Category Archives: Evaluation

Head Gravity 2023 Team , MP, and Pro Comparison

Moving between several reviews to compare racquets is tiresome, for sure, and inefficient!

We don’t want you to be tired or inefficient, so we include our Three Racquet Comp Data for the new Head Gravity 2023 models!

The highlighted areas are significant and affect any racquet’s performance.

A word about “dwell time”.  To get a more accurate view of the racquet we have elimiiated the player from the “slow” dwell time.  This allows us to see excatly what happens when the ball is “dropped” on the string bed without any external force (your swing)!

If you have questions about any of this information please submit a comment.

Numbers, numbers, numbers! What do they mean?

With each of our racquet reviews a long list of numbers is included.  It has been a few years since we explained what these numbers mean so here it is;

Numbers are your friend!
Racquet ModelHead Radical MP 2023
Reference Tension55 (what you tell the stingers to set the stringing machine).
This should be replaced by String Bed Stiffness (SBS)
MonoGut ZX Pro
Machine UsedTrue Tension Professional
String Bed Stiffness - RDC53.0 Units (Babolat RDC)
String Bed Stiffness -FlexFour64.9 pounds (Flex Four)
String Bed Stiffness - SBS51.8 pounds (Racquet Quest string bed stiffness SBS Master)
String Bed Stiffness - ERT35 Kg/Cm (previously Beer's ERT1000)
Racquet Flex, Babolat RDC65 - After stringing (unstrung racquets will be slightly stiffer. Loaded from the tip)
Racquet Flex, FlexFour44.5 (Loaded from the COP)
Racquet - In Plane Stiffness379.7 lbs/Inch (stiffness across the 3 ad 9 o'clock positions of the racquet head)
Weight, Grams326
Weight, Ounces11.50
Balance, mm333
Balance, Inch13.11
Length, Cm68.57
Length, Inch27.00
Head Width9.63
Head Length12.79
Head Area, cm2623.0
Head Area, Sq. Inch96.7
Beam Height @ Grip, mm21.0 (how thick the racquet is looking at the side)
Beam Height @ Mid, mm22.5 (how thick the racquet is looking at the side)
Beam Height @ Tip20.5 (how thick the racquet is looking at the side)
Beam Width @ Grip, mm12.5 (how thick the racquet is looking at the front or face view)
Beam Width @ Throat, mm11.5 (how thick the racquet is looking at the front or face view)
Beam Width @ Mid, mm12.8 (how thick the racquet is looking at the front or face view)
Beam Width @ Tip, mm12.8 (how thick the racquet is looking at the front or face view)
Number of Main Strings16
Number of Cross Strings19
Ratio Cross/Mains.634 ( typically the natural ratio)
Main String Grid7.18 (the distance between the two outer most main strings)
Cross String Grid9.44 (the distance between the two outer most cross strings)
Density (% of head filled with string)69.6% (how much of the head area is filled with string)
Average Cross String Space.494 (how far apart the strings are). The farther apart the quicker the wear.
Average Main String Space.449
(how far apart the strings are). The farther apart the quicker the wear.
Dynamic Tension, Kp, ERT35 (string bed stiffness in kilos per centimeter)
Dynamic Tension, Lbs/in195.76 (DT converted to pounds per inch)
First Moment, Nm.841 (sometimes called pickup weight)
Polar Moment347 (torsional weight)
Torsional Stability16 ( resistance to twisting on off center hits)
Swing Weight, Kg/cm2331 (the dynamic weight and the most significant property)
Swing Weight, Ounces11.68
Swing Weight Calculated361.5 (calculated from the butt end to the tip)
Power, RDC52 (property calculated by Babolat RDC)
Control, RDC49 (property calculated by Babolat RDC)
Manueverability, RDC66 (property calculated by Babolat RDC)
Power, Calculated 2101.4 (calculation based on several racquet properties)
Head Points3.15 ( a point is generally consider to be .125 inches/3.18mm)
Head Weight, %48.5%
Center of Percussion21.1 (highest COR)
Dwell Time, ms8.74 (length of time the ball is in contact with the string without a swing)
Efective Stiffness - lbs29.2 ( the calculated combined stiffness of the racquet and sting bed)
K, Lb/In169.87 (string bed stiffness in pounds/inch)
Recoil Weight156.44 (resistance to twisting about the grip)
Twist Weight226.48 (resistance to twisting about the neutral axis)
End Weight 126.0 (two scale system to calculate CG)
Tip Weight 197.7 (two scale system to calculate CG)
9 O'Clock105.1 (three scale system to assure symmetry)
3 O'Clock104.7(three scale system to assure symmetry)
Butt Cap115.6 (three scale system to assure symmetry)
COF, Main.416 (the stickiness of the string bed sliding the ball with the main strings)
COF, Cross.388(the stickiness of the string bed sliding the ball with the cross strings)

The Same but Different!

How can two totally different things be the same in so many ways?

Here is a good example:

Wilson Sensation 16, natural v Wilson Sensation Plus 17, black.

Same but Different!

Looking a the stress/strain portion of the graph, it is nearly impossible to see any difference!

Both strings exhibit good elongation and elasticity.

Finally, when it comes to UTS the Sensation is a little stronger, as you would expect, for a 1.33mm string.

The Sensation Plus measures 1.26mm!  So, the UTS is pretty good!

So what’s the deal?  

If you have been using Sensation but would like a black, thin string from Wilson simply use Sensation Plus!



Comparing Racquets (for real)

The Racquet Quest podcast recently aired a session on comparing racquets, so, to be fair I wanted to post that same data here. If you listened to the podcast this will sound familiar.

These racquets are not random. These racquets are owned by a client that is seeking an upgrade without going overboard!

Here is the data.  Take a look then read what the client has to say about them.

3 racquetcompare

Here is what Jess has to say:

“Hey, John –
Jess definitely likes the VS more than the Rafa. She said that she gets more easy power and stability with the Rafa but she’s able to accelerate faster on the forehand side with the VS.

She also felt like the VS was more maneuverable at the net. She said that if she’s in control of the point that she can really whip her forehand for a winner. She definitely noticed the lighter swing weight and liked that.

However, she also said that sometimes it feels a little unstable – like the VS is getting pushed around a bit. For example, she noticed that the head of the racquet can twist sometimes if her opponent nails a hard ball at her.

She has more control for sure with the VS – felt like she blasted more balls out with the Rafa. Overall, she likes the racquet- just would like a little more stability.”

By the way, Jess had not seen the racquet data prior to her hitting.  So, there you have it.  I believe you can see how much numbers help us find the right performance characteristics for a racquet.


Let’s Compare

We publish many racquet reviews that include comprehensive data to be used to speed up the selection process for players looking to review racquets and possibly demo them.

We thought it might be fun to do a little comparison of racquets in a simple format and we are starting with this one!

When considering racquets there is one “weight” that outweighs them all and that is swing weight!  Swing weight is also described as inertia which is, in our discussions,  the term used to describe the momentum of a tennis racquet.  Once it gets going it does not want to stop which equals power (sort of F=MA)


We will be adding groups of three (3) racquets whenever possible and when new racquets are introduced.

Weight is your friend!