Here's how I think it works... Firstly, I think the price you pay for a high-end badminton racket is astronomical, compared to the cost of materials and labour used in its manufacture. Most of what you pay is going into R&D, marketing, shareholders' pockets, etc - so to claim the higher cost of a high-end racket is due to the higher cost of manufacture, is not entirely true IMO. A company like Yonex will be constantly trying to research new technology. This could be new materials to make a racket perform better (eg. a stiffer/stronger material could allow them to make the frame/shaft thinner and more aerodynamic without sacrifing strength/stiffness, or it could allow them to increase the maximum tension of the frame). It could be new materials that don't affect performance, but allow them to make the racket more cheaply (eg. using lower grade materials for the bulk of the racket, and then adding small amounts of more expensive materials where it's most needed). It could be design features which don't affect the cost of manufacturing the racket, but which improve the racket's performance (eg. new stringing patterns, frame shapes, frame cross-sections, etc). Just *how much* difference any of this makes, is debatable. Anyway, when Yonex bring out a new flagship model, they try to design something to suit advanced players (ie. they make it very stiff), they stuff in all their latest technologies, and then they look at the market to see how much they think they can charge - an RRP of about £200 (so people expect to pay about £150). They then set about designing rackets to suit various lower price-points, and with each drop in price, they take away one or two pieces of new technology and shuffle the specs a bit. Obviously, if the cheaper rackets had all the same technology as the high-end models, no-one would buy the more expensive high-end models. And because no two models have the same basic specs but different technology, no-one can ever tell if the difference in playability is down to the technology or the specs. While high-end models are often (but not always) stiffer, there isn't a steady increase in stiffness with price. Yonex don't think in terms of "this is a racket for a beginner" or "this is a racket for an intermediate" - they think "this is a racket for someone who wants to spend £35" or "this is a racket for someone who wants to spend £70". And then they start again with the next series of rackets...
Got your point. Straight to the point, I think Yonex's quality control must have stricter tolerance level in comparison with other racquets manufacturer, that's why it is still well regarded even with the advent of the very well made Victors and Linings... Price-wise, Japan and being made in Japan is still much more expensive than say, if it were produce someplace else.
Wrong, the difference in materials alone can change the playing feel of the racquet. For example a better material will be more resistant to wear and tear and fatigue.
We have overlooked a couple of things. The high branded manufacturers like Yonex do have lower end racquets in their product lines. I think if you wanted an exterior T joint Yonex racquet for under 50 bucks, I bet you could find one. Another thing is that price for a product is not solely dependent on the manufacturing costs. It depends on: - what margin they want - what perception they want to have for that racquet. - and hence how much they can charge for that racquet.
It's not about the length - it's the shaft thickness that matters. Everyone knows that... And Demolidor - are you sure this isn't more accurate?
My friend just broke his strings on his racket. he is a great player and we play recreationally 2-3 times a week on a consistent basis. He had a $30 "clonex" he bought off of ebay and the head was actually bent. But he played fairly well with that thing. So then he bought a new racket, the $130 voltric 7 and he played just ok with it on his first session with it. (I suspect he will improve with time on his new racket). I play with a $150 panda power ultra 2 and play at my max level with it. I also own an $80 nanospeed 200 that i play just ok with. (It was my first racket and i don't perform as well with it). Its important to me that my ultra 2 racket is head heavy, has a 300+ balance point, has the factory grip removed and two yonex grips wrapped on the wood, is strung with bg 65 or 80 to 27lb, and is painted black and purple and says panda power. Each individual will always have their own opinion of what is a good racket (what they like in a racket), whether it is expensive or not... I had a really good experience reading the reviews for my ultra 2 as well as talking to Dan, and ultimately playing with it on the court. Everyone has their preference in racket type/racket cost. It is up to them to find what they are most comfortable with.
Shaft thickness? Ohhhh please. Have we degrade ourselves that much now in this discussion now? Everybody knows its the head shape and stiffness that is important. But more importantly it is your stamina and performance. Being able to perform for a long period of time will definitely impress the girls more.
Back to the serious discussion.. AHEM! Good point Paulierand! There are soooo many factors of a racquet design that influences how you feel or play with the thing. Shaft flex, head weight, balance point, racquet weight, head shape, string type, string tension, grip type and grip thickness. (anymore that people can think of??) If you can find a racquet that fits you perfectly on all the points and makes you feel so comfortable using it, then that will be the best racquet for you. Price won't be a factor.. Also, whether you are a defensive or attacking player, singles, doubles, etc etc etc. these things including what you play and how you play will influence what kind of racquet you like.. Maybe the voltric 7 isn't suited to your friend because it's a different stiffness, head weight or string tension compared to the clonex? I know I have a Voltric 70 with Nanogy 95 strings and I think the string tensions are toooooo soft for playing with feathers. I'm debating whether I should cut these strings and restring with a higher tension. So maybe it's a great and expensive racquet and good strings but the tension is terrible (too soft) and I play terrible with it. If I could find a cheaper clone racquet with exactly the same specs as the Voltric 70 and have the CORRECT string tension, then maybe I will play better with it. In the end, the paint job, price and branding MAY make some people feel better with using it but that is probably more of a emotional feeling rather than a physical comfort and actual performance feeling.
Why the shaft thickness/stiffness determines the cost of the racket? I believe that the shaft is the most expensive or major component of the racket, why? Because good shafts are manufactured by Japanese companies like TORAY, MITSUBISHI...etc. They always charge a premium for their products. That's why the new carlton's rackets n many others advertised themselves using 40T stiffness shaft..etc. Everything else is just carbon being injected into the shape of the rackets but they must buy the shafts from Japan. This is just my 2c.
Having tried rackets from various brands and price ranges over the years, I think there are a lot of factors to be considered, which makes selecting a racket so difficult. Personally, what I look for in a racket is the solidity and stability shot-per-shot, technique disregarded. So with every clear, for example, I want that solid feeling that provides me the reassurance that I can make any shot with this racket. Surprisingly, one of the most solid low-end rackets I have ever used was the Apacs Power Concept 700 with BG65 @ 22x24lb, a cheap clone of the Yonex Armortec 700. It was probably the best low-end racket I have ever used and I often chose it in favor of more expensive rackets. Unfortunately, I can't easily find these USD$24 miracles anymore, but this proved to me that low-end rackets could outperform their price. That said, price becomes subjective. This is where marketing comes into play because companies obviously want you to buy their product. Yonex is notorious for dressing up its technology in the fanciest descriptions so the buyer knows that he/she is purchasing a quality product. But despite everything, I have faith that racket innovators are at least working towards some sort of improvement. So while that technology may sound greater than its minimal effect on the racket performance, it's still something to be said about. That raises its price. A good metaphor for buying a racket based on its technologies would be like hiring a new employee based on his credentials, say a Bachelors and Masters degree, which usually suggests that a candidate is a higher quality worker, and will therefore perform well. Then again, this is how it usually works. It just so happens that high-end rackets usually feel better. I don't expect a huge spike in popularity for two-piece rackets over high-end Voltrics (although I know someone who enjoys the heaviness/challenge of using a cheap USD$9 racket...). So ultimately, my answer is that there is nothing truly justifying the price of high/low-end rackets except for the production costs and the result of marketing via technologies/brand names. In the end, we go back to the old saying that you just have to try in order to know. And likewise, you just need to follow your preferences. My humble 2 cents.
Why yonex charges higher price for their products? A> because it can.Simple as that, yonex is the only major brand tht has for the past 20 years and still promotes this wonderful sport call badminton. You can say Yonex practically owns badminton.The same question has been asked numerous tomes in other sports like golf, squash, tennis Or even sport fishing tht utilise graphite technology. It's naive to think that yonex uses different materials to produce stiffer shafts, if anyone knows about this industry, he will know the answer and laugh in your face. suffice to say that one just adds an extra few sheets of raw graphite before the baking process to produce a stiffer shaft than the more flexible counterpart.
That a $50 racket is more fun? , I like my restricted by a common denominator better (i.e. the user represented by the speed limit) . Results might be the same, the user experience on the other hand ... but perhaps we should have a 1:10 Catheram(?)/Donkervoortrius ratio branch underneath for those exceptions
So far, all we hear are the personal subjective experiences of how a more expensive racket compares against a less expensive rackets, this is wholly unscientific and heavily biased.So as for the question of why noone has tested out the differences between a yonex and a less well known manufacturer, the problem is money. Who is gonna fund the study? A study of this sort requires a tightly controlled environment, a robotic arm that is capable of hitting a shuttle in various angles and speeds, high speed cameras etc all this needs money. This problem is compounded by the fast advancement in racket technology, it's hard to keep up and not to forget also the risk of litigations, the risk of assassination and espionage etc etc : )
Cut off the shaft and weigh it, u will see it weighs practically nothing then you will know how heavy are a couple of graphite sheets.
Shaft probably ~10gr.? I think it is known the base material is the same and available to all, what about the nano-tech/other enhancements? Of course your answer A is correct and as someone mentioned the price is more related to product positioning than production cost ...
