User Tag List

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    149
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default head heavy/head light/even balanced

    i was wondering at what point of a racket such as a conventional racket(67cm) to be head light/head heavy or balanced.....from the edge of the handle goin up to the shaft...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    167
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hahahalol
    i was wondering at what point of a racket such as a conventional racket(67cm) to be head light/head heavy or balanced.....from the edge of the handle goin up to the shaft...
    Well, there are very few rackets where the balance point is located at the same position, so it's quite a difficult question.. Does this really matter?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,237
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bluejeff
    Since we have seen lots of 300mm+ rackets here, a lot of people (including Yonex's official specs) are suggesting:

    Head Light Balance: 285mm or less
    Even Balance: 286mm to 295mm (or 300)
    Head HeavyBalance: 300mm+

    A lot of rackets nowadays have 310mm or even 315mm+, so, 295mm is really just a small case here .

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bluejeff
    Head Light Balance: 285mm or less
    Even Balance: 286mm to 295mm (or 300)
    Head HeavyBalance: 300mm+
    what state is the racquet in when this measurement is taken though?
    strung or not?
    no grip on the handle?

    balance points of my racquets, strung, couple of layers of electrical insulation tape on the handle + 1 Karakal Super Pu grip

    supposedly head-light racquets
    Carlton AS-1 256mm
    Carlton AS-1 260mm

    supposedly even racquets
    Carlton AS-Ti 256
    Carlton AS-Ti 258
    Carlton AS-Ti 261
    Carlton Aerogear 1000FX 259
    Yonex MP100 262

    supposedly head-heavy racquets
    Yonex Ti10 275
    Monsoon 3000Ti 279
    Carlton Airblade Yong Hock Kin 282
    Carlton Airblade Rasmussen Superlite 296

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    149
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    what state is the racquet in when this measurement is taken though?
    strung or not?
    no grip on the handle?

    balance points of my racquets, strung, couple of layers of electrical insulation tape on the handle + 1 Karakal Super Pu grip

    supposedly head-light racquets
    Carlton AS-1 256mm
    Carlton AS-1 260mm

    supposedly even racquets
    Carlton AS-Ti 256
    Carlton AS-Ti 258
    Carlton AS-Ti 261
    Carlton Aerogear 1000FX 259
    Yonex MP100 262

    supposedly head-heavy racquets
    Yonex Ti10 275
    Monsoon 3000Ti 279
    Carlton Airblade Yong Hock Kin 282
    Carlton Airblade Rasmussen Superlite 296
    i guess just the frame of the racket..stock grip..no string..no added accessories

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    toronto
    Posts
    149
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stijn
    Well, there are very few rackets where the balance point is located at the same position, so it's quite a difficult question.. Does this really matter?
    lol..dun think so...guess i was bored when i asked this a few weeks ago...

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    what state is the racquet in when this measurement is taken though?
    strung or not?
    no grip on the handle?

    balance points of my racquets, strung, couple of layers of electrical insulation tape on the handle + 1 Karakal Super Pu grip

    supposedly head-light racquets
    Carlton AS-1 256mm
    Carlton AS-1 260mm

    supposedly even racquets
    Carlton AS-Ti 256
    Carlton AS-Ti 258
    Carlton AS-Ti 261
    Carlton Aerogear 1000FX 259
    Yonex MP100 262

    supposedly head-heavy racquets
    Yonex Ti10 275
    Monsoon 3000Ti 279
    Carlton Airblade Yong Hock Kin 282
    Carlton Airblade Rasmussen Superlite 296
    I believe most of your racquets here have a case of an overdose of too much weight on the handle. It looks like you have gone 2 steps higher in the 'U' weight category and 10% off on the b/p. They will play differently from what they were designed for, but you could have got used to them.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    I believe most of your racquets here have a case of an overdose of too much weight on the handle. It looks like you have gone 2 steps higher in the 'U' weight category and 10% off on the b/p.
    You think 2 layers of insulation tape and 1 grip is an overdose?

    But saying that, get this:
    MP100 - 121g
    Ti10 - 114g
    the others are all about 20g up from the "list" weight. The Yonexs are a bit more because the handles are longer than on the Carltons.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    You think 2 layers of insulation tape and 1 grip is an overdose?

    But saying that, get this:
    MP100 - 121g
    Ti10 - 114g
    the others are all about 20g up from the "list" weight. The Yonexs are a bit more because the handles are longer than on the Carltons.
    This weight range qualifies your racquets as training racquets. However, in the old days my Dunlop Maxply would be even stevens with your today's racquets.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    4,010
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    This weight range qualifies your racquets as training racquets. However, in the old days my Dunlop Maxply would be even stevens with your today's racquets.
    Bear in mind that the overall weight of a racket is less important than the distribution of weight.

    Adding weight to the handle has only a minor effect on a racket's playing characteristics - it doesn't affect the feeling of weight very much, because it is near to your hand and therefore has little moment.

    Adding weight to the head has a big effect on a racket's playing characteristics. Weight added at the head has a large moment, so the racket feels heavier.

    Light badminton rackets are obviously better than very heavy ones, but there is a limit to this improvement. Otherwise the best racket in the world would be the Karakal SL-70

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gollum
    Bear in mind that the overall weight of a racket is less important than the distribution of weight.

    Adding weight to the handle has only a minor effect on a racket's playing characteristics - it doesn't affect the feeling of weight very much, because it is near to your hand and therefore has little moment.

    Adding weight to the head has a big effect on a racket's playing characteristics. Weight added at the head has a large moment, so the racket feels heavier.

    Light badminton rackets are obviously better than very heavy ones, but there is a limit to this improvement. Otherwise the best racket in the world would be the Karakal SL-70
    To a certain extent it is true at the pivot point or axis of rotation. . But the handle is quite a lengthy piece and it does have a difference, especially when a designed 3U racquet with strings, which is supposed to weigh from 88.3g to 92.3g, goes over 120g. The extra 30g is not all concentrated at the 'neutral' axis of rotation-which changes all the time, depending on your constantly changing hand grip-and it will take the sting out of your clears, drives and smashes.
    The only way is to find if this is true is to do an A/B evaluation/comparison.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    especially when a designed 3U racquet with strings, which is supposed to weigh from 88.3g to 92.3g, goes over 120g. The extra 30g is not all concentrated at the 'neutral' axis of rotation
    who said it was 3U? Both my Yonex are 2U.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    who said it was 3U? Both my Yonex are 2U.
    A 2U is only 1-5g heavier heavier than a 3U. Your overall weight is just too heavy, even heavier than Punch Gunalan's 1960s-1970s Dunlop Maxply. But if you are used to your heavy racquets, I suppose you can live with them. But believe me, you have blunted some of the sting in your racquets.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    I believe most of your racquets here have a case of an overdose of too much weight on the handle. It looks like you have gone 2 steps higher in the 'U' weight category and 10% off on the b/p. They will play differently from what they were designed for, but you could have got used to them.
    The MP100 was about due for a new grip anyway, so I've stripped it down.
    To my surprise I found 6 (!) layers of insulation tape under the grip.
    With the grip down to the wood, the weight is now 92g (strung), BP 315mm.

    So how much weight can I afford to put on the handle before it
    "play's differently from what it was designed for"

    bear in mind that 1 Karakal Super PU grip will add about 12g

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    The MP100 was about due for a new grip anyway, so I've stripped it down.
    To my surprise I found 6 (!) layers of insulation tape under the grip.
    With the grip down to the wood, the weight is now 92g (strung), BP 315mm.

    So how much weight can I afford to put on the handle before it
    "play's differently from what it was designed for"

    bear in mind that 1 Karakal Super PU grip will add about 12g
    If your racquet is a 2U it would weigh at around 90-94g with the standard 8g grip but without string. With string it would be about 93.4g to 97.4g. Try not to go over 100g. If it is a 3U just subtract 5g. If it goes over 100g there are ways you can do to reduce the weight in the handle. The easy one is to take off the plastic filler cap or a counterweight inside the butt cap, if there is one. The newer Yonex racquets do have this inner cap or counterweight. The more professional way is to take away more wood in the tunnel of the handle with a wooden drilling bit. This is not as daunting as you might think. I do it all the time, sometimes to re-balance a racquet that has gone off balance, with the customer not even being aware of it except that he is aware that he has got back some sting in his shots.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    : 07-27-2011, 12:15 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    : 07-08-2011, 08:05 PM
  3. Head light or head heavy rackets likely to cause tennis elbow?
    By TRENTEND in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 19
    : 09-23-2008, 11:49 AM
  4. How does 'head heavy' or 'head light' effect a racquet's suitability for a player?
    By bad_man_ton in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 34
    : 06-12-2007, 06:10 AM
  5. Head-heavy/Handle-heavy/Balanced eackets
    By ari in forum General Forum
    Replies: 1
    : 03-28-2001, 02:00 AM

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
  •