Prince (manufacturing and or QA?) tolerances

As I had trouble finding retailers (and up the chain, manufacturers) that would send me at least 3 true to spec racquets, I decided to try and order a bunch myself and keep the (best) fitting ones.

The last few years, I mostly played with the 2019 Prince TeXtreme Tour 100 310g. Occasionally switching back to the trusty RF97A. Had demo'd a bunch lately including the VCORE 98 but couldn't find the (next) one.

The 2019 Tour 100 310 had felt always quite harsh to me, which was a big disappointment since the previous gen of TeXtreme had one of the nicest feels I could remember. Also e.g. on stretch shots I could feel the hoop wobble. 

The successor was supposed to address both. I had a hit with it over the summer and quite liked it. Despite the visual design :) (On this overview page, note that Prince mistakenly lists this as 300g.) 

But we're starting to get into a review here...

In regards to tolerances, here's what I was able to measure for the 9 frames at home:

Serial	Weight (g)	Balance (mm)
91795236	308	313
91784919	308	314
91780027	(309?)	(314?)
91786395	(309?)	(313?)
91780171	(310?)	(312?)
91784520	(312?)	(312?)
91780461	(306?)	(312?)
91786951	(305?)	(311?)
92076020	(305?)	(316?)

These would be "grip only". Compare to the official 310 / 310 spec.

Since I didn't want to unwrap all 9 frames, I estimated the values in () based on the following findings:

Weight

Prince cardboard 12g

Plastic grip wrap incl sticker 2g

Finishing rubber 1g

(for wrap and rubber combined, the scale sometimes goes to 4g => 3-4g)

=> -15g for grip only (no board wrap rubber)

Balance

Prince cardboard ~12g moves balance up ~7mm =>  -7mm w/o cardboard

Plastic grip wrap and finishing rubber 3-4g (without cardboard on frame) move balance down ~1mm

=> -6mm for grip only (no board wrap rubber)

So based on my sample of 9, we have very high ~7g and ~5mm spread. 

The 306 / 311 combo should be much too light feeling.

The 312 / 312, especially in comparison with 306 / 311, quite heavy.

Since I couldn't measure swing weight at home, I went by the above measures and dry-swing-feel.

So far I strung up 91795236, 91784919, 91780027, which are within +/- 1g and 1mm. 

Despite this close range they so far feel quite different to me: 1 like a sharp tournament stick, another one like a tweener power racquet, and 1 in between. Maybe that's partially due to where the weight ended up distributed in the frame. 

Once I get the chance of course I'll measure swing weight...

 

So far not enjoying this try-out, and not loving one of the racquets - but we'll see.

Again, in an ideal racquet world, one wouldn't even have to do all this work, but would get true-to-spec and/or "same-playing" racquets straight from the source. 

What do do? Looks like in terms of trusted specs, Yonex seems to have fallen too...

P.S.: Reminder that the player's goal is to find a racquet including specs that work for them, not (only) that the specs between racquets match :)

Yonex VCORE 98 review

Bought 6, sent 5 back...

But let's start at the beginning. As quickly mentioned before, I felt drawn back to the 2023 VCORE 98 when demoing racquets. 

Mostly I liked how fast it moved through the air. The frame felt like a natural match for my longer swings. 

For some time, I'd been wondering if I should move from my quite balanced 310g / 310mm Prince frame to something that would be a bit more polarized, on one end, for a bit more of a self-accelerating swing. 

On the TeXtreme Tour 100, I had put a leather grip for a while, but that ended being slightly too much of a good thing.

Also, the VCORE having that wider hoop up in the racquet and the sweet spot further up there makes sense to me, considering most people seem to hit the ball higher up in the frame. Reminds me e.g. of the Pro Kennex and Wilson tear shaped frames, just not as extreme and maybe wobbly as a result.

Although I had chosen the Wilson SixOne series for many years, I disliked that the sweet spot sat so low in the hoop. Even below the center. So most shots felt like mishits really. 

(Using an X frame could counter that, though with an extra half inch in the case of the KFactor that stick was a little too long to get around quickly and or on the run.)

For the VCORE 98, there was one particular early warning sign - already after a few shots, I felt pain shooting and building up along the whole arm. After hundreds and maybe even 1,000+ racquets that I hit with over the decades, that has only happened a handful of time. Last I remember was maybe ~15 years ago, with a set of quite harsh and metallic-feeling Tecnifibre demos.

But since I liked so much how it swung, and I had been looking for a while, and I'm used to playing with low tension, I thought I'd be able to sort this out with the string job.

As I had recently found quite high deviations between Yonex frames, and couldn't find anyone / -shop to find me 3 true-to-spec ones, I ended up ordering 6 to measure them myself. 3 turned out alright.

I strung up one frame a few times and kept going lower and lower, eventually below 20 kgs. The string bed got quite soft, but I *still* could feel the pain going up my arm.

That does not gel at all why other reviewers thought the frame was quite comfortable... Who even had likely strung the frame more tightly. So not sure what's going on there.

What also became more apparent was that the hoop didn't seem as stable on impact and would quite easily twist.

In both cases, a good amount of the energy built up by the player seemed to get misdirected...

So unfortunately, 2 no-go's for extended and / or competitive play. 

A tennis buddy has 2 VCORE 100s, and while I think that one is a bit too much of a racquet (mostly due to the wide beam), it might be the better buy. More stable, a real ripper, just not much of a finesse frame, and might do a little too much of its own thing.

Warming up against the 100 during a tournament this summer, I had to take a few steps back because the (new) balls were coming in so high hard and heavy. That has also not happened very often. So probably quite an effective frame for the modern game.

Maybe for the next gen of VCORES, something between the current 98 and 100 would be good. 

Other than that, I'm not sure why Yonex decided to make the string bed tighter in the middle section and lower down the hoop. When the racquet was designed for hitting further up in the first place. Then surely you don't need more control (and a change) further and especially far down. 

(Or reversely, why open it up further up when the frame was designed to make contact there?)

I suppose there's even a (at least) double impact then, as the head gets narrower towards the handle and with that the strings shorter, likely pulled at the same tension with constant pull against what's already strung. So the string bed should get much stiffer towards the handle, thus likely leading to a big diff in power response vertically. 

In addition, the last cross string sits very low, and in combination of all the density right above, I'm not sure if it still serves a purpose. Maybe Big Foe thought similarly on his frame, when he just kept that open...

Maybe I still have a few gaps in racquet science, so there's a chance I'm off and being unjust to Yonex here. I suppose in general I just like simple even string spacing, as e.g. on the Prince 100 16 x 18 frames. Assume I'd like that in a VCORE 98 as well - though that of course would have to get tried out.

All in all I still really want to like the frame, and kept one for testing and the collection. Def one of the more interesting racquets put together. Hope the next iteration will be it! 

P.S.: I still don't like the Yonex grip shape, plus seem to be fall between their L2 and L3 sizing. But with the right frame I'd probably manage. Or maybe put a Wilson-shape L3 pallet on it...

Yonex tolerances (e.g. VCORE 98)

Word on the courts has been that Yonex was pretty much the only brand from which you can pick up sticks off the shelf and they'd be very close to spec. Meaning also one would not have to worry about matching between them. 

I was looking at the Percept 97H, as that's pretty much the only heavy racquet on the market since the RF97A had left the show. Measured a few and was surprised and disappointed to find all of then a few grams too light and a few mm too head heavy. Sure you can get close to the 330 / 310 spec again with a slightly heavier grip, but then the fiddling around begins again...

Demoing a few other pre-selected sticks, I did like the VCORE 98 and felt drawn back to it. Although even at low tension I could feel pain in and along the whole arm, which has happened close to never in >40 years of playing at least hundreds of racquets. So not sure what's going on and why a good part of the energy needs to go in that direction...

Anyways, back to spec - in a store that only had 2 VCORE 98s, there was already a 6 (!) gram diff between them. 

Struggling still and again to find an online retailer in Europe that would find me at least 3 matching sticks, I ended up ordering 6 myself, in the hope that 3 would be closer to spec and each other. 

Turned out weight and balance were pretty close between all of them, however with 1 outlier each in weight and balance, respectively. 1 more frame that seemed close to the remaining 3 did feel a bit heavier to move around (3384900 below), despite just maybe 1 mm more head heavy balance:

Serial	Weight (g)	Balance (mm)
3384900	305	315
3384899	304	317
3384898	304	314
3384897	305	314
3384905	305	314
3384908	307	314

(Still can't measure swingweight at home, so trying to at least develop a feel for it - thinking since only feeling a diff later on court as well would be a problem....)

Also worth noting that without the ~2g plastic wrap around the handle, 5/6 racquets were moving from the 305g VCORE 98 spec towards 300 grams, which at least in terms of weight is the VCORE 100 spec... 

I do wonder a bit, why as a manufacturer, one wouldn't just put thin weight strips under the grip, to make final tweaks to get the racquets to fit.

Bottom line:

I think for players who care, one currently can not (no longer?) just go and buy Yonex off the shelf and expect true to spec material. 

(I feel somewhat comfortable making that claim as at max, 1 of the 10+ racquets I measured recently seemed true to spec, and most others were quite far off. Maybe Y has fallen victim to its own success, in that regard?)

Based on my limited samples, I'd say one would have to roughly double-purchase, to then possibly end up with half the racquets to one's liking. 

However as in my VCORE batch, one would still have to tinker around with the grip and / or handle - if one wanted to get to the spec that the racquets where developed and are advertised for. 

Still not there in 2024!

P.S.: FWIW, the cardboard and rubber bands holding it that come on Yonex racquets seem to weigh ~14 grams. So with the ~2g plastic wrap around the handle, what you pick up in the store weighs about as much as a strung VCORE 98. Though obviously, compared to a string job, with that weight distributed. String would add an extra ~2g in the head (~16g total), and removing the wrap would take ~2g off the handle. In other words, you'd have ~4g more in the head, affecting balance and swingweight.

Light or heavy racquet?

Think this has been covered quite a few times by now, but I'm still seeing and hearing even better players talk about light or heavy racquets, and with that referring to static weight.

However, except for block volleys the racquet is usually in motion, and the measure for how heavy that feels is swing weight - one could argue the most important spec! Tennis-Warehouse e.g. measures and then lists this on their racquet pages (e.g. 2019 Head Radical Pro @ 325). This key measure has been MIA on other prominent tennis websites such as Tennis-Point, but I wouldn't be surprised if we start to see this popping up soon...

To get a quick sense for values and range here, check out my post about the racquet spectrum. You'll also see that lightweight racquets are usually head-heavier, which brings the swingweight back closer to the heavyweights.

It is true that heavier racquets are harder to get into position and to get going - you're basically lifting more weight. For example I still sometimes struggle with the RF97 when pushed around and/or having to quickly change direction. Comparably, I also sometimes feel like lugging around 350+ grams slightly changes the way I move, even compared to 330 or so.

But once in motion those heavier racquets can actually feel easy to swing. Examples would be Wilson's heavy Pro Staffs over the years, especially the stock versions of the small head / thin beam 85 that Sampras, Courier, and Fed used as a base frame. If you pick up a true to spec (or even lighter and/or head-lighter version) of a SixOne or even an RF97 and start swinging you can still sense that just describing them as "heavy" is not sufficient.

There are also flipsides to having a light and maneuverable racquet, e.g. what happens to the swing paths. Your racquet should both support and guide your natural swing paths, in other words help and develop your strokes. If it feels like there's next to nothing in your hand there won't be much support or guidance!

In addition, if you fiddle the racquet around too much there's increased risk of repetitive stress injuries. Plus lighter racquets are usually stiffer and lose most of the impact battle with the ball, so extra shock occurs.

I'm a big proponent of playing with all sorts of racquets, balls etc - to make things easy, interesting, and/or build skill. However for your "normal" play, I would strongly advice against just going out and getting the lightest racquet that you can find.

As an experiment and experience, these days I would actually try to find the heaviest stick possible, get loose and start swinging, and see what happens to strokes and the resulting shots...

In general, try a few different options along the spectrum, and take along a few dampeners to play around with weight, balance, and thus swing weight, as suggested here.

For some guidance on how to choose a tennis racquet, there's also a post for that!

Prince Phantom 100 line roundup

Alright, so I've put on record before that subjectively, TeXtreme is so far the nicest playing material of the millennium. Well done Prince!

Also, I felt the last couple generations of Prince's lineup were well thought out - nice specs, good range of racquets. Personally I've just been missing a replacement for the somewhat hefty but friendly Speedport Tour that I've played for a few years. The racquets in the current Tour series are all a bit too light for that (see e.g. my review of the heaviest Tour 95).

While the Tour racquets already addressed the - what would you call it - maybe "classic competitive player" market, the Phantoms took a step further by offering even more a) of a classic design (at least at first sight), b) plusher feel. So how did that line turn out then?

(I know there's a Phantom missing here, didn't test in one go...)

Over the course of 2018, I've spent some court time with all the Phantom 100s. Most recently I had a chance to try number 3 of 3, the Pro. After the playing impressions, I think the line deserves a shot at a roundup...

Here's what I think all Phantoms have in common:

* Simple design (in a good sense)
* Thin and flexible beam
* Plush feeling (due to flex and material)
* Straight forward string pattern
* Proven spec combos

So what sets them apart?

1) Phantom (310g, 310mm unstrung) - friendly playing, but relatively low power ceiling. The swallowing effect of the relatively light, thin, flexy beam gets a multiplier with the big Speedport grommets. (Put a loosely strung Cyclone Tour in there and the ball will probably just drop off the racquet after impact... :P) I had enjoyed these wide grommets for a while in my Speedport Tours, but ended up replacing them with traditional grommets for more power and a more direct response. This Phantom could be for you though if you're after comfort first - coming back after injury could be one scenario. Think it would be a good coaching stick as well.

2) Phantom Pro (305, 315) - slight difference in spec, but almost the Phantom with normal grommets. Still very plush. If you're looking to compete, attempt to rip a winner here and there, and are looking for more precision, this might be the better buy of the two.

3) Phantom Pro 100P (315, 315) - specs and the boxy design are even more of a nod towards a traditional player stick, with a tad more weight and a more head light balance compared to the other two. I had expected to like this one best, but somehow the Pro felt a bit better. The Pro was also nicer to touch for the supporting (!) hand. Players who are missing "the good old frames", or those who are curious to try something other than a Babolat power racquet, would likely enjoy a demo. Even just as an experience, and/or for comparison.

Overall, all Phantom 100s are very nice racquets, of which any come with the potential to help most folks play better AND improve their craft (e.g. play more creatively, or generate power by hitting all out but doing so cleanly).

My one knock about the lineup, and what's keeping me from switching, is that there's not a hefty option, let's say in the 330 swingweight range. That could make quite a nice combo with the current design and plush feel, also getting closer to the way that pros like to set up their racquets. Maybe that's a gap in Prince's lineup? How about a more solid Phantom 100 with a straight 20 or 21 mm beam and 16 x 18 pattern? I guess I'm really asking for a TeXtreme version of the Speedport Tour :)

Regardless of this request, the Prince's Phantom and Tour racquets do deserve to sell a lot and be seen more at amateur and pro tournaments. Should be good for the industry to have Prince re-emerge and make some money to build on the advances in lineup and products. But please Prince, build them on-spec...

My latest 2 demos, the Pro and the 100P, were both relatively far off in terms of weight. The 100P stood out by being 9 grams too light. Even though I don't have access to a representative sample to determine whether Prince has lowered its manufacturing bar, IMO that's already way out of bounds. After finding what e.g. Wilson's seemingly +/- 5 tolerance can do to a racquet, I'd say you want to be as close to what's printed on the frame as possible.

When testing the racquets I tried to factor this in - and yes I think even with almost 10 grams more you won't end up producing a heavy ball with the Phantoms. The upside is that they're all so easy to play, they can get away with being off-spec much easier than most other racquets that come to mind.

The demos came from Tennis Warehouse Europe. Though I'm obviously thankful that they're offering the program, they currently seem to run it as if they don't care about the racquets (and the folks trying them). Apart from not picking representative (i.e. true-to-spec) demos in the first place, the frames were simply tossed in the box, no overgrips provided, base grips were quite worn out, one racquet came with a rubber band and the other didn't, no dampeners included, sloppy string jobs (very different tension on very similar racquets, strings not straightened, cutoffs long, uneven, and sharp), and their own tags not affixed well. That doesn't leave much positive to say, unfortunately!

While some folks believe in the "don't be gentle it's a rental" mantra, you'll find me in the opposite camp - respect and all that. So I was quite disappointed there, and it makes one wonder how other things are run at the shop. From TWE's perspective, it's also a missed sales and marketing opportunity. Probably better to spend some money and care there than in some other places...

Either way, the Phantoms thankfully got away with all that as well, and were still fun to hit :)

Yonex Ezone DR 98 racquet review

(2018 update: added quick EZONE 98 comparison below)

(2024 update: since there's no more DR 98, here's a review of the 2023 VCORE 98)

I did quite enjoy hitting with the Ai 98, so have really been looking forward to try its successor. Let's jump right into it:

Specs

Length: 69 cm (measured on demo)
Frame width: 23 / 24 / 19 mm (Yonex)
Head size: 98 in² / 632 cm² (Yonex)
String pattern: 16 x 19
Strung weight: 325 g (measured on demo)
Strung balance: 322 mm (measured)
Swing weight: 324 (TW)

 

Thoughts on specs

Classic unstrung weight / balance combo of 310 grams / 310 mm. Otherwise harmonic package of head size, string pattern, and frame width (though the max part @ 24 mm starts to get a bit thick for a player's stick). Note the extra ~0.4 cm in length compared to the standard 68.58 cm.

Playing impressions

Not a flimsy racquet, nicely weighted and pretty stable. Frame is quite powerful. String bed is on the denser side, but still produced OK spin. Enjoyed the extra bit of length.

Benchmarking

Had a little bit of a plank-like feel similar to the Wilson SixOne's, though obviously not as hefty. Little surprised about that given the pretty whippy specs. The Yonex Tour F 97 specs are almost identical, however that racquet zips through the air noticeably faster, but is less powerful and has a denser string bed.

2018 update: the new version, EZONE 98, has become a tad lighter (5 grams) and a tad less headlight (5 mm). When I tried it, it felt less planky, a bit more whippy, and more comfortable. While the DR98 nicely bordered on being a player's racquet (maybe except for the 24 mm part of the frame), the EZONE I played moved another step away from that, most of all because it felt less stable. So between the 2, it depends on what you're looking for.

Here's a visual that indicates where the DR 98 fits into the current spectrum:



Recommendations

Player type: Good modern all-court racquet, probably geared towards aggressive baseliners. Should work well for both long or short swings.

String: Would probably put a control oriented, grippy poly in there, strung at around 24 kgs / 52 lbs. Maybe something like the Tour Bite or Black Code 4S. Hybrid should work well too, would put poly in the mains - a) for spin, and b) since the frame is already quite powerful.

Closing thoughts

Really nice racquet that'll work for a lot of players, subjectively one of the 5 most interesting ones currently on the market. Unless you'd like any of the specs much different, it's definitely worth a demo. Gotta have to like or at least get along with the Yonex head shape though.

To get a better idea how this (or any other racquet) compares to what's on the market today, check out the racquet spectrum.

The tennis racquet spectrum

These days, it's thankfully easy to look up specs for individual mainstream racquets. One good resource is Tennis Warehouse (RF 97 example), who also offer their Racquet Finder to find racquets within custom ranges.

However, I haven't found a nice overview showing the current spectrum of what you can buy, so I took a first pass at creating one. The below charts are derived from roughly 250 frames that have been on the market over the last couple of years. The list is not comprehensive, but the decent sample size should give us a good idea of how the world of tennis racquets looks like.

Weight & balance (mm)

This scatter plot nicely shows the correlation between weight and balance. Generally, the lighter a racquet, the more head-heavily balanced, and the heavier, the more head-light. The general correlation here is that for every increase of 10 grams, the balance point moves down by about 5 mm.

On the heavy, more head-light end we find some classic-spec frames, such as the Wilson SixOne 95 or Roger's RF 97. Fully loaded, the stock RF 97 can come in over 360 grams. The lightest racquet I found on the market is the Donnay Superlite 114 at 238g, which is the outlier in the bottom left. So the spread here is about 120g, or a possible weight increase of up to ~50%.

In regards to balance, the most head light racquets are classic player's sticks like Pete's Wilson Pro Staff 6.0 85, the Völkl Power Bridge 10 Mid, and the Vantage BC20, all balanced at around 310mm. At the other end of the spectrum we mostly find game improvement / comfort racquets, such as the Head Titanium Ti.S5 Comfort Zone or Wilson Hyper Hammers, balanced at and even above 385mm. So we're seeing more than a 75mm range, or about 10% of total racquet length.

In the chart, we find the biggest cluster at around 325g and 325mm - probably a proven combo for players who have developed sound technique, and would like a versatile racquet allowing them to hit any shot in their repertoire. Good examples here are the Wilson Burn 95 FST, the Head Prestige Pro, or the Yonex Ezone Ai 98.

There's also a bit of a cluster around 280g and 350mm, where we find racquets such as the Dunlop Biomimetic S 3.0 Lite, the Head Graphene XT Speed REV PRO, and the Wilson Burn 100 ULS. Easy-playing racquets that should help develop more fluid swings and/or get the ball into the court.

Again, the biggest takeaway here is the correlation between weight and balance. The combination of the 2 lead to swing weight:

Swing weight (kg cm²)

The max value at 412 is the Gamma RZR Bubba. If you look again at the weight / balance scatter plot above, you'll find it out on its own at roughly 300g and 390 mm. This combo leads to the highest swingweight of any mainstream racquet I found.

Min: 282 - Völkl Team Speed Orange, 283g and ~334mm.

Average: 317 (e.g. Babolat Pure Drive, Dunlop Biomimetic F5.0 Tour, Prince Textreme Tour 100T)

Median: 316 (e.g. Yonex Vcore Tour 97 310g, Wilson Steam 105S)

Note: You can even go deeper here by looking at twist weight and recoil weight. Those measures are harder to get and may be more interesting for high end players who also care about optimizing their racquets.

Length (inches)

The standard length of 27 inches / 68.58cm is still the most popular, represented in ~3/4 of the racquets on the market.

The 27.0 - 27.5 range is somewhat popular too, mostly for game improvement racquets. Examples for 27.5 are the Babolat Pure Drive 110, or the Wilson Blade 104 that could be interesting for two-handers.

Notables in terms of length are the Head Graphene XT Instinct Rev Pro that is a bit shorter at 26.8 inches / 68.07cm, and at the other end again the Gamma RZR Bubba @ 29 inches.

Head size (in²)

Max: 137 - again the huge Gamma RZR Bubba.

Min: 85 - that's the Wilson Pro Staff 85 you can still buy today. Followed by more recent frames such as the Yonex VCORE Tour F 93 (=> 93 in²) or the Head Graphene XT Prestige Rev Pro (also 93).

Average: 101 (e.g. Völkl V1 Classic, Donnay Pro One 102, Head Graphene Radical S).

Median: 100, such as the Babolat Pure Drive, Dunlop Biomimetic M 4.0, Head Graphene XT Speed MP A, Wilson Juice 100 / 100 S, Pacific X Fast Pro, the Prince 100 racquets, and many others. Probably the "sweet spot" in terms of head size these days.

Stiffness / flex (RDC)

Max: 75, e.g. the Asics racquets, such as the 109 or the Head Titanium Ti.S6. The Wilson Juice 100S is up there too, at 74.

Min: 45. Vantage frames come in pretty soft below or around 50. Some of the softer mainstream frames are the Head MicroGEL Radicals (~56), the Donnay Pro One GT 18x20 (57), the Babolat Pure Control 95 (58), or the Wilson Blade 104 at 59.

Related note: Wilson Triad racquets feature gel inserts between the head and handle, resulting in a very low stiffness measures (around 17).

Average: 66 (e.g. Wilson Six One 97 and 97S, Yonex VCORE Tour F 97 (290g), Head Graphene XT Instinct MP.

Median: 67 (e.g. Babolat Pure Strike 16x19 (Project One7), Volkl Super G V1 Midplus, Prince Textreme Warrior 107).

Other racquet properties

... to think of are frame width, string pattern, grommets, and price. So some quick thoughts for now:

Width: 22mm beam width seems is pretty standard these days. More classic frames can be as thin as 18mm (e.g. the Pro Staff 95S or Roger's "old" Tour 90). Donnay made a comeback a few years ago with frames that were 15mm thin in some places. The Asics 125 or the Wilson Hyper Hammer 5.3 Stretch OS come in at 28mm, and the Prince Textreme Premier 120 marks the high end at 30mm.

String pattern: Recently, more open patterns have emerged to promote spin generation - if you see a 16x16 combo, or even less strings in any direction, you've probably found one. Classic patterns like 16x18, 16x19, or 18x20 are probably still the most prominent. PowerAngle racquets are somewhat interesting in this context, since they're strung diagonally.

Grommets: Over the years, many manufacturers have played around with grommets too, mostly aiming to increase the sweet spot. This has been done e.g. by trying to reduce friction, giving the string more room to move, or inserting some elastic material. In the last racquet generation, Wilson drilled the holes parallel into the frame, which seems to have worked well for the SixOne 95 that I had played for a while.

Price: New top brand racquets usually cost around $200, last gen racquets tend to be reduced to around $100, and current discounted or 2nd tier brand racquets are around $150.

So there you go, for now. Maybe this can help you find the right racquet, save some money by buying a previous generation, and push the industry to innovate beyond the usual variables...

Happy to rework or tweak this based on feedback and interest. Cheers!

RF97 Autograph long term review

After about half a year of playing and North of 100,000 ball contacts with the RF, it's probably a good time to post an in-depth review. Remember that Wilson has been stating that the racquet was co-developed with Roger, and that he is actually playing with what you can buy. So here's your chance to feel like Roger, at least a little :) So how does his racquet feel, actually?

Specs

Official:

Length: 68.58 cm (official spec - more on this below...)
Head size: 626 cm² / 97 in²
Beam width: 21.5 mm
String pattern: 16 x 19

Measured on true-to-naked-spec frames:

Strung weight: 358 g
Strung balance: 314 mm
Strung swing weight: 330 kg cm²

The 2nd generation RF97 is supposed to only be a cosmetic update, i.e. new paintjob. I have played both back to back, however not with exactly the same string and grip setup. The official specs are identical though:

Thoughts on specs, and some benchmarking

I put together a quick comparison between memorable Pro Staff models, and as you can see most of the specs are not that different:

	Pro Staff RF97	Six.One 95 16x18	Pro Staff Tour 90	Pro Staff 6.1 Original
Strung weight	356	349	354	356
Strung balance	314	316	314	315
Strung swing weight	330	330	336	326
Head size	626	613	581	613
Length	68.58	68.58	68.58	68.58
Beam width	21.5	22	18	21
Main strings	16	16	16	18
Cross strings	19	18	18	20
Even string spacing around sweet spot?	Yes	No	Yes	No

Most notably, head size and beam width have increased, mostly resulting in more power (and less backhand shanks for Roger :P).

It probably makes most sense to compare the RF97 and the SixOne 95 a bit more, as those 2 are the most recent racquets in the lineup. The RF97 is even a bit heavier, by ~7 grams. There are only a handful of racquets in that weight range on the market, however for both racquets the official head light balance leads to a manageable swing weight.

The RF97s racquet head is a bit wider and starts a bit lower in the throat. Compared to the 16x18 SixOne 95 you get 1 extra cross string. I can't help but think I would have preferred a 16x18 bed, but hard to tell without trying it out... The string spacing is pretty even around the sweet spot, which I do like as it helps with both power and spin.

I currently don't have a precise enough measurement tool at hand, but by placing both beams side by side they *seem* almost identical in width, at around 21.5 mm. These days that's a good compromise between feel and power. If you hit with Roger's previous racquet, the Tour 90, or the current 95S, you'll appreciate the speedy feel and precision of an 18 mm frame, but you'll likely find that it's tough to hit the ball through the court.

With current Wilson frames, I'm right between grip sizes 2 and 3 (4 1/4 and 4 3/8). I changed my set of grip size 3 RFs to size ~2.5 by replacing the leather grip with the Babolat Skin Feel. That took ~10 grams off the frame and moved the balance point by ~6 mm towards the head, making it now a tad lighter but also a tad less head light than my SixOne 95. Overall still in very close range.

Warning: Wilson's generous manufacturing tolerances lead to very different racquets carrying the same name. In addition to the weight / balance / swing weight issues, I now found that 2 of my 6 frames are actually ~0.4 cm shorter (!). Never seen or heard of that before, so it didn't even occur for me to order and check for length. So ask for what you want and measure what you get. More info here.

Playing impressions

The mass and relatively open string pattern help produce a heavy, decently spinny ball. If you end up with a frame with higher swing weight than the official spec, your shots will get even heavier, but it will also be tough to get the racquet around. If you end up with a lighter swing weight version, the RF transforms into more of a serve and volley racquet. I found a true to spec frame to be a nice all-court racquet. I've had the pleasure (pain?) to hit with all 3 variants, and insisted on receiving the all-court spec that's printed on the frame.

Product-design-wise, I am still somewhat bothered by the relatively low-sitting throat and racquet head, and the throat being a tad longer than the SixOne 95. I blame that combo for the sometimes wobbly response I receive on hits outside the sweet spot.

I've also been struggling with my topspin backhand a bit. For the backswing, I put the supporting hand's index finger inside the frame and on the strings. On the SixOne, it ends up resting between the 6th and 7th hole. Playing with the RF, I found that my finger rests a tiny bit higher, which after a few million backhands might have some impact on the rest of the kinetic chain...

Comparing the RF97 and SixOne 95 side by side, the 97 produces more spin and a higher launch angle, however the 95 is both noticeably more stable and more maneuverable. The SixOne's benefits become obvious when returning fast serves, and especially on volleys. If I was exclusively playing serve and volley, I'd stick to the 95, still probably the best racquet on the planet for that purpose. However, the 97 better suits the modern baseline game while doing well enough on serves and volleys. Hence the RF97 is probably the better all-year, all-surface racquet.

Both the RF97 and the SixOne 95 can feel a bit planky - I've had similar a similar impression hitting with the Babolat Pure Controls, or even the Yonex Ezone DR 98.

And - as common amongst today's mass-produced frames - both feel quite stiff, making it hard on the arm to use stiffer strings. I'd love to pair the RF with the 1.25 Tour Bite, but even around 20 kg / 44 lbs I end up in pain after a while.

I have a video hitting with the RF here, which you might have seen in another post on the stick.

Recommendations

Player type: All-court players who have (or want to develop) refined long swings, want to feel some heft in their hand, and aim to produce a heavy ball.

String: I've been playing the RF with the orange Cyclone 1.25, strung at 21/20 kgs in the summer, adding a few kgs in the winter. The 1.25 mm Tour Bite was a great fit too, but caused some arm pain. I would generally lean towards a softer but still grippy string. If money is no issue, Roger's Champion's Choice string job works nicely too.

Closing thoughts

Despite the manufacturing tolerance issues and sometimes wobbly response, the RF97 Autograph turned out to be a really nice racquet. Subjectively I'd say it's still one of the 5 most interesting frames on the market. There's not much competition in that weight range, and despite the high gram count it's much more playable than you might think. If you have - or want to develop - smooth swings, and like the thought of producing a heavy ball with a good amount of spin, give it a go.

Prince TeXtreme Tour 95 review

Took me a while to get hands on this one, but the demo was worth the wait: playing with Prince's 2015-year Tour 95 reminded me a bit of the Wilson Tour 90 - a fun to play, fast, precise, can-do-anything frame.

The TeXtreme material was a very positive surprise to me. Out of the last 100+ racquets I've taken for a spin, I'd put the TeXtreme 95 in the top 3 of "most pleasant hitting sensation".

However, that wand-like feel also comes with a familiar tradeoff for these kinds of racquets: despite the solid mass of ~325 grams strung, I found it tough to put serious weight behind the ball, and to really hit through the court. In other words, the racquet helps create a pleasant game for both you and your opponent :)

One of these days, I'd like to string one up with a Hyper-G or Tour Bite at or slightly below 20 kg. I could see that solving most of the power issue, while keeping control at a sufficient level (partially thanks to the strings' bite). For the Tour Bite, TeXtreme is probably one of the few current materials that could swallow some of that string's harshness.

For now, I'd say if you enjoy constructing points and/or consider the person across the net more of a partner than an opponent, playing with this frame could be a lot of fun. Maybe even hand your opponent the same frame to even the odds?

2018 post update: If you're looking for similarly maneuverable alternatives with more plowthrough, Wilson has re-released a relatively cheap (hoping price only, not material) Six.One 95, although only with an 18 x 20 pattern. I tried it and it plays nicely enough.

The (new) Yonex VCORE PRO 97 (330g) looks like another more hefty option on paper, though I found that it felt quite light in the head. Didn't seem to make much of a plowthrough difference to me, either. Would even recommend taking a loosely-strung 310g version out for a hit.

Not many player sticks left on the market! Maybe try one of the new Srixons?

2018 update: not much more power but also great feel, more flex, and a bigger head with the Phantoms. Also, the Tour line is getting a refresh in January 2019...

What are pro racquets like?

[BETA POST to get the content out there, will build out if there's interest]

Now that we have somewhat of an overview of mainstream racquets, it's probably interesting to compare that to what the pros are playing with.

Most top level pros use frames built upon proven basis, so called "pro stock" frames. Those are then build up to the pro's liking. As a final step, they receive the paint job of a current mainstream racquet that needs endorsement.

That established conduct is quite misleading (unethical?), and *maybe* apart from the RF97, you cannot really buy a racquet similar to what your favorite pro is using. (There's also the underlying question if that racquet would be best for your game...)

So what are pro racquets like, roughly? In summary, they tend to be a lot heavier and a bit more headlight, resulting in a hefty swingweight premium over mainstream racquets. The frames are also significantly softer, i.e. bend much more on impact.

Here are the averages of key properties, based on information I have gathered across the web and from conversations over the years - probably directionally correct:

Male pro racquets / ATP

Weight: ~370 grams, +/-15 (vs. 309 grams across all mainstream)

Balance: ~315 mm, +/- 10 (vs. 334 mm)

Swingweight: ~360 kg cm²  (vs. 317 kg cm²)

Flex: ~60 RDC, +/- 10 (vs. 66) (guestimate, few data points)

Beam width: ~20 mm, +/- 2 (vs. 23.7)

Female pro racquets / WTA

Weight: ~327 grams, +/- ~30 (see averages above)
Balance: ~344 mm, +/- ~25
Swingweight: ~342 kg cm², +/- ~50
Flex: ~60 (guestimate, few data points - might be a bit higher than the men's)

So if you want to get a mainstream frame close to a pro frame without plastering it with tungsten or lead tape, there are not a lot of racquets to choose from. The closest mainstream frames are probably the RF97 (although that one is pretty stiff), or the 330g Yonex VCORE Duel G 97.

You may be able to somewhat emulate the pro racquet feel by building up something like the Prince Tour 95, a heavier Head Prestige (e.g. the Pro), or some of the other thin Yonex beams (e.g. the VCORE Duel G 97 (310g). Prince's old Rebel 95 might have actually been quite close, as it was quite hefty, headlight, and noticeably bent back on impact.

Handles are sometimes customized too, accommodating the pro's hand. Leather grips are still popular. Some pros then add the overgrip in unique fashion - Richard Gasquet for example only wraps it halfway up the handle. The overgrip that seems most noticeably on tour is still the original, light blue Tourna Grip.

Pros also tend to opt for tighter string beds to better control the ball at high speed. The most popular string jobs are hybrids of natural gut and a poly (often a Babolat VS in the mains, and some Luxilon string in the crosses), or a full bed of a firm poly such as the Luxilon Alu Power or the brand's 4G. The Solinco Hyper G is worth a mention too, as Sam Querrey for example chooses to play with the string without getting paid for it.

The softer and heavier frames make these relatively stiff poly strings easier on the arm than a firm and light mainstream racquet would. Due to strings having become stiffer, I would triangulate that the average tension has probably dropped a couple of kg's from 25 to 23 kgs (roughly 51 lbs).

Finally, if you'd like to have a frame built to your preferred (pro's) specs, take a look at Head's and Vantage's offerings.

Quickly tweak weight, balance, swing weight

To put finishing touches on a racquet's playing characteristics, most folks apply lead tape. However, lead is not considered healthy to touch. In addition, if you need to reposition or trim the tape, the glue becomes an issue too - the tape can be tough to peel off, and then quickly loses its stickiness. You might also end up with residue / marks on the frame.

Tungsten tape is not supposed to come with those health concerns, but it's quite expensive, and you still have the glue problem. I found that if I'm lucky, I can reposition that tape once before it flies off with the next swing.

If you're 100% sure how much tape you'd like to apply and where, you're good. But if you want to experiment or finetune, why not use dampeners? They usually weigh 2-3 grams, and are easy to move around. Of course you can mix and match what you have, as long as you distribute the weight symmetrically.

I found that I liked the Tourna Pete Sampras dampeners for this purpose. They are small and soft enough to squeeze into tight spots.

If you want to tweak your racquet's playing *characteristics*, you want to experiment with weight around the 3 and 9 o'clock, 2 and 10 o'clock, and/or 12 o'clock positions:

Once you're dialed in, make sure to measure weight, balance, and swing weight for future reference. Maybe add a rating and notes too. Then you can cut and stick the tape of your choice to the frame. Voila!

Any of the above will obviously make the racquet more head-heavy / less head-light. A quick way to add more weight to the handle is to replace a synthetic grip with a leather grip, which can weigh up to 10 grams more. On the heavy RF 97 Autograph, that already changes the balance point by about 10 mm, which is huge!

Need more context or want more ideas? You can find related posts to racquets and customization here.

Why you might not have bought Roger's racquet

Alright, good news first. The Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph generally turned out to be an amazing racquet. Official weight and balance combo is spot on, head size seems right, spacing between the cross strings around the sweet spot is even (as opposed to many other PWS frames), it's got plenty of power but also provides good touch, and I like the graphic design too. And it's probably a collector's item.

Between different interviews, Roger has indicated that he has been playing his previous racquet, the Tour 90, close to stock spec. Maybe sometimes a slightly stiffer or softer frame, depending on playing conditions, but that was supposed to be it. After 127 prototypes and about a year of testing, Wilson and Roger came up with the RF97. He committed to the switch and has been playing great since. More power, better serving, less backhand framers - and maybe one can even give the racquet partial credit for the SABR :)

The RF97 was "meticulously play tested and developed by the greatest tennis player of all time", Wilson claims.  It gets better: according to the NY Times, both Wilson and Roger confirmed that the RF97 is what he's actually playing with. Amongst the top 100 players or so, who mostly use custom frames, that would be quite a rarity. And a treat for us consumers. Between the Tour 90 and RF97, weight, balance, and swing weight are actually pretty close - Roger probably wouldn't want to adjust his swings to a new racquet.

I first experienced the RF at the 2014 US Open. I didn't get a chance to hit with it, but holding and swinging it felt right. Very exciting! However, the racquet was almost impossible get a hold of after the official launch. Roger was playing well, and for the first few months it was *the* racquet on the market.

A few months later at a Wilson demo event at Stanford, I finally got a chance to hit with it. It felt rock solid, but I just couldn't get the racquet head around. Very disappointing! The racquet just seemed too heavy.

Most prominent resources found the same. Tennis.com for example tested a frame with 348 kg cm² swing weight. That's significantly higher than the ~330 I've seen resulting from the official specs (including string). Not surprisingly, the Tennis.com author wrote "Wow, it’s heavy.", "...the RF97 Autograph feels every bit it’s 12.5 oz measurement", and it was "a chore to swing". For comparison, Midwest lists 336 and Tennis Warehouse 335. This guy was lucky though and ended up with 331.

After that Stanford hit, I dismissed the racquet. Fast forward a year, I took part in a PBI Camp at Stanglwirt, Austria. That gave me a chance to give the frame another go. Between coaches and participants (but not provided by PBI sponsor Wilson!), there were 3 racquets to try. And they all seemed very different...

During the camp, I got about 30 hours of demo time in. I found that I really enjoyed the lighter swinging frames. So I made a trip to the closest Tennis-Point store in Munich and sacrificed a Champion's Choice string job to get the naked specs of the racquet I liked. Turned out that it was slightly below the official spec of 340 grams and 305 balance, which result in a 299 kg cm² swing weight.

In the case of the RF97 (and similar "player" racquets), a true to spec frame does feel substantial and heavy when held, but due to its headlight balance it's supposed to whip around quite easily. With a true to spec RF97, I even find myself making contact or abandoning a swing path too early. For example, I couldn't see players like DelPo or Ana enjoying this frame - the racquet head would probably come around too soon for their long-arm swings.

Based on what I've seen, it's quite likely that folks have been demoing heavy-feeling versions of the RF97. Between the 20 or so frames I measured, the weight range was 6 grams, and balance differed by up to 11 mm. Put those 2 together, and you end up with a swing weight spectrum of over 20 points (measured in kg cm²). That basically means you could get a racquet that swings as light as the non-Autograph Pro Staff 97 or the 95S, or almost as heavy as an old-school Dunlop 200G.

All in all the situation is a bit unfortunate:

• I probably spent more than 50 hours and more than a grand to figure all that out, just to end up with 3 racquets that match the specs that are printed on the frame.
• In the process, I also (kindly) tortured 2 local tennis stores and put the folks at Tennis-Point.de to work. That also puts retailers in a funny spot, as they have to balance sales, customer experience, and cost on their end.
• Many of us won't enjoy the fruits of the labor that Wilson and Roger put in to develop a spot-on racquet.
• Wilson, who has such a winner on their hands, could be selling many more racquets and gain more excited fans and brand ambassadors. 
• Roger, who has gone through the whole process and given his name and autograph for the racquet, probably wouldn't enjoy hitting with most of the racquets that end up on the shelves.

So what to do? Ideally the problem would be fixed at the source, by tightening up the manufacturing tolerances. If that's too costly and/or tricky for some brands, they could provide a spec range (as Technifibre does). And maybe print the actual specs on the frame, at least for higher-end models. Might also be worth thinking about charging more for more precision, and/or less for less precision. That way players who don't care can save some money, and players who do can spend a little more to save themselves a lot of hassle.

In the meantime, serious players should pay attention to the actual weight, balance, and swing weight of the racquets we're demoing, so that we make the right judgment and purchasing decision. I recommend asking for measures and/or measuring yourself. That'll educate you more about what you like, and create further demand in the marketplace for supplying racquets how they were meant to be. Your racquet should not be a blocker, but an enabler for your performance and development - right?

If you're ready to walk the walk, I have a few posts on measuring and getting matching racquets on this blog that may help you.

Keep enjoying game and gear, and try a true to spec RF97 sometime :)

Update: on a related note, here's my long-term review of the racquet.

Do I need the latest tennis racquet?

New tennis racquets are flooding the market each year. On the one hand that's quite exciting, but on the other their appearance triggers a cycle that reminds me a bit of Groundhog Day. The vast majority of racquets haven't shown to be breakthroughs over what's already been out there. So once the excitement wears off, we're mostly back to looking at the good old specs that we think best support our natural style and create effective strokes.

For example, the Wilson Pro Staff Classic's specs have lasted a quarter century, being reincarnated in the SixOne series along the way. A true-to-spec RF97 Autograph is not that different either. Material, grommets, grip dampening etc keep undergoing changes too - but they don't necessarily lead to better playing racquets, and most changes don't seem to stand the test of time. My favorite material for example still is Wilson's HyperCarbon, which came out around the turn of the millennium.

Tennis pros tend to stick to proven gear as well. Many pros play racquets based on a handful of stock frames, which are then tweaked to their liking. Ana for example confirmed that she hasn't changed her setup much over her career. At first sight, Roger's change from the Tour 90 to the RF97 seems quite drastic, however it's worth noting that both racquets are quite similar in terms of weight, balance, and swing weight. So often times, when a new racquet comes out, the pros stick to the old frame that gets a new paint job - unfortunately.

So what does that mean for us? Well, once we figure out what specs we like we can narrow down what's on the market from a few hundred to 20 or so frames. Or if you have an all-time favorite you go from there and demo similarly spec'ed frames, and maybe change 1 variable at a time. Either way, you don't necessarily need the latest and greatest.

From time to time though, I'd still try something different - maybe even extreme -  to question your assumptions, avoid missing out on the occasional step change, develop your game, or just get more excited about playing. For example, that crazy big, long, and swingweight-heavy Gamma Bubba found a surprising number of fans when it came out.

To help understand racquets are out there and what has and hasn't changed, I created a bit of an overview. And if you'd like to dig deeper, you can find plenty more about racquet specs here.

How to choose a tennis racquet

[BETA POST to get the content out there, will build out if there's interest]

1. Narrow down the options

Pick up as many racquets as you can (e.g. in a store), move them around, go through your swings, and then select a substet that appeal to you. And/or ask all your tennis friends who you can get a hold of if you may borrow one of their frames.

Pay attention to grip size too - they can feel different between manufacturers, models or even model years. In terms of size, factor in the overgrip if you use one.

If you're planning to identify a set of demos online, either start from the racquet of specs you know you like, or eliminate what you surely won't like - huge head size, super heavy, super light, dense string pattern etc. Tennis Warehouse for example offers a Racquet Finder (which I wish was a bit easier to use), and also shows similar racquets on each product page (RF97 example).

2. Try your favorites

Pick your favorite frames to demo, and maybe pick up 2 extremes that you think you won't like, just to get a sense for the spectrum and question your initial impression.

Any self-respecting tennis store will offer a demo program. You can also order demos online, e.g. at Tennis Warehouse, Tennis Express, or if you're in Germany for example, there's Tennis-Point.

3a. Found a clear winner?

Go for it. And enjoy it for the time being - if you discover that you don't like something, you can always adjust later. At least you got on court in the meantime :) If you just like to tweak your racquet a bit, you can find an idea here. If you're looking for a more drastic change down the line, select your future set of demos based on your current pick and adjust the spec(s) you're no longer fond of.

3b. Not in love yet?

Note weight, balance, swing weight, head size, string pattern, and any other spec that stood out to you. Even better, measure what you can. From there, figure out what you liked and what you didn't.
Then pick the next set of demos by keeping what you liked, and changing what you didn't. If you want to keep track and rate your demos, there's a template here's that you can adjust and use.

Hope this gives you some ideas so far. If you're an advanced player, here are some other things to pay attention to:

* When buying multiple racquets, get them matched to what you like and to each other. Over the years, I wrote a few posts about my matching woes - here's an example.

* If you're sensitive towards the grip, remember that there are different butt caps (somewhat easy to change) and grip shapes (not easy to change).

* If you know exactly what you want, you can order a custom racquet, e.g. at Head or Vantage. Fun playing around with this the Head customizer in any case :)

Triangulating weight, balance, and swing weight

Once I had decided to switch to the Wilson Pro Staff RF 97 Autograph, I ventured out to find 3 true to spec frames. As mentioned before, Wilson and some other brands' racquets come out of the factory quite differently. Technifibre for example recently increased their official tolerance from 5 to 7 (grams for weight and millimeters for balance), so basically a spread of 14 for each measure! At least they print that on their frames...

I had tested the RF 97 in different weight, balance, and swing weight combos for more than 30 hours, and found that even a slight increase in balance and swing weight over the official spec made the racquet feel as heavy as often reported. However, I loved the feel of a true to spec (or slightly below) frames. So I had no choice but to become a picky customer when it came to the measures.

Even if you only want 1 racquet, you may have found the weight, balance, and swing weight combo that works for you. There are a few situations in which you might have to triangulate a bit, for example:

• you want to pick the right racquet(s) off the shelf at your local tennis shop, but they're not very keen removing the plastic wrap around the handle, cutting out the card board, stringing the racquet up etc
• you fell in love with a demo or someone else's racquet, but they're not very keen on you cutting out their favorite string job, removing their grips etc.

Both of the above actually happened to me, so here's what I found as I was looking for a RF 97 with a true to spec 340 grams and 305 mm balance point in-store:

The cardboard in the racquet head...

• weighs ~14 grams
• moved balance up by ~8 mm (from 305 to 313)
• increased swing weight by ~41 kg cm² (higher than the string value below - maybe due to air resistance?)

A (Champion's Choice) string job...

• increased weight by 16 grams
• moved balance up by ~9 mm
• increased swing weight by ~31 kg cm²

The Wilson Pro Overgrip...

• weighs ~4 grams
• moved balance point by ~3 mm
• increased swing weight by 1 kg cm².

The plastic wrap around the handle weighs ~2 grams, so you'll have to subtract that from your measure. The effect on swing weight is negligible though.

A 5 gram dampener increased swing weight by 2 kg cm².

A fully loaded frame with string, overgrip, and dampener weighed 340 + 16 + 4 + 5 = 365 grams. All that moved the balance point up by ~8 mm, so a true to spec model with a naked 305 mm balance point would have a fully loaded balance of ~313 mm. I still have to measure swing weight on that one - should be in the mid 330s...

Note that with ~340 grams, the RF 97 is one of the heaviest frames out there. So on lighter frames, cardboard, string, grip etc should have a higher relative impact on balance and swing weight.

You can find some tips on measuring weight and balance in this post. For swing weight, you'll need something like the Alpha Accu Swing 2, the Babolat Racquet Diagnostic Center, the Gamma 3 in 1 Racquet Test Center, or the Prince Precision Tuning Center. Luckily some tennis shops are starting to recognize the importance (and business opportunity?), and are investing in these machines. As a workaround, you can check out Racquet Tune, which features a swing weight calculator.

For reference values, I recommend visiting Tennis-Warehouse.com, where the staff actually measures multiple frames and then posts the averages on the racquet description pages (RF 97 example). Note that not only weight, but also balance and swing weight are taken from strung racquets.

There are some more sophisticated tools and formulas out there to calculate all this, but hope this info and approach gets you thinking in the right direction. And most importantly, gets you 99% the racquet you want within 5 mins :)