Difference between Yonex Mavis 350 and 500

[cooler]

Sorry, but just as those set that comes with two rackets,net and plastic shuttles sold at the gas-station, the equipment does not get better for tournament use just beause they are sold in huge quantities..

/Twobeer

u had claimed before that u r impartial on plastic players, and only discuss on the merit of each types of shuttles. Obviously this is not the case and the above proves that u r at the same level as taneepak. You two never provided any hard data to support your case, just one sided talk. Your best effort was an analogy of rubber boot versus track shoes....just great

It is amazing some feather proponents, who lack knowledge about nylon shuttles, come to this 'mavis 350 vs 500' thread to debate about nylon shuttles, and try to steer on topic posters to go off topic.

[cooler]

To equate this 500 > 350 > 300 Eq. 1


That assumption would make the equation TRUE. I didnt make any actual measurements as what others have done but just tried to prove that Cooler and SH's statements "dont contradict."

Of the slow (green) grade, the weight difference is even more pronounce.
I have a tube of slow mavis 300 that weighs in ~ 4.78 to 4.86 g range. That is another reason why i prefer 300 over 350/500, 300 tend to fly slower than 350/500 in my area. Disregarding the weight, the 500 does feel heavier on impact.

[twobeer]

Sorry, but just as those set that comes with two rackets,net and plastic shuttles sold at the gas-station, the equipment does not get better for tournament use just beause they are sold in huge quantities..

u had claimed before that u r impartial on plastic players, and only discuss on the merit of each types of shuttles. Obviously this is not the case and the above proves that u r at the same level as taneepak. You two never provided any hard data to support your case, just one sided talk. Your best effort was an analogy of rubber boot versus track shoes....just great

I have never claimed to be impartial, I think.. I do not however look down on badminton players using mavis shuttles, or playing badminton on the lawn in the backyard.

And what exactly has I written that leads you to beleive I think some people who use plastic Mavis shuttle or buy badminton-sets at the gas station can't be highly skilled players??

You start in insulting tones, and ask for hard data supporting "my" "case" ??
I don't have a "case".. I am trying to give an honest opinion about the perforamnce of Mavis 500, 350 and 300 in this thread.

Obviously, you have a problem with people that don't find these shuttles to be the best thing since sliced bread.. But that's OK, everyone are free to use them if they like to play with them.. Their quality are just not accepted for international tournament play as of today.

By straying from the topic, and mocking my arguments (from other threads), becuse they don't match your view of the universe , is just a sure way to close down this thread as well

It is amazing some feather proponents, who lack knowledge about nylon shuttles, come to this 'mavis 350 vs 500' thread to debate about nylon shuttles, and try to steer on topic posters to go off topic.

How can you be so sure, that you have so much more knowledge about nylons and shuttles in general, than the rest of the members in this forum? And that your view must be more valid than someone elses?

/Twobeer

[twobeer]

I can not contradict with Master Cooler's statement because I have med speed. Also, IMHO, the weight difference is not statistically significant between the model. However, I would like to point out the skirt design is different. Also, I want to measure if the balance point is the same because it will effect the flight path.

All great and valid points.. It is actually interesting. I've seen some yonex brochures having graphs of the flight path of the 500 compared to "other plastics" showing that it should have a more steep trajectory. However when I tried it it dind't feel much different, just slightly faster (both being medium)..

Mavis 350 yellow and Mavis 500 below..

/Twobeer

[twobeer]

To equate this 500 > 350 > 300 Eq. 1

Yes :-D

The thing I though was questionable is that SH had:

avg Medium M300 = 5.05g
avg Medium M350 = 5.07g
avg Medium M500 = 5.10g

and

cooler ( http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...17&postcount=5 )
avg Slow M300 = 4.85g
avg SLOW M350 = 5.00g

thus giving a 0.20g difference between a slow 300 and a medium 300, and only 0.07g diff between avg of slow and medium 350.. I would expect the difference to be about 0.2 between the slow mavis 350 and medium version..

looking at the small difference in weight on medium 350,300 and 500, one would expectect small difference in weight on the slow versions as well (if they are consistent)..

thats what I felt was odd.. Maybe I was not clear :-)

/Twobeer

[phandrew]

Which shuttlecock use cork for the head and which one uses plastic rubber for the head?

They probably used a cork head on plastic to get a similar feeling as a feather.

[cooler]

Yes :-D

The thing I though was questionable is that SH had:

avg Medium M300 = 5.05g
avg Medium M350 = 5.07g
avg Medium M500 = 5.10g

and

cooler ( http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...17&postcount=5 )
avg Slow M300 = 4.85g
avg SLOW M350 = 5.00g

thus giving a 0.20g difference between a slow 300 and a medium 300, and only 0.07g diff between avg of slow and medium 350.. I would expect the difference to be about 0.2 between the slow mavis 350 and medium version..

looking at the small difference in weight on medium 350,300 and 500, one would expectect small difference in weight on the slow versions as well (if they are consistent)..

thats what I felt was odd.. Maybe I was not clear :-)

/Twobeer

as stated by SH, skirt design difference plays a greater role in speed than just pure weight difference vs speed correlation like in feather. Since SH sourced his mavis shuttles from the same supplier and likely from the same time period, his statistic would serves as a better comparsion. Their weight difference is small but they are trending in direction as i have first stated, M500 feels heavier.

My source of mavis is different, i buy from different club players who have bought them in bulk, M300 and M350 likely not made in the same year let alone same batch. Who know how long they were stored, ie plastic is more complicated than u think. However or whatever these nick picking difference, even my weight statistic from different sources still lead to the same conclusion on weight of mavis product line. I don't have sufficient M500 around to show any conclusive data. They feel heavy and pricey so i dont have too many of them around. There are reason for this weight difference but i will hold this info morsel in my sleeve. U can say cooler is full of crap and bluffing. It's your call.

[taneepak]

Why do you spend so much time and effort to weigh different brands and speeds of Mavis shuttles and not test them for the more meaningful speed test on the courts? Just select Mavis tube each of slow Mavis 300, 350, 370, and 500 and test them for the more meaningful speed on the courts in Cooler's city. Silentheart can repeat the test with medium speed Mavis and get a player who can hit consistently to do the test.
At least Cooler can have bragging rights that all slow Mavis 300, 350, 370, and 500 passed the court speed test in his city.

[silentheart]

And your point is?

[cooler]

And your point is?

that's why i didn't replied.
All talk, no walk.

[taneepak]

And your point is?

Simple:test what is meaningful (court speed) instead of weighing it on a scale, which is meaningless. It is weight + cone size + hole size and # + skirt design that determines real dynamic speed, which = court testing for speed. If weight is the only thing you brag about then all slow Mavis 300, 350, 370, 500 would weigh the same and have the same speed.

[cooler]

Simple:test what is meaningful (court speed) instead of weighing it on a scale, which is meaningless. It is weight + cone size + hole size and # + skirt design that determines real dynamic speed, which = court testing for speed. If weight is the only thing you brag about then all slow Mavis 300, 350, 370, 500 would weigh the same and have the same speed.

see post#29, same thread

Shutter speed designation used to come in 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, etc to denote its weight 0f 4.8g, 4.9g, 5.0g, etc. This was not a very accurate classification so the current speed classification of 75, 76, 77, 78, etc is preferred. This system uses a 30cm distance difference between one grade and the next speed grade. Surprisingly this system was in use many years ago, even by nylon shuttles which used to come in speed grades of 76, 77, etc. Both the weight and the diameter of the feathers shuttlecock are the major factors in shuttle speed.

i believe every model and grade like every mavis 300+, like AS20+, have the same diameter.
Even with all your talk, your talk is shakey.

[phandrew]

Just a question is the price difference between these shuttlecock big or small?

[taneepak]

Why the reluctance to court test all the Mavis models? Perhaps other players who play with Mavis can volunteer? Could the unpredictable pattern of collapse of the skirt between each test hit send the shuttle over a wider distance range, or even under or over the distance limits? To solely highlight its weight consistency and "run away" from speed testing on the courts looks more like a smoke screen.
Again, Silentheart and Cooler, how about biting the bullet and do the right thing?

[twobeer]

Why the reluctance to court test all the Mavis models? Perhaps other players who play with Mavis can volunteer? Could the unpredictable pattern of collapse of the skirt between each test hit send the shuttle over a wider distance range, or even under or over the distance limits? To solely highlight its weight consistency and "run away" from speed testing on the courts looks more like a smoke screen.
Again, Silentheart and Cooler, how about biting the bullet and do the right thing?

seems like pointless (as SH mentioned)..

If you have read what cooler has written, it is obvious that he HAS tested his shuttles for correct speed. He even elaborates on how he adjusts speed on plastics (which I beleive does not work very well, becuase the Mavis plastic shirt always strives to go back to its original shape it has when it was molded).

Regardless of what shuttle is used its speed can be adjusted (albeit with Mavis just temporary).

The BIG problem with the Mavis shuttles discussed in this thread is NOT the speed when testing using an underam-stroke from the base-line..
This test has been designed to test the speed of feather shuttles and is based on the assumption that the tested shuttle has the correct flight path anything flying can basically be adjusted (even spheres to play with sold for recreation here in sweden) to have the right distance but the test really mandates a good trajectory to begin with.

The problem is the non-rigidity of the folding shirt, the flat trajectory and minimal spin, making these shuttles inferior to more expensive alternatives.

Maybe cooler is "lucky" that an un-pressed Mavis 300 slow, in most cases have the right speed for his environment.

But I don't think you would agree that Mavis is a good shuttle, even IF cooler could proove to You that his Mavis 300 in most cases have consistent and correct testing-speed for his high-altitude courts? right

/Twobeer

[silentheart]

Hi T,
Thanks.
3 points.
1) Mavis does what it design to do. It is a plastic shuttle design to perform closer to the real feather shuttle than other brand's plastic bird. Mavis does great on that.
2) Mavis has average consistency and durability much better than feather shuttle.
3) Mavis was never meant to replace the real feather shuttle.
Mavis plays and feel different than feather shuttle. Different strategy and tactic need to be adapted between Mavis and feather. Mavis is not a bad shuttle, it is just a better than average/good simulation of the feather shuttle.

[cooler]

Hi T,
Thanks.
3 points.
1) Mavis does what it design to do. It is a plastic shuttle design to perform closer to the real feather shuttle than other brand's plastic bird. Mavis does great on that.
2) Mavis has average consistency and durability much better than feather shuttle.
3) Mavis was never meant to replace the real feather shuttle.
Mavis plays and feel different than feather shuttle. Different strategy and tactic need to be adapted between Mavis and feather. Mavis is not a bad shuttle, it is just a better than average/good simulation of the feather shuttle.

i can't disagree on those. The evil empire teaches u well