Then 4U probably would be better for me. Glad I went with that! I usually do all of my purchasing threw Yumo. Free shipping is always nice as well. They have a ton of products and their stringing jobs are some of the best quality I've seen. If it's a Yonex product I usually cross reference Yumo and Max Sports (they are a Yonex only dealer) and compare pricing. Sometimes there are some differences. Hope this helps, cheers!
First impressions, feels heavy but not bad when playing. Very crisp, easy to defend but mistiming smashes atm.
4u, I expect the crisper shots are due to the bigger sweet spot. Just swinging it around is completely different from actual play. If you're one of those that swing racquets around before buying, it won't apply with the falcon.
Thinking of getting this racket too, but unsure of 3U or 4U. I play mostly singles and currently using ZF2 3U. Power is great but looking for a change and something more forgiving. Sometimes I do play doubles with n9ii, great racket and really fast. Anyone who's used to ZF2 3U and owns a TKF 3U. How does it compare in terms of head-weight, balance, power smashes?
I have the 4u falcon, and I find it fast but also very light. A little too light for my taste. The 3u zf2 is definitely head heavier and slower, but going from the 3u zf2 and n9ii to a 4u falcon will be a big switch in my opinion. I would suggest giving the 3u falcon a try, if you are planning to get the falcon. In terms of smashing, the power is there, but not like the power of the zf2 or the n9ii. If you're used to the zf2, you will definitely find the falcon to be head lighter than the zf2, but the head weight is there and comparable to n9ii. I do love that shaft of the falcon and wish they had that on the n9ii (n9iii, maybe, in my dreams ). Since I'm so used to my n9ii and other 3u racquets, with the light weight 4u, I'm slightly having a little timing issue, but only a little. The 3u weight contribute to my accuracy a lot, so I wish I bought the 3u falcon instead of the 4u. Hopefully, you will pick the right one for you.
I have posted my first use of my TKF 3U feedback on page.9 post #170. My previous racket was Yonex 80etune 3U with tunning parts. I guess ZF2 will be more hardcore/stiff than 80etune. Anyways in short: Head-weight of TKF is more in the T-joint not top of the frame like the yonex voltric. So it might take a bit of time to get used to and you might get disappointed if you were expecting top head heavy. Balance: My TKF had Zymax 66 fire and AC106EX grip on top of original grip. Had it tested and its actually balance in the middle of the racket (surprisingly) When swinging/playing, you can still feel a bit of head weight though of coz. Definitely different to 80etune. (which prob means more diff to a ZF2) Power smashes: Personally definitely feel alot more power and more solid in the voltrics. Having said that, the TKF swings much faster though. So if you have enough time to prepare for a smash, definitely the ZF2 in terms of power.
After spending 8 hours with my 4u falcon, I thought I share my impression on the racquet. Back court smash - falcon < n9ii Mid court smash - falcon < n9ii Front court interception - falcon > n9ii Flat Drive - falcon <= n9ii Backhand drive - falcon < n9ii Clear - falcon < n9ii Drop shot - falcon > n9ii Net play - falcon > n9ii Accuracy - falcon > n9ii Defense - falcon > n9ii Stiffness - falcon > n9ii Head heaviness - falcon < n9ii Swing speed - falcon >= n9ii Recovery - falcon >= n9ii Paint job - falcon > n9ii The falcon is definitely fast like its name. It excels in all the places where speed is crucial to perform. The falcon feels like a beefier js10, with more head weight, but maintaining the speed. However, most of that head weight is concentrated at the t-joint, and not at the top or sides of the head frame, which is not a popular weight concentration location among head heavy racquets. And because of that, it doesn't have the power of the voltric racquets or other head heavy racquets. However, it is also understandable why they chose the weight concentration point at the t-joint instead of the top or the sides of the head frame. The falcon has an enlarged head frame, so it has a longer head frame than most racuqets. If the head weight is concentrated more on the top or even the sides, I can imagine that it surely will drag it down in the speed department, making the falcon feel slow and heavy, which will completely defy the physics of the falcon. If you are used to head heavy racquets like the voltrics or meteor x, you might find the smashing power to be less satisfying or even lacking. Like I commented earlier, the falcon feels like a power boosted js10, so it definitely packs a bigger punch than js10, but with speed comparable to the js10. If you love the js10, but was hoping for a little more power, the falcon is definitely a good choice to consider.
Completely do not get why You would even start comparing 4u and 3u racket... it is like comparing apples and oranges.
I never understood why that would be a problem. They're both delicious fruit Some racquets come solely in 1 weight spec, it just so happens the TKF comes in 3. It's simply an observation on the differences between two racquets that they own. If we were to be so stringent, racquet comparisons would be so needlessly complicated. A 85g 3U is closer to a 84g 4U than a 89g 3U. Mate and I both own a 3U ARC11 yet mine is noticeably heavier and stiffer than his. In the end, we can never take into account the numerous extraneous variables and these reviews are simply someone kindly sharing their personal experiences which may vary greatly from someone else's anyways even if they were given the exact same two racquets.
Yea it is possible to compare even an elephant with a mouse and everyone is free to state their feelings .. but 4 grams for a badminton racket is really a lot, so a lot that such aspects as swinging speed, recovery and reaction is not comparable between the two of them. and advantages of one or another are so obvious that there is no need to confirm them with personal feelings
Paul27 wasn't sure about getting a a 3U or 4U. and he had used ZF2 and n9ii Konquerian happens to have n9ii and also a 4U TKF. And hes kindly sharing his experience and thoughts so Paul27 would get an idea. Hope you would now understand and contribute something more useful too Martynas
I've only played a 2 hr session with a 4u so far but don't see it as a huge improvement in overall power over the tk6000 4u. I lost my dependable smash but gained crisper tighter shots. Clears were effortless (recently have had to exert more energy for the same result on the tk6000, maybe something to do with not hitting the sweet spot as much). I will give it a chance as it's got huge potential.
there are absolute differences which comes into play when you're having only one racket, then there is relative difference which comes into pplay when you have more than one rackets and your using them all in rotation. this relative experience is what we want to hear about. Some racket parameters in play are very generalised and with some really popular rackets some parameters act as some kind of a benchmark as someone would have more or less played with that racket or of a similar kind. this can provide some idea about the racket. thanks to some brave folks who can abuse their rackets to a degree that we can get to know the actual stress a racket can handles under all conditions. this further help us to save money and resist(very hard to, okay who am i kidding here) the rackets which may lie beyond our techniques, example zstrike, or may not be actually as good as they are touted to be or may be lacking in quality, example hypernano x900. all information is therefore good.
I didn't measure dry weight or balances (apparently less weight at the top and more lower down to the tjoint TBC) but it does feel heavier in the hand but not in the usual sense while playing. You expect it to be slower and more tiring but it isn't.