Panda Power: A Racket That Can Take 40lbs. String Tension!

[kenzo]

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

[amleto]

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.

[DinkAlot]

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.

[amleto]

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?

[dimcorner]

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.

[visor]

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.

[demolidor]

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)

[Iori]

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.

[visor]

. 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.

[demolidor]

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 ...

[demolidor]

So ... back on topic

[j4ckie]

So ... back on topic

The 4th from the left - I imagine that's what Dink looks like when a new racket shipment arrives

[Mark A]

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

[demolidor]

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

[DinkAlot]

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...

[milford30]

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?

[Mark A]

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.