Ants, if your opinion is correct, then wouldn't it make sense to ship the better ones to other countries? It will reduce the cost of shipping the faulty ones back to Japan.
silenheart, words in quotations are deliberate...they are not meant to be the "outsourced" word. outsourcing is legit. heck no, not talking about low end (of course, common sense tells us low ends are printed made in china). Oh no, no, no...we are not talking about false claims. oh i love ynex products. no way I'm taking them for the plunge! MetalOrange p.s. of note though, just take into consideration the technicalities of distribution codes. fairly straight forward it is, then some...
May be when you have a chance to visit Japan, let me know your schedule. I will do my best to arrange a tour?
Notice he didn't make any direct performance comparisons between the TC700 and the ZS? I put in another 3 hours with the ZS, and I have to agree with some of what 2B said, but the power of the racket and the speed make up for it as far as I'm concerned. I'm still not completely convinced BG80 is the best string for it, but when you play aggressively the ZS is pretty lethal and it's growing on me, bigtime. Then again I haven't played with the N90 or AT700 (Played with the NS9900 and thought it was weirder than the ZS) like 2B - or everyone else on this board for that matter - so I'm still very much a newbie in making broad comparisons.
JasonVan, Yes, I am not saying that TC700 is not closer to oval, I'm saying that ZS is narrower...thus, there's the oval, the iso and the isoval. And yes, regarding codes, it's much debated or discussed... but at the end of the day, it boils down to who wins the match. However, subliminally it matters how our rackets hold up specially after a clash. MetalOrange
As Easy Tiger mentioned before, one has to be more aggressive when using the ZS. Tried it again last night and can confirm that that's the mode to follow. Played mixed doubles and it was quite weak, as I tend to be less aggressive, and unforced errors were common. Then when playing singles, the ZS was again the weapon of choice. Guess you don't use a samurai sword as a paring knife. Point here is, IMHO, to be happy with the ZS, use it for the right game.
TC700 and ARC-Z both feels very fast trough the air, for me the feel of arc-Z is more close to cartlon/cab "classic head" feel, I think TC700 feels more like an ISO than ARC-Z (probably due to the wider frame). I have found I almost play as much with LN N90 these days as TC700. Both feel very solid in dubles i often use NS9900 due to its speediness cheers, T update, after evening session: Power is still awesome (and really effortless when timing is good), my first impression still holds that i feel it is lacking in control and flexes a tad to mch in many shots for mhy taste...
twobeer, Glad you have tested it for couple of plays by now. Before, I love NS9900 dearly, now, I personally rate ARC ZS at no. 1 and NS9900 at no. 1.1 and Mizuno TC700 at no. 2. I only have little playing time with N90 and it feels like a brick (but that's unfair b'cos I only played it once for 2 hours). The TC700 is very much like N90 too, only a tad less stiff. Don't get me wrong, I like stiff rackets as much as those with a little 'give'. In my case re ZS, it only feels a tad flexy when the shuttle is hit a little higher than in the dead centre, else it doesn't feel flexy at all. Overall, I like the power of ZS and the maneuverability of NS9900. MetalOrange P.S. Please give it some more playtime and come back with a definitive review. By then, it is what it is already when you've clocked-in enough hours on the ZS. P.S. 2. Grab a regular oval or CAB and hit for half an hour, then try the ZS again. Power and control comes together by then. As I've mentioned before in my previous threads, I switch back and forth between ISO and Ovals, thus the transition is smooth.
I did read the whole thing. However, from my reading including of all your ""s. My understanding of your post is that you are saying only the initial batch is made in Japan. All other subsequent (or only selected) racquets are not made in Japan from the graphite sheet to the final painted racquet in my hand. I have to say my English is still not as good as yours after all these year living in US. Or should I say I am only good in American, not good in English? Please enlighten me.
I have used and tried classic-headshape racket quite a lot (for example lately the GP-77, GP-88 Mizunos, Carlton Airblade tour etc) so I do not feel there is something "new" with the difference between ovals/classic and ISO frames.. Forza, Carlton, Mizuno all have done "controlled forze, Optimetric and whatever they called the semi ISO frames..) Generelaly I think these rackets have been very succesful. Arc-Z is a new take with "narrow-ISO" which I have my doubts on design wise.. For me classic has always provided a better "boom" (all things else being equal) than ISOs, but the bigger sweetspot and "forgivness" of the ISOs have more than well compensated for it, That is one reason i think we have not seen many "classic" rackets succeed at the top mens singles/double etc. for many years.. The flexy feel is most evident to me when hitting the sweetspot.. The feeling is somewhat close to the arc-10 "hold"-flex but added to this the shaft seems way flexy which "assists" proppelling the shots but takes away lots of control. Usually I can compensate for this by stringing harder.. But with the narrow frame I suspect the sweetspot will become smaller than the corks contact point if i go to 35lbs or so /Twobeer
silentheart, ...read the whole thing refers to the above you've chosen to partially quote verbatim: "we are not talking about false claims. oh i love ynex products. no way I'm taking them for the plunge!" now, regarding which batch(es) is not directly relevant just like the pre-selection process(es). so long as they're doing it within their own set (legal) parameters, it is ok. fortunately rackets requires not the deliberateness of some other goods wherein, there's a mandatory: assembled in, finished in, made in (technically a sufficiently high %age of where it is made will suffice; sometimes the specificity in %age of the main product is considered rather than the by-product), etc. ever thought who did the made in japan "blance" thing? of course, yonex japan still has to do the first person apologies. tnx for the offer to factory-hop me in japan. i do my whirlwind quarterly rounds in japan (tokyo only) for company and personal purposes but not for the wrong reasons. kind regards, MetalOrange p.s. hey, from your uso posts, i think you like tennis so let me take a page from johnny mac: you can not be serious! this is a forum where lively discussions are held and unfortunately total agreeance isn't the norm. twobeer, probably there's a finality to your playtests already. when i do smashes it doesn't flex and hold but it does when hit higher rather than dead centre (as i mentioned before i seldom frame it). mine is at 28x30 w/ bg 66, however i wouldn't be inclined to string at 33/34 ever again (lasted barely 10 minutes). i find it quite refreshing though for yonex to come up with a narrower frame. it just makes one FOCUS a bit more. MetalOrange
Yonex factory and office is not as spectacular as you expect them to be. Of course it is more organised but then Their showrooms is much nicer...
Had another 5 hours of play from yesterday night and today's afternoon. Still having problems during doubles on netplays and drops. Clears and smashes are no problem, easy to adapt (i m using LN N55 and Zelm Trixon 8 prior to this). Still cant conclude, like many of those in this thread. Will give it another 20 hours of play before conclude it whether it suits me or not. Ganbate!
Yes, I tried it this weekend as well, and I think the feel remains.. good power but at a hefty price of control :-(... I do not like slicing with the narrower frame :-( It will be interesting to see how pro's take to this racket.. My experience is that pros usually looks more for stableness/control to be able to place/aim more precise (usually more important to put it on/close to the line than 10% harder ) I will be watching the upcoming Danish Open closely.. To bad the best Chineese players are not present :-( It was funny comment about having to "focus" when using it.. Guess it could be a good training racket to have it unforgiving to "punish" just the slightest off center hit when slicing/blocking etc .. I think a nice analogy could be with classic steel blade ironclubs in golf.. Extremely nice feel but less forgiving than modern toe/heel perimeter weighted irons. When starting of with golf I found these old clubs to be great fo training to get rid of hooks/slices.. But would i use them if money where at stake in a competetion, given the more forgiving irons of today .... Maybe onecould try to string it with tighter mains to get it wider /Twobeer
I think the control is excellent. If you think it lacks control, you better hit on the sweetspot. the sweetspot is quite small, that's what causing you feel the poor control. After using for more than a month, I have improved a lot on Arcz. I think I have to play with this for 1 or 2 more months to get my miss rate down to normal compared with ISO frame. I think this is the most difficult racket to adjust to.