Results 1 to 17 of 27
Thread: Box vs Aero frame
09-17-2007, 02:05 AM #1
Box vs Aero frame
How is it that a box frame has more power than an aero frame? i thought it would be the other way around because the aero frame would cut through the air easier.
09-17-2007, 02:09 AM #2
I dont think that the shape of the framewill make much of a difference in the swinging speed, but I'm quite sure that the box-shaped ( isometric ) will actually provide more power and control, as the sweet-spot is larger.
The weight of the racquet, the stiffness of the shaft, and the string tension will affect the repulsion power too, i think.
09-17-2007, 02:12 AM #3
box/aero refers to the cross section of the frame. not the overall shape.
box frames are stronger and stiffer than aero frame, which makes racket stiffer and thus allow for more power transfer when the player is powerful enough.
09-17-2007, 02:57 AM #4
refer to this www.yonex.com/badminton/technology/racquets.html
check out the power armor system and delta power frame
more easy to compare are Yonex At800OFF and At800Def. Offensive type is more to box shape for power(stable) and Defensive type is more to speed(to defend). errr.... correct arr?
09-17-2007, 03:25 AM #5
box frames make a very lovely sound when clearing or smashing. =)
aero just feels nice on the swing but feels terrible when it impacts shuttle. )=
is the at900t aero or box???? ppl say it's aero but all other AT racquets have box frames.
09-17-2007, 03:51 AM #6
09-17-2007, 04:02 AM #7
It was a very close contest between box and aero in the Japan open Mens single finals
09-17-2007, 04:47 AM #8
09-17-2007, 04:51 AM #9
since the 9000NS is aero would that mean AT900P is more powerful?
09-17-2007, 05:56 AM #10
have to consider racket stiffness as well.
09-17-2007, 10:23 PM #11
There are too many variables being tossed about...
I think the correct question would be:
All other things kept the same (material, string tension, racket stiffness and whatnot), what are the advantages/disadvatages of a box-section frame and an aero-section frame?
09-17-2007, 10:35 PM #12
There are more cross-section types than just box and aero. However, between box and aero, the box has advantages in low costs (you can use very cheap materials because of the box's stronger structural design), more power but it is slow, sometimes very slow because of strong air resistance. AOTBE the aero is less strong but it has less air resistance and is therefor faster. However, the use of good and expensive materials, e.g. Yonex Swingpower 900 SP, can make an aero both strong and fast.
As a matter of fact it is possible to make a respectable box shaped cross-section racquet for US$10. Not possible with a good aero design.
09-17-2007, 11:06 PM #13
09-17-2007, 11:12 PM #14
The Swingpower 900 pops easily but it's a very nice racquet nonetheless.
09-17-2007, 11:17 PM #15
09-17-2007, 11:37 PM #16
09-18-2007, 12:20 AM #17
A racquet with high grade ultra high modulus graphite will resist the enormous twisting forces of power shots much better than a high modulus graphite racquet. But being more brittle because of its higher stiffness, UHMG will have less impact resistance than HMG and will not fare as well in a racquet clash. A steel racquet may be unbreakable in a racquet clash but it will perform poorly handling the enormous twisting forces of power shots.
My comments about the Swingpower being strong is from its strong resistance against the enormous twisting forces a racquet encounters during play. From a racquet clash impact point of view a steel racquet will probably be stronger than almost all modern high grade racquets, but it performs poorly. Would you call a steel racquet a strong racquet?
By bmtfreak123 in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 11: 04-04-2012, 02:34 PM
By shinn in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 2: 08-01-2011, 12:20 PM
By joedc in forum Racket Recommendation / ComparisonReplies: 3: 11-10-2009, 12:09 PM
By niemrieng in forum Racket Recommendation / ComparisonReplies: 2: 11-05-2009, 11:37 PM
By impact1984 in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 3: 10-08-2007, 06:54 AM