Head 140 or 160G racket?
Squasher98
with either the 140 or 160G's, and further, how about the "slimbody" versions??
Thanks
Suleyman Karabuk
limited (I tried and owned 3 different racquets only), I find it a pretty
good one.
Squasher98 wrote in message
<199807302207...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Mal Stainkey
head 140G.
I tried a pp120 and got the 140G because I also felt the pp was too light in
the head (wrong balance for me) YMMV. And I have since upgraded it to the
new slim body. I usually buy a new racquet each season but I haven't had a
chance to play with the new Ti120, I think it might be a bit heavier in the
head than the pp120.
I like lightweight racquets with some weight towards the head. The only way
to chose a racquet though is to play with it :)
bye for now
Mal
art...@ozemail.com.au
"Don't Think....... Feel!"
Bruce Lee
Kenneth D. Jaffe
design gives it the stiffness not often found in teardrop heads, but the
power granted by the elongated string bed.
For doubles, I prefer the Head 160G. It's a bit stiffer still, in that
its non-teardrop head further prevents twisting of the frame.
Both are plenty light enough to be very manuverable, and they feel more
solid than their 120 and 140 counterparts. I feel that they are the
best two racquets made, although the titanium 150 may be even better
(haven't tried it yet).
On a couple of occasions, I have recommended the PP120 to people (who
happened to be women) who may have lacked the hand/fore-arm strength to
easily manuver the slightly heavier racquets.
oren golan
titanium 150. It's a great racquet and I truly recommend it.
Marcus Schnell
> I've heard about the 'too light' problem before and that's why I bought the
> titanium 150. It's a great racquet and I truly recommend it.
I used to have the same problem. I need a more solid
raquet in my hand. The one I use is a Head Pyramid Power
170g. Great racquet, well balanced.
Cheers,
Marcus
Michael Babyak
playability, but are they any more durable than the present composites?
Mike Babyak
oren golan (or...@spirit.tau.ac.il) wrote:
: I've heard about the 'too light' problem before and that's why I bought the
: titanium 150. It's a great racquet and I truly recommend it.
: >Squasher98 wrote:
: >>
: >> I currently own a Haed PP120 but it's too light. Does anyone have
: experience
: >> with either the 140 or 160G's, and further, how about the "slimbody"
: versions??
: >> Thanks
--
_________________________________________________________________
Michael A. Babyak, PhD (919) 684-8843 (Voice)
Box 3119 (919) 684-8629 (Fax)
Department of Psychiatry
Behavioral Cardiology Laboratory michael...@duke.edu
Duke University Medical Center mba...@acpub.duke.edu
Durham, NC 27710
http://dcl.duke.edu/behcard/index.html
_________________________________________________________________
In Flumine Stercoris Noli Undas Facere
_________________________________________________________________
oren golan
more durable or not. anyway I ran to someone in the squash court today who
own a Head T120 (for a month and a half) and broke it today. he claim he
didn't do something extremely irregular...
Michael Babyak wrote in message <6q9qaj$io8$1...@news.duke.edu>...
Mal Stainkey
fault with the Ti-120 and had issued a new batch.
I have heard a lot of reports of them breaking so this might have been the
reason.
Apart from that I haven't played with one yet, I still use my slim body 140
which is a good racquet.
Mad Hamish
>I have found the PP150 to be an ideal racquet for singles. Its Pyramid
>design gives it the stiffness not often found in teardrop heads, but the
>power granted by the elongated string bed.
>
>For doubles, I prefer the Head 160G. It's a bit stiffer still, in that
>its non-teardrop head further prevents twisting of the frame.
>
>Both are plenty light enough to be very manuverable, and they feel more
>solid than their 120 and 140 counterparts. I feel that they are the
>best two racquets made, although the titanium 150 may be even better
>(haven't tried it yet).
>
>On a couple of occasions, I have recommended the PP120 to people (who
>happened to be women) who may have lacked the hand/fore-arm strength to
>easily manuver the slightly heavier racquets.
I'd be cautious about recommending the 120 racquets to a woman, the problem is
that the lighter the racquet the harder it is to get good lenth, especially when
the ball is cold...
IMO, especially at lower levels, a bit more weight in the head is probably a
good idea, the extra maneuverability of the lighter racquet probably doesn't
compensate for the probable lack of length in drives.
****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@postoffice.utas.edu.au
h_l...@tassie.net.au
Kenneth D. Jaffe
>
> On Sun, 02 Aug 1998 17:43:50 -0400, "Kenneth D. Jaffe" <jaf...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> >I have found the PP150 to be an ideal racquet for singles. Its Pyramid
> >design gives it the stiffness not often found in teardrop heads, but the
> >power granted by the elongated string bed.
> >
> >For doubles, I prefer the Head 160G. It's a bit stiffer still, in that
> >its non-teardrop head further prevents twisting of the frame.
> >
> >Both are plenty light enough to be very manuverable, and they feel more
> >solid than their 120 and 140 counterparts. I feel that they are the
> >best two racquets made, although the titanium 150 may be even better
> >(haven't tried it yet).
> >
> >On a couple of occasions, I have recommended the PP120 to people (who
> >happened to be women) who may have lacked the hand/fore-arm strength to
> >easily manuver the slightly heavier racquets.
>
> I'd be cautious about recommending the 120 racquets to a woman, the problem is
> that the lighter the racquet the harder it is to get good lenth, especially when
> the ball is cold...
>
> IMO, especially at lower levels, a bit more weight in the head is probably a
> good idea, the extra maneuverability of the lighter racquet probably doesn't
> compensate for the probable lack of length in drives.
>
> ****************************************************************************
It would be an interesting study to compare a lighter racquet with it's
greater head speed vs a heavier racquet (more mass), as it relates to
pace imparted on a squash ball. It seems that the speed of the ball
would be a direct correlation to the momentum of the racquet head, which
if I remember correctly is = (mass * (velocity squared)).
With a person with a weaker forearm, there may be a greater difference
in the racquet head speed than with a stronger person who may not feel
that big a difference of 30 grams.
That being said, if the person is having trouble getting the racquet
around well on the volley, the manuverability of a lighter raquet may
well be worth the lesser pace on "ground" strokes if there is indeed a
loss.
The individual need to try it out for themselves, which is what I
recommend to anyone.
James Taylor
<jaf...@erols.com> wrote:
[snip]
>It would be an interesting study to compare a lighter racquet with it's
>greater head speed vs a heavier racquet (more mass), as it relates to
>pace imparted on a squash ball. It seems that the speed of the ball
>would be a direct correlation to the momentum of the racquet head, which
>if I remember correctly is = (mass * (velocity squared)).
>
[snip]
momentum is mv [mass times velocity] --- linear
kinetic energy is 1/2mv[squared]
And yes, you are imparting momentum to the ball. But while the racket
is what hits the ball, it is the racket body system's momentum that is
important. I.e., the racket is attached to the arm more or less
rigidly at the time of impact. So, for example, halving the mass of
the racket and keeping the head speed constant does not [I'm fairly
sure, but I will admit this analysis is done off the top of my head
:-(] halve the momentum transferred to the ball.
jim taylor
mit tennis & squash