Results 69 to 85 of 377
08-08-2010, 07:29 PM #69
Looks great. Congratulations on a job well done.
08-08-2010, 08:21 PM #70
08-18-2010, 02:43 PM #71
08-18-2010, 03:01 PM #72
I can't edit my post so I write it here. Better becouse the upper side (on the picture with yellow tube) will be cut on the CNC waterjet machine.
Last edited by Michal; 08-18-2010 at 03:14 PM.
10-14-2010, 01:42 PM #73
10-14-2010, 03:52 PM #74
Man, that's so nice!!!
10-16-2010, 11:25 PM #75
Wow, Good Job!
10-17-2010, 07:42 AM #76
That's impressive. Looks like you are ready for world-wide sales.
(what was originally in the box you have them packed in? They fit perfectly.)
10-17-2010, 12:03 PM #77
Where do i place an order?
10-17-2010, 03:51 PM #78
Thanks for praise.
I can maybe make more this parts (first I have to test it carefully) and sell. But I don't know when and what will be the final price including shipping. In Europe is no problem, North America, Asia, Australia is more difficult- shipping cost is my opinion quite expensive (50$ US and more). I'm still looking something cheaper.
If I know something new, I will write it here.
BTW. This is chocolates box. Candies was delicious
10-17-2010, 05:19 PM #79
The only thing I would worry about is that rubber sleeve seems a bit thin. For a high-volume stringer (not myself) it may wear out and if he/she didn't notice, they might scratch a customer's racquet.
10-18-2010, 03:13 AM #80
10-18-2010, 07:38 AM #81
if it is worth, it would be no meaning for the shipping cost.
to me, using high shipping cost but secure (for example using DHL, FedEx, UPS or similar) is better.
just do let us know how much for 1 set (4 pieces) and shipping cost.
we wait for your further information.
10-18-2010, 11:53 AM #82
These clamps are very promising, but I would suggest making the base significantly thinner. The higher the racket sits in the machine, the more angle there is between the string and the horizontal when pulling, which will make the true tension end up lower than the set value.
I've seen a few Pro's Pro Pilot/XP and other Eagnas 800/900 Combo clones on here, and these have removable rubber mats at 12/6. If these are removed the racket will drop down another 5 mm, which would be as good as we can get; ideally, the shaft would only just clear the puller when spinning the racket, getting as close to a horizontal string pull as possible.
Of course, some machines would need the extra clearance of the thick base, so the base thickness would probably end up being customer-specified.
10-18-2010, 12:54 PM #83
10-18-2010, 01:35 PM #84
Which version is better and why?
First is "half cnc" ,welded, upper cnc side (with yellow sleeve) is 6mm width, bottom side 14mm. Second (on the pics all black at the moment, without a rubber sleeve) all 12mm width. Both with M8 steel screws.. Mark A: It could be some problem with making "lower" base, but I will think about this. It's interesting. Thanks for opinion.
10-18-2010, 02:25 PM #85
The ones with the curved back get my vote - the fewer sharp edges and/or corners there are the less chance there is of accidentally fouling or, worse, snapping a string on them.
However, the ones with the round backs look slightly too wide to me; they should fit between the closest holes on a racket (those in the middle of the crosses) without blocking them at all. If they were 1 mm or so wider than the Mk1s (with the rubbers included) they would be a winner for me.
If I may ask, what would be the problem with making a thinner base?
By Mark A in forum Buy & SellReplies: 0: 12-21-2011, 03:49 PM
By sadlonelylad in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 2: 11-13-2011, 09:02 PM
By Pete LSD in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 52: 04-19-2007, 04:04 PM
By vatovey in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 1: 01-10-2007, 01:22 PM
By Michal in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 29: 12-18-2006, 10:00 AM