Yonex ASTROX 77 (2017)

Had a good session with AX77 yellow 3ug5 today. IMO the main difference between 77 and 88s, is that 88s feels like it has refined control, feels more stable and accurate due to the stiffness in the shorter shaft and overall just feels more solid. The rotational system, if you wish to believe it, feels like its much more tuned than the 77. I can't really fault the 88s except that it does get tiring after a 2 hour session, but for me this is because I don't play much during the week.

The AX77 doesn't have as much of the control feeling of the 88s, I think mainly due to the flexible shaft. It feels a tad bit more head heavy than 88s, and I feel I can smash slightly harder with the 77. I needed to tune my backhand and backhand defense, as my timing was out, I didn't have this problem with 88s. Overall there is much less strain on the arm, partly due to the flexier shaft and a big sweet spot. In the AX77, you can conserve more energy as it's definitely less taxing, which is probably why the female players use it.

For my own personal preference, I'd choose 77 over 88s for doubles. I find defending flows better around the stomach area probably because the racket is more forgiving.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
 
Had a good session with AX77 yellow 3ug5 today. IMO the main difference between 77 and 88s, is that 88s feels like it has refined control, feels more stable and accurate due to the stiffness in the shorter shaft and overall just feels more solid. The rotational system, if you wish to believe it, feels like its much more tuned than the 77. I can't really fault the 88s except that it does get tiring after a 2 hour session, but for me this is because I don't play much during the week.

The AX77 doesn't have as much of the control feeling of the 88s, I think mainly due to the flexible shaft. It feels a tad bit more head heavy than 88s, and I feel I can smash slightly harder with the 77. I needed to tune my backhand and backhand defense, as my timing was out, I didn't have this problem with 88s. Overall there is much less strain on the arm, partly due to the flexier shaft and a big sweet spot. In the AX77, you can conserve more energy as it's definitely less taxing, which is probably why the female players use it.

For my own personal preference, I'd choose 77 over 88s for doubles. I find defending flows better around the stomach area probably because the racket is more forgiving.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
Nice comparison and interesting conclusions that you prefer 77 more for doubles.

Could the difference you're feeling in control be down to the string setups, or are you running the same on both rackets?
 
Nice comparison and interesting conclusions that you prefer 77 more for doubles.

Could the difference you're feeling in control be down to the string setups, or are you running the same on both rackets?

Both rackets were 3UG5, string setup for both were no1 26x28. I did have my usual grip on the 88s, AC402 on wood to cone area. On the 77, the plastic wrap was still on and g10 grip, but I had enough play time on it to come to my conclusion.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
 
Had a good session with AX77 yellow 3ug5 today. IMO the main difference between 77 and 88s, is that 88s feels like it has refined control, feels more stable and accurate due to the stiffness in the shorter shaft and overall just feels more solid. The rotational system, if you wish to believe it, feels like its much more tuned than the 77. I can't really fault the 88s except that it does get tiring after a 2 hour session, but for me this is because I don't play much during the week.

The AX77 doesn't have as much of the control feeling of the 88s, I think mainly due to the flexible shaft. It feels a tad bit more head heavy than 88s, and I feel I can smash slightly harder with the 77. I needed to tune my backhand and backhand defense, as my timing was out, I didn't have this problem with 88s. Overall there is much less strain on the arm, partly due to the flexier shaft and a big sweet spot. In the AX77, you can conserve more energy as it's definitely less taxing, which is probably why the female players use it.

For my own personal preference, I'd choose 77 over 88s for doubles. I find defending flows better around the stomach area probably because the racket is more forgiving.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
before 88 came out, kevin sanjaya is not a female lol
 
Cracks at the cone.
757e92b827c55cc6811a1841ff5ae662.jpg


Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
 
Well 1 year is a fair enough time for such typical YY traits to eventually emerge

Sent from my LG-H930 using Tapatalk
 
Cracks at the cone.
757e92b827c55cc6811a1841ff5ae662.jpg


Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
That's just cosmetic, in the clear coat layer only. Pretty common with heavy use especially on the front and back of the cone where the shaft flexes the most.

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
 
I've only played like 20 games with it. My 1st Yonex racket that shows this. Thanks guys. Didn't know is common.

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
 
Oh yeah. You can find these even on the extra stiff ZF. Nothing wrong really. Like visor said, it's just cosmetic. I've seen it on my BS12s over the years too for example.

Sent from my LG-H930 using Tapatalk
 
But the shaft is flexible..so technically shouldn't it have less control?..that's why I asked if the control is good enough?
 
Definitely takes some getting used to especially if compared to stiffer and more head heavy rackets. Of course depends on your technique too.
 
Well mate, you're getting your wish haha. My affair with Aerobite is over. Probably tension too low since the strings were sliding everywhere when I started getting a bit sloppy due to fatigue. Just cut them, original owner had it done at 30lbs. Time to go to my favourite BG80 tomorrow.

So far looking at the frame, there's no real damage at all, a few of shared holes show signs of a bit of "bubbling" but I don't feel that there's anything to be concerned about. Just seems like the top layer of lacquer being pushed a bit by the high tension. I do have a gripe with YY though, they're still using the same grommets instead of choosing to go the route that Victor did by using newer grommets with thicker heads. If they're gonna dare to raise the warrantied tensions, they should be prepared for people to push it. It's a small string mark on the frame I have between a couple of shared grommets at the 5 o'clock position, but I still think it could have easily been prevented by simply using better grommets (a really cheap solution).

So at this point in time, I've put down a couple of sessions with the racket totaling about 4 hours with the racket. The latest session earlier I decided to take out the JS12 and N9II for a spin because in my collection they're the 2 most similar rackets on paper that any brand I can think of has. I do find myself really enjoying the AX77 honestly. The frame seems a bit unwieldy at first, but once you get it going and you're caught up in the pace of the game (doubles purely for me), the aerodynamics are quite negligible. I continue to hold to my original first impressions where I find it a noticeable bit slower than the Aracsaber frame and faster than the Voltric frame.

Keeping in line with tradition, YY clearly has this put out as the successor to the VT70 and VT70ETN, and I really think they've got a winner here. It has been 3 years since I actually touched a VT70ETN (and even longer since the VT70), but as successors go, you would expect them to be a better incarnation of their predecessors and it is my firm belief that this is. I have a good friend who uses the VT70ETN exclusively now and I will be meeting up with him soon for a game so we can swap rackets to get a feel for the other's to get a good comparison. I truly think that the AX77 is faster and still capable of more power than a fully kitted out VT70ETN (with the golden jazzy grommets). The answer of durability of course is still an open one as it is too new on the consumer market to truly have an answer, but the AX77 does have quite the mountain to cross over the VT70ETN which I know has few to no complaints on the durability side even when you go to the 30lbs range yet has only a very low warrantied tension (was it 24 or 25 for the 3U? I don't remember).

Comparing it with the JS12, even with the meh Aerobite on it and BG80 on the JS12, I still think the the AX77 has got the edge in more departments than the JS12 does. More power, more stable, just as easy to use, and the only point it loses on truly is swing speed (you just can't beat physics here as the aerodynamic profiles of both rackets are vastly different). The feel for the AX77 I also find is better, in terms of directness they're about the same, YY more than likely has foam in the core of the head which contributes to fantastic shock reduction because I had several mistimed hits above the sweet spot from full power smashes while trying to adjust to the new racket yet I didn't feel a single thing coming down the frame into my hand or arm. The JS12 isn't as head heavy either, the weight in the head is distributed a lower at the middle of the head up to the 11 and 1 o'clock regions, whereas the AX77 is all up top from the 11 to 1 o'clock region.

There was a good reason I brought the N9II along of course. On paper and both in use, it is the one racket I've tried so far that is pretty much similar to the AX77 in nearly every way. Even down to the shaft stiffness, these 2 rackets are really similar, they only differ in the way the shaft flexes. I don't know how to put it into words properly unfortunately. I suppose I can try to put it this way, The N9II has a gentler and slightly easier flex while the AX77 recovers faster. The one thing I didn't expect that truly surprised me was that they share a near identical head weight distribution. Both rackets carry all their weight at the top of the frame. Both rackets share many similarities that I actually find it a wee bit spooky.
  • Both are moderately head heavy (with very similar head weight distribution).
  • Shaft stiffness (except when they flex, but I put this difference down to simply being different materials and construction perhaps).
  • Short handle (just eyeballing it and feeling it under my towel grips they're practically the exact same length of wood).
  • Shaft length (it may be off by a few millimeters though due to the different cones from 2 different brands).
  • Head size (just putting one on top of they other there are barely any differences in the square area, if there is any difference then the N9II is the ones with a tad more area because of the thinner frame).
  • I want to say 76 holes but the N9II is on the older 2+3 while the AX77 is on the newer 2+4 pattern.
  • As I type this I just recalled and realised that both rackets actually feel quite similar too on impact with the shuttle. The feel is very direct yet the shock absorption is so well done that mistimed hits that usually would have a jarring impact are all taken care off.
I know I've typed an amazing wall of text but I don't consider this a review at all. Overall so far I'm very very satisfied with the AX77 and truly believe that YY has come out with a winner here. It is a racket that is easy to use yet is capable of giving more to a better player than I am. However if your technique isn't there, my advice would be to get a piece on the heavy side of 4U if you're trying it out in 3U initially. I do have to say though, I might actually be exploring the idea of cherry picking a copy that's 85g or a 4U copy that is 84g. I say this because I'm not used to using moderately head heavy rackets regularly, so this racket is still capable of tiring my arm out after 2 hours of play. If I'm gonna keep this in the bag as a regular playing piece, I'll more than likely need a lighter one to use when I'm fatigued but still want to keep the benefits of the AX77.
When you are comparing this with the n9ii are u using the 77 3U or the 4u ?
 
Back
Top