fore/mid/rear court whereas the T200 was good fore/midcourt, a little weaker in the rearcourt.
    -Droptshots: I'm good at doing dropshots from any position on the court. No real difference with either racket.
    -Netshots: I can do crosscourt netshots and tumble it over the net. No real difference with either racket for me.
    -Stamina: After about 2 hours constant play with no breaks, I start making a few mistakes with the L60/70, not as much with T200. Both rackets have the same stiffness and I'm used to it so I wasn't sore from hitting too much with either racket.
    -Strings: I usually use BG80 @ 23lbs. I can do an underhand clear end to end and pass the backline ~0.5 ft. @ 25 lbs. it lands between doubles service line and singles service line. I prefer to play @ 23lbs. since I need the power to get out of trouble once in awhile and it is more forgiving; the smashes are more precise for me.

    I haven't tried the Slayer 99, but I would think it plays similar to the L60/70 since they're both head heavy and 3U. There's a 2U Slayer 99 but I think that's just ridiculous.
     
  6. surajaya

    surajaya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indonesia
    I'm really curious about slayer 99. I read on some apacs store that it's design seem to be the same with lethal 100 : bulge in 12, 8, 4 o'clock, diamond shaped frame, around 2U weight, etc. Are slayer 99 exactly identical with lethal 100 (except the paint) ?. Just tried my friend's lethal 100 and it's really-really fast and powerful. I want to buy slayer 99 or lethal 100 but need some input on slayer 99 to make a final decision.
     
    #5266 surajaya, Apr 17, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2013
  7. phaaam

    phaaam Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Scroll down to read the specs:

    Slayer 99: http://www.ebay.ca/itm/APACS-SLAYER...n_0&hash=item2ec7540ae0&_uhb=1#ht_4404wt_1348

    Lethal 100: http://www.ebay.ca/itm/APACS-LETHAL...n_0&hash=item2ec7540ae2&_uhb=1#ht_4548wt_1348

    Overall they're really similar. Slayer 99 being a little more HH and Lethal 100's shaft is a little thinner by 0.3mm.
     
  8. surajaya

    surajaya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indonesia
    Other source say that they're identical in BP :
    http://www.apacshk.com/product_info.php/slayer-99-3u-p-114?osCsid=d0fa5674a71df797683bd6776f7d186d

    http://www.apacshk.com/product_info.php/lethal-100-p-117?osCsid=d0fa5674a71df797683bd6776f7d186d

    So which source is more credible ?.
     
  9. jerby

    jerby Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,040
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    EU
    From what I tried (I only briefly had the 100 in my hands) the rackets are identical, but the slayer99 has a stiffer shaft. But I tried the 2U of both.
     
  10. surajaya

    surajaya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indonesia
    Thanks for your reply. Really help me in making a decision since I tried the 2U version too.
     
  11. phandrew

    phandrew Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    Racquet breaker
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Thanks for the replies Jerby and Phaaam. Likes are given to both of you.

    Looks like the Slayer 99 is my type of racquet :).

    Now all I need to do is break my unbreakable Sotx W7 somehow :p
     
  12. Arrowspeed

    Arrowspeed Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Car sales
    Location:
    Blackburn
    The difference between L100 and Slayer 99.
    L100 is Nano High Modulus Japan carbon with chrome braided into the frame not as stiff as slayer 99.
    Slayer is Japan high modulus carbon +carbon nano tubes+ 3k woven frame.

    Both racquets look great as you can see the woven process.
     
  13. Arrowspeed

    Arrowspeed Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Car sales
    Location:
    Blackburn
    Tweet 8000 idoes not have the power armour frame as L60/70 it is muscle wave heavy impact frame and also has new technology foaming tech and inbuilt carbon t joint + 6.7 shaft so this is why there is a price difference
     
  14. dsmbooster

    dsmbooster Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    financial analyst
    Location:
    canada
    nice and clear write up review, I recently clash my T200, and broke in 2 pcs at 1 and 7 o'clock, i'm looking for a replacement, like your experience with T200 I found it lacks power at the rear court, the defend was improved alot since i own T200,
    I'm looking for something like T200 with more power at rear court without sacrifice the defend , and aero dynamic shape for easy swing , and faster compare with box frame. would you guy think Visible Hollow 2000/2020 fit in my objective? but I read somewhere VH 2000 slower than T200 in defend, which hold me back to purchase one,
    and how's the VH 2000 's defend compare to L60/70?
     
  15. surajaya

    surajaya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indonesia
    How about it's frame thickness ?
     
  16. surajaya

    surajaya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indonesia
    ^^^
    Sorry, wrong quote on above post
    Post from mobile phone with small screen
     
  17. phaaam

    phaaam Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    I think the VH2000 has similar frame shape to the T200 already. I took a quick look and found these that might fit your play style:
    -Lethal 90 - http://www.ebay.com/itm/APACS-LETHA...412?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2ec7540ae4
    -Tweet 7000 (Tweet 8000 has a box-frame) - http://www.ebay.com/itm/APACS-TWEET...658?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c6dd38c9a
    -Visible Hollow 2000 - http://www.ebay.com/itm/APACS-VISIB...660?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c6dd38c9c
    -Slayer 99 (careful with this one since it comes in 2U) - http://www.ebay.com/itm/APACS-SLAYE...408?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2ec7540ae0

    I think the Lethal 60/70 would be a reasonable "upgrade" to the T200 since it's head heavy, similar frame shape. However, it's not that aerodynamic. Both frames are thinner than my Voltric 80 though, which has an aero-box frame shape (i.e. a compromise between the two).

    There are a lot of options. I personally have 4xTantrum 200, 2xLethal 70, Voltric 80 PG, Finnex Nano Tour. Of the 5 rackets I have the Tantrum 200s were the cheapest.

    If I were you, I would just get at least one more Tantrum 200 and then try it out against something else you like. Usually I just read the racket specs at the bottom of the page to get an idea of what it might play like. The first thing I look for is frame shape, since I can't play with aerodynamic. My understanding is that when it's aerodynamic, it sacrifices a little stability compared to a box-frame. Which is why the Armortec 900 Technique isn't as powerful as the AT900 Power (I've tried playing with both).

    But, this doesn't apply to every racket and the only way to find out for sure is to play with it yourself. Apacs doesn't cost too much so there is a lot of room for trial and error. I actually sold 4 Apacs rackets a couple months ago and selling another one soon.
     
    #5277 phaaam, Apr 21, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2013
  18. surajaya

    surajaya Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indonesia
    How about it's frame thickness ?. Lethal 100 seem so slim, frame thickness probably around 9 mm (more or less).
     
  19. Arrowspeed

    Arrowspeed Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Car sales
    Location:
    Blackburn
    Thickness of Lethal 100

    Side Measurement (Where grommits are) tapered 12mm from t joint to 9mm at 12 o clock.
    Face measurement - 7mm
    Reinforcement -9mm
     
  20. dsmbooster

    dsmbooster Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    financial analyst
    Location:
    canada
    Phaaam, I'm done with T200 for the reason "lack of power in rear court" (i'm over 40) I hope to find something like T200 but better aid in rear, that' s y I hope to switch to aerodynamic shape like VH2000/2020 without sacrifice the power, and for stability, VH has hollow shape will absorb vibration, some reviews in this link http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php/77894-Apacs-Visible-Hollow-2000!
    said more power compare to T200, more head heavy, more favor toward vh 2000/2020 but I find T200 is more popular, (for me I can get them at the same price). very few people using this racquet in my area, so finding one for testing is a problem.
     

Share This Page