User Tag List

View Poll Results: do you prefer Isometric or Oval?

Voters
1438. You may not vote on this poll
  • Isometric

    1,064 73.99%
  • Oval

    374 26.01%
Page 5 of 33 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... LastLast
Results 69 to 85 of 559
  1. #69
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,920
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    Well, at least Thomas Laybourne thinks an iso (wide-body) is better because it can take higher tension and it produces more power than an oval like the Gosen 3500. You can click the Thomas Laybourne Forum, look for "Equipment Question", and then stroll down to thread #10.
    Thomas said:

    I haven�t tried the 3500 but as far as i can remember it is a slim model, and i like the rackets to be widebody models. The have better power and can take more kg�s.
    widebody does not equal ISO. they are completely different things.

    widebody is like the Aerotus series where the frame is thicker than normal. that's why Thomas also referred to slim in the prior sentence. slim is the opposite of widebody.

  2. #70
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    Thomas said:

    widebody does not equal ISO. they are completely different things.

    widebody is like the Aerotus series where the frame is thicker than normal. that's why Thomas also referred to slim in the prior sentence. slim is the opposite of widebody.
    Well, what do you think Thomas Laybourne is using? Probably a larger frame (wide body) racquet than an oval. I don't think he was referring to the Aerotus.

  3. #71
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC - Kirkland WA
    Posts
    654
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    ......thinks an iso (wide-body) is better because it can take higher tension .....
    Beyond Kwun's explanation of how wide body is different from ISO, I wanted to add that an ISO shape cannot take more tension than an oval head (once again, assuming equal material strength).

    The racquet head shape that can take the highest tension is a perfect circle. This is because the geometry is self-reinforcing. The more you deviate from that shape, the more the frame needs to resist deformation using its inherent strength instead of the string pattern's support.

  4. #72
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A large frame (head) has a greater web or stringbed area, which gives you more power. Even some oval racquets try to mimic the larger area of iso racquets by having grooves on the inner side of the frame, a sort of pseudo iso, i.e. Gosen 5300 and 3500.
    Today's larger frame size racquets have enabled more women to play more powerful shots. I am sure this also applies to badminton's closest relative, tennis.

  5. #73
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    TW
    Posts
    3,949
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A larger frame would provide more sweetspot area, but that's it, it has nothing to do with increasing power. And that's the main reason people generally play better with larger frame racket (or ISO shape rackets).

    Hitting more "successfully" (within the sweetspot) is what this is all about

  6. #74
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC - Kirkland WA
    Posts
    654
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    A large frame (head) has a greater web or stringbed area, which gives you more power. .....
    That point is a fallacy actually. The larger web as you say, only increases the probability of contacting the area on the head that maximizes energy transfer. I can hit the sweet spot every time, but if my swing is slow inherently, the shot will be slow too.

    The fact that the head is larger has no correlation to how hard I can hit it. That depends on my stroke.

    The larger head just increase the likelihood that I'll hit a spot that transfers as much energy as possible.

  7. #75
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    (1) The groove on the inner side of the frame is to increase the trampoline effect of the string bed.

    (2) Boys and gals today have much better nurtients and modern training techniques. These two factors account for more powerful shots and faster court actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    A large frame (head) has a greater web or stringbed area, which gives you more power. Even some oval racquets try to mimic the larger area of iso racquets by having grooves on the inner side of the frame, a sort of pseudo iso, i.e. Gosen 5300 and 3500.
    Today's larger frame size racquets have enabled more women to play more powerful shots. I am sure this also applies to badminton's closest relative, tennis.

  8. #76
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ask any racquet manufacturer about how to play around with a racquet's swingweight. It is weight, balance, head size, and length. To get the right mix is a lot more difficult than you think. I have just had 10 custom-made racquets made with my own specs on swingweight.

  9. #77
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    Ask any racquet manufacturer about how to play around with a racquet's swingweight. It is weight, balance, head size, and length. To get the right mix is a lot more difficult than you think. I have just had 10 custom-made racquets made with my own specs on swingweight.
    you're deviating your point.
    you said larger frame and/or oval frame increase swingweight and therefore more power. Pros do customization on existing sponsored rackets. Racket frame size is UNCHANGE. They only playing around with balancing and/or weight

  10. #78
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    If you keep the weight, balance and length constant, it would be interesting to compare an oval 4U against an iso 4U of the same brand racquet.
    Aha! I thought. Carlton now make Ovals and Isos in 4U
    Airblade Superlite and Powerblade Superlite

    Looking in the Carlton catalog though, I see the Airblade Superlite is 81g but the Powerblade Superlight is 84g.
    I guess the Powerblade is heavier because the frame is bigger

    But on other models they do have the same weight between oval and iso
    Airblade Elite 84g
    Powerblade Elite 84g

    Airblade Tour 86g
    Powerblade Tour 86g

    maybe the Powerblade Superlite weight is a misprint.

    interestingly, of all the pros mentioned in the catalog that use the new racquets, all the men (Richard Vaughn, Nathan Robertson, Simon Archer) use ovals, and all the women use iso (Gail Emms)
    And, fortunately for Carlton, they all use racquets from the different ranges
    Elite
    Tour
    Superlite
    Carbon TT

  11. #79
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    there is a contradiction there.

    the 4 factors:
    size, balance, weight, length. if you want to do a fair comparison, you must keep 3 factors constant and vary one of them.

    if you keep balance, weight, length constant, i don't see how the size of the frame can affect the swing weight.
    I don't see that as a contradiction
    If you keep balance, weight and length constant, what you do by changing the frame size is alter the weight distribution. You need more material to make an iso than an oval so there will be more weight in the head and less somewhere else. Therefore more head-heavy than the oval, therefore higher swingweight.

    (The frame could, presumably, have been made from a less dense material and kept the weight distribution the same, but it depends on what things we are trying to keep equal.)

    To keep the static balance point the same, some weight has to be moved towards the handle end (reducing the swingweight, but reducing it by less than it was increased by the extra weight in the frame)

  12. #80
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    A large frame (head) has a greater web or stringbed area, which gives you more power.
    maybe more people should use Yonex's MegaFrame racquets then. Even bigger than their normal Isometric frame.
    Why do Yonex only market these at the lower end, on extra-flexible racquets?

    In Yonex's words
    "The Isometric and Isometric Mega-Frame series racquets have been developed by Yonex to deliver consistent shot power and accuracy, even on off-centre hits. The Mega-Frames's further enlarged 'sweet spot' gives you the ultimate control and power"

    Well, there you are, ultimate control and power. Nothing will ever be better.
    That's what ultimate means isn't it?

    Would we get more power using a squash racquet or tennis racquet to play badminton?
    Higher swingweight and larger stringbed area.

  13. #81
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe this thread should be split, and a new thread entitled "Racquets and Power" started...

  14. #82
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    I don't see that as a contradiction
    If you keep balance, weight and length constant, what you do by changing the frame size is alter the weight distribution. You need more material to make an iso than an oval so there will be more weight in the head and less somewhere else. Therefore more head-heavy than the oval, therefore higher swingweight.

    (The frame could, presumably, have been made from a less dense material and kept the weight distribution the same, but it depends on what things we are trying to keep equal.)

    To keep the static balance point the same, some weight has to be moved towards the handle end (reducing the swingweight, but reducing it by less than it was increased by the extra weight in the frame)
    u had deceived yourself neil.
    read kwun's post carefully, he said

    Originally Posted by kwun
    there is a contradiction there.

    the 4 factors:
    size, balance, weight, length. if you want to do a fair comparison, you must keep 3 factors constant and vary one of them.

    if you keep balance, weight, length constant, i don't see how the size of the frame can affect the swing weight.


    those are the stated terms and condition.

    by your logic, you would be implying that 100 lb of lead is heavier than 100 lb of cork because they come in different packaging and lead has higher density.
    Last edited by cooler; 03-10-2005 at 12:11 PM.

  15. #83
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler
    u had deceived yourself neil.

    by your logic, you would be implying that 100 lb of lead is heavier than 100 lb of cork because they come in different packaging and lead has higher density.
    I don't think so.
    I thought I was saying that the same weight, distributed differently, can have a different swingweight.

  16. #84
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC - Kirkland WA
    Posts
    654
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    I don't think so.
    I thought I was saying that the same weight, distributed differently, can have a different swingweight.

    Right, but the dependent variable should be head area, so all the others should be independent, including the distribution.

  17. #85
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    I don't think so.
    I thought I was saying that the same weight, distributed differently, can have a different swingweight.
    U forgot that the parameter 'balance' was also specified.

    kwun was just playing it safe by listing more parameters than needed. Balance or moment of inertia is already defined by weight, shape, dimension (x,y,z).
    Last edited by cooler; 03-10-2005 at 02:02 PM.

Page 5 of 33 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Head heavy very stiff Oval Head racket ???
    By pussiii999 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 17
    : 12-19-2008, 05:19 AM
  2. Square/Isometric or Oval/Traditional ?
    By eh7eh7 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 1
    : 03-27-2006, 08:30 AM
  3. Oval head, isometric head and ovaliso head.
    By Extremesmash in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 5
    : 11-18-2004, 01:39 PM
  4. switching to oval from isometric head shape
    By Josh in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 4
    : 12-18-2001, 03:19 AM
  5. Isometric vs. Oval Head
    By Vy in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 14
    : 09-18-2001, 12:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •