There have been a few posts in No.1 thread about this string but not a lot. I just can’t find much if any real testing data on it. Since I’m a big fan of thin strings and their characteristics, I thought it’d be best to have a separate thread on it so I wouldn’t feel horrible about going off topic when posting about this in No.1 thread. I’ve received a couple a packets today and here’s the front & back of it if anyone is interested in the “claimed” specifications or data. I’ll post more data once my 66um dies and I put this on. Another BC’er will be using one of these packets but at 26 lbs so hopefully there will be data ranging from all sorts of tensions. But right off the bat, this is the thinnest string I have in my box at the moment. Thinner than ZyMax 62 first & second gen, No.1, BG66UM, Pro 66 & BG66 but I don’t have any aerosonic around me to compare right now though I don’t think it’s as thin as that from what I remember. It looks exactly like no.1 and it’s almost as if they just made a thinner No.1. Has anyone of you tried it and liked it?
Really? I hadn't heard this before. I'm guessing people have put together the actual thicknesses for Zymax strings somewhere? Sent from my SM-J500FN using Tapatalk
Yeah, that's what I was talking about. And they noticed that the Zymax strings aren't as thin as stated.
I might be wrong on this but I think Dink mentioned something along the lines of "they measure the thickness at 25lbs". Perhaps they've always done it like that and hence still follow it to this day. P.S I'm almost damn sure No.3 isn't .63 and no.1 isn't .65 as well. Sounds like the perfect string tbh. Can't wait but my 66um is destroying everything else in terms of performance on court so I probably won't cut it before it dies haha.
I find it a nightmare to string, twists so much and some of the coating (on the blue version) comes off as the string is pulled through grommets. It's a very flimsy string. Having said that, I restrung a friend's racquet with the pink version and he loves it.
Yeah, but if Ashaway measures at 25 lbs and the other companies don‘t, still means that the Zymax strings aren‘t as thin as proclaimed.
From what I remember Yonex was ever so slightly above the claimed diameter as well but closest to it when compared to all the other manufacturers. Only good reason I can see other than not blatantly lying to us consumers is that all of them measure at a certain tension of their own. But because not all of them reveal it publicly, we end up with strings thicker or thinner than each other despite them all claiming to be .65mm (for example).
Zymax 62 is not thinner than BG66UM! Zymax 66 Fire Power is like Yonex BG65. I would say 0.69-0.7. I have try Li Ning No3 and for me its like no.1. No big differences. Besides, I'm number 1 and not number 3! My string is no.1!
Honestly they do seem that way. I'm a sucker for great sounding rackets so I hope to get more of that from no.3 haha.
Tried No.3, went back to using No.1. More repulsion from no.3 but it plays similar to Aerosonic and doesnt do well for control and net shots.
I would say the No3 is superior to the No1. Especially when strung above 30lbs I can distinguish the two strings. The No3 gives a more clear sound and also repulsion is better. Regarding net play the two strings are rather similar.