User Tag List

Page 112 of 120 FirstFirst ... 12 62 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 LastLast
Results 1,888 to 1,904 of 2028
  1. #1888
    Regular Member Badmintan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    AMK (Singapore)
    Posts
    1,008
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yurimaster2010 View Post
    many ppl claimed z slash is very powerful and good in smashing.
    can anyone provide a better justification...

    This racket is not extra stiff why so its powerful?
    This racket have smaller sweet spot so smaller chance to hit yet why so its good in smashing?
    This racket is also not heavy head like AT900P yet why its powerful?
    This racket is claimed to be much longer, yet was its really that long compare to ns9900 and AT900P so why it easier to smash?
    This racket using some sort unique materials yet seems not so much diff compare to other arcsb rackets....

    so conclusion how true behinds all these claims?
    Depends on the combo of head heaviness + stiffness. Most extra stiff racquets at least in Yonex are relatively headlight eg Ti10/NS9900
    The smaller the sweetspot, the more focus is the repulsion of the strings when the shuttlecock is squashed into the stringbed
    The racquet has a higher racquet head speed owing to less drag, it is moderately head heavy and has very thin/aerodynamic frame
    Owing to leverage, the longer the shaft the bigger the d. Therefore M (moment) = F X d, more moment or torque is generated
    Aerodynamic design, the frame is thinner than most Arsaber slim head design, hence less drag or resistance when the racquets cuts thru the air.

    Not a conclusion, but just application of general knowledge. I believe that's the philosophy or rationale behind the arcZ design. That may or may not translate into real world performace, which depends on other factors like skill, strings, shuttle, wind, etc.
    Last edited by Badmintan; 09-12-2010 at 06:28 AM.

  2. #1889
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,989
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSLvictorSOTX View Post
    Faulty design but TC700 is not? I think they are well designed, it's just that not TOO MANY people can handle it. Afterall, Mizuno and Yonex both deflected from the usual ISO (from classic oval to make it ''semi iso; semi oval''), thus, it evolves from there. Guess, we'll have to see if Yonex totally dumps the ''semi iso; semi oval'' shape altogether. Btw, any experience with Sotx Woven 16 that you can share with me? Tks. I know how a Woven 16 plays from my perspective but thought you have so much more experience with different brands of rackets.

    I trust that you are one of those guys who gets the framework of a ''semi iso; semi oval'' shaped racket. It's like somebody learning to ride a bike in 30 minutes while others takes days.
    Semi ISO isnt really the same as ARC-Z "narrow" frame or classic.. i Have tried different "semi" frames from Forza (CF-frame), Mizuno, Carlton etc. and they usually have quite OK sweetspot (granted, a tad smaller than the best iso rackets).. But this fact itself is not why i have a problem with Arc-Z.. For me it is the combination of the narrow fram (which makes it have samller sweetspot than the "semi"-isos, very close to pure oval imop) with the extra long high flex shaft that make it a poor control racket. If the TC700 had had a too felxy shaft i think it would also be a bad design..

  3. #1890
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    307
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSLvictorSOTX View Post
    It is mostly due to you proficiency and consistency at hitting the sweetspot everytime! Therefore, the Z does wonders for someone who can dial it in every time! Congratulations!
    If you are consistently hitting the small sweet spot (which as Twobeer says is questionable FOR ANYONE) then it is not an indication of your proficiency, but is an indication that you are playing against inferior opponents who allow you to do it !!

    The pros don't hit the sweet spot all the time because their pro opponents don't give them the chance ! This is one of the major reasons I believe that the pros are not using the ARC ZS.

  4. #1891
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    307
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer View Post
    Be careful here.. You have to differentiate between Real-life smashing and Yonex marketing here.. If you look at stats from radar guns in tournaments (last world championship for example).. Players using it does NOT produce the fastest smashes.. Usually heavier rackets seem to porduce bigger top speeds in game play.

    The arc Z has been tweaked aerodynamically to produce less drag in a normal swing, and this is what yonex highlighted in measuring the initial speed the first few centimeters the shuttle has when smashing using it in a lab-environment. Problem is of course that that test doesnt really compare it with other rackets, as similar test has not been published for any other models.. The only comparable data I know of is the radar measurements from tournaments. and these have not confirmemed the marketing hype that this racket produces faster smashes than more heavier "power rackets" with larger sweetspot.

    /Twobeer
    Exactly, Twobeer. Haven't we been here before ? - on this thread and many others .

    There's marketing hype........ and then there is Yonex marketing hype !!

  5. #1892
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,645
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer View Post
    Semi ISO isnt really the same as ARC-Z "narrow" frame or classic.. i Have tried different "semi" frames from Forza (CF-frame), Mizuno, Carlton etc. and they usually have quite OK sweetspot (granted, a tad smaller than the best iso rackets).. But this fact itself is not why i have a problem with Arc-Z.. For me it is the combination of the narrow fram (which makes it have samller sweetspot than the "semi"-isos, very close to pure oval imop) with the extra long high flex shaft that make it a poor control racket. If the TC700 had had a too felxy shaft i think it would also be a bad design..
    I didn't feel the ArcZ have a smaller sweetspot than the TC700. In fact, I've stacked both the ArcZ on the TC700 and the frame shape is almost identical. Lb for Lb, the TC700's tighter string bed gives it a smaller sweetspot.

    However, I agree with you that ArcZ's combination of smaller (than normal) sweetspot yet somewhat flexy shaft gave me a lot of problem, especially in defense. I will not go so far to say that the ArcZ is a bad design though.. it just obviously did not work out for a number of folks. As a saving grace, there are folks who loves it and there are pros who uses it.

  6. #1893
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    court
    Posts
    642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roy b View Post
    If you are consistently hitting the small sweet spot (which as Twobeer says is questionable FOR ANYONE) then it is not an indication of your proficiency, but is an indication that you are playing against inferior opponents who allow you to do it !!

    The pros don't hit the sweet spot all the time because their pro opponents don't give them the chance ! This is one of the major reasons I believe that the pros are not using the ARC ZS.
    Perhaps I should rephrase (probably been moonlighting), if someone can hit very hard, the sweetspot naturally spreads out, don't you agree? By how many percentage points, that I am not sure.

    Not all pros wins it all by smashing alone you already know that; one just can not win everything with their smashes!

    Quote Originally Posted by yurimaster2010 View Post
    thanks for your input, u r now switching into topic for aerodynamic within Z-slash...do Yonex ve the best aerodynamic frame build into z-slash? was it really much better than NS9900 and AT900T frame design?
    If we would like to benchmark other brand i would BS11 is the best aerodynamic if not the best but at least the most most obvious frame design can just seen by naked eyes...
    so the debate here was aerodynamic frame from Z-slash contribute 51% until its was nominated by Z-slash fans that claimed to be most powerful and best smashing racket ever by our beloved forum fans?
    fans lets share more on your side of stories with better justification...

    honestly i doubt how shaft stiffness, frame weigth, shaft length, frame shape from Z-slash ve really came out with a best combination ratio to create such a powerful smashing racket every under the yonex brand...
    Aerodymically speaking, the Z is by far a better design than the BS series imo.

    Quote Originally Posted by weeyeh View Post
    I didn't feel the ArcZ have a smaller sweetspot than the TC700. In fact, I've stacked both the ArcZ on the TC700 and the frame shape is almost identical. Lb for Lb, the TC700's tighter string bed gives it a smaller sweetspot.

    However, I agree with you that ArcZ's combination of smaller (than normal) sweetspot yet somewhat flexy shaft gave me a lot of problem, especially in defense. I will not go so far to say that the ArcZ is a bad design though.. it just obviously did not work out for a number of folks. As a saving grace, there are folks who loves it and there are pros who uses it.
    Normally I string all my rackets at 28/30 (strung my one and only Woven 16 at 35/37 just for the heck of it and I'm not cut out for it, I know immediately right away so now it's strung at 28/30). With the Z, the more I played with it the ''truer'' its flex (mid stiff--stiff; not the ''true'' flexy kind though, you know what I mean) came clear to me...I wasn't going to string it higher and higher BECAUSE it just bends the shaft even more the harder I hit at it SO I lowered it to 26/28 and now it's about as good as it gets. Gotta experiment.

    My TC700 is strung at 28/30, unfortunately I am nowhere near your proficiency in harnessing its true potential!

    What I am really saying is, the Z is not badly designed, it's just not for everyone but it's the best smashing racket for me (Smashing department alone! Z best!).

    Of course nothing compares to SiW 35 just like nothing comapres to your trusty TC700 (aherm, nearing a dozen in count?)!
    Last edited by RSLvictorSOTX; 09-13-2010 at 01:04 PM.

  7. #1894
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    307
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSLvictorSOTX View Post
    if someone can hit very hard, the sweetspot naturally spreads out, don't you agree? By how many percentage points, that I am not sure.
    No, I disagree. Why would it ?

    Not all pros wins it all by smashing alone you already know that; one just can not win everything with their smashes!
    Agreed

    Aerodymically speaking, the Z is by far a better design than the BS series imo.
    Great quote. Ants would be proud of you . But please tell me WHY is it better ??

  8. #1895
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    TW, SG, HK
    Posts
    7,314
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [QUOTE=RSLvictorSOTX;Of course nothing compares to SiW 35![/QUOTE]

    This is the best piece of information, in the 100+ pages of this thread

  9. #1896
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    court
    Posts
    642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roy b View Post
    No, I disagree. Why would it ?


    Agreed


    Great quote. Ants would be proud of you . But please tell me WHY is it better ??

    Why would it not? A sweetspot is not an acute spot...inertia forces the resistance of that tiny spot to widen a bit.

    Aerodynamics of the Z has been describe by Yonex and forumers alike (it's nearly a year since Z's inception, no point in being redundant.). I wouldn't want to throw in my bits and pieces of FORMULA 1 body aeros. However, just a simple fact check re BS series, don't they look like armoured vehicles? Just how long the BS line would stay in production is indicative! Admittedly though, I think BS 10 is really a good one anyhow!
    Last edited by RSLvictorSOTX; 09-13-2010 at 03:22 PM.

  10. #1897
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    court
    Posts
    642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why is that only ''we'' know the merits of SW 35?

    For those who aren't a fan of SW35, just enjoy your respective favourites, I know we can not be all the same.

    Cheers,

  11. #1898
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    TW, SG, HK
    Posts
    7,314
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSLvictorSOTX View Post
    Why is that only ''we'' know the merits of SW 35?

    For those who aren't a fan of SW35, just enjoy your respective favourites, I know we can not be all the same.

    Cheers,
    Because only "we" are good enough to use it ? (except for JJS, LYD, PSH, LHJ, and the rest of Team Korea)

    On a more serious note, most likely it is due to the fact that Victor rackets, aren't as readily available as Yonex Rackets.

  12. #1899
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    307
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RSLvictorSOTX View Post
    Why would it not? A sweetspot is not an acute spot...inertia forces the resistance of that tiny spot to widen a bit.
    No, this is not correct. At any given 'inertia', the sweet-spot (call it area) remains the same. Merely hitting harder means that off-centre smashes are harder but still not as hard as sweet-spot smashes.

    Aerodynamics of the Z has been describe by Yonex and forumers alike (it's nearly a year since Z's inception, no point in being redundant.). I wouldn't want to throw in my bits and pieces of FORMULA 1 body aeros. However, just a simple fact check re BS series, don't they look like armoured vehicles? Just how long the BS line would stay in production is indicative! Admittedly though, I think BS 10 is really a good one anyhow!

    Come on now. You are Ants in disguise, aren't you.

  13. #1900
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    court
    Posts
    642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roy b View Post
    No, this is not correct. At any given 'inertia', the sweet-spot (call it area) remains the same. Merely hitting harder means that off-centre smashes are harder but still not as hard as sweet-spot smashes.




    Come on now. You are Ants in disguise, aren't you.
    Factor in the give of the string bed which no matter how tightly strung (even at 40 lbs) still has to deform upon impact--yeah, it may crash the cork but the strings are going to budge anyhow. Even a concrete wall has to cave.

    Btw, lots of people confuse the sweet spot from the sweetest spot, so yeah, it's not a dead spot, mind you!
    Last edited by RSLvictorSOTX; 09-13-2010 at 03:50 PM.

  14. #1901
    Regular Member yurimaster2010's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    MY
    Posts
    1,006
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    so can we conclude that the smaller sweet spot mean the better strength concentrated at the centre for you to smash?
    what string is the best to further enchance the smashing quality?

    btw, how can we do differently to adapt to Z-slash to make it a better control racket...

  15. #1902
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    240
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yurimaster2010 View Post
    so can we conclude that the smaller sweet spot mean the better strength concentrated at the centre for you to smash?
    what string is the best to further enchance the smashing quality?

    btw, how can we do differently to adapt to Z-slash to make it a better control racket...
    Make it stiffer.

  16. #1903
    Regular Member tckang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Boleh-Land
    Posts
    733
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yurimaster2010 View Post

    btw, how can we do differently to adapt to Z-slash to make it a better control racket...
    Nothing should be done onto it. This is what makes Arc Z as it is, just like any other rackets. Every rackets is unique, so if you think it is not a better control racket, move on, there are so many good rackets out there.

    Get the racket because which pro use them/ endorse them / or don't buy because no pro use them ? Now that is REAL bad decision for someone who succumb to Racket Marketing strategy. (i.e You are still nobody and not Lin Dan or Play like Lin Dan simply by getting his N90)
    Buy the racket because who and who create the fastest smash out of it? Now that is plain no brainer as well.
    Get the racket because it suits your game and style, no matter what level you are, now that is smart and what it should be.
    So, if Arc Z is not your cup of tea, move on. It is not your fault, and certainly not Yonex. It just does not suit you, thats all.
    (Btw i am open for buying your Arc Z )

  17. #1904
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    721
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tckang View Post
    (Btw i am open for buying your Arc Z )
    tckang,

    How many Arc Z you want??? You are already having so many,,,, I am only using 4 pcs....


    Thanks.

Similar Threads

  1. Yonex Arcsaber Z-Slash Taufik Review
    By cycilver in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 53
    : 06-02-2012, 02:11 AM
  2. FS/FT: Yonex 9900 for ArcSaber Z Slash/ArcSaber 8DX/MX 80
    By ghooga in forum Buy & Sell - Read the rules sticky before you post
    Replies: 5
    : 12-31-2011, 10:33 AM
  3. Yonex ArcSaber 10 or ArcSaber Z Slash or Voltric 80 or AT900 P or Victor MX80
    By Polaroid in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 9
    : 04-05-2011, 02:25 PM
  4. FS /FT : Yonex Arcsaber Z-Slash With YY NS9900 / YY Arcsaber 8DX
    By ishak.ahmad in forum Buy & Sell - Read the rules sticky before you post
    Replies: 2
    : 04-16-2010, 04:42 AM
  5. My new ArcSaber z-slash! Review
    By MarcAs11 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 8
    : 03-03-2010, 10:33 AM

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
  •