Summaries:
=========================PART 1=======================
=========================PART 1=======================
I/ My profile
II/ Rackets
II.1/ Technical & Technological Features
1.1/ Technical feature
1.2/ Technologies
2.a) Built-in
2.b) Design & Aerodynamic
2.c) Shock resistance
II.1/ Technical & Technological Features
1.1/ Technical feature
1.2/ Technologies
2.a) Built-in
2.b) Design & Aerodynamic
2.c) Shock resistance
II.2/ First impression
II.3/ String and Grip
II.4/ Look, Quality and Price
II.3/ String and Grip
II.4/ Look, Quality and Price
=========================PART 2=======================
III/ Tests & Comparison in double
III.1/ Period of adaptation
III.2/ Service and Return
2.1/ Service
2.2/ Returning serve
III.1/ Period of adaptation
III.2/ Service and Return
2.1/ Service
2.2/ Returning serve
III.3/ Net play
3.1/ Net shot and Net lift
3.2/ Push and Rush
3.1/ Net shot and Net lift
3.2/ Push and Rush
III.4/ Mid-court
4.1/ Drive and Interception
4.2/ Defence
=========================PART 3=======================
4.1/ Drive and Interception
4.2/ Defence
=========================PART 3=======================
III.5/ Back court
5.1/ Drop
5.2/ Smash
5.3/ Offensive and Defensive Clear
5.1/ Drop
5.2/ Smash
5.3/ Offensive and Defensive Clear
III.6/ Feelings
IV/ Overall Observations
V/ Conclusion
VI/ Acknowledgment
VII/ Images Gallery
I/ My profile:
I am a French Badminton Player for 4 years
now, I am over 30 years old for 72kg (158.7pounds) and 1m82 (6foot) tall. I had
the opportunity to play in the UK/France/Réunion and now Japan.
I am playing around 14 hours per week in men
and mix double. I am not a single player because I probably don’t have the
stamina for 3 sets and found it less fun^^.
Regarding my level, I judge myself as
Intermediate/Good player. In Japan for the Chiba Prefecture, my club is ranked
on the sixth position and I am at the twelfth place in men double for Chiba.
This is a list of my qualities and flaws in
game:
+ Service (short, lift or drive, for the 4 corners)
+ Return of Serve (close to the net, high guard)
+ Drop shot (front court or rear court)
+ Drive and Interception
+ Offensive and Defensive Clear
+ Service (short, lift or drive, for the 4 corners)
+ Return of Serve (close to the net, high guard)
+ Drop shot (front court or rear court)
+ Drive and Interception
+ Offensive and Defensive Clear
-
Hairpin drop shot (counter drop shot??)
- Smash (power and vertical accuracy are uneven but correct horizontal accuracy)
- Backhand Cross-Court Clear
- Backhand Straight Smash
- Overall defence (average)
- Smash (power and vertical accuracy are uneven but correct horizontal accuracy)
- Backhand Cross-Court Clear
- Backhand Straight Smash
- Overall defence (average)
To finish, I position myself as an accurate
player for service, aggressive on net play, average in defence/smash, versatile
in the back of the court.
II/ Rackets:
I started with a Yonex Muscle Power 22 (3U)
classed as an All-Around racket by Yonex for 8 months. Then I changed for the
excellent Yonex NanoSpeed 8000 (3U), a head light racket but also very stiff
for a beginner.
I used it over 2 years and a half before my
first experience with the Victor BRS-12 (1er generation) in 4U, it
gave me so much speed in double that I bought it right away.
At the same time, I have decided to replace
my NS8000 by the new model from Yonex: the NanoRay 800. Another stiff racket
but with good overall qualities (on the paper). But this time I wanted to try
the Yonex one in 4U.
Unfortunately, 5 months ago, after a clash
with my partner, I broke my BRS-12. Been satisfied by this racket, I obviously
went for the new model: the BRS-12N (4U again). The transition was quick and
simple despite the new head aerodynamic design.
Recently, I also bought the Victor BRS-LHI
still in 4U to add more power in my mixt double game without losing the swing
speed of the BraveSword.
II.1/ Technical
& Technological Features:
1.1/
Technical feature
The Three rackets tested are all 4U/G5 and
consider as balanced (B.P. Balance Point <300mm).
Data and Measurements of the rackets
Model
(Code) |
Balance Point*
|
Weight*
|
Shaft length
|
Total Length
|
Stiffness**
|
String Pattern
|
Response
Indicator***
|
BRS-12N (HK)
|
287mm
|
94g
|
217mm
|
674mm
|
2/5
|
72 holes
|
S◌●◌◌◌F
|
BRS-LHI (HK)
|
298mm
|
98g
|
223mm
|
675mm
|
3.5/5
|
72 holes
|
S◌◌◌●◌F
|
NR800 (SP)
|
287mm
|
94g
|
207mm
|
670mm
|
3.5/5
|
80 holes
|
S◌●◌◌◌F
|
*Measure took form a string racket and equipped with
an over Grip AC104
** Guesswork stiffness, 5 = very Stiff, 0 = very Flexible.
*** The R.I. shows the overall behaviour of the racket in game. S= Stiff, F = Flexible.
** Guesswork stiffness, 5 = very Stiff, 0 = very Flexible.
*** The R.I. shows the overall behaviour of the racket in game. S= Stiff, F = Flexible.
We notice the similarities of the three
rackets from this table. However, the BRS LHI data let us show a more flexibility
during the swing. At same speed and power, NR800 will probably deliver less
power to the shuttle due to a shorter length of the shaft, a lower B.P. and a
slightly lighter weight. The BRS-12N’s data look very close from the NR800 in
other words a semi stiff racket with a light and balanced weight.
The string pattern is interesting but
questionable. Both Victor racket used a 72 holes pattern for a more powerful
hit (trampoline effect) compare to the Yonex one at equal string tension. On
the contrary, the NR800 should be more repulsive and precise with a larger
sweet spot.
For a 72 holes pattern string, it is
advised to add 2 more pounds for the horizontal. I want also to remind you,
this pattern can save you some string length if you do it yourself (for one
more restring racket for 200m of string).
1.2/ Technologies
The BRS-12N and BRS-LHI shared the same
technologies, so I will if necessary separate each section of this chapter by
model: Victor BraveSword and Yonex NanoRay
2.a) Built-In
BraveSword
& NanoRay: These two models are using Ultra
High Modulus Graphite as main component for the frame. It is essentially carbon
fibre shaped like honeycomb at a molecular level, also called nanotube. These
fibres are themselves woven then compacted and glue to each other with resin.
The resin used for this process is a polyepoxide
called NanoTec for Victor and X-Fullerene for Yonex. The result give a dense,
uniform and resistant structure.
NanoRay: One difference for the head shaft of the Yonex racket, they have
used a titanium alloy called sonic Metal and should give an extra repulsion to
the shuttle as well as a clear sound during the hit.
About the handle, I have unfortunately no
information about it, but should be mainly built from wood like most of the
racket.
2.b) Design & Aerodynamic
● The
handle:
Data and Measurements of the handle
Model
|
Grip*
|
length**
|
Circumference***
|
|
BRS-12N
|
G5 (81mm)
|
206mm
|
89mm
|
|
BRS-LHI
|
G5 (81mm)
|
201mm
|
89mm
|
|
NR800
|
G4 (89mm)
|
211mm
|
90mm
|
* The grip indicator (G1, G2, …) system is independent
of each constructor.
** The shorter length of the handle (cap included) is taken for all BraveSword‘s racket.
*** Measurement took from the middle of the handle with its original grip + the Yonex AC104 over grip.
** The shorter length of the handle (cap included) is taken for all BraveSword‘s racket.
*** Measurement took from the middle of the handle with its original grip + the Yonex AC104 over grip.
BraveSword
& NanoRay: Yonex use is own size indicator,
a Yonex G4 is equivalent to a G3/S3 for the other constructors. Surprisingly,
the final result on my racket is (almost) identical for the circumference of
the three rackets. One thing to note, the gap between the NR800 and BRS-LHI
shaft length. This should affect the stability at the cost of the power for the
NR800.
● The
cap:
NanoRay: New design for the NanoRay range, with a wider size for the thumb. Useful for the players with a high grip on the handle. Nevertheless, the difference between the two models is insignificant.
NanoRay: New design for the NanoRay range, with a wider size for the thumb. Useful for the players with a high grip on the handle. Nevertheless, the difference between the two models is insignificant.
● The
shaft:
BraveSword: Not much information from Victor about the shaft, we only know its diameter (70mm) for a longer length than the NanoRay.
BraveSword: Not much information from Victor about the shaft, we only know its diameter (70mm) for a longer length than the NanoRay.
NanoRay: Yonex made an 80mm diameter shaft called Super Slim Long Shaft. We
can already notice from the measurement a stiffer and shorter shaft for the
NanoRay in comparison with the BraveSword. This will probably affect the
gameplay and give a different feeling especially between her and the BS-12N.
● The
throat:
BraveSword & NanoRay : Like most of the new racket, both of them are using a T joint technology. Which is a very resistant piece shaped like a T and built-in the frame at the intersection of the shaft and the head. The result allows to decrease the lateral torsion of the racket.
BraveSword & NanoRay : Like most of the new racket, both of them are using a T joint technology. Which is a very resistant piece shaped like a T and built-in the frame at the intersection of the shaft and the head. The result allows to decrease the lateral torsion of the racket.
● The
head:
Again, the two brands shared se same head shape by using the Isometric (an “old” Yonex Technology) with maybe a shape more curved for the NanoRay. The result might allow the NanoRay range to use a 80 holes stringing pattern. This give an advantage in terms of repulsion, shock abortion but also the sweet spot area.
Again, the two brands shared se same head shape by using the Isometric (an “old” Yonex Technology) with maybe a shape more curved for the NanoRay. The result might allow the NanoRay range to use a 80 holes stringing pattern. This give an advantage in terms of repulsion, shock abortion but also the sweet spot area.
Measurement and Observation of the head
Model
|
Exterior
frame
|
String
area
|
Thickness
|
Cross-section Shape
|
|||
length
|
Width
|
length
|
Width
|
4 & 8 o’clock
|
12 o’clock
|
||
BraveSword
|
249mm
|
200mm
|
235mm
|
190mm
|
70mm
|
70mm
|
hexagonal Prism
|
NanoRay
|
252mm
|
204mm
|
236mm
|
190mm
|
70mm
|
60mm
|
Elliptic*
|
* The length of the small radius depend from the
thickness of the head
BraveSword: Victor named their shaft Sword for this range of racket because of
its sharp shape (like a diamond) and of the sound produce during the swing.
This choice produce a drag coefficient relatively high (>0.8) but with a
shorter surface, reducing the air friction, in comparison with an elliptic
shape. A questionable choice but clearly offset by a lighter weight and smaller
size for the head.
NanoRay: Yonex especially created for the NanoRay range racket a head with
two distinguish parts. Sharpe and smaller for the top head in order to improve
the air penetration while the base of the head, thicker, allow the racket to be
more resistant and stable. This elliptic shape form the cross-section, called
Aero Frame by Yonex have a very low drag coefficient (>0.6) and therefore
very aerodynamic.
2.c) Shock resistance
NanoRay: Surprisingly, Yonex decided to have a solid core for the head
(Solid Feel Core) to manage a best propagation of the choc wave and this
without any significant increase of the head’s weight. The NanoRay use a simple
but impressive combination to spread the shock weave between the head and the
shaft.
BraveSword: Failing to have a solid head frame like the NanoRay, the
BraveSword range will handle the shock absorption directly from at the base of
the grommets with its Inner Waves Technology. The explanation of it is still
vague for me but should increase by 5% the sweet spot said Victor. Moreover,
Victor included the Sockless technology à 3 and 9 o’clock on the head. But one
more time no more information has been detailed and we can only assume its
further development in the new Zxion technology used in the new JetSpeed range rackets.
II.2/ First impression (blank shot):
From the first time I have touch the
BRS-12N and the NR800, I immediately felt the light and balance weight of these
rackets. It was less obvious with the BRS-LHI with a B.P. higher but with the
same sensation of lightness.
However, after few swings, I clearly saw
the great aerodynamics from the head of the two BraveSwords at the cost of the
NR800.
Regarding the flexibility, I really felt a
difference between the BRS-12N and the two others. She is very flexible in
comparison with the NR800 and the BRS-LHi. These last two racket share the same
feeling regarding its stiffness.
II.3/ String and Grip :
● At the beginning
of my experience in badminton, I have mainly used the Ashaway PowerGut 66 and
Yonex BG80 strings. But since my first BRS-12, I changed my string with the
Yonex NBG99 at 10.5Kg (23lbs) of tension.
Less than a year ago, I have entirely
changed my style and went with a full repulsive string. This modification on
the BRS-12 and NR800 was possible with the Yonex BG66 Ultimax. In consequence,
I had to learn again how to control my rackets with in the end a mixt feeling:
_ Convincing for the BRS-12 and so for the new generation (BRS-12N) in order to improve the lack of repulsivity for the rushs/drives and counterbalance the primary “control” aspect of the racket.
_ Disappointing for the NR800 with a total loose of feeling and so control. I switched back to the NBG99 after few tries.
_ Convincing for the BRS-12 and so for the new generation (BRS-12N) in order to improve the lack of repulsivity for the rushs/drives and counterbalance the primary “control” aspect of the racket.
_ Disappointing for the NR800 with a total loose of feeling and so control. I switched back to the NBG99 after few tries.
For the new one (BRS-LHI), I tried in the
first time a “control” string from Victor, the VS-850 with 10.8Kg (24lbs) of
tension in order to get a large sweet spot and get used to the new style of the
racket. I quickly switched to my “favourite” repulsive string (BG66 UM) because
once again I wasn’t satisfy by the power of my drives. Towards the tension, I
started with 11.8Kg (26lbs), which was too unstable during the hits but then
changed for 25lbs (11.3Kg) on the horizontal and 23lbs (10.4Kg) for the
vertical. These last settings is the best configuration I have ever tested for
my BraveSwords.
For your informations, the test of the
NR800 in this review will be based on a racket stringed with the NB99.
String information per rackets
Racket Model
|
String Name
|
Tension
|
Propriety
|
Gauge
|
|
Horizontal
|
Vertical
|
||||
BRS-12N
|
Yonex BG66 Ultimax
|
26lbs (11.8Kg)
|
26lbs (11.8Kg)
|
Very Repulsive
|
0.65mm
|
BRS-LHI
|
Yonex BG66 Ultimax
|
25lbs (11.3Kg)
|
23lbs (10.4Kg)
|
Very Repulsive
|
0.65mm
|
NR800
|
Yonex NBG99
|
24lbs (10.9Kg)
|
24lbs (10.9Kg)
|
Control
|
0.69mm
|
One downside since the winter arrived, some
indoor court are not heated (5-10°c), in these conditions, the strings are
getting very tight.
● For the grip,
all my rackets are now using the Yonex AC104 Wave Grap over the original grip.
I am more than satisfied by it, which give me a great hold of the racket but
also good feeling on the hits. The only small issue is the shock absorption,
relatively too substantial and give me as a result a loss of power to transfer
to the shuttle. Since I found this grip for less than 2€ (300yens), I change
them regularly.
II.4/ Look, Quality & Price:
I won’t talk much about the look of the
racket. This criteria being totally subjective. As far as the racket is not
paint in pink with green dots (but why not :P ), I am good with it.
Miscellaneous Informations about the rackets
Model
|
Date & Place of
purchase
|
Price*
|
Colours
|
Look**
|
Quality**
|
BRS-12N
|
09/2013 (HK)
|
80€
|
Black/Grey/White/Red
|
★★★☆☆
|
★★★☆☆
|
BRS-LHI
|
01/2014 (HK)
|
85€
|
Black/Navy
blue/Turquoise/White/Gold
|
★★★★☆
|
★★★★☆
|
NR800
|
10/2012 (HK)
|
120€
|
Flash blue/Black/
Yellow/White/Red |
★★☆☆☆
|
★★★★★
|
* Price without taxes and shipping cost. Exchange rate
for 1€ to $10.5HK.
** Subjective observation of the look and finish.
*** Quality of the paint job, not its wear.
** Subjective observation of the look and finish.
*** Quality of the paint job, not its wear.
No comments:
Post a Comment