Results 1 to 17 of 27
Thread: Min. string length
04-01-2006, 06:38 AM #1
Min. string length
Can someone tell me what is minimum lenght of string needed to string a recket (2 pieces 4 knot)?
I bought a yonex 500m reel of string and i try to calculate how can I string as many recket as possible. My calculation tell me that for main 440cm and for cross 415cm should be enough to string a recket. Is that rihgt? If thats enough i could string 58 recket with 500m reel.
I use eagnas crank st-200 machine.
04-01-2006, 08:36 AM #2
Hi if you make high tension you got more string left,usualy you need 8.5 to 9 m for one raquet!
04-01-2006, 09:05 AM #3
Your question depends a little bit on the string tension, how high you go. The safest way is to measure out 33 feet. If you use higher tension, you can go 32 feet.
I normally do a one-piece, two-knot at 26/29lbs. and I only need 29-30 feet.
04-02-2006, 09:11 AM #4
I second Sir DinkALot. If you want to save string, do 1 piece method. Since YY is ok with starting cross from bottom now.
04-02-2006, 10:07 AM #5
Originally Posted by silentheart
I guess with Yonex's "approval", more people are "OK" with it.
04-02-2006, 01:47 PM #6
What I do is to measure about 8 rackets length for each piece of string, thus 16 rackets for a 2 piece string job. I usually found about 1 racket length of string left after a 25lbs job, so DinkAlot is right for measuring about 32 feets for each racket, and 31 feets should do too but at your own risk.
04-02-2006, 08:03 PM #7
Originally Posted by Wong8Egg
04-03-2006, 02:48 AM #8
Thanx for answering my question ppl.
I strung mostly YY reckets 80% and some Victor reckets. Tenison is max @25lb becouse I strung reckets on club level.
I could string a recket in 1 piece but i read many topics on this forum that says, that 2 piece stringing is better and faster.
04-03-2006, 06:16 AM #9
Originally Posted by p@p@k
04-03-2006, 07:17 AM #10
Personally, my own minimal length (w/o taking too much risk) will be at least 9m. You need a few inches extra here and there to tension the last pieces (main or cross). To further squeeze the extra 0.3m or so, will give me only headaches rather than savings.
04-03-2006, 12:12 PM #11
Originally Posted by LazyBuddy
I believe this can affect the warranty on the racket if rackets are returned due to a problem and are seen to have been strung incorrectly. This is what seems to happen in the UK. Best to cut out the strings first before returning if you do have a problem with the frame etc.
04-03-2006, 05:04 PM #12
Originally Posted by RAMADA77
04-05-2006, 12:31 PM #13
Originally Posted by LazyBuddy
Not sure if that is the case in the UK, but it may well now be !
I was told this a couple of years ago particularly when the string was tensioned slightly higher than that recommended.
I suppose you cannot blame them really.
04-25-2007, 12:10 PM #14
What's the precise lenght for crosses amd mains?
After all, what should be the exact lenght (in meters or feets) for crosses and mains, in a 4 knots stringing?
04-25-2007, 12:39 PM #15
Please be more specific. Are you asking
a) min main and cross string length to string a racquet
b) string length of main and cross string after stringing
The answer depend on racquet type and model. Also depend on the machine you use. Are you using starting clamp or string extension. Also depend on the tension (not to much).
04-25-2007, 04:22 PM #16
Last Year I mostly strung a Yonex (MP, Armortec, NS) racquets and came to this:
For main I needed 490cm and for crosses 400cm. Stringing tension between 10-13kg.
So I strung 56 racquets with 500m reel
04-25-2007, 05:26 PM #17
Yeap, do it anyway you wish . Someone get to try diagonal.
Originally Posted by DinkAlot
By taneepak in forum Badminton StringReplies: 47: 02-18-2009, 09:48 PM
By bluecraze07 in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 13: 01-09-2009, 06:42 AM
By silentheart in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 11: 04-23-2007, 08:46 AM
By jerby in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 18: 01-04-2006, 05:29 PM
By Dave18 in forum General ForumReplies: 3: 11-24-2005, 09:17 PM