ZFII 3U vs 4U?

If you are given a strong wrist and powerful arm, then dont go for lighter rackets. I mean, how heavy could a racket today go? 95gram at most after strung and overgrip is still pretty light. i have both 3U of VT80 and VTZFii. Indeed VTZFii is slightly head heavier than VT80 and really nice for clear and smash. Never try (never will) 4U version because i just dont see the point of what could mere 4-6gram mean for a racket (players are getting more and more spoiled nowadays with choices of weight that even a 5 year old kid can swing nicely with no complain)

However, having heavier racket (in this case is mostly 3U already considered heavy) will make you want to attack more than being in defensive mode. Attacking feels great with VTZFii but very slightly slower when in defense (but again, you can never win with only being defensive, can you?).

If 3U weight is still heavier and not fast enough, then i believe the best solution is to work out a bit in the gymn rather that getting 4U version.

Just my opinion here.

 

I agree with arfandy. If you're going for a "super head heavy" racket, there's no point going for a 4U (in my opinion). I've tested 3U and 4U ZFI, and 3U and 4U TK9000, and very much preferred the 3U versions. You simply get slightly less power with 4U versions. Paul Stewart (some UK badminton coach that's quite respected here) reviewed 3U VT80, 3U ZFI, and 3U ZFII and gave all of them great marks. Then he reviews 4U TK9000 and gives it another great mark despite never trying the 3U version (he makes the assumption that 4U would be better...doesn't make any sense, considering he never mentioned that 4U would be better for the VT80 etc).

If you want to get a 4U version of the ZFII, I'd suggest getting a Victor Jetspeed 10 instead (it only comes in 4U on the regular market, but go for the heaviest version you can find). In this way, you get a racket that's been made for speed but is also moderately head heavy. Your attacks will be less powerful overall, but perhaps you are playing high level men's doubles where having an extra 10-20% power on your smash doesn't actually make a difference in the rally, and it's more important to have well placed attacks, good defense, and good drives.

 

You guys are talking rubbish. If you aren't a very very decent doubles player and I mean ranked in a high leagues you will always struggle with a 3U ZFII when it comes to defence and fast exchanges. A 3U ZFII has a wet swing weight of ~47g and a 4U ZFII ~44g. You should know that a 3U MX80 has a swing weight of ~43g. And a MX80 is a beast and hell of a racket. Saying that a ZFII is a light racket and for kids is pure sh*t. You all make the mistake, that you always think about your smash. Smash power her, fast smash there and power etc. What do you do, when your opponent are really good players and place the shuttle there that you can't smash or their game is more based on drives, or... you all think you are heavy smashers, but what do you do when your opponents have the better and fast smash? Your choice is based on one kind of stroke, which is always a bad choice. Or you will play a tournament? You will struggle with you baseball bat.
The ZFII 4U is a great racket regardless, singles or doubles. You can produce with it good and effective smashs. It's anything but not headlight. Even a 4U is hammer.
Suggesting a Jetspeed 10 is also rubbish. That's a different kind of racket. Much head lighter than a ZFII 4U. But that's a different story...

 

Wow, cool off, if everyone responded like you, this forum would become very unfriendly. People are entitled to their opinions without being ridiculed.

Firstly I consider myself a "very very decent doubles player" hehe.

Also I don't go by "head weight this" and "head weight that", but by actual feel in real-world play - it's subjective, but then everything ultimately is when push comes to shove. That is, how one performs in real-world play is all that matters ultimately. In my experience, the 4U JS10 (on the heavy spectrum of 4U admittedly) is like a lighter version of my 3U ZFII. As I've posted in the JS10 thread, I don't know how to explain it, but when executing power overhead shots, the JS10 seems to become more head heavy than it initially feels.

 

I also have the 3U MX80 and have enjoyed using it for the last couple of years. I've never understood the posts here on badmintoncentral claiming it's some "beast and hell of a racket". I think one poster mentioned it nearly hospitalised him because it was so stiff or something. I've never had any aches or pains playing with this racket. Either I got an off spec MX80 (that's really flexible?...doesn't feel that way though), or I really believe that technique is the issue here.

Regardless, I think it's worthwhile doing personal experimentation when it comes to "3U" or "4U". I've had good firsthand experience with head heavy rackets (including ZFI and TK9000) and I really don't see any advantage in selecting a 4U over the 3U. As I said, you just lose a bit of power without any change in defense and drives. That's how I've felt anyway. Others may feel differently. I think even pros feel differently, hence why some use 3U and some use 4U.

 

I will give my opinion on the ZF2 here. I have been using it for over a month now and love. Nearly half the people I see that play baddy have a ZF2 and most can't use it properly regardless of 3U/4U. Unless your body and skill is developed then there's no point getting the ZF2.

You would probably be better off with an Arcsaber 11.

 

20% extra power from a racket! Seriously?

 

As I said, I don't really go by numbers - I was just throwing one out to make a point. Without having an objective speed measuring device, I won't know for sure. But in real-world play, I feel I get slightly less power with 4U rackets compared to 3U.

 

I think that's a good point. However I'd go further and say that of those who can't "use XXX racket properly", they wouldn't be able to use any racket "properly" at all. Seriously, I truly believe if you have decent technique etc, the racket only makes a slight difference to your play, and it's more of a personal feeling rather than "I need this specific weight otherwise I can't play properly".

Back in the 1990s, I'm pretty sure all rackets were much heavier (I started with a steel racket, and I'm older and much stronger now), and I'm pretty sure we weren't hearing of more people being "hospitalised" because the racket was too much to handle.

 

I'm sorry, but sometimes it's necessary. Did you read all my posts, to judge my mood? Especially this power smash department is non-sense. I was talking to OP, because he want to decide if he should go for a 3U or 4U. Congrats that you are such a great player, but it's OP decision and not yours.
Please understand that head weight measurements are a good unit to tell how head heavy racket is. Swinging a racket is just physics, so measurements of head weight are a superior thing than any BP to compare rackets.
TBH a JS10 4U can't be a lighter version of a 3U ZFII. Their is too much difference in head weight.

 

And I was posting with the OP's queries in mind. I've never tested the VT9, but I would guess that since it's part of the Voltric series, it would be head heavy. And since he's using a 3U version and appears to be having no problems with it, the 3U VTZFII would be the natural progression.

 

There is a BIG differens between VT9 3U and VTZFII 3U! To have a strong arm is a good thing to have, but not the mark for to choose rackets. It´s all about the technique you have to handel a racket. The reason to switch to VTZF compare to VT9 should be "precision", you won´t get more power with ZF but with the stiff shaft you will get more precision.... If you have the skills!

My opinion is to choose when you are at the shop an have the racket in hands, what does your stomach say´s... there is to many personal opinions for recommendation for you here!

For me, I love my VTZFII 4U....my 3U version is my fifth choice!

 

Get the 3U one, since you are already used to HH 3U racket it will not be hard to adjust to it. 3U will have more Power than 4U. Using a 3U HH racket for doubles is no problem, you will get used to it. I always use 3U Armortec 700 for doubles and it is no problem.

 

I agree with you. Head heavy is not an absolute and accurate description of a racket type. The head of the ZFII is much heavier than the head of the VT9. If OP scratch on the border of his defence he would be better of with a 4U. Especially for doubles.
I know here has everybody a stronger wrist than the pros and a better and quicker defence and can handle 3U Sledgehammers with ease when it comes to doubles. That's the only reason why this guys recommend a 3U for doubles. I guess that no pro use a 3U sledgehammer for doubles. Maybe these guys all go for the 3U because the can't handle the stiffness with less head weight? Who knows.
Power is not the master key to make points and win. Maybe most people here don't play badminton and only compare their smash power in a competition like ring the bell? I don't know. When you can create space in singles to finish the rally with a save point, it's worthless if you hit with more or less power. If your smash has a good angle and good placement it doesn't matter how hard you hit. For doubles it is similar. If you are a good smasher you will generate bombs with a 4U and gain quickness and defence. Maybe you 3U guys never challenge a much better opponents?

 

I understand your points ucantseeme. I actually made similar points above already:

I agree that we shouldn't use "blanket statements" for everyone. That's sort of what you're doing though - claiming (rather sarcastically too for reasons I don't fully understand) that one needs to be "better than the pros etc" to wield a head heavy 3U in doubles. Everyone has a certain playing level, and everyone has a certain comfort level with the rackets they use. The most important thing is to test it out yourself. There's no substitute for real-world play.

Did you ever use a steel racket? How about U or 2U rackets? Because I have (and I'm sure many others here have too), and going from those rackets to a 3U initially feels really good. But there reaches a certain point where the racket becomes too light. I've also tested 5U and 6U rackets, and they were far too light for me (for example, really disliked Apacs Lethal Light Special, but really liked Lethal 60/70). 4U is borderline for me. Maybe I've got bad technique, but I generally don't see much difference in drives/defense between 3U and 4U, but I notice the difference in smashing power (as above). Or maybe it's because I've "grown up" with heavier rackets and am simply used to them. I tested 3U and 4U ZFI and TK9000 thoroughly, trying to psychologically convince myself that the lighter racket should improve my drives/defense etc (I mean, look at Paul Stewart's review on 4U TK9000, and Mark A raving on about his three 4U TK9000's...that should be enough to psychologically swing someone to 4U right hehe). That wasn't the case at all, and in fact overall, I felt I played better shots with the 3U (not just in the smash department). The differences were slight, but they were there.

Like many others, I had read thoroughly about people's experiences with 3U and 4U. That's why I decided to test it myself personally. And it's okay to disagree with people, because it's more important to honestly evaluate what's best for you. In that way, you can enjoy your game more. If all you care about is smashing and you enjoy it, then don't let anyone else tell you otherwise. Most people here play badminton for fun - they're not getting paid for it and their ego doesn't get damaged if they happen to lose a game to "better" players. If you're looking to improve significantly because you want to play more competitively and at higher levels etc, then choosing between 3U and 4U should be one of the last things you do - getting formal coaching, performing drills, working out in gym etc are much much more important.

 

I started playing with a 2U. I'm not that old. But the overall weight isn't the problem and the reason what I'm talking bout. A 3U can be faster than a 4U but it is relate the head weight. Sometimes a 2U can be faster than a 4U but then we are talking about different racket with a different balance. I agree with you that anything lighter of current rackets than 4U is lacking in penetration. No doubt. But we are talking about a freakish head heavy 4U. Not a NR800. The distribution of the weight is more important than the overall weight. No added weight at the handle will change anything. I can add lead tape on the handle of a 4U NR800 to make it a U. Does I need a strong wrist for using it? No!
You also forget the habituation. Centuries ago it was normal to play with racket with a huge head weight. Now many people are used to less head weight. They started badminton with less head weight and can get soreness if it is increased.
I agree with you that for a dinasaur who played badminton in the 60's a 83g light racket is a joke but your shoes are also a joke for them. They never needed much cushion, support etc. They played with shoes which some of use wear at the beach in summer. These changes are called progress. But if they had in the past the chance to choose a 4U ZFII or a 150g steel and wood racket, they went for the first. No doubt.
IMO some of you hyperbolize the difference in terms of power of a 4U and a 3U. There is no other advantage than power. I would always go for a 3U, but if it comes to one of the head heaviest racket in the last 10 years I would choose the 4U.

 

I hear you loud and clear. But my points still hold as above.

By the way, I've thoroughly tested VT80, ZFI and ZFII, and find the ZFII has better aerodynamics than the others (possibly balances out the high "swing weight"). So if you were going to choose a head heavy 3U racket, the ZFII would seem to be the ideal choice.

 

From AT 900 P user ,3ug5, I can tell you that ZF ii 3ug5 is better.
I try 4u ZFII but unlucky I can not play it well.
When I try ZF II LCW 3ug5 it make difference, I play it better than my old AT 900P.
Now I have 2 ZF II LCW rackets,and replace my old AT 900P.
IMHO.

 

You arguments don't weight the most. What you feel, impressions you get etc. is an anecdote and subjective. Not more. I was talking about scientific measurements and physics. Laws which describe how the world works, objective.
Let me ask you just two questions:

1. Were the 3U and the 4U you compared same gripped and strung with same string and tension? If not, you didn't make a serious comparison. You played with total different rackets.
2. Did you gave both rackets the same time to adjust? If not, no wonder that you go-to which you use since a year feels better.

Just an anecdote:

I was testing a racket from a friend. Switch Pro. Don't like it. He gave me his BS10, 3U, same coded as mine, just wrapped with an replacement grip on the original grip and with the same string, strung by the same stringer, just at 22/24lbs. I hated this racket I couldn't play with it. It was awful. It was the same racket, with just 2 different parameters (BG80P @22/24 instead of @30/30 and with a replacement grip on the original one instead of a half overgrip on bare wood. The funny thing I have several BS10's as my go-to. If I had test drive it these day I never had bought it.