Ashaway vs Yonex strings

Discussion in 'Badminton String' started by Sgbad, Sep 27, 2007.

  1. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    21,811
    Likes Received:
    23
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    I kinda see ur point.
    However, in this case, the difference was 0.008 to 0.01mm.

    Difference between say bg65 and bg80 of 0.02 mm is noticable by me too but it could be mostly due to individual filament diameter and usage of vectran in the bg80. In the bg80, cross sectional area is different too, it's more oval while filaments in bg65 is circular.
    Of course, difference of 0.05 mm is quite huge.
     
    #181 cooler, Apr 4, 2008
    Last edited: Apr 4, 2008
  2. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    If you buy a precision caliper or a micrometer you will see a certification that give's you the tolerance error of the devic's parallelism deviation of either the jaws or the anvils. For calipers you have the added problem of aligning the string to be at right angle to the jaws properly. Badminton strings are not completely round and are easily compressed to be meaningful measured with a caliper. Only technicians who use a micrometer can do an acceptable job.
     
  3. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    USA
    Anyone with access to a physic lab with laser caliper? If not, caliper used by Sir DinkALot is good enough for me.
     
  4. jerby

    jerby Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,124
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    EU
    easily compressed: sure
    certain tolerances: offcourse...

    But you're saying those measurements DinkAlot did are unreliable?
    That's....odd....

    Not only is he consistently close in measuring (he did about 25 measurements per stringtype) he is also scarily close to the package-thickness ashaway states...to me, those two provide a pretty good benchmark..

    Okay, so he measured ML is consistently 0.6988...
    if that's 0.6992mm because he (apparantly veyr consistently) compressed the jaws... Fine with me:p:eek:
     
  5. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Everyone would know that readings like 0.6689 mm from a caliper like the Mituyoyo 500-672 is just too good to be accurate. FYI, this caliper has a resolution of only 0.01mm and an accuracy of only 0.02mm. Measuring something like 0.6689 is punching beyond its weight. Strings are not perfectly round. Strings with finer filaments in the core will be rounder than strings with thicker filaments in the core. Streching them will make them rounder but still not a perfect circle.
     
  6. DinkAlot

    DinkAlot dcbadminton
    Brand Representative

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    12,682
    Likes Received:
    290
    Occupation:
    Social Distancing Specialist
    Location:
    Southern California
    I updated the string thickness review. I added some more explanation. The actual thickness is the average of the five measurements rounded to the nearest 0.001.
     

Share This Page