Yes, the E-1000 actually started off with being off specs. Only those subsequently modified ones and the TEP Select version were good enough. But that was two years ago, and in badminton 2 years is a long time. They are by my standard a bit dated today, just as all 2U racquets, even the best of them, are dated today. Today's badminton has changed a lot. Racquets must now reduce weight and go for speed with effortless power. The key is to design very slim x-section frames with the proper matrix of carbon graphite/epoxy that will convert the frame (not the shaft) into a storehouse of energy like a condenser. All the raw materials are with us today. It is just a simple problem of coming up with the right matrix. Even the grommets are adverse to reduced air resistance. Paired grommets like those in the MP series and those used at the throat are a drag. Try cutting all your grommets so that they are flush with the inner side of the frame. It helps and it costs nothing. Also, don't carry any old baggage. It hampers one's ability to think outside the box.
Lighter and faster racquets will also help players with poor technique-they will have to adjust to a faster hand speed in the absence of weight. With faster hand speed the game will be faster and will bring you one step closer to the professionals.
But with lighter racquet you'll have to swing faster at the same ratio of weight different to get the same momentum transfer. For a racquet half the weight as existing you'll have to swing twice as fast to transfer the same momentum. Basically thats why a lot of ppl find it easier to use AT racquets for power, the head heaviness allows you to swing much slower to transfer the same momentum as a NS. I guess designers need to balance a realistic swing speed of the average person, i doubt anyone would play well with a 45g racquet at this point.
right..in badminton 2 years is a very long time... the currently used ti-10's, at700's, ns900's used are all outdated.. I can't believe anybody still plays with them... and yes, I'm currently playing, yet again, with a racket designed in 2003... and I love it...
I'm not...I couldn't care less in which age your racket is made in... merely commentating on taneepak's statement(s)
I assume you have done a wind tunnel test? Also, may I ask what is your racquet head speed during a defensive clear of a return smash? I would like to know in the case of your racquet is on forhand side and you need to defend a smash on the back hand side (or vice versa). My understanding is in the case the racquet BP and head lightness trump all the air resistance because you need all the initial acceleration you can get from 1 side to another. Then stop, then flick. Unless all these moves are done in at higher than 150 km/h (or about 94 mph) the corss section makes very small difference. It is not the effect of air resistance, it is effect of extra mass on the racquet head. To debunk your claim, just put 4g of leads tape (1 2g lead tape on the oppiside of the fram wall (about 13~14th grommet on the side). This will simulate the same effect of the string weight. I can tell you it will swing like the same racquet with string. Slower because of extra mass, not air resistance.
According to classic physic, you still need to transfer of momentum. Also a head heavier racquet will help stablize a off center shot. FYI, the vibe you mention about NS9k-x is due to the head light with stiff shaft property. It need stiffer shaft to stablize a off center shot. That is why most heavy hitters like head heavy AT racquets vs def players like NS racquets. Any lighter head for NS you will run the risk of breaking the frame because the momentum can not effectively transfer over to the shuttle.
Sorry, Jerby, You know I am kidding right??? I just want to bring up 1 racquet. CAB20 BABY! It was good then and it is still as good as 20+ years ago.
In holland, we often make jokes about "learning to ride on an old bike".... I don't know how that flies in English when I see a post by you...the default modes is "can't be actually serious"
I have a prototype "raw" racquet (called X), iso-shaped, 85.7g with string at 675mm length, or when extended 87.1g with string at 680mm length, that uses a radical matrix of material/epoxy resin, b/p w/o string of 28.6cm, with x-section dimensions of 10.2mm width and 5.95mm height (I believe it is about as slim as you can get now), extraordinarily stiff. It is very fast, as tested on the courts by players against ATs and NXs. The difference after playing with the X and then reverting back to the ATs and NXs is very obvious in speed and maneuverability. Its power is its strength and weakness. For many players the extremely stiff frame (shaft is made moderately flexible to moderate the extreme frame stiffness) makes the racquet too hard and stiff to play with any power. But for the advanced players who have high racquet hand speed the racquet has enormous power with the frame acting like a condenser. It needs high hand speed to unlock its "condenser" power. Despite its slim dimensions and enormous power, off-center hits are as solid as spot-on center hits, with utterly no "jelly-like" feeling. There are enough new age materials and resins to put together an ultra fast and powerful racquet today in the below 90g weight category. In the 1950s we had 150g wooden racquets; in the 1960s we shaved off 30g to 120g; in the carbon graphite age from the 1980s we shaved off another 26g to 94g. Today we are still stuck with 94g (2U), despite so many improved resins and materials.
I'm sure with the current technology we could make a racquet that could withstand all the forces or even much greater forces with a weight of 20g. Costs aside, how viable is such a racquet? You would have to swing almost 5 times faster to get the same transfer of momentum. As we're human's we have physical constraints, the faster we accelerate something in our hands the more we are prone to injuries. I think racquets in the future will become slightly lighter, maybe like 5/6/7U, but not much more after that, not unless we're all on steroids I'm getting an Arc10, but it won't be here for a while
MaxSports is selling it at $250. So i'm assuming its going to be up there. Just think of how much the retailers sell the ARC7's and add $20-30 to it
the more i use arcsaber 10 the more i am convince that its strength as compared to other yonex racquets is its ability to remain stable even in cases of offcenter hits. As if it was design more for ordinary recreational players than for professional players (which is a good thing for me). I applaud the designers of this racquet. We can discuss and analzye the dimensions and physics of racquets all day long but in the end we the players will be the best judge which racquet would work best for our style of play and technique.
