Armortec, Arcsaber, Nanospeed chart

Is your chart based on the specs from Yonex ?

Anyway, for the AT700 it is not extra stiff, it is just stiff, it is also definitely the head heaviest racquet from Yonex.

 

missing Nanospeed 7700

 

New AT700 is rated as extra stiff in Yonex official website.

Missing AT700 LTD and AT250?

 

I believe you are referring to www.yonex.com ?

If you look at www.yonex.co.jp website, the AT700 is not extra stiff.

http://www.yonex.co.jp/catalog/pdf/2009_badminton_spec.pdf

I have AT700, NS9900, Arc10, Ti10 (1st Gen) and AT900T and the AT700 definitely not the stiffest.

 

I believe the 2U version of the Ti-10 1st gen is the stiffest Yonex has ever made, along with some of the old Carbonex's (I think Carb 9 Tour is also pretty stiff by today's standard). I actually started my training with it and now my forearm is insanely thick, relatively to my left forearm.

The AT700 (old colour especially) is actually stiff rather than extra stiff, although I believe the stiffness of the material used in the shaft is similar to the AT900P/T but due to the slightly longer shaft, the AT700 is ultimately less stiff.

The AT700 LTD on the other hand is pretty much similar to the AT700 old colour (in terms of shaft stiffness), just with an almost overweighted head weight, even more than the AT700. I think this could be due to the thicker and tougher paint (plus some side materials maybe) put onto the very top part of the frame.

 

Nice link and chart. Erm, then i dun know why the global YY website rate AT700 as extra stiff, typo?

And one suggestion to jediwannabe, may be u need to add more beginner level rackets in ur chart, coz i guess ur target user should be more on beginner player. Cheers

 

i agree that there should be a selection of "beginner" rackets, or those easiest to use for beginners based on what you can gather from these forums (e.g. maybe look up beginners and their most common problems and resulting preferences?).

also, a suggestion for your balance point scale is to use maybe 1-10 instead of only 4-8, a larger range will provide more information and more relevance to the user of the racket, instead of having say x rackets rated at "4" on the balance point scale - what is that supposed to mean, how can i tell the difference between the rackets then, etc, it can eliminate confusion and other issues like that. perhaps best, though a little more work, is to find the balance point of every racket, and have a predetermined range of bps to signify head light, even balance and head heavy (maybe a combination of both scale and measurement?). you'll have to also measure the length of each racket for bp measurements to be useful (especially true if you want to eventually include "classic" length rackets like the cab series later on).

anyway, just my 2c...

 

What does your stiffness scale start and end? Because from what I have heard, if some other rackets are rated "8", at700 should be a bit higher than that. Also, from my experience, the arc10 is slightly head heavy and an all round/offensive racket - by no means is it a smash everything that you see racket like the at700 or 900p.

I don't think that the sources you have cited are entirely accurate in the strictest sense.

My half cent =P

 

why not ask a friend who works in a badminton store to help wif the balance points?
He/She can measure the averange balance points and tell you them
so chart will possibly be more accurate

For the balance point scale, i suggest that at each mark, you provide the distance from grip end:
ie:
1- 270 - 273mm
...
5- 279 - 281mm
etc
should make the scale more accurate