Hmm stability issue...works fine for me so far in 4U.
Been playing with a lot of mid court interception and drives tis week.
Speed is simply amazing with the extra punch needed.
Straight down sideline smashes is pretty accurate too.
I was trying to illustrate the different to ZF1. Not trying to put it down . Basically, it all rounds up to power(ZF1) with high stability or speed(ZF2) with lower stability, whichever you are looking for.
soulsync: Accuracy to me is individual's reaction, awareness, psychological concentration, eye to court, timing etc (individual's attributes). So i don think its valid as an argument for better or worse to the tool or even inputs for consideration. However, tks for your reviews maybe i should try out a 4U some day..
Agreed ... if that's the case how do we evaluate a frame stability ? Just want to know more on this definition. Is it upon stringing or how the frame reacts upon shuttle impact and etc ? Thanks for the input.
IMHO, i feel that the lack of stability comes in when you want to do a follow up smash to gain the point. That's the part where it is the most obvious(for me), where you want to power it down with the fastest snap going for the kill. For the mid court dog fights exchanging drives would expose a little too.
Based on readings, Hi Module carbon/graphite is common for Yonex's racket frame inputs. The material construction contribute to the frame response and stability. So with smaller head(ZF2) is equivalent to lesser material incorporated than the standard head size. If stability drops, the solid feel dampen(the wielding feel decreases which you don't feel the racket) and vibration increases which is bad for joints. Contrariwise, it become lighter, faster and focus like nrzp or other smaller head version.
Stability is important for hard smash when u want to place the shutter and feel the hitting.
Just my 2cent.
There's three factors that dictate the stiffness or otherwise of the head - the total stringbed area, the design and crossectional area of the head, and the physical characteristics of the material the head is made of.
You have to realise that there are degrees of stability. If one thing is less stable than another, it is not 'unstable', it's 'less' stable.
From my perspective, the VFI is a completely numb plank of a racket, so giving up a degree of stability for added playability, speed and usability is actually a good move by Yonex, and in no way constitutes an inferior unstable product.
Can anyone imagine a company like Yonex putting out an inferior successor to their flagship product?
I don't think it low stability. It's simply not lying in the top tier.
IMO, it's performance in this part is beyond average, not excellent or outstanding.
Guess we, at least I am, picky here. The ZF I (4U) was just that good. Outstanding solid hitting feel, outstanding power with more than ok speed. Now we have more speed, solid hitting feel... don't dare to say something about the power yet.
From initially feel the ZF I 4U always gave me the impression to be able to take on everything, some serious abuse. My ZF II 4U seems to be the better package since in most cases it saves energy because the power is more accessible for me. I don't really have to work and I am even thinking about getting a few 3Us. That luxury wasn't given before
What is missing... I'd say this lovely solid feel I had with the predecessor's 4U on hard hits . It still feels nice with this new racket but I don't have the same degree of satisfaction. Even if this new racket lets me hit harder than before there still is this little voice telling me it's the other way round.
In term of stability my verdict is as follow:
ZF1 3u > ZF2 3u (= 2u ARC10) >(a gap here) ZF1 4u > ZF2 4u
IMO, 4u ZF1 is still not in the category of excellent or outstanding.
It's better than ZF2 only by a margin.
Also on the margin of ZF1 4u's sweetspot, the stability degrades a lot.
This kind of performance doesn't show on ZF2, this is an improvement.
I used Arc10PG 3U in the past an well, the frame did twist and flex a lot... weak frame. I'm really surprised you state the 2U ARC10 that stable.
It's about 9am there right foo.tw? Good morning by the way
There's always a lot of difference between wieght.
Even the NS9000S 2u is much more stable than 3u and achieved very good result.
As always, there's also a gap between 3u and 4u ZF2.
From my experience, the more aero-dynamic the frame is, less stable it is.
The heavier the racket is, more stable it is.
This is why many hard hitters like to play with box-shaped heavy rackets.
They are basically the most stable type when you smash hard.
However, I think, to become the top level of players, one has to overcome the unstable frame.
That is, to hit at the very center of the sweetspot when you smash hard.
Surely it's difficult and players will miss the very center, and this is where their daily training helps.
The difference in training and physical properties is why some ppl can smash hard with a light racket.
I think the latest rackets offers more stability per head-weight&aero-resistance.
This is where the improvement is .