User Tag List

Page 58 of 78 FirstFirst ... 8 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ... LastLast
Results 970 to 986 of 1320
  1. #970
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Manchester, United Kingdon
    Posts
    16
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm. Didn't quite know how to phrase it before but Mark has got it right. I played around for 20 minutes with a 3U Z Speed few weeks ago. Unfortunately strung with bg 65 @27lbs. Higher tension and different string than I'm used to.

    In short, swings head heavy, noticeably smaller sweet spot. Not too much issue with mistiming. Not sure its noticeably quicker around mid or front court compared to my 3u voltric 80.
    Smash wise, reasonably powerful but doesn't give the same direct hammer feeling / "bang" I got with my voltric 80. Didn't think the smash itself was any quicker.

    Most importantly, as Mark said, it just felt dull and muted. Another friend tried it and simply said it didn't feel like anything special.

  2. #971
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,210
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Nice review Mark, but I think we should just treat any Yonex racquet with a "Z" in its name as completely different from the rest, almost like a different line - regardless of whether it is called a Voltric, ArcSaber or NanoRay. Just as any VXR's are completely different to other Vauxhalls! lol

    I can see your frustration as I sense you feel cheated having waited so long for a NS9900 replacement. But I strongly believe there will be a NS9900 eventually, but this is not it.

  3. #972
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R20190 View Post
    I can see your frustration as I sense you feel cheated having waited so long for a NS9900 replacement. But I strongly believe there will be a NS9900 eventually, but this is not it.
    I agree! Held off buying a replacement backup 9900 for a while. Maybe it's time for me to stock up on a few more until it's true replacement comes out!

  4. #973
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,076
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by R20190 View Post
    I can see your frustration as I sense you feel cheated having waited so long for a NS9900 replacement. But I strongly believe there will be a NS9900 eventually, but this is not it.
    There have been post-Z Arcsabers, so there's no reason to think this will be the last Nanoray.

    I can't think Yonex won't get wind of the (mostly) negative feedback on this thing... maybe they'll remember what NR's are supposed to be about and make an NR900...

  5. #974
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,149
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yep, Mark. You put it very well.

    That's how I felt when I tried it out 3 wks ago. A heavy swinging smash machine that has absolutely garbage feel. Forget about trying to do any accurate touch shots with it.

    And the FS listings on the Buy/Sell forum is a good indication of how disappointing it is... yours included.

  6. #975
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Penang,Malaysia.
    Posts
    149
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It just being created for smashing "speed world record" but not all rounder racquet...too bad.

  7. #976
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    821
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardSmasher View Post
    It just being created for smashing "speed world record" but not all rounder racquet...too bad.
    You do realize that the way Yonex measured it was not the way it's measured in a real game right?

  8. #977
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    282
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HardSmasher View Post
    It just being created for smashing "speed world record" but not all rounder racquet...too bad.

    lol, agreed

  9. #978
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,169
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah I pretty much agree with what you've posted there Mark. Nice review. However, I find all of the Z series rackets quirky. In a way, they're not even the top-of-the-line of their prospective lines - they're kind of weird niche-beasts. I think of all the Z rackets though, this is the most accessible for a greater number of players though, despite its quirks.

    However, if you want a 300mm fast, light, zingy racket....just get an Mx70. If you want a quirky smash beast, get this.

  10. #979
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,169
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm wondering with racket head frame design (coz I'm busy designing my own for future use), that once you change the profile dramatically to induce some kind of flex, or movement...or if you change the shape of the head dramatically....you're adding so many new variables that you actually can't control them.

    Or worse, as with the NRZS, you get this (as Mark nicely puts it) 'jekyll and hyde personality' where the racket works in one way, and one way only, and if you deviate from that it feels like a different racket, or dosen't work as it should.

  11. #980
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,149
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^ In a way, the bend zone thing is nothing new. There have been discussions in the past that a bit of frame flexibility is needed to amplify the rebound effect on the shuttle, just like a bit of flex in the shaft also helps in the same manner. Anyone who has played with a racket with super stiff frame and shaft will know what I mean.

    Thus those rackets that use frame strengtheners like Ti or Kevlar at the 2,4,8,10 o'clock positions create such bend zones at the 12,3,9 o'clock positions by making those areas flexier relative to the strengthened areas.
    Last edited by visor; 10-18-2013 at 01:29 AM.

  12. #981
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,076
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by visor View Post
    ^ In a way, the bend zone thing is nothing new.
    In more ways than one - have a look at Head's "Flexpoint" rackets... Yonex aren't first here by any means.

    Or worse, as with the NRZS, you get this (as Mark nicely puts it) 'jekyll and hyde personality' where the racket works in one way, and one way only, and if you deviate from that it feels like a different racket, or dosen't work as it should.
    I think I was too kind comparing the NR-ZS's sweet spot as "frying pan vs wok"; it should have been saucepan vs wok. Never have I used such an unforgiving racket in this regard.

  13. #982
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,076
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    I think of all the Z rackets though, this is the most accessible for a greater number of players though, despite its quirks.
    I find myself forced to agree here - the AZS has timing issues, and the ZF has a tiny head and a sweet spot the size of a golf ball.

    The NRZS wins... but only by being the least inaccessible.

  14. #983
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,169
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm not convinced they do. What I think it does is spread the load over that particular area, which dissipates the 'hot-spots' (stress-risers) within the structure, most of which are caused by the drilling of holes. It doesn't add any perceptible stiffness, it makes the stiffness more uniform.

    Of course this is all BS because it hasn't been scientifically tested

    Heck, I'm not convinced making 'flex points' within a racket structure anywhere is a good idea - especially if you change the physics of the string-bed. Shouldn't we be trying to make the stringbed stable, then introducing an appropriate amount of flex evenly throughout the structure to facilitate tactility?

    I do however LOVE the shape of the NRZS' head. Making it smaller in the way that they have is a great idea, because that's exactly where the aerodynamic gains are IMHO.

  15. #984
    Regular Member Maklike Tier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,169
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark A View Post
    I find myself forced to agree here - the AZS has timing issues, and the ZF has a tiny head and a sweet spot the size of a golf ball.

    The NRZS wins... but only by being the least inaccessible.
    Well if I can just pick it up and use it, anyone can

    This is the genius from a marketing point-of-view, though. There will be people who tried the Z-Slash, framed every third shot and sold it. They then bought the Z-Force, found it was like hitting the shuttle with a plank of wood, and sold it. And just when they thought Yonex was rubbish, the bring out the Z-Speed.

    Smashing within that soft but zesty sweetspot is going to be like a drug for a lot of people.
    Last edited by Maklike Tier; 10-18-2013 at 02:58 AM.

  16. #985
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,076
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklike Tier View Post
    Heck, I'm not convinced making 'flex points' within a racket structure anywhere is a good idea - especially if you change the physics of the string-bed. Shouldn't we be trying to make the stringbed stable, then introducing an appropriate amount of flex evenly throughout the structure to facilitate tactility?
    I would tend to agree - why use a one-inch patch of 20% softer material when you can just make the entire frame out of 5% softer material? Homogeneity is the key to consistency - just look at the string pattern on the ZSP: hit the middle stripe, and you're fine... miss it, and the next shot is going through you.

  17. #986
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    399
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Too bad you guys havent tried out the 4U version , it feels reaaaaaaaly different

Page 58 of 78 FirstFirst ... 8 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

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
  •