Why are Li-ning racket softer ?

[Chocomaster]

Hi,

I saw that as a general trend, Li-ning rackets are generally softer/less stiff than yonex and other racket.

Why is that ? does it have something to do with CBA teaching ? Or maybe just in order to be the exception in the market ?

 

[llrr]

I personally think that LN is just lagging behind in terms of tech compared to yonex. They cannot make the shaft stiff but still have good flex on the swing (you often see people describe yonex as stiff-but-repulsive), so they generally make everything softer to compensate. On the other hand, it could just be their philosophy and marketing. Most non-professional players would not like too stiff of a racquet so they try to cater to the audience/market. They produce higher quality aesthetics to attract people's attention, and they are usually known to survive clashes better than the other brands, so the combination of all of those factors steer people towards their racquets.

 

[Budi]

I rarely see lining develope new tech & even if its there like Tectonic series box frame + flex point on 4 & 8 (tho its not new & we already had many of it on other brand), they still fail to deliver the marketing hype.
Seems like they do less R&D on material & tech. But again maybe its those soft thing that become their unique trait.

 

[Croavistar]

Definitely not lagging behind in terms of tech as most of them are marketing hype. More likely limited access to latest top quality materials from Japan and Europe. But it does not limit them to produce stiff rackets as many other non Japanese brands have done it well. It should be more of product positioning and strategy to make them appeal more to the masses since domestic mass market has so much potential.

 

[llrr]

Definitely not lagging behind in terms of tech as most of them are marketing hype. More likely limited access to latest top quality materials from Japan and Europe. But it does not limit them to produce stiff rackets as many other non Japanese brands have done it well. It should be more of product positioning and strategy to make them appeal more to the masses since domestic mass market has so much potential.

But material is part of racquet tech...

 

[Budi]

Agree that most of the time, new tech are just a gimmic marketing word, but coz if that we all put our attention on it.

On YY i know new Namd or the latest Black Micro core.
V side we had Avenger, Spiderman, & all. Maybe we can shot a web & glide with the racket. Lol... But well it still delivered.
Lining, i dont even know what unique tech are on Tectonic series compare to TC/3D C/ AN. They release abunch of racket but fail to makes each of them shine bright. They had good quality racket & the most durable out of the 3 brand but just fail the marketing job.

 

[Sumanth99]

Li Ning seem to be doing a lot of work on frame shapes, I have seen a lot of people here in BC who love the speedy TC frames and the feel they give without compromising on attacking abilities, I personally adore my N80II it gives me the feel of great control. I don't know what it is but Li Ning rackets give some sense of most premium compared to others. Its like Apple iPhone vs Samsung phone.

Also with Tectonic LN shifted to T1100G carbon from Military grade carbon fibre. I do agree that Li Ning need to invest on material side of the research.

 

[Swaraj Lakshman]

Li Ning has to hire someone from the marketing department of Yonex just like Yonex have to hire someone from the Li Nings paint job dept.

As for the thread ,yes Li Ning definitely makes more flex racquets ,personally I haven't used 900C which I believe is the stiffest in TC ,An and 3d series with rating of 8 in stiffness,if remember correctly. May be that is the stiffest racquet in offering from them.

Technology or material-wise, no disrespect to anyone, it is just my personal experience,I had been using Yonex for a long time before switching to Li Ning and this stuff lasts, can withstand clash of racquets during match with just paint chips ,better than my Yonex (Arc11)in the past could. I love the durability of Li Ning.

 

[s_mair]

Definitely not lagging behind in terms of tech as most of them are marketing hype. More likely limited access to latest top quality materials from Japan and Europe. But it does not limit them to produce stiff rackets as many other non Japanese brands have done it well. It should be more of product positioning and strategy to make them appeal more to the masses since domestic mass market has so much potential.

Fully agreed to that. Li-Ning has excellent rackets with excellent quality. So far, I have seen zero sinking grommet issues on any Li-Ning racket whereas Yonex and especially Victor rackets were (and are) suffering for years. Also, as @Swaraj Lakshman says, the paint job quality on their high-end rackets is incredible - I have had numerous minor contacts with other rackets with my Li-Nings and most of them didn't even cause a paint chip. With Yonex, it's sufficient to look at the racket agrily to cause a paint chip.

If you believe Li-Ning marketing, they are using military grade carbon which surely is at least at the same quality level as Yonex and other major brands. Li-Ning just massily sucks in terms of marketing. Or maybe let's put it the other way round - Yonex expecially is a genius in selling teenytiny innovations as the biggest thing since the invention of carbon fibre.

Why is that ? does it have something to do with CBA teaching ? Or maybe just in order to be the exception in the market ?

Regarding the initial question - having "softer" rackets is somehow part of their racket DNA. And not sure if you've ever played a Li-Ning racket, but they manage to still maintain great control and a superbly direct feel on impact without any unpleasant vibrations (like some Victor rackets have). And in terms of playability, the slightly more flexible shafts end up supporting the player to generate power, simple as that. "the stiffer the better" is not always true.

 

[Swaraj Lakshman]

Fully agreed to that. Li-Ning has excellent rackets with excellent quality. So far, I have seen zero sinking grommet issues on any Li-Ning racket whereas Yonex and especially Victor rackets were (and are) suffering for years. Also, as @Swaraj Lakshman says, the paint job quality on their high-end rackets is incredible - I have had numerous minor contacts with other rackets with my Li-Nings and most of them didn't even cause a paint chip. With Yonex, it's sufficient to look at the racket agrily to cause a paint chip.

If you believe Li-Ning marketing, they are using military grade carbon which surely is at least at the same quality level as Yonex and other major brands. Li-Ning just massily sucks in terms of marketing. Or maybe let's put it the other way round - Yonex expecially is a genius in selling teenytiny innovations as the biggest thing since the invention of carbon fibre.


Regarding the initial question - having "softer" rackets is somehow part of their racket DNA. And not sure if you've ever played a Li-Ning racket, but they manage to still maintain great control and a superbly direct feel on impact without any unpleasant vibrations (like some Victor rackets have). And in terms of playability, the slightly more flexible shafts end up supporting the player to generate power, simple as that. "the stiffer the better" is not always true.

"With Yonex, it's sufficient to look at the racket agrily to cause a paint chip."
That was epic .

 

[Chocomaster]

Haha yes li-ning does beautiful paintjob, and I love their shoes color as well


Hearing you all saying their rackets are solid is very reasuring haha, because my friend told me he heard they were very fragil

Regarding the initial question - having "softer" rackets is somehow part of their racket DNA. And not sure if you've ever played a Li-Ning racket, but they manage to still maintain great control and a superbly direct feel on impact without any unpleasant vibrations (like some Victor rackets have). And in terms of playability, the slightly more flexible shafts end up supporting the player to generate power, simple as that. "the stiffer the better" is not always true.

Yes I actually own my first one since few months, n55 iii, I was first surprised by how soft it was, but the racket is actually very precise.
The little hole in the racket head are scarry tho (I'm scared that it break easily)

that definitly broke "the stiffer the better" for me, I had a duora 10 before so the switch was very surprising at first

 

[Chocomaster]

I posted this thread because after i got my first l-ning i did a little bit of research and saw that li-ning raket were all softer as a general tend

 

[s_mair]

Yes I actually own my first one since few months, n55 iii, I was first surprised by how soft it was, but the racket is actually very precise.
The little hole in the racket head are scarry tho (I'm scared that it break easily)

There were some concerns regarding the robustness of those Aero-thingie hole rackets (by the way, that's a marketing tech gimmick that so far not even Yonex has shown!) but so far, there has been zero reported issues around here afaik. And overall, Li-Ning are clearly one of the most robust rackets you can get. I'm talking about the high-end ones though, can't really say anything about their low- or mid-range rackets in that regard.

 

[Budi]

can't really say anything about their low- or mid-range rackets in that regard.

not sure if my old Lining are low or mid end (Mega Power Ultra Carbon 5000). But it clash many times, misshit numerous times, slipping from my hand few times, & scope the shuttle on the ground everytime, but it still survive till now with all its beauty.
But on today Lining low end like TC008/3DC009, the paint quality are the worst. My friend own it & his 3 day usage already look ugly compare to my old one.

 

[Z-Force III]

Very often soft is mentioned in a negative context. IMO LN makes very userfriendly rackets for all kind of players. People often fear flex and frankly the myth still stands that smashers need stiff shafts. I personally think that many people are not capable to use the full potential of a very stiff shaft. Duo ZS, ZFII and so on are popular rackets, bought because of the glory of pro players, but honestly the percentage of players who can really wield them is so low, that Li Ning is quite smart to offer rackets which are better useable for the average players. IMO some other brands like Babolat and Dunlop also offer more flexible shafts compared to Yonex. They just aim the average players and not the extremes.

 

[ChocoChipWaffle]

Well considering 90% of the racket buyers are better off with soft rackets with medium flex or lower, and li ning's rackets are durable at high tension on top of that, they're actually making what most of the player base could consider an ideal racket.

I would say making a soft racket that's as sturdy as li ning is much more innovative than making stiffer rackets. Literally every brand from big to small in this industry has been making stiff rackets for decades, it's really not what you can consider high tech. Whereas creating rackets as consistently durable as li ning is really rare in this industry, in fact they're the only ones who have done it. If anything that's probably one of the most technologically impressive things done by a badminton company in recent times.

 

[j4ckie]

Regarding the material R&D - it's very doubtful that any badminton company does ANY actual material development. Someone once compared racket production to bread baking, and that's closer to the truth than what Yonex marketing will make you believe. While I don't have any insider knowledge, developing and producing high-quality carbon is actually a high-tech industry (which badminton is not) and basically all badminton companies buy their materials and/or even the readily produced racket.

Overall, you should always assume that a badminton company who "developed" a new material/tech just found a way to source a new material and usually uses it very sparingly to slightly modify the lower-grade (&cost) stuff that makes up the bulk of the racket. Most of the new "technologies" are mostly marketing, or ONLY marketing (such as the "rotational generator" system that has no mechanial reason to be any sort of improvement whatsoever).

Lastly, don't fall into the trap of buying every shiny new thing that comes out, way too many people play with too-stiff rackets because they like the design or a pro that uses that. They limit their play and risk injury. Find something you like, stock up, and stick to it for a while if you really want to play well. I've used the same racket model for about 5 years now, I think, and as a result all I ever have to worry about it my own performance.
I may switch to something lighter, and maybe softer soon - sitting at a desk for 12+ hours per day for almost a year definitely hasn't exactly made me stronger.

 

[Matt]

j4ckie, just curious isn't it true that the R&D technologies which do get implemented came from other sports like tennis first before it makes their way to badminton?

Defiantly agree about not getting every new racket. Nice to demo/try them out, and if it does it suits the person using it, that will determine the appropriate action.

 

[j4ckie]

j4ckie, just curious isn't it true that the R&D technologies which do get implemented came from other sports like tennis first before it makes their way to badminton?

Defiantly agree about not getting every new racket. Nice to demo/try them out, and if it does it suits the person using it, that will determine the appropriate action.

The 'technology' is usually a new carbon-based material that was developed without sports in mind at all. Like half the racket technology is either completely useless or marginal at best. The real differences are better materials (allowing reductions in weight/size and adding stability) and a handful of the developments such as smaller racket heads. I haven't actually sat down and done the simulation but I'm pretty sure that the smaller head of a Z-Slash or whatever reduces drag more than any Sword shape, especially since that shape is usually not in its optimal orientation relative to its trajectory.
I don't follow other sports to the extent that I'm familiar with the equipment there, but it's quite possible that different features get handed down from tennis/golf, as those sports likely produce much more revenue (especially with so many tennis brats breaking rackets like they're 5$ apiece). Would be very similar to other industries where big companies have tiers of products/brands with innovations slowly making their way down the ladder over time.

 

[fufu27]

or maybe lining made it for their characteristic?? such as example, I have stiff racket of lining like calibar 900C, it still has not stiffer like medium stiff ax77 from yonex