Discussion Forum
Hopefully everything will work smoothly for you – however, if there is something wrong, please take a moment to email us (forum@badminton-coach.co.uk) so that we can put it right !
Please do not SPAM this forum – anyone found posting non-badminton related messages or ADVERTISING without permission will be removed without notice and may be banned from using the forum in the future.
Membership of this Badminton Discussion Forum is FREE
To join, just click the Register button just BELOW on the right. Please note however that any strange email addresses (lots of random letters etc) with an obscure user name will be deleted.
Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS 
5:51 pm
September 11, 2011
Offline
Hi,
I am new to this forum, just joined recently. My question pertains to one of the old rackets available even today:the Carbonex 21 special. How would this compare to the newer generation rackets available ie the Yonex Muscle power/Armortec/ Nanospeed series. Many consider the cab 21 sp to be one of the greatest rackets ever, thing is i dont know how much tension it can handle and as someone who generally strings at 24 lbs and up, i think i would be inviting disaster if i did that on this racket.
Right now i use a Armortec 250 and a Ashaway Ribtec 88, both strung at 24 lbs and 26 lbs respectively. I am mainly a power player who relies on the smash to finish off the rally. I mostly play doubles from the back of the court and rely more on power than finesse and speed to win the point.
Would you recommend going in for the carbonex 21 or should i stick to one of the newer rackets offered by Yonex. Please advise
Nausheer
10:54 pm
January 24, 2011
Offline Maximum recommended tension for CAB21 is 22 lbs for a 3U model – Although I'm sure it can take more but you'll lose your warranty.
If you're a power player, you might look for a more head heavy racket (CAB21 is slightly head heavy but not much). Yonex Voltric series are excellent rackets for power play, but the high-end ones are quite expensive. I'd recommend these if you have the budget.
The best thing is of course to try them out – even having a swing in the store might just tell you whether it's the racket for you or not. But I'd be really surprised if you'd be disappointed with a Voltric as a power player.
<3 Badminton!
11:59 am
February 15, 2011
Offline
I’m amazed that Yonex continues to manufacture Carbonex series when they have so many good racquets available. There must still be the demand somewhere for the oval shape over isometric shape otherwise there would be no business sense in continuing production.
As always racquet choice is a personal thing. I believe that the racquets I have tested over the years outperform the old oval shape racquets, but that’s only my opinion. The materials used in newer racquets tend to be lighter and stronger and therefore the racquets can be strung to higher tensions – if that matters to you.
At the end of the day you really have to test and decide for yourself whether you prefer to move with the times or stick with the racquets that served Yonex so well in the past and continue to sell today.
Paul
8:55 am
September 27, 2011
Offline I had my Carbonex 20 stolen from the gym, miss it so much – just got used to it over the years. I too am surprised to see Carbonex still in production, in the good old days there were a few series but now there are too many for a new player to choose from all too confusing.
I just bought the AT 70 mega at 24lb, its head heavy. Also looking to but the VT5 after reading your review. Would like to put another one in the bag but having hit a few shots with the VT80 I am not sure if that's for me.
Most Users Ever Online: 676
Currently Online:
75 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
Matthew Seeley: 391
Peter Warman: 239
Ed: 186
Dobbie98: 165
gingerphil79: 158
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 10
Members: 1529
Moderators: 1
Admins: 2
Forum Stats:
Groups: 2
Forums: 8
Topics: 581
Posts: 4716
Newest Members:
ehsianturi, wkt_1, merlyn, Suzena, ManojModerators: Design: 0
Administrators: AngieS: 0, Paul Stewart: 1283
