Readers of my reviews know that I rarely comment on the technology behind a frame. Who cares what it really is, what it’s named and why it’s supposed to make the racket better. What is important is how a racket feels and plays.
Nanoflare 1000Z is a breakthrough from Yonex. I expected Yonex to replace the Nanoflare range with a new name, new “technology.” Instead, they have cleverly kept the name but I suspect, we will see new rackets emerging to replace the existing line. Yonex, created the technology to make a fast frame even better.
Top-of-the-range rackets tend to be very stiff and this may not suit the majority of players, who require more flex. Nanoflare 1000 has been released with four versions, Z, Tour, Game and Play, virtually identical in looks. Having tested Game version alongside Z, I suspect this racket will be very popular. It looks identical to the Z but is not made in Japan, does not have the same technology and materials, but has the benefit of medium flex shaft. If I was Yonex, I’d also release the Game version with the same medium flex, upgraded technology and materials and possibly call it the new Nanoflare 700 pro (assuming Yonex will now upgrade the entire Nanoflare range in line with Astrox and Arcsaber.)
For me, Nanoflare 1000Z is a triumph.
I’m not just saying it, I absolutely love it and decided to make the switch away from Astrox 100ZZ, shock, horror.
I still retain one 100ZZ in my bag and every now and again use it just to check I am feeling the new Nanoflare the same way. Each time, Nanoflare 1000Z wins the day. It’s become more of an extension of my hand than I thought possible.
RRP on this racket is a hefty £230 but is already available with discount for around £207. Initial stocks are limited and as a write this, many of the Online retailers have sold out. I suspect pricing may reduce further when stock levels ease in 2024.
I’m not keen on such a high price for a racket, especially for doubles players who are worried about clashing with their partner. Badminton rackets are also becoming as expensive as tennis rackets. Surely that shouldn’t be right.