User Tag List

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 17 of 70
  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default New cross stringing tool from Stringway

    I am doing the developments for Stringway which is a Dutch manufacturer of stringing machines.
    Our latest development is the new tennis cross stringer and because weaving badminton cross strings is much more difficult then tennis we would like to know if there could be an interest for such a tool in the badminton-world.

    This video shows the principle of the tool http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=YZQ3xCHFGqw. The lady is not a stringer she just shows the principle of the tool very slowly.

    We think that the tool has the following advantages:
    * Weaving goes quicker and the speed is the same for every kind of string.
    * Pulling the string through goes quicker, without friction.
    * No danger of “burning” the string.
    * Minimum chance of misweaves.
    * The level of concentration can be lower, it is easier to string more racquets without interruption.

    I am interested to hear your opinions about this tool.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi there,

    Yes, there is tremendous interest in this cross weaving tool for badminton stringing.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    hm, that looks pretty cool. and if you can develop something of this sort for badminton it would be great.

    however, don't forget about the integrity of the strings. Tennis strings are more stiff thus they stay in the same trajectory easier. i am not sure if that would make a difference.

    and, a bit of topic...but: is that a guy in a big a

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default badminton cross stringer

    We have a prototype for badminton also so we can test any comments that you have.
    With the help of all your ideas we will be able to make the system as good as possible.

    FT46

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Canada, BC, Burnaby
    Posts
    763
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    When it comes out, I'm so going to buy it as long as the price is reasonable! Less friction while pulling through as well as speeding up the weaving process has me sold! Be sure to PM me when one is ready for sale!
    Last edited by Optiblue; 11-12-2008 at 04:12 AM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Jakarta & Auckland
    Posts
    349
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes, I think it will help alot. Does the tool work on both tensioned and untensioned main?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes very interesting. Is it as affective when string crosses nearer the bottom or top of the frame when there is less play on the mains. I notice you started in the middle probably for ease of sight.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default first crosses

    Coachgary:

    We started in the middle only for the video.
    It is best to use the tool from the first cross string, but there is no need to position the tool at the top of the racquet, just put it in the middle, pull the complete string through the tool and the grommets, open the tool and pull the string straight.

    There are 2 channels in the tool one on each side, which means that you can also start with the shorter side to cross less mains.

    You can use the tool until there is no room anymore.

    FT46

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Production version of the SW cross stringer

    We have received quite some positive messages from badminton stringers so we decided to work on the design of the production version.
    Because we are not active in the badminton world we would like to cooperate with you stringers.

    The first information that we need is the following:
    - Are all badminton racquets strung with 22 main strings?
    - If not what other number of mains are there available.
    - To decide on the positions of the main strings in the cross stringer we need to know:
    o The maximum and minimum distance between the 10th strings from the middle that exists.
    o The maximum and minimum distance between the 9th strings from the middle.
    - What racquets have the most patterns that differ most from a “normal” pattern concerning the positions of the strings?

    We would appreciate it when you can provide us with this information. The more info we have the better we can optimize the tool for racquets on the market.

    If you have other remarks that can be useful please let us know.

    Thanks in advance
    FT46

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,645
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1) Yes, most of the racquet out there are 22 main. Only a very few I know which no good players use (ie crappy Prince racquet). Another good place is US stringer association puts out a annual guild for tennis, badminton and racquet ball racquit (one each) which has string pattern for most up to date pattern.
    2) The badminton guild will tell you what other odd jobs are out there.
    3) I will suggest you use Yonex Cab20 (not Cab30ms) string pattern as a standard for oval shape racquet. Use MP-45 for standard ISO shape. For newer grommet design, use AT900 as example. of your distance between center to 9th and 10th mains.
    4) It is difficult to say. Prince's racquet with Y throat (OEM by Bonney) is the worse wack up design. The second is Prince O3 which has to be string is a specific order. The third is one made by ProAce (I believe) which has 30 or 32 crosses. Otherwise, most of the racquet uses very simular pattern except minor difference in string gaps.

    Also you need to account some stringer are trained on 1 piece method. That will make a racquet 23 crosses. Some stringers in SE Asia (Which I do not see it is your targeting markets) skip 1 cross near the throat.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,645
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1) It is a good idea for tennis. But not a great idea for tennis.
    2) It has some not too small issue for badminton racquets.
    Sorry, this might not be any good suggestion for you.
    1) For any badminton racquet, to be practical, you might be able to use it for the lower 17 crosses. Any more you will still weave through first 3 mains on each side. With a tool in place, it might not save any time.
    2) For most of the stringer who pre-weave both main and cross, burn string is not a major issue. The added weight of the device will make it harder to pre-weave the cross.
    3) For stringer like me who pre-weave and tension the main first. Do not pre-weave cross. I tension each cross then weave the next cross. I feel it might be a major issue if I use any Constant Pull machine. Once I tension the cross #1, I leave the string on the tensioning head and weave the next string. By using your tool, you will lift the mains up and down and add additional tension to the cross that is on tensioning head. If it is a electric CP machine, the tensioning head will adjust the corss tension to the additional tension. If it is a drop weight machine, the additional tension to the tensioned string will lift up the tensioning bar and when you are done weaving the next cross, the tension on the other string is no longer correct.
    3) Another question is how much time can you save by using your device. I can see about 5 min saving for frequent stringer like me. However, what is the price point for a device that is nice to have but not a necessary?
    Sorry for being straight... I am not gay... (this is a joke, I do not intent to offend any one)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    296
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with Silentheart on the string burn and time saved issue.

    It might be a good idea to get a person with some amount of stringing experience (I'd say 12 badminton rackets is enough) and see if there is much of a time savings comparing with and without the tool.

    If thinner and more flexible strings such as 0.66mm BG66 were used, pushing through in a manner shown in the video may not be much faster than regular weaving.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    202
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default learning about badminton stringing

    I see that I have a lot to learn about badminton stringing. I also think that it is important for us to test all aspects that are mentioned on this board before we decide to produce a badminton tool.
    I have the following questions Silentheart:
    1) Using it for the 17 lower strings and not for the top and bottom ones? Why is this? Do you go from bottom to top or opposite? Or do you start in the middle? Why would you not be able to use the tool from the beginning? Lining out the tool with the holes in the grommets is not important at all (see below).
    2) Why do people pre-weave mains and crosses? Is that because weaving goes quicker or does it have other advantages? Does that not give a tremendous mess of unstrung strings?
    3) Do you leave the cross string in the tensioner during the time that you weave the next cross to take all the elongation out of the string as good as possible? I find this a good way.

    But this does not have to interfere with the functions of the tool at all:
    There are different ways to use the tool:
    * The way the lady does with the channel about in line with the holes in the grommets and push the string through from outside the racquet.
    * Position the tool a 3 to 5 cm away from the last cross, move the string through the grommet, pull a loop and push the string through.
    I always use this method.
    If you use this way with the way you pull tension on the crosses the tension on your tensioned cross will not rise.

    About the time saving: Of course this is a major item, I hope that the fact that the tennis Pro stringer could not beat the tool, also means that the fast badminton stringer can not beat the badminton tool. But we certainly have to test this.
    I do think that if the tool takes about the same that there are some advantages left for using it.

    The question is: Is it possible for some experienced guys on this board to do a test? Take a certain length of string, weave in 6 strings without tensioning and pull the string through and measure the time needed.
    It is difficult for us to send our proto tool around to stringers to let it test.

    I hope you can help me out on some of these questions.
    We will certainly take all aspects in considerations before we will decide to start production of the badminton unit. If we doubt we will probably only produce the tennis units.

    Thanks for you help.
    FT46

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    16
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stringtechno View Post
    - Are all badminton racquets strung with 22 main strings?
    The new babolat series (x-feel) has less mains, only 20 mains and 21 crosses.
    They are the only professional rackets i can think of that has less mains.
    Other than that 22 is pretty standard i guess.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The reason that pre-weaving is done is to minimise problems with shared grommets and having to move the mains out of the way to push a cross through. The other reason, like me, is that you can pre-weave a racquet whilst watching the TV in the comfort of your lounge, instead of standing in a freezing cold shed!

    Typically the worst shared grommets to get through are the corners of the racquet, from memory, its grommet 12 from throat, and grommets 10 from head.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stringtechno View Post
    I see that I have a lot to learn about badminton stringing. I also think that it is important for us to test all aspects that are mentioned on this board before we decide to produce a badminton tool.
    I have the following questions Silentheart:
    1) Using it for the 17 lower strings and not for the top and bottom ones? Why is this? Do you go from bottom to top or opposite? Or do you start in the middle? Why would you not be able to use the tool from the beginning? Lining out the tool with the holes in the grommets is not important at all (see below).
    2) Why do people pre-weave mains and crosses? Is that because weaving goes quicker or does it have other advantages? Does that not give a tremendous mess of unstrung strings?
    3) Do you leave the cross string in the tensioner during the time that you weave the next cross to take all the elongation out of the string as good as possible? I find this a good way.
    Hi,
    Sorry, I was assuming you have more experience in stringing a badminton racquet when I made the post. Here are my concern.
    1) Usually tennis racquets are symmetrical horizontal and vertical. However, badminton racquet is horizontal only. The top of the racquet taper off start from 15th string from the throat (even on the ISO head shape racquet). I understand the time saving from almost no weaving on the cross. However, if you make a badminton version, the device will be able to cover the 18~20 mains (I assume) to make it fast enough. That means you will not be able to use it on 17th corss and following cross. Please refer to the string pattern from www.Yonexusa.com. To be able to use it after 17th to 20th cross, you can cover only the center 16 mains. That means you still need to weave the 4 mains on each side. With the device on the mains, you will need to weave 4 on the right, aim, pass through, then weave 4 on the left. There is alsmot no time saving there.
    2) Just like Master coachgary said. Also, by pre-weave main and cross, it cut down the chance of burn string too.
    3) If I use an electric machine, I start weaving the cross once the tensioning head engage and start to pull. Yes, taking out slack is the main reason I leave the string on the tensioning head while I weave the next cross.

    One thing I just though of, Just like Master Coachgary said, we pre-weave becaus eit is easier to get the string through shared grommets. Your device might block a couple of the shared grommets and that might shrink the size of the badminton version to the center 16 mains only. I will suggest you make a badminton prototype version and try to determin what is the optimal length for the device.

    I hope these help.

    Have a nice weekend.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Newark, CA
    Posts
    417
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just watching that video, sorry to say that tool is probably good for a new stringer or someone who is very lazy. To me stringing is an art, using something like a crutch to be honest just doesnt make personal. My customers like my string jobs because people see my work, and my string jobs feel good to my customers. It is a personal touch. Dont get me wrong it looks like a good tool for a home stringer but I doubt you will ever see it being used in a professional shop. Good idea, not for pros.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. ** Stringway cross-stringer for badminton**
    By stringtechno in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 83
    : 10-19-2012, 10:36 AM
  2. Stringing Tool deals - FYI
    By mg27 in forum Market Place
    Replies: 4
    : 11-08-2004, 12:32 PM
  3. Stringing the cross
    By Yong in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 19
    : 09-25-2002, 06:42 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    : 08-31-2002, 10:09 PM
  5. Stringway or Ekleton Stringing machine retailers or distributors?
    By Nick in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 2
    : 08-30-2002, 10:57 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
  •