User Tag List

Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 211
  1. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Burnaby, BC, Canada
    Posts
    3,511
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    How about tying a 1lb measuring weight to the end of the racquet frame (with the racquet handle anchored to a table or something) and measure the length of the flex? Wouldn't that be more standardized?
    Last edited by cappy75; 12-01-2003 at 12:02 AM.

  2. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I can assure all of you that the test methodology used is very standardized, consistent and repeatable.

  3. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by kwun
    cooler, you do own a cab22, no? that's is generally known to be a stiff racket, i wonder if you can take one more measurement and include that in the data.

    excellent data, first class stuff!
    Thanks kwun. For that, cab22 relative stiffness as requested. I have also added the infamous blacken. BTW, cab 22 should read cab 20 power because that is the one i got. Technically, cab20 power is equivalent to cab 22
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  4. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Coquitlam
    Posts
    1,045
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by cooler
    so u see, the range variation of 0.1% isn't that bad at all. It is small enough to be explained by the difference of wood source (ie, which part of tree trunk that wood came from)
    I see your point cooler
    btw... is it possible that you get your hands on a CP/CN racket to do some tests? it would be a good idea since it could possibly end the CP/CN racket debate once and for all well... at least the rumors about it being "more stiff"

  5. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    T.O.
    Posts
    2,096
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by cooler
    I can assure all of you that the test methodology used is very standardized, consistent and repeatable.
    Standardized, consistent, and repeatable equates with percission, but to not to accuracy nor reliability.

    We'd like to hear the details of how you measured the stiffness.

    Also, i doubt that your measured stiffness equates to actual stiffness feeling. Presuming a shaft with the same degree of bending, a racquet with that shaft that is twice as heavy would be twice as flexible, and yet your rating scale would not detect such a difference.

    Static stiffness is not the same as dynamic stiffness.

  6. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    BRL, i didnt say the stiffness data presented would be the holy grail answers to all question about stiffness. Yes, it is static stiffness comparison, it suppose to be a guide. I did not claim to be a dynamic stiffness comparision. If you want a dynamic review, go read the racket review section, you will see the opinions vary much much wider than my data on static stiffness.

    http://www.badmintonreview.com/rp/showcat.php?cat=3

    Even if i have a $1,000,000 machine to do dynamic stiffness testing, new questions and doubt will come out of it. It will never ends. It like you asking answers to the 10th decimal place after i gave you data with 9th decimal place.
    Last edited by cooler; 12-01-2003 at 02:47 AM.

  7. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Originally posted by JChen99
    I see your point cooler
    btw... is it possible that you get your hands on a CP/CN racket to do some tests? it would be a good idea since it could possibly end the CP/CN racket debate once and for all well... at least the rumors about it being "more stiff"
    for cn/cp and jp rackets, i think weight is the important parameter to measure. The whole agrument of owning cn/cp and jp rackets is that they can withstand higher tension.

  8. #18
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,001
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    also notice in the chart, if we take out the data point for the mp33. we have the 2U racket being the stiffest, then the 3U, then the 4U.

    the MP33 just seems to be sitting at the wrong place.

  9. #19
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,001
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    another observation. the cab20MS that cooler has is a 3U. while the cab20 original that most ppl were accustomed to mainly comes in 2U.

    but still, not a bad idea for the reference point.

    not too surprising about the cab22.

    i already offered cooler two of my old Iso900 SS for measurement. one CN, one SP, both cracked at the frame. we will have to wait till next time we meet though.

  10. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    dont think so kwun. I got two mp33 and both came within .075% stiffness difference with each other. I had repeated the test twice. I even done gut feel flex test using my hands and it does feel stiff for a medium range racket. I think we shouldn't see mp33 as a medium range racket but yonex might want a light and stiff racket in their line up, it is just my guess. I have tried this racket and it is a fast and very maneuverable racket, very snappy, great for double. The performance (double games) seem to support the racket stiff and balance (to be posted soon)

    Too bad i dun have a 2UG4 cab 20 to compare with. I only got a U cab 20 and it is not with me now.
    Last edited by cooler; 12-01-2003 at 03:04 AM.

Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Raquet Swingweight Measurements
    By Neil Nicholls in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 5
    : 03-21-2011, 03:45 AM
  2. New Yonex grip measurements?
    By nummertwente in forum Grip
    Replies: 13
    : 05-22-2008, 11:46 AM
  3. Smash Speed measurements
    By likeahcild in forum General Forum
    Replies: 23
    : 04-25-2007, 03:03 PM
  4. Forza 2003 Rackets
    By Chia in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 51
    : 04-09-2003, 02:14 AM
  5. court measurements
    By Peter T. in forum General Forum
    Replies: 2
    : 03-31-2002, 12:41 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
  •