My french isn't the best. But it seems like yonex is contradicting itself in the second image. First they say the strings straighten quickly after slicing. But then the image shows the strings bending dramatically and goes on to say that the strings have weak friction in general. I can't imagine strings selling well to the general public if they move around a whole bunch.
This will sell shedloads because it's Yonex and because it's new (nobody will remember that Adidas were here three years ago), but even this promo stuff is misrepresenting the whole point of hybrid stringing: compromise. Any idea what the parent strings are?
Theoretically, will the +1lb on crosses rule of thumb apply? Since presumably the thicker string on mains will have a higher tension loss.
My French is non existent. What does it say? That there's more friction or less? I assume more? Parent strings could be BG85 and AS.
The only mention of "friction" with an adjective defining it, translates to "weak". It's with the photo of the main string being way out of position as well.
Hi, I'm japanese. BG65 has not been sold in the Out of print. Main might be different kind of string .
0.67 + 0.61 gauge, 1 pack in 2 different gauge. actually we can just pair BG85[0.67] + Aerosonic[0.61] to try it out instead.
We can actually pair the thickness of the strings that we want wif the wide range of strings haha Gonna be a lot of combinations
I don't understand why so many users in here are so opposed to hybrid stringing? It make sense in so many ways. Durability, frequency/repulsion matching (long and short strings), etc. I guess that the only drawbacks are that it's more expensive to produce and distribute, and more cumbersome to "use".
I tried almost a whole reel of the adidas hybrid stuff and I can tell you why I think hybrids don't really work. The 'thin' adidas string (0.69) really cuts into the thicker string (0.72) and most times the main strings were worn through by the thinner strings. The thin strings still looked brand new afterwards. If you have two equal strings biting into each other, the wear is spread between the two. Sadly the thinner string is also stiffer (for the adidas casem however I think thinner strings generally need to be stiffer than thick strings to handle the same tensions), this mis-match in stiffness (and/or hardness) almost guarantees all the abrasive wear occurs on the side of the less stiff/hard set of strings. In the end, I got more mileage out of using 0.69 for mains and crosses than using the hybrid combo
Sounds a bit strange. I've experienced better durability after going thicker on the mains in a couple of tests. However I have never tried adidas strings, not as a player nor as a stringer.. Perhaps the hybrid strings we have seen so far just simply haven't been good strings? Given that on same strings, you get the vast majority of cut on the mains, it should be possible to improve upon using hybrid. And given that you get better repulsion from mains than crosses, this should also be able to improve upon. Either in getting a better tradeoff from repulsion/durability on the overall string job - or by getting a better performing string job due to mainstream and crosses working better together. Look at it this way: In a given string job today, you could go a bit thinner on the crosses, getting better repulsion and bite from those, without sacrifying overall durability (because it is still the mains that break). However you must keep in mind that thinner crosses perhaps cut more on the mains as you mention. This however cannot be much. If you start at 66 mm you could perhaps go down 2 mm on crosses and up 1 mm on mains, end up with better performance and durability. Now I'm not talking mixing current strings, I'm talking strings that are designed to work together and yield same properties.
Pick any two strings and there will one one lying in the middle, so just use that one. There's no need to hybrid in badminton, IMO.
Yeah, this just seems like another Yonex desperation concept like the whole 'two sides to one frame' business - it's a solution to a problem nobody needed, wanted, or asked for; it's just there to create sales. Quite why they bothered doing this with string is a mystery in itself, most people seem to use Yonex string at the moment. It's only we few on here that are quite so pedantic about our strings.
Well, I welcome development. Maybe it's a dead end, maybe it will be the next thing. The theoretical potential is there. At least, the engineer within me think so. I think it's better that they try, rather than lean back saying "everyone plays Yonex strings anyway, why bother". That approach would have robbed us of the BG-AS. And honestly, how many of you would have said: "It's just a marketing gimmick to make the thinnest string. No one will use it, since they already do the BG66UM". "Such a thin string doesn't make sense".
Anyone here who string tennis rackets? Isn't hybrid normal or at least an accepted concept in tennis?
I dunno @FeatherBlaster I preferred Li Ning No.1 to Aerosonic for power and control, so to me it did seem like a thin gimmick.
