2003 Yonex rackets measurements

**FEND.** · 11-02-2004, 01:36 AM

Originally Posted by bluejeff

Possible, if that 5 grams of difference are located in the shaft.

Wonder if cooler will get a 3U Cab30 if that is the case .....

**cooler** · 11-02-2004, 05:55 PM

wrong assumption, yonex rackets that i have tested so far have consistent stiffness and balance point between their respective 3U/4U and 3U/2U versions. Rate of change after been used is another matter.

If you read that table closely, the 2 mp88's (stiffness) should have dispelled your assumption already

**cooler** · 11-02-2004, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by bluejeff

Wow, I am surprised that Cab30MS is stiff

!

why do u thot so initially? There are 2 ways to tell it would be x-stiff before even formal testing.

1. just casually bend the racket and compare them to other rackets in your collection

2. It's in the blood. (history)

**bluejeff** · 11-02-2004, 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by cooler

why do u thot so initially? There are 2 ways to tell it would be x-stiff before even formal testing.

1. just casually bend the racket and compare them to other rackets in your collection

2. It's in the blood. (history)

Well, comparing Cab30MS to my MP99 (3U and brand new ones), I felt MP99 is more stiff.

Also, inside the Yonex's catalog, MP99 is rated as "9" while Cab30MS is like "8".

**cooler** · 11-02-2004, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by bluejeff

Well, comparing Cab30MS to my MP99 (3U and brand new ones), I felt MP99 is more stiff.

Also, inside the Yonex's catalog, MP99 is rated as "9" while Cab30MS is like "8".

- where did u get that rating( i only got the north american catalog)?
- u should bend them again

**bluejeff** · 11-02-2004, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by cooler

- where did u get that rating( i only got the north american catalog)?
- u should bend them again

here you go

(the japanese catalog ratings.)

**cooler** · 11-02-2004, 10:52 PM

ic, however, there isn't yet a 100% proof that mp90=mp99 (performance wise) either so u have derived an inferred conclusion, not scientific enough against Cooler's rigorous testing standard

just do a common sense test, do a set of rapid wrist swings back and forth for each of these 2 rackets and feel which is more stiff

**bluejeff** · 11-04-2004, 02:35 AM

By the way, cooler, if you have any chance, make sure you test the Cab-20 Long. I have a pair here and they are just so stiff (compare to my Cab-22, Cab-20L is probably in that range, and even more stiff then Cab-22

) that hurts my hands. So, if you have any chance, make sure you try those

It might be the king of stiffness !!

**cooler** · 11-06-2004, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by bluejeff

By the way, cooler, if you have any chance, make sure you test the Cab-20 Long. I have a pair here and they are just so stiff (compare to my Cab-22, Cab-20L is probably in that range, and even more stiff then Cab-22

) that hurts my hands. So, if you have any chance, make sure you try those

It might be the king of stiffness !!

problem is there isnt many 20L around for me to test. It was introduced at the time of isometric ti10 i think.

maybe ur comparing a new 20L and your used cab30

**bluejeff** · 11-07-2004, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by cooler

problem is there isnt many 20L around for me to test. It was introduced at the time of isometric ti10 i think.

maybe ur comparing a new 20L and your used cab30

No, in case you don't know, I always buy rackets in at least a pair. So that I will always have a brand new racket for comparing.

(Yeah, Cab20L is rare, that's why I still keep them

)
New Cab20L vs. New Cab22 or New Cab30MS

Results:

Cab20L is obviously more stiff than Cab30MS without any doubt.
Cab20L is more stiff than Cab22, but not by much (but still very noticeable easily)