User Tag List

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 52 to 68 of 72
  1. #52
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,161
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Yonex under tension

    I just have just strung my W7 with BG-80 at 26/29 (crank) and taken some readings: mains are 0.69 at the centre, graduating to 0.72 at the sides, while crosses are between 0.67 and 0.68.

    Since it is ostensibly 0.68mm, it would seem that BG-80, at least, assumes a crank tension in the high twenties (or an electronic in the mid twenties). Makes sense, as their rackets are warrantied up to somewhere in this band.

  2. #53
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ashaway UK picked up on this thread (way back when)
    http://ashawayuk.blogspot.com/2008/0...omparison.html

    P.S.
    Hi again everybody

  3. #54
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls View Post
    Ashaway UK picked up on this thread (way back when)
    http://ashawayuk.blogspot.com/2008/0...omparison.html

    P.S.
    Hi again everybody
    WB neil. I personally don't follow or believed the stated diameter of any brands of string. I just know what strings do what and nots, and how they're compared wtih each others. However, yonex should be embarassed to have such huge deviation of diameter from the specs stated on package. Japan products are often revelled for their high quality and tight tolerance to specification. If they can make their racket color pattern so detailed to thwart counterfeiting, surely they can make string diameter more closer to specified dia. If yonex had just stated their string specs in AWG (20,21,22), that is fine but stating actual diameter and can't meet them? --> evil.

  4. #55
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    just a quick note
    I dug out an old imperial micrometer and tested some BG65 I was stringing
    (calibration: zero looked dead on)

    untensioned BG65 (black) at various places
    28.7, 29.3, 29.2 thousandths of an inch
    ~ 0.729, 0.744, 0.742 mm

    BG65 (black) @ 16lb
    27.5, 28 thousandths of an inch
    ~ 0.699, 0.711 mm

    not a particularly thorough test, but some backup for the claim that Yonex's thicknesses are measured under tension

  5. #56
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skunklover View Post
    i think it should be when strung at like 23 or 22 lbs.
    this seems to make sense for yonex at least, because it is in the middle of their recomended range.
    by your account, shouldn't racket manufacturers categorize their racket weight and balance OF A STRUNG RACKET

  6. #57
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jerby View Post
    itsn't it the same with racketsweights?

    karakals rackets weigh an amazing 75grams..without a grip...
    ashaway rackets reach 76grams...without the handle and grip...
    I have some sotx which were weighed after they were strung etc etc...
    the best policy is the declare specifications 'as is condition' of a sale product.

    karakal could say 70 gram too if grip and paints were removed, maybe sub 70 gram too if grommets are excluded as well.

  7. #58
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls View Post
    just a quick note
    I dug out an old imperial micrometer and tested some BG65 I was stringing
    (calibration: zero looked dead on)

    untensioned BG65 (black) at various places
    28.7, 29.3, 29.2 thousandths of an inch
    ~ 0.729, 0.744, 0.742 mm

    BG65 (black) @ 16lb
    27.5, 28 thousandths of an inch
    ~ 0.699, 0.711 mm

    not a particularly thorough test, but some backup for the claim that Yonex's thicknesses are measured under tension
    at what ambient temperature and humidity???

  8. #59
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drifit View Post
    now, how about tolerances?
    Dink has the effort to produce some reference for us to view. plus minus couple of 0.05mm, shall be fine.
    can i sue manufacturer if their specification is out from printed-label??
    yes u can sue if u can show the court the wrong diameter caused u mental anguish that led to personal financial failure.

  9. #60
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    3,966
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    the best policy is the declare specifications 'as is condition' of a sale product.
    Well, Does it matter?
    as long as it's consistent it's fine. Best would be if all brands were on the same page, but you can't have it all

    Give a man 2 rackets, one says frameweight 70, other frameweight 75.
    Give the same man, the same two rackets, but now call them 80 grams and 85 grams (respectively) 'unstrung weight'.
    ...Does it matter?
    Now, the confusion comes when the man gets a 70 Frameweight and a 90grams unstrung weight, or something like that.

  10. #61
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jerby View Post
    Well, Does it matter?
    as long as it's consistent it's fine. Best would be if all brands were on the same page, but you can't have it all

    Give a man 2 rackets, one says frameweight 70, other frameweight 75.
    Give the same man, the same two rackets, but now call them 80 grams and 85 grams (respectively) 'unstrung weight'.
    ...Does it matter?
    Now, the confusion comes when the man gets a 70 Frameweight and a 90grams unstrung weight, or something like that.
    string is different. A small difference of +/-0.05mm can change playability significantly plus that these small changes can be affected by many outside variables like tension, temperature, and age of string. If yonex can't be assure of string diameter because of various reason, they should rate diametesr like in your examples of weight where yonex uses U's which they could use symbol D's. They could also use the more relaxed existing AWG rating system.

    AWG
    20 0.812 mm
    21 0.723 mm
    22 0.644 mm
    Last edited by cooler; 01-29-2009 at 02:53 PM.

  11. #62
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    3,966
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    string is different. A small difference of +/-0.05mm can change playability significantly plus that these small changes can be affected by many outside variables like tension, temperature, and age of string. If yonex can't be assure of string diameter because of various reason, they should rate diametesr like in your examples of weight where yonex uses U's which they could use symbol D's. They could also use the more relaxed existing AWG rating system.

    AWG
    20 0.812 mm
    21 0.723 mm
    22 0.644 mm
    but they are sure, and tension/temp/age/etc is nothing they can do about.
    They are consistent in there string, but they use a different 'scale'.
    (It's like ashaway qoutes it's prices in usd, and yonex in euro's. How's that for a comparison?)

  12. #63
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,658
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Guys, both of you are right on the subject. Yes, YY should be embarrASSed for not giving the condition of measuring of string thickness. (yes you hear it from me) And yes, Dr Jerby is right also, YY want to produce consistent product.

    Thanks for Mark doing all the work on measuring the string. Ans good pick on the Ashaway line for Neil.

  13. #64
    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 cooler View Post
    If yonex can't be assure of string diameter because of various reason, they should rate diametesr like in your examples of weight where yonex uses U's which they could use symbol D's. They could also use the more relaxed existing AWG rating system.
    back of my packet of BG65 it says
    0.70mm / 22GA.

    but then it also says 10m / 33feet
    and we know we'd all complain if there was LESS than 10m / 33feet in the packet.

    Maybe they think we'd all complain if it was LESS than 0.70mm thick

    The marketing fulff says "This 0.70mm gauge is processed braided fiber which is strong for friction"
    but then that's sales BS, and sounds badly translated at that.

  14. #65
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    128
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If thinner string always play better than thicker string regardless of make, material, and whatever technology they put in strings. Then why doesn't every Pro use the thinnest string possible from their sponsors? Or do they?

    Unless you're good enough to know the difference under a control test, why concern ourselves with it unless you want to sue Yonex.

    What we should really discuss is how the colour of the string can influence your game play/mood. And if they should implement a wear indicator on the string like toothbrushes so we know when it is time to change strings...

  15. #66
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DinkAlot View Post
    My panda paws knew all strings were not created equal.

    So, thanks to SCChang for loaning me his Mitutoyo 500-672 digital caliper, I went to work...

    In a nutshell: Yonex and Gosen understate the thickness of its strings moderately to significantly. Ashaway is very accurate.

    I heard that both Yonex and Gosen measure string thickness while tensioned (don't know tension, length of pull nor how it's pulled) and I know for a fact Ashaway does not.

    My measurements were straight out of the package, untensioned.


    Here are the results in detail:



    Here's the caliper, it's so nice and oh so shiiiiiiney!

    hey dinkie, the first link is obselete now, can u provide new link or post a snap shot of the table?

  16. #67
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,203
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    hey dinkie, the first link is obselete now, can u provide new link or post a snap shot of the table?
    I need to update the file as there are more strings to add to the list...one of these days...

    Please remember, Ashaway and Yonex measure string thickness differently. Ashaway measures string untensioned while Yonex measures it tensioned (I do not know the exact number but a good guess is around 20-24lbs.)


  17. #68
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    3,966
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I might be wrong about this, but I think ashaway changed it's thickness measurement for the zymax strings. Their 'new' 0.70 ZM70 is definately thicker than their 'old' 0.70 MP.
    The ZM67 feels about as thin as MP.

    And if I can be honest, if their ZM62 is really really 0.62mm, I just can't believe it could last a minute at 30lbs But I never tried it, so I can't know

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. String tension test on racket
    By Kiloo in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 7
    : 10-30-2009, 07:44 AM
  2. String Tension Test By Sound
    By DinkAlot in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 65
    : 04-02-2008, 04:55 PM
  3. difference in string thickness
    By harryc in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 5
    : 08-04-2007, 11:54 PM
  4. String Thickness affecting Frame Durability?
    By JonYKN in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 1
    : 08-04-2007, 10:38 PM
  5. String Thickness
    By Byro-Nenium in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 3
    : 06-20-2001, 09:47 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
  •