Better can be very subjective...However, I do like add durability in 'better'. Not many newer rackets out there can survive a clash these days... I have seen some newer/better rackets just collapse even during games.
racket prices hasn't really been going up that much. just in line with inflation. so they are not really charging us more for those features. but point taken, i have also pointed out that the "sound filter" is total garbage marketing talk. but that's the problem. they have to justify for bringing out yet another racket so any little thing they blow it way out of proportion. Yonex seems to be the worst offender though.
Which is a scary prospect. I wonder what the reason for this could be? Cheaper materials, less density? Perhaps an intentional marketing agenda to ensure more buyers require replacement rackets? I'm sorry if I sound highly pessimistic, it's just I really do worry about these things. The phrase, old is gold sometimes really is true. My 8DX actually recently broke, and I had a chance to have a peak inside. far as I can tell it has some sort of woven carbon dense wiring/wrapping, (imagine a bundle of string tightly wrapped together inside the head), but annoyingly it was still slightly hollowed on the inside (from what I can remember). Not really sure where the "nanotube" technology comes in to play, as the visual properties just resembled ordinary carbon "fibre" on breakage.
mainly because the trend towards lighter and lighter rackets. 20 yrs back, all CF rackets are 2U, 10 yrs back things start to go 3U, and nowadays, many rackets comes at 4U which was really unheard of. while we cannot dispute that some of these 4U rackets do play really well, the consequent of which is that there is less material and that means less durability. perhaps that's part of the innovation. lighter, faster racket with same stiffness.
I think after all's said and done, technology and its application to products (racquets) has made a significant change/improvement over time. If you step back and observe a 40-year timeline, you cannot deny that we are currently using much lighter, snappier, stronger, faster, better racquets than those available 10 years ago. R&D has it's role. But to expect game-changing advances to happen each and every year is not exactly fair. As Dinkalot has been at pains to point out repeatedly on his Panda Power thread, it's about synergy and the symbiotic relationship between materials and their quantities, densities, properties, positioning, and heaven knows what else, that eventually gives a racquet it's unique place in the line-up. And for me as a player/enthusiast, that's the USP: the diversity of products within a price/performance bracket that just was not available in the past. Take the VT80 and the MX80 for example. Such a strong current of excitement about these products at present, but after the dust dies down and people come back to reality about cost, expectations, price/performance, most of them will probably go to the (now much-reduced-cost) ARC10 or BS11 or AT900T or N55 or whatever, and feel really good about their decision. For most players/enthusiasts who would still want to adopt the latest creation (e.g., Voltric) I believe the best policy is one to be borrowed from what is practised when buying new software or an Operating System: Wait until the Service Packs or V1.x or V2.0 is released! Hence, you see a lot of FS posts for the VT70 now that the VT80 is receiving such great reviews...
The other thing, is that I get the impression maybe some of the marketing stuff gets lost in translation. Like with the "Sound Filter" technology, I could believe that it might have originally been some sort of vibration absorption technology, designed to improve feel (since sound and vibration are kind of the same thing), and then somewhere along the line that meaning was lost.
Other brand may be true on "stronger", I am not sure about "stronger" on Yonex rackets these days. I at times hold back in playing with friends that have expensive Yonex rackets in doubles games. I like to use Cab 8 but need to switch to 'newer' rackets otherwise no one will like to have a doubles game with me!
Keep in mind that higher performance does not always mean more durable. In point of fact, many high tech, high performance materials are less durable. In terms of strength steel > aluminum > carbon fiber which is pretty obvious. As already noticed in the last few years the shafts are actually hollow. This is because advances in carbon fiber makes it stiffer so you can accomplish the same stiffness with less weight, this is good in that it makes rackets faster but with a penalty of less durability.
I agree with what sketchy says in that these aditional materials tend to be in to cover up poorer quality carbon fibre. The original Cab rackets had good quality carbon & hence why they are still very much playable now despite the fact they are 20+ yrs old. I played a match tonight with a 22 year old "U" cab20, it didn't feel that much different from a modern racket & I passed it to my wife in between play & she commented "Good balance, nice flex"! Super strong rackets don't make great rackets. TC700's for example are very solid - but it feels likeyou are playing with a solid carbon stick, you don't "feel" anything. If strength & durability was the most important there wouldn't be 4U rackets. Some of the most popular (and subsequently expensive) rackets of recent times were AT800, AT700 1st Gen & Boron2. The common link in those selection is that they are very fragile.
Yup, these are key changes (Although you forgot Cab3 - wood head Cab shaft!) It is also important to note though the difference between Metal head rackets & wooden rackets with Metal shafts are not so great with the modern ones. I am often surprised when I pick up older rackets that they don't swing too differently. Picked up a cab7 today & it is not really very heavy. The main difference between them is: a) Graphite Shafts could be much stiffer b) Metal heads, then Graphite heads could take higher string tensions. c)Graphite maybe slightly more brittle in heavy clashes, but it does not deform or dent like Metal Need to do some research & weightsof my older models I think.
Agree that the prices hasn't really gone up (way up) commensurate with inflation. off-topic: Oh man, just as I'm going in, you are pulling me out!
Glad you pointed that out because while I dig it (TC700), I just somehow love SiW35's feel. Solid yet I can feel the bird leaving the strings from my SiW35! May I ask how would you stack your 22 year old ''U'' in terms of stiffness? Medium flex in today's term?
Hello to one and all. Thanks to the original post-er, this has been a very interesting post & thread and it has certainly drawn many responses with varied insights and info. I'm personally very interested as I still play regularly using rackets made from the 60s to the present day. One example would be using my Aeroplane 515 wooden (circa 60s) and a Yonex Armortech 700 (present day) in my weekly games. In my first 3 games during my weekly sessions I always use the wooden racket partly as a warm-up/training racket and it has held up quite well in alot of fast and furious games of doubles. For additonal info the said racket used is an Aeroplane No.515, wooden laminated head construction, with s.steel shaft and wooden handle. Strings are the original factory nylon 'fishing-line' string prob. with an estimated tension of 5- 10 lbs. When not in use I keep the head in a racket press. I've been playing consistently with wooden rackets for 30+ years and also a myriad other rackets as well so if anybody is interested I'll be glad to offer my 2 cents worth of hindsight and insight into this discussion. Rgds, ubootsg
Yonex Carbonex 3 (wooden head with a graphite shaft) . I did remember the Yonex Carbonex 3 (wooden head with graphite shaft). In fact, I had 2 of them when they first came out. I left it out from the list because that experiment failed. It vanished after just one year of production (I think). Both of my Yonex Carbonex 3 were broken at the shaft just months of using them. Why? Because the wooden head was found too heavy for the graphite shaft to carry. .
Aeroplane No.515 (wooden head with steel shaft) . It's great that your wooden racket is still in use; and still kept in a racket press. Regarding strings; it's a beautiful sound produced when hitting the shuttlecock with natural gut strings. Have you tried playing with natural gut strung on your wooden frame before? .
Med flex at best. The thing with the Cab20 flex is that it is different to modern flexy rackets modern flexy rackets don't seem to kick back like it does. They just flex and then the shuttle has left the bed. With the cab the racket flexes and kicks back quickly.
Hi Chris. Did not have the chance to play using natural gut. The Aeroplanes were sold with cheap 'fishing-line' nylon string. I've broken at least 1/2 dozen of them over the past 20-30 yrs playing though I do remember having some of them re-strung with Gosen Hysheep at about 10-15 lb tension during the mid-80s when I was playing competitively for a while. About the sound...in games where I've used the Aeroplane, quite a no. of my opponents made the comment that they hear low thud sound when I hit hard, and hardly any sound when I hit softer, and it sometimes put them off guard in anticipation - guess they're more used to the sound of regular rackets when anticipating shots, heh? ubootsg
Marketing is all about getting inside your customers mind, and selling them either consciously or subconsciously on your product. I read an article the other day on the most over priced items. They are: Cosmetics, bottled water, greeting cards, mattresses/furniture, restaurant drinks (wine+soda), brand name clothing, diamonds/jewelry, glasses, movie theater food, and prescription drugs. Now some of these like the no.1 item rx drugs have a very useful purpose, however some like clothing and bottled water are sold because of the brand attached. In my opinion Yonex, Victor, and Li Ning make very minor changes to the rackets from year to year. The greatest jump in technology was previously stated and that is when racket technology moved to carbon based rackets. I believe one the greatest improvements was indeed the muscle power "system" if you want to call it that. I think all the other stuff you hear nano, ti, mesh, etc is all marketing. (Woven technology on the other hand is a real system, however I wont go into that here.) Although professionals do use these rackets, its only because they're paid/sponsored to. Why did lin dan try to use his original at900 for so long? It's cause he know the racket works for him. Why do players use older rackets when the newer rackets are supposed to be technologically better? Why do players have no problem switching from yonex to li ning, or yonex to victor when their sponsoe changes? It's cause rackets are relatively all the same, and they know that even between brands they will have a racket similar to the one they use and like, and thats my point. Use what works for you. If you can play well with a $50 racket, by all means, use that $50 racket. If you feel confident with the technology and new space age design of the Voltric 80, then get a VT80 and work it on the court. What ever works for you is what you should do.
I must say, I find it fascinating so many still use older equipment. Namely Uboot and James. Utmost respect to you both. I'm only 25 here and quite new to the sport, so unfortunately have never had a chance to play with the golden oldies. Would be lovely to get an in-depth comparison between these older rackets and some of the new one's!
