Results 35 to 51 of 239
03-05-2013, 03:07 PM #35
03-05-2013, 07:34 PM #36
03-06-2013, 09:29 PM #37
03-06-2013, 09:41 PM #38
@kwun @vajrasattva @demolidor @cobalt
No one is interested? Or is this too complicated or arcane? Or useless?
It's not complicated and it's very useful, I think. Just ratios and proportions.
Just instinctively assume:
(head wt / total wt) = (bp / 675mm)
675mm being racket length.
And you can see the relationship between head wt and bp. Hence if you know any two measures, you can calculate the third.
Pretty nifty huh?
No one interested in this or is this already well known on badminton central?
03-06-2013, 09:59 PM #39
I won't disagree that you're on to something here Adn whether the engineers at Yonex and Victor have worked this out or not, it doesn't take a jot away from your application and endeavour. I think this can easily become a quick reference for people who are looking for a certain type of weapon.
I just keep asking myself if it is complete enough, though.
What about this think called "kick point" whcih apparently differs from BP, in that it is also dependant on the flex/stiffness/composition? Will it not experientially affect swing? Does it not also dictate the choice?
The statistical data would generally assume straight shafts with no deviation in thickness up or down the length. What about tapering or pinched shafts - does the result get affected in such conditions?
03-06-2013, 11:13 PM #40
visor liked this post
03-06-2013, 11:20 PM #41
I just started threads in the past week on stringbed frequency vs tension, and now head wt vs bp,... and you're asking why I didn't incorporate kickpoint also... dang this is a tough crowd to please!
Reason is I play with pretty stiff rackets like mx80, mx70, precision pro, so at the moment kickpoints don't matter to me...
Last edited by visor; 03-06-2013 at 11:23 PM.
03-06-2013, 11:38 PM #42
Well, I wouldn't want anyone thinking you're anything less than perfect in what you do!
Besides, you asked....
03-07-2013, 12:23 AM #43
03-07-2013, 12:29 AM #44
03-07-2013, 12:32 AM #45
^^ now where is that "dislike" button...
03-07-2013, 12:36 AM #46
Update from the latest visit, with bare wts and bare bp calculated.
Arc FB 73.1g 32.6g 301mm Arc 11 86.8g 38.1g 296mm MX70 86.9g 38.7g 301mm MXJJS 4u 84.6g 37.2g 297mm BSLYD 4u 84.3g 36.3g 291mm BSLYD 3u 90.1g 40.0g 300mm TK8000 89.4g 39.3g 297mm NR700FX 83.7g 36,4g 293mm NR700RP 88.4g 38.3g 292mm
- dang that 3u bslyd is a beast! more so than tk8000. i had dry swings with all of the rackets and this one takes the cake in swing wt! could've passed for a training racket!
- obviously arc fb felt like a fly swatter on dry swinging...
Last edited by visor; 03-07-2013 at 12:47 AM.
03-07-2013, 12:39 AM #47
seriously though, your research is definitely a great contribution and will probably help out people who know what they're looking for, in at least 95% of cases.
I would suggest (and pending Kwun's approval) that you should take this a step further and use it as one of the main criteria for racquet selection. Now, to assemble the other main criteria, and insert formulae as required, put it all together in one succinct post and sticky it!
Generations of badminton fanatics will forever choose wisely because of visor. (sorry, can't stay too long on the straight-and-narrow! )
03-07-2013, 12:55 AM #48
^^ Actually thinking about it, my ultimate goal is this:
to identify and measure all the aspects of the racket and string system so that any player can choose the right one for his/her particular swing and play style, hand speed and power, etc.
Just as for golf equipment customization, I think this is possible and long overdue for badminton.
03-07-2013, 01:04 AM #49
...and you're the man who can do it! Grunts like me will do all we can to help, but you'll just have to supply the brains yourself, I'm afraid...
03-07-2013, 01:21 AM #50
03-07-2013, 08:44 AM #51
BTW, these are some pretty heavy 4U from Victor...