User Tag List

Page 38 of 85 FirstFirst ... 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... LastLast
Results 630 to 646 of 1441
  1. #630
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    You sure that the NS9000X is faster? NS9000X does not have a slender x-section and would not be a fast racquet.
    huh? wut?? how slender are we talking about in order for a racket to be fast? I would think the balance of a racket is more significant.

  2. #631
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Brunei & Malaysia
    Posts
    178
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i think both factors should be take into account..but i think, racket head dimension contribute more to racket head speed..ie. imagine swinging a head heavy box like frame..wont be nice...

    and even if we do have a racket with head light balance..if combined with slender x-section...it'll cut thru air and move at a faster speed..

    reminds me of my carlton AS-1 racket...light..yet powerful..awesome rackets. ^_^

    Just my 2cents

  3. #632
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What should I string my Arc 10 jp with?
    I'm deciding whether to use the recommended NBG98 or BG80 at around 23lbs on 3uG4

  4. #633
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,989
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRDartz View Post
    What should I string my Arc 10 jp with?
    I'm deciding whether to use the recommended NBG98 or BG80 at around 23lbs on 3uG4
    To be honest, If you need to ask, I think you will be ok with either of the options mentioned!

    my 2 c.

    /Twobeer

  5. #634
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer View Post
    To be honest, If you need to ask, I think you will be ok with either of the options mentioned!

    my 2 c.

    /Twobeer
    Thanks for your input. I current use a MP90 with BG68Ti. I like the control I get but it seems shots aren't too powerful (might be my poor technique).

  6. #635
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anyone did a test of the 2U version?

  7. #636
    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 MSN04 View Post
    huh? wut?? how slender are we talking about in order for a racket to be fast? I would think the balance of a racket is more significant.
    I string and do some modifications/then test a few NS9000 quite often. To me it is not a fast racquet at all. Its dimensions are moderately fat. If it trims down its x-section to about 10mm or no more than 10.25mm on its width and 6mm or less on its height (including the T joint bulge), then and only then can it be considered fast and maneuverable. But then at these reduced dimensions it may not have the power. Compromise and more compromises, that is what the NS9000 is about. Racquet balance is also a factor but not in the same way as a slim x-section.

    You can swing two identical racquets, one with string, the other without. This gives you an idea of the effects of air resistance.

  8. #637
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete LSD View Post
    Anyone did a test of the 2U version?
    yes, someone on the chinese forum has a review on that.

  9. #638
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We have moved from heavy wooden racquets to lighter aluminium ones, and then to carbon graphite, and now to carbon graphite with a matrix of other high performance fibers. Over the same time, weight has also decreased from close to 150g to the 4U to 2U we see today. But we are still stuck with 2U weight category racquets for the last 20+ years for power.
    I think we have today the raw materials to dispense with 2U or even 3U weight categories. Power comes from racquet head speed (of course technique is important) and less from weight, as it should be. Lighter and faster racquets of say the 4U or lighter class is the way to go. If improved performance racquets of today still have to depend on weight for power, say a 2U, I don't think we will ever make a quantum leap forward. We need to think outside the box. Remember the shuttle is less than 5g in weight. You don't need a sledgehammer to it hit hard and fast.

  10. #639
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    721
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    ...I don't think we will ever make a quantum leap forward. We need to think outside the box...
    You are right, just change the design of the shuttle...

    Thanks.

  11. #640
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Or better yet, use E-1000 .

    Quote Originally Posted by HKChua View Post
    You are right, just change the design of the shuttle...

    Thanks.

  12. #641
    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 Pete LSD View Post
    Or better yet, use E-1000 .
    Yes, the E-1000 actually started off with being off specs. Only those subsequently modified ones and the TEP Select version were good enough. But that was two years ago, and in badminton 2 years is a long time. They are by my standard a bit dated today, just as all 2U racquets, even the best of them, are dated today. Today's badminton has changed a lot. Racquets must now reduce weight and go for speed with effortless power. The key is to design very slim x-section frames with the proper matrix of carbon graphite/epoxy that will convert the frame (not the shaft) into a storehouse of energy like a condenser. All the raw materials are with us today. It is just a simple problem of coming up with the right matrix.
    Even the grommets are adverse to reduced air resistance. Paired grommets like those in the MP series and those used at the throat are a drag. Try cutting all your grommets so that they are flush with the inner side of the frame. It helps and it costs nothing.
    Also, don't carry any old baggage. It hampers one's ability to think outside the box.

  13. #642
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Lighter and faster racquets will also help players with poor technique-they will have to adjust to a faster hand speed in the absence of weight. With faster hand speed the game will be faster and will bring you one step closer to the professionals.

  14. #643
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    169
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    But with lighter racquet you'll have to swing faster at the same ratio of weight different to get the same momentum transfer. For a racquet half the weight as existing you'll have to swing twice as fast to transfer the same momentum. Basically thats why a lot of ppl find it easier to use AT racquets for power, the head heaviness allows you to swing much slower to transfer the same momentum as a NS. I guess designers need to balance a realistic swing speed of the average person, i doubt anyone would play well with a 45g racquet at this point.

  15. #644
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    3,966
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    right..in badminton 2 years is a very long time...

    the currently used ti-10's, at700's, ns900's used are all outdated.. I can't believe anybody still plays with them...
    and yes, I'm currently playing, yet again, with a racket designed in 2003... and I love it...

  16. #645
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,653
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jerby View Post
    right..in badminton 2 years is a very long time...

    the currently used ti-10's, at700's, ns900's used are all outdated.. I can't believe anybody still plays with them...
    and yes, I'm currently playing, yet again, with a racket designed in 2003... and I love it...
    How about me, I am still useing my lovely Cab30ms. So are you calling me an antique? Or Dino?

  17. #646
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    3,966
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentheart View Post
    How about me, I am still useing my lovely Cab30ms. So are you calling me an antique? Or Dino?


    I'm not...I couldn't care less in which age your racket is made in...

    merely commentating on taneepak's statement(s)

Page 38 of 85 FirstFirst ... 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Yonex ArcSaber Z Slash Review
    By ants in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 2027
    : 05-23-2012, 06:19 PM
  2. Yonex ArcSaber 8 DX Review :D
    By Deathblader in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 13
    : 11-25-2010, 05:22 PM
  3. Yonex ArcSaber 9 Review
    By silentheart in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 53
    : 07-16-2010, 06:36 PM
  4. My Review: Yonex ArcSaber 9 vs. Ti-10 (3rd Gen.)
    By magiadam in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 6
    : 11-03-2008, 02:48 AM
  5. Yonex ArcSaber 10's personal review from other person
    By ThinkRiver in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 1
    : 02-23-2008, 04:41 PM

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
  •