Arcsaber Z Slash vs LiNingN90I?

He is crazy if he Is considering a N90 and he plays mostly doubles, in fact the Z Slash isn't great for doubles either, what skill level is he ?

I would consider if I was mostly doubles player, a NS7000, NS9900, ARC10, ARC8DX, AT900T Victor BS10/11 MX70/80 SW35 Li Ning, N50, N70II, N50II

 

N55-II or N70-II would probably be better options.. From YY probably NS9900. Arc-Z has poor control for singles and to small sweetspot for fast actioned doubles. If he has powerfult wrist and is a bug dude and usually seeks back position in offense in doubles N90-II or N50-II may be OK.

 

I used to use the Li-Ning, but i must say I love the Nanospeed 9900 more. I actually prefer the NS9900 for smashing. I love the speed it gives me.

 

Arc Z and N90 are generally singles racket but doesnt mean you cant use it for both. Arc Z would be better between the two as its stiffer and better defence though a lot of poeple find it hard to get used to it especially overhead shots :S

However, if you like smashes and play doubles try some either victor SW35 or BS11 for loads of smashes while still being good for doubles. Even MX80 is good for smashing doubles/singles racket hybrid.

As above i agree with NS9900 from yonex and N55-II from li-ning. never tried N70-II though. Between the three brands, you cant beat victor for their quality at their price though.

 

I beg to differ.. N90 is stiffer than Arc-Z.. Arc-Z is in my opinion really one of the worst top-priced rackets ever made.. it is really a beginners racket disquiesd as a pro model. It was a one-time designed that failed and the whole ideas behind it was abandoned by yonex for later models.. And It has pretty much been abandoned by mort pros as well.. Only a few still using it.. I regard the Arc-Z will go down as the Dront-model of Yonex .

My words may seem abit harsh, but to be honest, all differences in mid-range to top-range stuff are not huge, so all comparison in smash-power, control, etc. are somewhat exhaggerated. I hope I don't make any Arc-Z lovers feel bad, but honestly i regard the racket as an epic-fail from Yonex. That said I think weak players may like it and be helped by its flex+small sweetspot to get a little more speed on the smash, at the expense of pretty much all control and defence.

The small sweetspot is especially problematic in doubles as the game is so fast that every little gain in forgivness/control is welcome.. THe Artc-Z narrow-frame is kind of like stepping back to the era before isometric.. And we all know there is a reason why classic head-shaped rackets died.

 

I don't agree that the Arc-Z is an epic fail. It was designed with one purpose in mind, and that's power. A no compromise, no nonsense focused racquet. The down side of such a racquet is that it's not going to appeal to everyone, but it doesn't mean it was a failure. I'm sure Yonex didn't expect it to suit everyone's game. It's certainly not a beginner's racquet, no beginner should ever be using a racquet of that stiffness.

The narrow head frame is not a step back to the old oval shape head shape. It's still an isometric head shape, only narrower for aerodynamic reasons. The main point of an isometric head is to have a straight, flat crown which acts as a straight beam - as opposed to an oval racquet should would have a curved beam and so is less able to resist torque.

I'm not a fan of the Arc-Z (mainly because I can't stand the colour) but I can see the point of it and can see why it would be a good weapon to have on court.

Back to the OP's question - I would recommend trying the ARC8DX, NS9900, MP100 (if you can find one) and Ti-10 (Gen1).

 

But it really fails even being a power-only racket.. Even the hardcore back/players in pro doubles stay away from it!! And YY has made no comparative speed tests with other models like ARC10,NS9900,VT80 etc. So there are really nothing that has indicated it is more powerful than any other model. Pure marketing gimmicks imop.

 

Despite all discussions, I have only one question. Can you tell us what racket your friend is currently playing with?

 

To Master TB,

I would like to beg the differ on your post. I personally think ARC-Z fulfill what it designed for.
1) It is designed for faster smashing speed. It has achieve that. It set the speed record.
2) It is designed for publicity. By setting record, it shows YY is still tech leader.
3) It is designed for market testing. YY want to know what is the market reaction if they design a racquet that is good for 1 thing only and no practical purpose on the court. Well people bought it.

I am not saying your post is wrong. I just want you to see it in the other way.

 

Ok, I'll try to explein my thinking about the Arc-Z and the "speed record"..

1) A world record with a type of measuerment not used for any other rackets to my knowledge.. That is like being wold champion in a game with only one player entering , with no known speeds in similar setup of test with other models, the figure has little or no value, imhop.

2) As not comparising with other rackets has been done on this type of test with the same player, I don't see how this would prove anything about anything really? Have any similar tests been done with VT80? What is the speed with that? With N90-II? With My belowed Mizuno TC700, With NS9900 etc.. enlighten me what are testspeeds with these racketso or ANY other racket with same player, same type of measuerement? There are plenty of radar measuerements in BWF tournaments these days, and I have never seen the Arc-Z model top any of the speed-records there. It's usually the Cineese mens singles player who tops the single-charts, the Chineese & korean double players (some danes but not often) seems to produce the fastest speeds and among ladies with their rackets it usually is the Ponappa from India topping the measured speed..And they are aslo not arc-z users.. So there is really no basic evidence that it smashes harder than anything else.
3) That is what prototypes and Pro-player testing is all about.. To test out new ideas, technology, and designs to see if it works well for strong players. I think Victor, LN etc. has a smarter approach to involve pro players more early in the development phase.. Seems silly to construct, start massproduce, and then sell something without "beta"-testing..

 

Lol, the TC700 has a small head and small sweetspot just like the Z-Slash.I still think the Z is a rely fast racket, and I do believe YYs aerodynamic claims do hold up on court, and it's wrong to suggest the YY has 'abandoned' technology it has learned from the Z - the aerodynamics it's transferred over to the VT80, as well as the slim shaft design. I'd almost go so far as to suggest that the VT80 is largely a Z that's head heavier and with a standard iso head.There are a lot of rackets that use 'compact' iso heads such as the TC700, Carlton VT, Ashaway Viper, to name but a few.The Z isn't an epic fail. The failure was in the BS marketing and over hype.

 

I agree. The Z is an awesome racket, it's just not for everybody. It's a bit difficult to adjust to (in my case). But once blend, it's a really good racket for both single and doubles. It has indeed serve it's purpose. But personally I also agree that there are many better rackets than the Z and N90 for doubles. Choosing N90 for double is almost like a suicide mission. You can also consider Victor, they have good range of rackets for double.

 

It's such a personal thing. I know a guy who is 50+ years old and absolutely lethal with the Z-Slash, and I know a 20 year old girl whose go-to is the Armortec 900P.

If I was a back court smasher, I'd be looking at rackets such as the Victor MX80, SW35, or BS11. All of those rackets don't really suffer at the front of the court, either.

 

I can see where you're coming from but I don't fully agree. The world record was certified by Guinness, it's official and fair - they don't give world records without checking that it's fair and repeatable/comparable. The record has stood for two years and nobody else has tried to break it - to my knowledge.

Why would yonex want to compare it to other racquets anyway? The intention was to use their expertise to design a racquet that would give a professional player (TBH) the best chance at setting a world record (while generating publicity). It was not an exercise to see how it compared with other racquets - that would have been done in the lab I'd expect.

In response to your second question, the fact that you have never seen the Z top the fastest smash in tournaments could be because...

(a) No one will be aiming to break records in a match, your aim is to win points and so you will need to be accurate (often hitting tight to the line) and therefore won't be going full out on power. But when TBH was going for the record, he wasn't concerned about accuracy, angle of smash, his oppponent or anything other than hitting the shuttle as hard as he possibly could.

(b) Just because some players have topped the smash speed log at certain tournaments doesn't mean they have the fastest smash.

(c) The Arc-Z does not suit everyone's technique, style, game etc. Some players may get more power from other racquets. As it happens, it seemed to suit Tan Boon Heung - it may have been designed with him in mind?

(d) The Arc-Z is not a magic wand that will double your smashing power! It's merely a racquet combining lots of subtle features and technology that gives you a slight "edge".

But I agree that unless someone is willing to pay to test the Z against other racquets under controlled conditions, no one will really know for sure whether it is better that other racquets in the power department. Having said that, would yonex give TBH a racquet that they didn't feel would maximize his chance of setting the fastest speed possible? Surely they would have tested and fine tuned the Z against other racquets in the lab, behind closed doors before coming out with confidence to set the record. It would have been pretty embarassing and a huge business risk for yonex if they didn't manage to set a decent speed and break the record.

I don't know the whether yonex use professionals at design stage but I'd be surprised if they didn't. You don't have to employ the best players to test/assist in designing racquets. A bit like car companies, they employ test drivers who are just as good at assisting in design development but cost a lot less than the Sebastian Vettels ...

To me, LN as a relatively new brand will need a lot more assistance from pros as their design experience and technology is still behind other companies. It also helps with publicity/advertising. I would expect a company like Yonex to already have a good understanding of the requirements of professional players with the experience they have in racquet manufacturing and so may not need as much input.

 

By the way, THB doesn't play anymore the Z-Slash, but Ti10...

As for this once off record - of which interest is it ?? - , I always felt the Z-Slash as an irritating racquet:
- yes you may play one of your best offensive shots with it, ever
- this shot might make you win the point
- you loose 3 behind....

In fact not withstanding TH age, both TH and Dwi Kuncoro have such an inconsistent career since they have started playing the Z-Slash.

 

I very much doubt the original intent was to make a racket to break world records in the first place..I feel pretty sure that they (or others) can produce a racket that can hit ONE hot faster than arc-Z if they did the head half the size and more fragile/expensive, without taking massproduction and overall performance into account.

My firm beleif is that this "speed" test and inviting guiness etc. was solely to market/hype that particular model for sales, and nothing else, and anything else is an afterthought argument when the racket got bad reception from pros.

 

Wouldn't tension of the racket effect the smash slightly ?

 

Oh yes.. very much soo.. But for most of these discussions we talk about close to max playable-usable tension.. (somwhere in the 32-37 lbs range)