How do FZ Forza Rackets Compare to other Brands (Yonex/Victor etc)

[Daniel2207]

I am looking at purchasing a new racket hopefully one I can really fall in love with have never tried Forza products and interested to know how they fair against other brands Yonex, Victor, li ning etc.

A lot of my friends have sponsorship deals with Forza and they seem to love the rackets. I was looking at getting the Astrox but since I play tournaments it might be of a benefit if I stay away from the typical marketing.

Also using Forza products already before you are sponsored by them will increase the likely chance to receive a sponsorship other than using Yonex product where unless you are Gabby and Chris Adcock you don't have much chance at sponsorship.

Any advice on FZ Forza would be Great

 

[Ensio]

As I started badminton again I have used the FZ Forza 988M Power, as medium is quite stiff

If I compare the stiffness ratings to my Victor JS10 and JS11 the Forza fits between the middle.

I guess danish vikings have designed them so they have power to handle them. I guess a proper Uk bloke would handle them too.

I would guess that Forza stiff is really stiff, and very stiff is redicously stiff

I like the 88 holes for some reason, it gives me more accuracy/controll on specially at net compared to the JS11 and the strings last maybe little longer.

Headframe is quite fast and have no issues to create power.

If its good enough for Antonsen, its good enough for me

my 5 cents

 

[Daniel2207]

That's really helpful I currently use the Victor Jetspeed 10 and really like it but wanted to try to get a racket with a bit more power and more slightly heavier since I am playing singles a lot more now

 

[Ensio]

That's really helpful I currently use the Victor Jetspeed 10 and really like it but wanted to try to get a racket with a bit more power and more slightly heavier since I am playing singles a lot more now

You are more pro than me so check out the stiffness that is more suitable for your play.

Power series are head heavy but fast enough for my singles/doubles

Specially returning after 25 years to badminton, I dont like those marketing gimmicks, shark frame LOL

Back in the days you just played with the racket you father gave you and if you lost it was not the rackets fault

Please do the forum a favour once you have the new Forza make a review of it and post it here.

 

[Daniel2207]

I'm sure that not true haha
Yeh I don't know rotational generator system Yonex

Of course, I haven't ever used a Forza so excited to try one out I will make a detailed post once I get one

 

[Petersen]

It's true a medium stiff Forza racket is what other brands would claim as stiff or very stiff I have the 899M which I use for doubles
and the 999 power for primary singles, the 999 is very stiff and that tiny amount of flex you find in it, when you bend test it> go towards the head.
IMO especially the 999 is unique when it comes to effortless smashes-clear-drives the 999, do exactly what it's supposed to do, 2-3 power smashes and it's a new shuttlecock, suddenly badminton can turn out to be a very expensive sport without a sponsor
There is a but > timing of backhand-drops-net-lift , it will take some time to get used to it, if you aren't familiar with this kind of racket ,, Defence is actually quite fine, when all specifications points to the offensive, but don't expect any explosive rebound effect as in flexible double rackets.
My 899 is still alive but now retired, after 3-4 years of countless crashes it's chipped all over but incredible still in one piece, (I'm a left-hander) that I can't say about my LN N36 /Tantrum 200ll //>>etcetera
For me the 899M is a very forgiven all-rounder, even on bad days I feels it get the best out of me (double/back-court)
Just bought two of them from badmintonshoppen.dk where they are on the normal yearly summer-sale right now

String I use BG-80 LBS 27-28, never played with other strings or tension on this rackets, My stringer in CPH (VIP) claims they're like created for each other, and he is not a man a wan't to argue with...

 

[Ensio]

You made me try the 999 if its eats shuttles for breakfeast.

Good that there is actually others using Forzas. Not much rave of the rackets on the forum( I guess rest of the users are actually to busy with playing/training)

 

[Petersen]

If you look around at the Badminton Arenas in Denmark Forza is the common brand together with Yonex.of course.
I have over the last 3 years brought 6-7 pieces of the Power rackets down to my Indonesian friends and they all love the quality of the racket,, BTW it's a very good idea to get it strung by a DK shop.. I seen the 88 string system strung in various patterns, and if/when they break,, cut them, but let the string stay in the holes, so your stringer (if he isn't familiar with the system) get the clue to knots and knitting

 

[Petersen]

Not much rave of the rackets on the forum( I guess rest of the users are actually to busy with playing/training)

Narhhhh Friday evening we badminton nerds stay home and re-wrap our handles and rectifies paint chips

 

[jlp2097]

Narhhhh Friday evening we badminton nerds stay home and re-wrap our handles and rectifies paint chips

I actually laughed out loud because of this. Thats's exactly what I was doing yesterday evening (friday). Watching soccer world cup with my wife with me re-wrapping my badminton rackets and adjusting the weight balance a bit

 

[konstancij]

would be interesting to hear about forza light 9.9 model, how it compares to js10, or nr800-900, as they write it is a medium stiff in specs but stiff in description.

 

[Ensio]

in the description the FZ 9.9 Light is also head heavy, I dont feel that my JS10 is specially head heavy. Plus i guess the headshape is normal vs the smalle box frame that the JS10 have.

 

[Eastfield]

For a singles racket I would recommend the Power 988S. I've got the Power 988M myself, and it's noticeably more flexible than the 80 e-tune.
For an equivalent of the JS10 I'd say the Precision 10.000S.

 

[Z-Force III]

Qualitywise the paintjob of Forza rackets is piss poor. Holographics get dull fast and come off and they chip-easily. Their patterns and grommet layout are sometimes weird and force you to apply a one-piece job or some other hassle. Young Forzas tend to look like several years abused compared to other brands very quick. IMO they are one of the worst paintjobs. Durability-wise I have seen a few of them broken. Performing-wise they are quite good, tend to be stiffer than labelled. Personally I would go for a Yonex/Victor/Li-Ning high-end over a FZ at equal pricing. If you get into midrange territory a Forza can be a great option. Especially the high-ends are possible to get at a mid-range price, but I would stay away from their 88 and 96 holes rackets and when they rate them VS you will 100% get a steel pipe.

 

[Eastfield]

Qualitywise the paintjob of Forza rackets is piss poor. Holographics get dull fast and come off and they chip-easily. Their patterns and grommet layout are sometimes weird and force you to apply a one-piece job or some other hassle. Young Forzas tend to look like several years abused compared to other brands very quick. IMO they are one of the worst paintjobs. Durability-wise I have seen a few of them broken. Performing-wise they are quite good, tend to be stiffer than labelled. Personally I would go for a Yonex/Victor/Li-Ning high-end over a FZ at equal pricing. If you get into midrange territory a Forza can be a great option. Especially the high-ends are possible to get at a mid-range price, but I would stay away from their 88 and 96 holes rackets and when they rate them VS you will 100% get a steel pipe.

I can't really speak much for their old glossy designs, however the new matte finish Forza has introduced is, from my experience, just as durable as any other top end racket I've come across from Yonex, Li-Ning etc. My Power 988M "color up" has endured probably more than ten hard clashes now with just small bits of paint chipping off as an outcome.
Nearly all the new top end FZ rackets have the 88-hole setup, which can be strung both as a one and a two piece job. It really is a non-issue.
As for performance, being to a certain extent a personal taste thing, I'd say my Forza racket is just as good as its rivals equivalents.
I do agree that the 96-hole setup should be avoided, from what I've been told. Considering only one of their top end rackets have 96 holes (Power 996), it shouldn't be an issue. I also agree that their stiffness rating is slightly skewed towards the stiff side.

 

[Z-Force III]

I can't really speak much for their old glossy designs, however the new matte finish Forza has introduced is, from my experience, just as durable as any other top end racket I've come across from Yonex, Li-Ning etc. My Power 988M "color up" has endured probably more than ten hard clashes now with just small bits of paint chipping off as an outcome.
Nearly all the new top end FZ rackets have the 88-hole setup, which can be strung both as a one and a two piece job. It really is a non-issue.
As for performance, being to a certain extent a personal taste thing, I'd say my Forza racket is just as good as its rivals equivalents.
I do agree that the 96-hole setup should be avoided, from what I've been told. Considering only one of their top end rackets have 96 holes (Power 996), it shouldn't be an issue. I also agree that their stiffness rating is slightly skewed towards the stiff side.

Several single holes at the bottom by two main strings running outside blocked isn't an issue? With thicker strings and higher tensions not very smooth to string compared a 76 racket. Also starters or tie-offs in an uneven numbered shared hole at the bottom are not the standard for me due a risk of flushing or higher tension loss compared to other frames. Especially with the trend of thinner strings a no-go for from my perspective. The Layout don't give any options to adjust. On the contrary I see no benefit of their layout, just downsides, because other frames give the stringer more options for the pattern and a better work flow. Why to complicate it? You are right in terms of some models. To be fair I was refering to the models of the past 5 years I came and not exclusively the new rackets. Never the less their layout complicate the stringing process and far away from a "Yippie, an 88 racket to string!".

For the OP: IMO it is not necessary to use a brand before to have higher chances to get a sponsorship. More important is your success rate at a high level and your age. Also your influence ratio can play a role if you are a coach. I have seen people who came from Yonex or any other brand at their own costs to a different brand which offered a sponsorship. You should use what you want if you pay full. If you have a sponsorship you are married to a brand. It makes no sense to kiss the ass of any brand to get a higher chance of a sponsorship. You must represent them well and successful. If you use their stuff before you get sponsored, they can think as well "This talented and well-skilled guy represent us at tournaments for free, why giving a contract?"

 

[Eastfield]

Several single holes at the bottom by two main strings running outside blocked isn't an issue? With thicker strings and higher tensions not very smooth to string compared a 76 racket. Also starters or tie-offs in an uneven numbered shared hole at the bottom are not the standard for me due a risk of flushing or higher tension loss compared to other frames. Especially with the trend of thinner strings a no-go for from my perspective. The Layout don't give any options to adjust. On the contrary I see no benefit of their layout, just downsides, because other frames give the stringer more options for the pattern and a better work flow. Why to complicate it? You are right in terms of some models. To be fair I was refering to the models of the past 5 years I came and not exclusively the new rackets. Never the less their layout complicate the stringing process and far away from a "Yippie, an 88 racket to string!".

For the OP: IMO it is not necessary to use a brand before to have higher chances to get a sponsorship. More important is your success rate at a high level and your age. Also your influence ratio can play a role if you are a coach. I have seen people who came from Yonex or any other brand at their own costs to a different brand which offered a sponsorship. You should use what you want if you pay full. If you have a sponsorship you are married to a brand. It makes no sense to kiss the ass of any brand to get a higher chance of a sponsorship. You must represent them well and successful. If you use their stuff before you get sponsored, they can think as well "This talented and well-skilled guy represent us at tournaments for free, why giving a contract?"

I think the point here is that you fixate a lot more on stringing than most people do. I give my racket to a competent stringer, with info about what string I want and at what tension. I get it back perfectly strung, no complaints from the stringer, no abnormal tension loss. Sure, it might be a bit more of a hassle to string than a regular 76 hole racket, however for most people that doesn't make any difference, neither will it do for a somewhat competent stringer.
The most obvious benefit of the 88 hole setup is that your frame can take higher tensions, since none of the holes have to endure the forces from two strings pulling in different directions.

 

[Z-Force III]

I think the point here is that you fixate a lot more on stringing than most people do. I give my racket to a competent stringer, with info about what string I want and at what tension. I get it back perfectly strung, no complaints from the stringer, no abnormal tension loss. Sure, it might be a bit more of a hassle to string than a regular 76 hole racket, however for most people that doesn't make any difference, neither will it do for a somewhat competent stringer.
The most obvious benefit of the 88 hole setup is that your frame can take higher tensions, since none of the holes have to endure the forces from two strings pulling in different directions.

I'm sorry if this offends you. For me is this is important point compared to other brands where Forza rackets differs totally from other brands. Not only for stringing, also the stringbed of 96 holes rackets is very dense which make them kinda unique in this department. I owned a TI550VS a half decade ago. 96 holes play horrible like a plank. If they are great rackets for you I respect your opinion, please respect that my opinion differs from yours and that my focal points are different than yours. I disagree on the durabity argument. More holes means less mass between them which also makes no sense for me. Maybe I strung different rackets than you own, which would also explain our different views and maybe I came across them not so often like your stringer so he is more used to it to daily see.

 

[Cheung]

Sure, it might be a bit more of a hassle to string than a regular 76 hole racket, however for most people that doesn't make any difference, neither will it do for

Hmm, if I were a stringer, I would like straightforward stringing patterns. Time is money. Also, many more holes increases the chance of error rates. Once you get a string wrong, that's time needed to correct.

 

[VeritasC&E]

I own an FZ Forza Supreme 4000.

Big Advantages of the Racket
> Great Price to Performance Ratio (probably from far the best I could get for what I paid for it in Finland). Great performance at decent prices clearly is the big strength of Forza rackets.
> Extremely well-rounded racket, perhaps only slightly lacking in the energy transfer ratio department. It feels very natural and performs very well. I'm very attached to it. So much so that I bought it again 5 times in a row upon breaking the strings on it. And I'm considering buying a bunch of them for friends and family.

Small Drawbacks
> Factory grommets suck. They are very brittle. I damaged grommets on all 5 Forza Supreme 4000 rackets I've owned. My current racket now has 4 damaged grommets.
> Factory string is slightly too thick, yet it breaks easily (broke 4 each in the first 1-3 sessions in which I used the rackets), factory tension is too low and drops fast. Outside the grommets, after two months of use, the coating of the string and the string core are dissociating
> The paint is very nice when the racket is new, but it chips very easily (about 50% chip chance for each hard miss-hit). After two months of use I have dozens of chips mainly located next to the upper and lateral string holes and around the racket head.

Despite the drawbacks I think would not hesitate to buy this racket again. I'd like to replace all the grommets with the best grommets on the market that would fit*, and restring it with a decent string at decent tension (I was thinking perhaps NBG99 at 23-24lbs might fit the racket well). After that, appart from the paint, I think it will be the most ideal doubles racket I can think of.

*I'm wondering if the single grommets from a ZFII set would fit, if anyone knows?