User Tag List

Page 301 of 453 FirstFirst ... 201 251 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 351 401 ... LastLast
Results 5,101 to 5,117 of 7686
  1. #5101
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    122
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As a reward can I buy one of those new zymax 62 reels you have so many of?

  2. #5102
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,110
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amleto View Post
    Dan - if the (your) manufacturers weren't allowed to add lead tape, would this impact sales due to a higher proportion of unwanted specs?
    quoting this because it may have been missed in the bickering.

  3. #5103
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,280
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amleto View Post
    quoting this because it may have been missed in the bickering.
    Sir, I am not bickering with you. I am simply stating facts.

    To answer your question: no; because the racket(s) are not out of spec. You keep thinking the racket(s) are off spec because there's some lead tape or other variable involved. They are not. This is the way the manufacturers do it. Racket manufacturers who don't use lead tape many times use heavy epoxy inside the handle. Just about all manufacturers use something to fine tune the racket(s) if necessary.

    That is all.

  4. #5104
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,110
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DinkAlot View Post
    Sir, I am not bickering with you. I am simply stating facts.
    comment was not aimed at you at all. sorry if it came across that way.

    onto the reply:
    I am trying to get at is: What would happen if you asked the manufacturer to NOT adjust with epoxy or lead or ...? Will this be detrimental to cost/profit/number of undesirable rackets?
    Last edited by amleto; 05-27-2011 at 11:37 AM.

  5. #5105
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    438
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm guessing since you will get a bunch of different BP's then you could just call some of them "Head Heavy", "Slightly Head heavy", "Even Balance", etc. like the other manufacturers do and have 3 different product lines.

  6. #5106
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    10,262
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dimcorner View Post
    I'm guessing since you will get a bunch of different BP's then you could just call some of them "Head Heavy", "Slightly Head heavy", "Even Balance", etc. like the other manufacturers do and have 3 different product lines.
    As stated before, all manufacturers will use lead in the handle to adjust balance as needed. This is no secret.

  7. #5107
    Regular Member demolidor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    @Hollanti
    Posts
    11,835
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iori View Post
    I get amleto's point. If he wants a head light racket for speed, giving him a 310 mm racket + lead tape won't work. For example, adding 10 grams of lead tape to my at900p won't make it ns9900. It won't have the speed and quick response.
    Purely coincidentally something I bumped into when tidying up: Yonex Nanoscale Technology - (roughly translated and summarized) due to this development (Fullerene) a 15% weight reduction was achieved for the shaft (more hollow) which could be shifted to the handle allowing for the manufacturing of very stiff headlight rackets (NanoSpeed)

  8. #5108
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    117
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by demolidor View Post
    Purely coincidentally something I bumped into when tidying up: Yonex Nanoscale Technology - (roughly translated and summarized) due to this development (Fullerene) a 15% weight reduction was achieved for the shaft (more hollow) which could be shifted to the handle allowing for the manufacturing of very stiff headlight rackets (NanoSpeed)
    Yup, so the weight is now shifted to the handle, not added, which is important. If you chop off the head of the at900p and the ns9900 and weigh them, the at900p would weight a lot more. If the difference in balance is achieved by adding weight to the handle the racket heads would weigh the same. During play it would feel different, but no speed advantage would be achieved.

    My assertions are simply from my experiences from playing with a at900p and a ns9900, the latter which I sold because I cannot use a headlight xtra stiff racket properly. There is nothing I can add to the at900p's handle to make it fast like the ns9900.
    Last edited by Iori; 05-27-2011 at 03:48 PM.

  9. #5109
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    10,262
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iori View Post
    . There is nothing I can add to the at900p's handle to make it fast like the ns9900.
    Of course not. One is a power box frame design, the latter is an aero thin frame design. If you weighed just the head of both, you'll find that the former will weigh a few grams heavier than the latter.

  10. #5110
    Regular Member demolidor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    @Hollanti
    Posts
    11,835
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iori View Post
    Yup, so the weight is now shifted to the handle, not added, which is important. If you chop off the head of the at900p and the ns9900 and weigh them, the at900p would weight a lot more. If the difference in balance is achieved by adding weight to the handle the racket heads would weigh the same. During play it would feel different, but no speed advantage would be achieved.

    My assertions are simply from my experiences from playing with a at900p and a ns9900, the latter which I sold because I cannot use a headlight xtra stiff racket properly. There is nothing I can add to the at900p's handle to make it fast like the ns9900.
    As above by Visor (wanted to mention that straight away but lett is slide, better to experiment with would be the AT900T) but the point here was it's not headlight because the frame has been made lighter but the weight reduction was added back on the handle end (higher density wood?) ... (I guess that's why there still are no xtra stiff headlight 4U, 5U's, etc.)
    And even then picking up a modded 275mm (strung) AT700 feels light as a feather even if it is actually heavier

    But who knows, perhaps in the follow up to the NanoSpeeds with use of the NanoPreme material ...
    Last edited by demolidor; 05-27-2011 at 07:03 PM.

  11. #5111
    Regular Member demolidor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    @Hollanti
    Posts
    11,835
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So ... back on topic
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  12. #5112
    Regular Member j4ckie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,857
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by demolidor View Post
    So ... back on topic
    The 4th from the left - I imagine that's what Dink looks like when a new racket shipment arrives

  13. #5113
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,724
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would have thought second from left - the quintessence of a Panda facepalm... all that stringing!

  14. #5114
    Regular Member demolidor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    @Hollanti
    Posts
    11,835
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Naw, this is where Ashaway get's it's fibers from

  15. #5115
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,280
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by demolidor View Post
    Naw, this is where Ashaway get's it's fibers from
    Speaking of Ashaway, Panda has been using the new ZM70 at 30, 31, 32 and 33lbs., it's tremendous, Panda's go to string.

    The new ZM67 at 29, 30 and 31lbs. is tremendous as well, so crisp but need to see how durable it is...

  16. #5116
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    164
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenzo View Post
    Adding or removing lead tape at the butt of a racket does not change the flex characteristics of a racket, only how the racket handles and feels. However if you were to add lead tape to the head of the racket, it would change the flex characteristics as more weight away from the fulcrum means a greater moment of inertia and hence more force needed to rotate it - only achievable by an increase elastic power through flex. This is obvious as adding a large weight at the end of your racket would make it flex a lot more (hence why more people prefer head heavy rackets to be stiffer).

    So if you were to argue that the racket handles differently because there is lead weight at the handle from the same racket without lead weight - you'd be right, it's pretty obvious. But if you were to argue that the racket handles differently to those specced the same without lead weight, then the answer isn't quite so clear. The answer then depends on the following things:


    • Whether the weight of the racket from the fulcrum to the head is consistent between rackets
    • Whether the balance point of this part of the racket is consistent
    • Whether the flex characteristics of this part of the racket is consistent
    • Whether the resin used to hold the racket and control cap in the handle is consistent in strength
    • Other things affecting torsion in the handle and at the fulcrum (i.e your grip)



    Many manufacturers do not even give a spec for flex (am looking at Yonex specifically), but Panda Power rackets have a flex range consistency of 0.3, whatever that means - so we can assume the flex is the same. We can also assume things affecting torsion in the handle are the same. So then the only question left to ask is whether the weight of just the weight and balance of the racket from the fulcrum to the head is consistent between different rackets of the same specs. A question for which an answer is not easily given, but I assume would be easily controlled.

    TL;DR: manufacturing consistency not guaranteed
    The weight and balance of the racket from the fulcrum to the head would have a major effect on the flex, keeping in mind the difference in flex of a Tpro(playable by most players) and the Ultra(need a very strong arm/wrist to use effectively) is only 1 'flex' unit, so i would say we can't assume 0.3 'flex' unit is rather insignificant, though it would require the equations of how they calculated this flex to determine with more confidence how much this effect has, for all we know this may not be a linear scale... measurements that calculate how much force it takes to bend the racket x mm, beam bending theories are generally non-linear...

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...p/t-57979.html
    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...p/t-64353.html

    if the replies are true, SOTX scale is use for pp, which means 20kg at the t joint?

  17. #5117
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,724
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    SOTX scale is use for pp, which means 20kg at the t joint?
    Not sure of the weight/location of the weight, but the methodology is the same - I think the scale is quantifacted and may be as basic as mm of deflection.

Similar Threads

  1. List your playing style, main racket, string & string tension
    By neoanderson777 in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 725
    : 10-24-2014, 07:43 AM
  2. Panda Power Ultra 2 Racket!
    By Hakular in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 9
    : 02-04-2011, 11:46 PM
  3. String Recommendation for Panda Power Precision
    By kevindd992002 in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 1
    : 10-02-2010, 03:50 PM
  4. WTB/FT: Panda Power racket or sotx racket/s. Scarborough Area plz (gta)
    By Kirbit316 in forum Buy & Sell - Read the rules sticky before you post
    Replies: 1
    : 06-05-2010, 11:05 PM
  5. 40lbs string tension
    By Daniel Chen in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 8
    : 06-27-2001, 08:49 PM

Tags for this Thread

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
  •