Results 1 to 6 of 6
07-22-2007, 11:40 AM #1
Review on Kumpoo POWER SHOT NANO 1100
I always try other brand of racket instead of Yonex because I think they are too expensive. However out of all the racket I tried, Yonex still makes the best racket in this industry. Recently I just bought in the Kumpoo POWER SHOT NANO 1100. Kumpoo is the first used the nano technology in badminton from what I heard and I have always have great interest in it. However I email the Japan HQ before about possible source of oversea purchase and the reply was disappointing until recently I discover they finally have sales office in mainland China. Now I finally got it.
My main weapon is MP99 BG65@26lbs. For the Nano1100, I strung it BG65@24lbs.
First impression was disappointing. I guess I put too much hope in it. Its very light (4UG5) and the shaft is not as stiff as MP99. The feeling is like Yonex Nanospeed 7000 but much lighter.
Clear: Require bit more strength than usual. Easy to get a good clear.
Drop: Its a good control racket and allow me to put the ball close to the net.
Net: Fast. Very Fast! Its easy for my finger to send the ball to where I wanted. Easy for me to create chances for my partner in the back.
Smash: Average performance. The overall power is weaker than MP99. It will be a pain for a lot of power player.
Drive: VERY FAST. Power of 4U allows the driving game push to next level.
For that kind of price, I think believe I found new love. Its like Yonex Nano7000 but cheaper and lighter. Its not recommended to any power smash player.
07-22-2007, 02:28 PM #2
thanks for your info, may i ask what's the price? i've heard alot about Kumpoo but one thing i found weird is:
- their normal series on Japan website (powershot or nano, expensive series) have tension to only max 23lbs.
- but they also have some series that you can only find on their China website (powershot lightning P300, P310) with max tension to 35lbs (yes, 35lbs) and the price is cheaper too (about 50eur for a lightning P310). I dont understand their price policy, maybe you can find those series too.
07-22-2007, 07:45 PM #3
i got mine for a much cheaper price compare to Japan. (about RMB200 cheaper from some online store I found) The shop I bought from is recommended by the China agent so I guess I didnt buy in the fake one. The price is set to aim for China market I guess. Their factor is also in China and that should lower the cost of good. the strung tension is up to 28lbs according to warranty. In japan they usually have a lower one so avoid too much claim. (same with Yonex)
I have no interest in trying out series since i couldnt get too much info on it and doesnt seem to build so good for the lower model. For the lower end model, there a lot of good brand to try instead. In the future, I am planning to buy in the Nano Power 900 and 1300 for testing.
07-25-2007, 08:58 PM #4
After more testing and comments from coach and player. Its safe to say this is a great racket.
Additional comment: (from my coach)
Slim shaft and 4U racket usually give great vibration and this one (NANOPOWER 1100) doesn't. Balance racket with slightly head heavy allow user feel the racket and point it to exactly where you want the ball go. Great control racket. It will be very good for both double and single. In the double game, since its so light, its easier to play a good net play and driving game. Now the rackets are going toward the light weight structure since the badminton game now require more speed than before.
10-04-2008, 11:01 PM #5
anything else about that racket?
is kumpoo rackets good for playing?
10-07-2008, 01:26 AM #6
Depends on your style but its good for playing. Its a well balance racket but its not for hard smasher. the shaft is too soft
By superstar19 in forum Buy & SellReplies: 0: 08-26-2010, 02:53 AM
By Sealman in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 125: 02-23-2010, 06:11 PM
By hola4 in forum Buy & SellReplies: 4: 01-23-2010, 12:02 AM
By Matt in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 7: 10-12-2008, 01:11 PM
By dranmo in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 5: 10-07-2008, 02:45 PM