Category Archives: Technology
Save Your Racquet!
🎾 Avoid the Tariff Trap – Customize Instead! 🎾
New racquet prices will increase due to tariffs. But guess what? You don’t need a new racquet—you need the right racquet.
At Racquet Quest, we specialize in custom tuning, balance, strings, and full racquet transformations.
💡 More control. More power. Less money.
✅ Just performance.
📍 Casselberry, FL. The World Headquarters
🌐 racquetquest.tennis
🎧 Racquet Quest Podcast – Expert Tips Every Week!
#TennisLife #RacquetQuest #CustomTennis #TennisGear #RacquetCustomization #TennisPerformance
Head Auxetic 2 Radical Pro 2025
The Radical Pro represents the pinnacle of a player’s racquet. So, this review is based on our desire to see how much power we can squeeze out of it through string bed stiffness.
The following specifications explain why this racquet’s natural properties make it a powerhouse.
This 98-square-inch racquet packs a powerful 339-gram weight with a very easy-to-handle 331 swing weight!
With this racquet, you will not be pushed around by big hitters.
As tested, this racquet has a stiffness rating of 66, which is moderately high. However, with an effective stiffness of 27.1, it is well within the range of any player who can benefit from the other performance factors.
As you can tell from the picture, the racquet is ORANGE. These pictures are the skills of Bobby Diviliansky, a high school student who just happened to stop at the World Headquarters! His brother Ryan is a client, so he had a reason to be here.
| Manufacturer | Head |
|---|---|
| Racquet Model | Head PT57A2 Auxetic Coat - No Grip Pallet |
| Reference Tension | |
| String | |
| Machine Used | |
| String Bed Stiffness - RDC | |
| String Bed Stiffness -FlexFour | |
| Strig Bed Stiffness - SBS | |
| String Bed Stiffness - ERT | |
| Racquet Flex, RDC,No Pallet | 62 |
| Racquet Flex, FlexFour, No Pallet | 57 |
| Racquet - In Plane Stiffness | 462.2 |
| Weight, Grams | 255.6 |
| Weight, Ounces | 9.016 |
| Balance, mm | 354 |
| Balance, Inch | 13.94 |
| Length, Cm | 68.2 |
| Length, Inch | 26.850 |
| Head Width | 9.437 |
| Head Length | 12.748 |
| Head Area, cm^2 | 611.3 |
| Head Area, Sq. Inch | 94.75 |
| Beam Height @ Grip, mm | 21.1 |
| Beam Height @ Mid, mm | 20.3 |
| Beam Height @ Tip | 20.3 |
| Beam Width @ Grip, mm | 11.0 |
| Beam Width @ Throat, mm | 11.0 |
| Beam Width @ Mid, mm | 11.7 |
| Beam Width @ Tip, mm | 11.5 |
| Number of Main Strings | 18 |
| Number of Cross Strings | 20 |
| Ratio | .634 |
| Main String Grid Inch/mm | 7.18/182.3 |
| Cross String Grid Inch/mm | 9.51/241.5 |
| Density (% of head filled with string) | |
| Average Cross String Space | |
| Average Main String Space | |
| Dynamic Tension, Kp, ERT | |
| Dynamic Tension, Lbs/in | |
| First Moment, Nm | |
| Polar Moment | |
| Torsional Stability | |
| Swing Weight, Kg/cm^2 | 285 |
| Swing Weight, Ounces | |
| Swing Weight Calculated | 318.5 |
| Power, RDC | |
| Control, RDC | |
| Manueverability, RDC | |
| Power, Calculated | |
| Head Points | |
| Head Weight, % | |
| Center of Percussion | |
| Dwell Time, ms | |
| Efective Stiffness - lbs | |
| K, Lb/In | |
| Recoil Weight | |
| Twist Weight | |
| End Weight | 81.2 |
| Tip Weight | 177.6 |
| 9 O'Clock | 87.2 |
| 3 O'Clock | 87.9 |
| Butt End | 88.1 |
| COF, Main | |
| COF, Cross | |
Soft is the New Black!
The word “soft” is popping up everywhere; for good reason, we think!
Most juniors and high-level players we deal with have or are now switching to “softer” strings.
The following plot shows the difference between Luxilon Element 125 and Luxilon Element IR Soft 127. Looking at the slope, you can tell the Soft is softer than the non-soft, but by how much?
Element v Element Soft
A quick calculation says about 12.3% at 50 (22.68Kg) pounds of force. If you follow the slope, you will see that at 100 pounds of force (45.36Kg) the strings intersect at a deflection of 54.8mm.
If you hit very hard and exceed the 100-pound mark, the “soft” will become slightly less soft than the “non-soft.”
So, what’s the big difference?
For nearly twenty years (20) years, we have been using PEEK for high performance tennis strings. Ashaway has been using PEEK longer than we have under MonoGut ZX and ZX Pro (thinner) models.
“The significant property differences between 1.25mm polyester and 1.25mm polyetheretherketone (PEEK) are based on their chemical composition, mechanical strength, thermal resistance, and durability. Here’s a comparison:
- Chemical Composition
- Polyester: A polymer made of ester functional groups commonly used in textiles, films, and some industrial applications.
- Polyetheretherketone (PEEK): A high-performance engineering thermoplastic with ether and ketone groups, known for its superior mechanical and thermal properties.
- Mechanical Properties
| Property | 1.25mm Polyester | 1.25mm PEEK |
| Tensile Strength | Lower (~50-100 MPa) | Much higher (~90-120 MPa) |
| Elastic Modulus | ~2-4 GPa | ~3.6-4.0 GPa |
| Toughness | Flexible, lower toughness | High toughness, impact-resistant |
| Abrasion Resistance | Moderate | Very high |
- Thermal Properties
| Property | 1.25mm Polyester | 1.25mm PEEK |
| Melting Point | ~250°C | ~343°C |
| Glass Transition | ~70°C | ~143°C |
| Thermal Stability | Moderate | Excellent |
PEEK can withstand much higher temperatures than polyester, making it ideal for high-heat applications.
- Chemical Resistance
- Polyester: Moderate resistance to chemicals but degrades in strong acids and alkalis.
- PEEK: Excellent chemical resistance, even to strong acids, bases, and solvents.
- Electrical Properties
- Polyester: Good dielectric properties but lower breakdown strength.
- PEEK: Exceptional electrical insulation properties, making it suitable for high-performance applications.
- Water Absorption & Durability
- Polyester: Absorbs some moisture, reducing strength over time.
- PEEK: Extremely low water absorption, maintaining strength and dimensional stability.
- Applications
- Polyester: Used in textiles, packaging, and some low-load industrial applications.
- PEEK: Used in aerospace, medical implants, and high-performance engineering applications.
Conclusion
If you’re looking for high strength, thermal resistance, and durability, PEEK is far superior to polyester. However, polyester is more cost-effective and widely used in consumer applications. The choice depends on the required application and performance needs.”
Racquet Quest, LLC
