No illusion. He put those two above the other N90IV and found that they were "a couple of mm" shorter. And that one he just measured at a perfect 675 mm.
Only thing I can really think of is clamps slipping.. someone else complained about getting short rackets with aerobite too. If it were more common, I'd be inclined to say it's just a general issue with hybrid stringing that can't be avoided. Not sure what else it could be off the top of my head.
When I did bg80/ln1 at 26/27 on my z strikes I didn't notice any big distorting. I did need to adjust the clamps for the thinner crosses, so I would side with Charlie here. s_mair even did 26/28 so it shouldn't really be the string stretching that much more should it? It is a softer string than bg80, but still.
Hm... that leaves me even more puzzled. So I guess it all comes down to a stringer/setup related issue. If things work out as planned, I get both back on the machine again today or tomorrow, so I'll triple check the mounting and clamps. What bothers me though is that the issue apparently got worse after giving out the racket to the client (or I seriously have to check my length measuring process...), so there will still be some doubts, even if I return then in perfect shape next time.
Maybe double check your starting knots if you aren't used to doing 2 piece? I suppose you could always try doing non-hybrid 2 pieces and seeing how they come out for comparison.
I'm a bit confused. You normally do square and now you went 2lbs on cross? I wouldn't expect a shorter frame. For the measurements: I did it a few years back and even if get various rackets of the same model they are not always equal in length. You can just compare the particular racket unstrung and strung. The same model can be okay, but you need to accept that the comparison is error prone. Even if it's just 1mm. Some frames are softer than others so some deform easier, others not. My guess is that you maybe forgot to add the 2lbs on the cross (Happend to me in the past, too), the starter and tie -off sunk too much (Can happen easily with thinner strings) or you didn't adjusted the clamps enough when you came from the BG80 mains and did the No.1 cross. On the other side: The tension loss curve of BG80 is much more different than from No.1. I wouln't pair these strings. No.1 drop at the beginning much and stay constant after that, BG80 drop very slightly. No, surprise that the racket is after 1,5 weeks deformed. IMO the combination BG80P and No.1 complements better. BG80P has a closer curve to No.1. If No.1 and BG80 should be used, I would manuell PS No.1 to overcome that. When I did hybrids in the past I narrowed the tension loss curves to prevent deformation. E.g. I did BG65/BG80P combo, and manuell PS the BG65 too prevent its great loss. IMO you shouldn't never ignore this aspect for hybrids.
My opinion is that there are simply too many factors to make a definite call on how much to add. Different clamps, clamp base, strength and mechanics of ur side support arms, side support sleeves/attachments, top and bottom support as well, racket material and strength, tension head mechanics/quality, tension, pre-stretch, string nature etc. That's why 10% or 2 LB is just a relative guide and no expert wud really want to definitely endorse how much exactly is good or if necessary at all. Key is to experiment with your machine, get very intimate with it, know it's strength and weaknesses, draw the outline of the unstrung racket frame onto an A4, string with different combinations then draw on top of the unstrung outline and compare how much it stays the same. You may also fold the A4 into half to check for any distortion between each side. Alternatively u can measure the length n width before and after. And lastly know ur customer preferences and able to make appropriate recommends from ur professional expertise and experience. Don't be surprised some customers wanting to widen or lengthen the racket. Gosen Haribito has never propaganda for the adding of 2lb on the sides while Victor does. All in relative to the nature of their rackets or machine? I guess this is where the stringer experience comes in and probably Gosen Haribito leaves it to the stringer's discretion. Experimenting on one of my US patent machines, +1lb for <=28, +0lb for >28 (remain +1lb for marshy, tension creeping strings). But dynamics may change again especially on extreme combination like Aerobite Boost. But rule of thumb is to retain or achieve the desired frame shape. Lastly, tie off knots plays a very significant role since there are 4 points of 'failure' in 2 piece stringing. Earlier Gosen Haribito knots are actually meant for Tennis but not good enuff for Badminton. The Toshi knot, while he is definitely not the 1st person to use it, is an improvement over the Haribito parnell knot by adding an additonal over the main and into both the old n new loop.
Adding tension in this regard is to balance out feeling, moreso than the nuances of the machine; I agree with what's posted here, but yeah, adding tension for a hybrid is just to avoid the crosses feeling slack.
Left out another factor, if u pre-string ur crosses, or somehow there is some kinking and twisting, it is indeed better to add at least another pound or two to even out the slacks.
So you mentioned four points of failure with stringing 2 piece, what are your thoughts between: 1) Using a starting knot 2) Using a starting clamp to support the first cross, and then repulling it and using a tie off knot at the end (saw this in a video, believe it was Mark Lawrence) With a starting knot, I don't really consider it a point of failure, unless I'm missing something obvious. I can see it being the case for the second method. Perhaps the 2nd method is preferable for high tension 2 piece stringing (consistently doing 30lbs+) as a professional might expect, as most starting knots won't like having that tension pulled against them. I have a so-so flying clamp, so I tend to do some double pulling shenanigans to get through it.
I agree with your views on higher tension avoiding direct pull. If your tie-off knot is good, the additional point of failure will more or less be negated. I wud prefer the 2nd method of using a starting clamp. Not sure if it is just me, i find it better in retaining the frame integrity as opposed to a starting knot where there is pressure on the bottom and mains at the start. Another advantage of using a starting clamp is that in the event the cross snaps or for some reason you need to re-do, the mains remain intact.
As said I saw one of yys top stringers doing it, so can't be that bad. Just figured this was preferable for higher tensions that are frequently seen in tournaments.
I certainly didnt think much of the Yonex stringers and didnt hear anything special nor rationale on their special techniques or considerations that make them standout stringers. It is common to see tournament stringers doing things like pre-stringing the entire mains n crosses in a tournament and that speaks for itself. On the contrary i learn alot from Chinese (PRC) stringers in person who hv so much experience, details and justification for their methods.
I read through all the posts, but has any one ever tried GT5/LN#1 hybrid. Any inputs would be appreciated. Thank you Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
I don't get your +1lb <=28lbs and +0lbs >28 for the cross. I mean if the tension of the mains increase, the tightness of the mains increase and the friction as well. If you string a racket at lower tensions pulling the cross is much easier while weaving. So I would say based on this that it must be vice versa. If I string 22lbs I can do square. If I need to do 32lbs I need to add on the cross due the more force and more friction which is put from the mains. What's your intention to do this? If the cross string snaps, I redo the whole racket. Especially when tensions get high, this puts alot of stress on the frame when crosses break. IMO sloppy work. I keep the moment of just mains in as short as possible. Would anybody do this with my rackets, he would never see me again. He risk my racket on the cost of a half set and ten minutes work because of his fault. That's gainst my codex. If something pop on the machine, the whole job get cut and grommets checked again. I never had problems with my starter even on direct pull as long as it sits in an even numbered hole. Never seen pre-weaved crosses on a Yonex Event. They weave so fast on rackets, why to do this with loose strings? Don't make any sense and didn't speed something up. @kakinami can maybe share? IMO a solid and "boring" job is IMO much better than a fancy pattern with. FME the pattern never made a huge difference, just looking a bit more neat. Maybe you wanna share this "superhuman" methods from the PRC?
How do you pre-weave all the mains and crosses without wasting a huge amount of string? Or is this a cost vs time calculation that only makes sense when the strings are free.
I think that might be the Malaysian stringers who like to preweave the whole racket. The UK stringers I think have the best techniques, US stringers are not very good. =P I learned some from the UK stringers, they don't agree with my pattern but I use a modified Yonex pattern tying my mains off at 9 =) Sent from my Lenovo YT3-X90F using Tapatalk