# Thread: Why +2lbs On The Cross?

1. If you say add 2lbs. to the cross is your recommendation regardless of the machine, then on an ES5Pro or Panda's set-up, or for that matter, just about every machine that has the Chudek side supports (assuming good side arms), the rackets will come out narrow.

2. Regular Member
Join Date
Sep 2008
Location
California
Posts
534
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by Blitzzards
I do not understand your logic of having to string three racquets (all of the same model and make) at your suggested tensions then comparing them side by side, while what I have done myself is to just string one at my usual uniform tension (for example 32x32lbs) then compare the strung racquet with the unstrung racquet. What I will do next is to use a measuring tape and measure the longest vertical and horizontal lengths on the racquet frame, plus some more specific points such as 10 and 2 o'clock.

What I have noticed is that with my technique and machine, I am able to get the shape of the strung racquet to be exactly the same dimensions (or measurements) as the unstrung racquet. I have also done racquets in the past at 31x32lbs (to get the overall of 32lbs) and even though the pitch is almost the same as you pointed out (albeit very slightly lower), the overall hitting feel is actually slightly stiffer for the uniform tension job. The string tension on the uniform tension job also lasts slightly longer especially with the thicker strings that I usually use. And that is the way I like my racquets strung
my logic to test for this +2lbs concept myself. the ending measure are the racket's shape and tension obtained.

there are way too many debate about this same topic across the globe, and I wanted to share my experience here.

3. Regular Member
Join Date
Sep 2008
Location
California
Posts
534
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by DinkAlot
If you say add 2lbs. to the cross is your recommendation regardless of the machine, then on an ES5Pro or Panda's set-up, or for that matter, just about every machine that has the Chudek side supports (assuming good side arms), the rackets will come out narrow.
have you tried +2lbs anyway?

that could be the case with your set-up and your technique. This is a more than set-up topic, since it must also be related to rackets, hole patterns, etc.

Anyway, I am here to share my experience with people. It's important to make sure all kinds of voices are heard by people, as we are doing over the last couple of days.

mmm, Christmas wish.... someone to spend his / her life to do a research about this!

Merry Christmas, all!

4. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2011
Location
norway
Posts
119
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
my 2 cents... using a shuttle express 6 point machine, i frequently string at 27 - 29 pounds and always keep the crosses and the mains the same, i dont get any frame deformity.

eg.

Zymax 67 @ 27x27 pounds. The shape frame is exactly like its unstrung outline.
Point being, secure the racket frame into the 6 point mounting correctly and the mount should prevent any frame deformity during stringing.

Regards,
asmd.

5. Originally Posted by dunmaster
have you tried +2lbs anyway?
Sir, you must not know this Panda very well. Panda has tried just about all techniques and methods and used over 10 different stringing machines with 15 different supports.

If Panda used 29/31 on his machine, the racket would come out long. In fact, ideally, on Panda's machine it should be 31/30 to get as close to the original shape as possible.

Conclusion:

If you were to use Panda's stringing machine with your technique (29/31), your racket would come out long.

If Panda were to use your stringing machine with an even string tension (30/30), Panda's racket would come out round.
On your machine Panda would need to use the 2lbs. difference.

Panda advocates whatever method is necessary to get as close to the original shape of the racket as possible. And that is stringing machine dependent (due to the type of side supports and shoulder arms).

6. Originally Posted by asmd6230
Point being, secure the racket frame into the 6 point mounting correctly and the mount should prevent any frame deformity during stringing.
While this is true on your machine, you guys keep missing a point this Panda is trying to make; that's your method on your machine, not necessarily for all machines. Mounting the racket perfectly doesn't necessarily mean the racket will come out right just using one universal method for all machines.

Example, Panda's stringing machine set-up: Combo 910 + WISE Tennishead 2086

For a 30lbs. string job...

...originally with stock side supports and side arms: would need to go 28.5/31.5 to get the right shape (3lbs. difference)

...upgraded to the SPTennis badminton side supports: now need to go 29.5/30.5 to get the right shape (1lbs. difference)

...finally upgraded to the Chudek side supports + strengthened the side arms: now go 30/30 to get the right shape (0lbs. difference)

Quite a few people have strung on Panda's machine and some had done the +2lbs. because they are used to it on their machine or other machines. When the racket is done, it's too long...

...again, conclusion: every machine is different and may need a different method of stringing to get the correct racket shape. If you have your method working well on your machine, GREAT! But it doesn't mean it's going to work on all machines.

Whenever Panda strings a on new machine, Panda will ask whoever is an expert on that machine what they do and then Panda follows their recommendation first. Once the racket is strung, then Panda will know for sure.

7. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2011
Location
norway
Posts
119
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
Agree.LI too too several tries to come about to my own conclusion as to qhat worked best on my machine. Initially I did add 2 pounds to the cross and the racket didn't quite look right. I stencilled many outlines and compared them to the strung racket after I was done to confirm.

8. Regular Member
Join Date
Oct 2011
Location
Timmins, Ontario
Posts
35
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
am i weird in that i do 1 pound only? I noticed there is a slight circle when i was stringing and so i did a 2 pounds cross but then it looked kinda long so i did an outline and compared different racquets after stringing. i find that doing 1 pound is just right for me anyway *shrugs.

maybe its' because i'm only stringing at 19/20 or 22/23 pounds *shrugs.

9. Originally Posted by hesho
am i weird in that i do 1 pound only?
No, you are not weird, in fact you are spot on. You do whatever it takes, on your machine, to get the correct frame shape. And in your case, it's a 1lb. difference.

Kudos!

10. Regular Member
Join Date
Dec 2006
Location
Portugal
Posts
130
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
If the machine is this one, what should be done?

11. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2011
Location
norway
Posts
119
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by gavias
If the machine is this one, what should be done?

Trial and error, start with mains=cross and check frame shape. if frame shape is maintained, you're all good. If not, adjust poundage to the cross strings accordingly until there is no frame distortion.

12. Based on that specific machine with no modifications to the side supports nor arms, Panda would say try a 2lbs. difference first.

Originally Posted by gavias
If the machine is this one, what should be done?

13. and that's exactly the reason why i don't usually use other people's machine even though i have access to top end machines like ES5Protech and Victor 7030's. my string job would come out differently, not only the shape of the racket but also the final feel (which is ultimately affected by the shape + tension). i have experimented on my own machine and have found the optimal flow that produces the best result, and that includes both the mounting, tension selection, as well as the technique and rate that i tension each string.

14. Regular Member
Join Date
Dec 2006
Location
Portugal
Posts
130
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
DinkAlot, I want to ask you a question about a little different question.

Considering your experience, do you think that in a crank machine the loss of tension, because of the lack of constant pulling, justifies the use of a drop weight machine, that its slower and more difficult to operate?
Last edited by gavias; 12-31-2011 at 07:46 AM.

15. Originally Posted by gavias
DinkAlot, I want to ask you a question about a little different question.

Considering your experience, do you think that in a crank machine the loss of tension, because of the lack of constant pulling, justifies the use of a drop weight machine, that its slower and more difficult to operate?
You can get constant tension pull out of a crank machine simply by double or triple pulling on the string. The tension lost for most crank machines normally happen only on the first pull where you are pulling on a previously untensioned string which has still some slack in it. The second and third pull will have increasingly short travel distance on the crank until all succeeding pulls have the same travel distance which is when you have constant pull tension.

The only hassle with the crank tensioner is that the constant tension pull is more or less manual and not automatic.

16. If you are a good stringer, it's not that big of a difference. The key is the stringer.
Personally, this Panda would use a crank over drop weight just because it saves time.

If you are used to crank machines, then it's not significant at all.

If Panda had to use a crank machine, he would just "overclock" it. Say Panda wants 30lbs. ECP, then he would go 34-35lbs. on a crank to get similar tension.

Originally Posted by gavias
DinkAlot, I want to ask you a question about a little different question.

Considering your experience, do you think that in a crank machine the loss of tension, because of the lack of constant pulling, justifies the use of a drop weight machine, that its slower and more difficult to operate?

17. Regular Member
Join Date
Sep 2008
Location
California
Posts
534
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
0 Thread(s)
Originally Posted by gavias
DinkAlot, I want to ask you a question about a little different question.

Considering your experience, do you think that in a crank machine the loss of tension, because of the lack of constant pulling, justifies the use of a drop weight machine, that its slower and more difficult to operate?
You can definitely achieve the same or better result with a crank machine, which is a lot faster than drop weight machine. Besides what DinkAlot mentioned, this is what I normally do:

- first of all, develop a constant and steady pull motion with your machine, which means that make sure every pull you are making is as the same as possible. You should be able to feel the higher tension when the "tension head (right term?)" is about to lock.

- with this repeatable motion in place, perform a good tension calibration with a good tension gauge and the same string as you are going to use.

NOW, here is the key: when you perform calibration, use the close-to-steady number on the gauge a few seconds AFTER the crank stopped!

for example, if you want 30 lbs, the gauge may say 35-36 lbs right after it locks. It will drop quickly and then slow down to a close-to-steady number. Calibrate the system to that number.

NOTE: this will be pending on your experience and speed of making the pull. Normally, a few trials and errors will be fine. ALSO, different string has different tension loss speed and amount. You will need experience to get a hang of them.

Hope this is useful.

Page 19 of 22 First ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Last

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•