User Tag List
Results 52 to 68 of 362
Thread: Why +2lbs On The Cross?
-
07-03-2005, 10:56 AM #52
Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
re-tested BG66 under the same conditions as the 65,80,68 and got 1.47%
Originally Posted by cooler
The BG70Pro figure should maybe be discounted also. I don't know how much those 66 and 70 from a long time ago had already been stretched.
-
09-09-2005, 06:45 PM #53
Here's a thought for everyone.
Usually when I do string jobs for people, I string with a 2lbs difference between mains and crosses. One of my recent clients however accused me of not doing the 2lbs difference because the racket looked too "fat" (horizontally too wide)-- I assured him that I had done the 2lbs difference and that when I gave him the racket it looked fine.
When I went to see him at his gym, expecting to see something wrong, he showed me his AT800DE which looked perfectly normal to me, exactly the way I had strung it... the reason why he thought it was fat was because he was comparing his AT to someone else's that was strung "also at the same tension", but that looked extra *long*. I mean, the racket face was actually thinner (noticibly less wide) and longer (noticibly longer from head of the frame to throat).
The owner of this "AT800DE Long" (i just made that name up) suggested to me that I was stringing incorrectly, wheras I am sure that it is his stringer who perhaps made an error. I compared my stringing job to an AT800DE without any strings and the shape of my stringjob is almost identical to a stringless AT800DE.
So what I'm wondering is this... the person with that AT Long insists that he had his job done by someone in China who strings for the national team. I didn't pry for details, it's not really important. But what I want to know is, has anyone here at BC ever heard of using MORE than 2lbs difference on mains and crosses? And, moreover, is this safe?
My own answers to these questions is, no, I have never heard of more than 2lbs difference. As to safety, i'd imagine that any distortion from the stringless form of the frame could be dangerous to the racket. But i'd like to get some other opinions as well.
I am thinking from the look of it that this isn't even something like 'a little more' than 2lbs difference, it's got to be even more than that considering that my first sight of the racket was "holy cow, it looks like a rectangle with rounded edges!"
I don't beleive the player who uses this special AT has never really had any problems so far....Last edited by Jinryu; 09-09-2005 at 06:51 PM.
-
09-09-2005, 08:24 PM #54
check the AT-long. dose the head look more square? imho, even at 19mx24c, my cab20ms is identical to another one with 19mx21c. however my old aerotus88 will change shape. i think the ms box frame will not change as much compare to the thinner defense frame. just like to get some opinions from other people. do you think the aerodynamic shape frame is softer?
-
10-22-2005, 08:57 PM #55
wut wud happen if i did 25X23 lbs ^.^
-
10-28-2005, 05:47 PM #56
Well, personally, I find it's softer than some but stiffer than others. The 'softest' racket i've seen so far is in my opinion the Nanospeeds.
Originally Posted by silentheart
On another note-- i'm posting to folow up on this.
I did a little experiment on one of my AT 800smanaged to acheive an AT800De "LONG" by stringing the crosses, instead of from top to bottom, from bottom to top. I guess that usually when we use the recommended top-down direction for stringing crosses, the frame of the racket gets "stacked" downwards, and the opposite is true too.
The thing I'm concerend about with these 'long' ATs is that basically what they are is a regularly strung AT, but the bottom 'fatter' part is more compressed-- I rather think that this means that the lower area of the stringbead will be more tense than the upper area. So my guess is that stringing form bottom up makes the sweetspot move lower?
Any thoughts?
Also, does anyone here actually string crosses from bottom-up? Is this bad for the racket?
-
10-28-2005, 05:52 PM #57
Errrr, 25 mains and 23 crosses is definitely not a good thing.
Originally Posted by Noob848
-
10-28-2005, 05:53 PM #58
I've always done bottom up on the crosses because I pre-string a 1-piece string then tension it. Never had a problem.
Originally Posted by Jinryu
-
10-12-2006, 01:42 AM #59
Hey benibeni,
Originally Posted by benibeni
Yonex recently changed their stringing patterns. The Nanospeed 9000, and the Armortec 800 Off & Def are strung differently than all the other Yonex racquets and there was some buzz going around saying that they had changed the tension different of 2 lbs. I work in a pro-shop and had heard this rumour a number of times. I hadn't heard anything from Yonex but decided to phone them up anyways. It still stands, with all the Yonex Badminton racquets they should always be strung with 2 pounds higher. That's coming from the mouth of the Yonex representative at the head office. Anywho, there's my 2cents!
-
10-12-2006, 01:46 AM #60
Ummm...aren't all Yonex badminton racquets strung as a 2 piece? At least that is the way that Yonex recommends that you do it. Same with their tennis racquets! You string thru to the 9th string, then go from T12 (twelfth throat grommet) to H11 (eleventh head grommet) over then to H10 and down to T10. Then tie off on T8 or T6. (Can't remember what they recommend). Then you start your crosses from bottom up. You don't string them as a one piece do you?
Originally Posted by DinkAlot
-
10-12-2006, 01:50 AM #61
Do you not prestretch your frame? When you have it mounted do you not pull down your throat clamp and then lock it in place. This is what I was taught to do?!
Originally Posted by kwun
And wouldn't this have a negative effect on the stringing job? Because if the head of the racquet is stretched longer then when you take it out won't the mains loose more tension and then the crosses gain more tension?
-
10-12-2006, 04:45 AM #62
Just because Yonex says or recommends something, doesn't mean it's right or best.
Originally Posted by black_knight006
I do a one-piece string job most of the time.
-
10-12-2006, 09:54 AM #63
Blasphemy! Blasforyou, blasforeverybodyintheforum...
Originally Posted by DinkAlot
-
10-13-2006, 01:50 AM #64
Lol...I guess I can agree with you on that. Maybe just not on this topic
Originally Posted by DinkAlot
Aren't you supposed to do it a two piece because Yonex wants you do string your crosses from top to bottom? Otherwise you could just got thru and string it a one piece. And what is this I hear about starting your crosses in the middle? Is that something that "cooler" does? Why? What is the logic behind it?
Please explain someone!!!
-
10-13-2006, 01:57 AM #65
I'm not using Yonex rackets so I do not have to follow anything they say.
Originally Posted by black_knight006
I use a SOTX Woven 7 and there's no preference and the warranty is good for up to 31lbs. So again, I do not use Yonex's recommendations.
-
10-24-2006, 04:02 PM #66
Question. IF you go to the blackknight website (www.blackknight.ca), somewhere in the site under the stringing methods, it says that for their badminton racquets, the ratio is 22m, 23x. So, does that mean if i have 23lbs for main, i should have 24lbs for cross? Because it matches what kwun says...assuming my stringer has decent stringing machine.
-
10-24-2006, 04:08 PM #67
Yes, based on the BK website. But I would recommend 23/25lbs.
Originally Posted by a_n_d_y
-
10-24-2006, 04:10 PM #68
Unfortunately i ordered it roughly 23X24

Will that distort the racquet? But thanks anyway.
Similar Threads
-
Non-isometric head. 2lbs difference main/cross necessary?
By KinkySmasher in forum Badminton StringReplies: 2: 07-07-2012, 05:56 AM -
2lbs on cross
By lalalala in forum Badminton StringReplies: 2: 10-15-2010, 05:50 PM -
2LBs Cross Failed
By dreamzboy in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 34: 12-05-2009, 03:56 PM -
crosses and mains?? 2lbs more
By azn_123 in forum Badminton StringReplies: 1: 11-12-2006, 09:47 AM -
2lbs higher on cross with 4 knob string job
By batrachian in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 6: 10-28-2006, 05:34 AM




Reply With Quote

Bookmarks