Tecnifibre - 225 or 305? is 18 gauge that much better?

Published: 15 Mar 2007 - 13:47 by titleist731

Updated: 10 Aug 2007 - 21:55

Subscribers: Log in to subscribe to this post.

technifibre 225 or 305? how much additional benefit from the 18 gauge? the durability is pretty poor on 18 but i have access to a stringing machine...so...and i do my own

what do you guys think? is the 18 gauge worth it? i haven't tried the 225 yet but i like the 305 a lot.

i heard most of the pros opt for the 225 but they get it for free and probably dont have to string their own sticks...

the powernick 18 is ok...but just doesnt quite feel as good as the technifibre to me.

How to add images to Members' Forum posts and replies here...

Replies...

Please Note: The most recent replies are now at the top!

From paul01323 - 10 Aug 2007 - 21:55

http://www.squashgear.com/luacesqst.html

From ferris69 - 10 Aug 2007 - 18:03

What make is the new 19 gauge string?

I don't think the 18 (225) gauge is too thin peronally and feels much nicer than the 305 tecnifibre.

From rskting - 10 Aug 2007 - 05:05

There is a 19 gauge string now. personally i think it is too thin. 18 gauge was also too thin. There is not enough contact area between ball and string. think of a solid board hitting a ball versus two strings (a cross) hitting a ball.

From hamburglar - 05 May 2007 - 01:36 - Updated: 05 May 2007 - 01:41

I tend to assimilate power with control. If I can generate more power with the same stroke, then I can slow the stroke down a little and gain more control. I think the 225 string is win/win. The power is there when you need it, and so is the control. The only drawback to the 225 is the lifetime, and sometimes the ball hitting the string near the frame can break the string, but you'll have to be hitting all out. I know other people who can play with 225 for years without it breaking because they don't generate string movement that frays the string.

From missing_poster38 - 04 May 2007 - 11:22 - Updated: 04 May 2007 - 11:26

Thin strings will give you more power but definitely less control, as the strings are more flexible and increase the so called trampoline effect. You could use higher tension, to get more control but this defeats the object of the thin string, that is to give you more power. Another downside of higher tension is that the cross strings bite harder and the mains usually break sooner.

If you want control definitely go for the 305 and as a bonus it lasts longer.

If you want control and more durability try RAB - Sensor Fibre 1.27mm of comparable standard to Tecnifibre and it’s also cheaper.

From hamburglar - 24 Mar 2007 - 03:48

it really depends on your stringer. The type of stringer can really affect the end stringbed tension. I string at 21 lbs to get the same result as 26 lbs. on another stringer.

If you like the red powernick at 23 lbs, try the 225 at the same tension.

From ferris69 - 24 Mar 2007 - 03:03

I'd go for tighter rather than looser. i do mine at 27.5 lbs.

From paul01323 - 23 Mar 2007 - 22:13

After reading all the positive comments about 225 I've decided to try it next time I have my racket restrung, should the tension be the same as when I use 305 (27/25lbs)? or the same as when I use powernick 18 (24/22lbs)? or something inbetween?

From hamburglar - 20 Mar 2007 - 02:35

ADZ,
i reread your question and maybe i misunderstood. I think with power shots, the ball compresses so much that both thin and thick strings would dig into the ball surface and the exact amount of friction would not matter.
Also what would you consider a 'rougher' string, 305 or 225? I think the surface texture is the same on both, but the thinner string is equivalent to a 'rougher' surface. On the other hand, some might say the weave of the thicker string causes the string to bump up and down more, thereby creating a rougher surface. But for light shots, I would guess the contact area only covers 3 or 4 string intersections and this 'roughness' is pretty negligible.

If you have your own stringer, i'd say go for the 225. You'll pay off the stringer within a year, not to mention the convenience.

From hamburglar - 20 Mar 2007 - 00:52

imagine a light touch shot. Say the ball pushes on the strings with about 4 ounces of force. On thinner strings, the strings will push into the rubber slightly more than the thicker strings because the contact area is just slightly smaller, therefore higher pressure, but still the same 4 ounce force. This results in greater friction for the same 4 ounce force and more spin or more control, however you want to think about it.
I think this helps with cut shots (backspin drops) since more backspin makes the ball drop sooner and doesn't let it come out as much.

From Adz - 19 Mar 2007 - 22:42

JBS,

Not sure I follow your logic on that last post.

At a lighter contact, a rougher surface string will provide the best friction, but during a heavier impact a thinner string cuts into the ball better to give better grip. I completely agree about the lighter string having more "spring" due to better stretching.

I'm contemplating buying a set of 225 to try, but there are so many cheaper alternatives out there that I'm taking my time on the decision!

Adz

From hamburglar - 18 Mar 2007 - 14:34

I don't agree that thinner strings will have less control or less surface area. The change in contact area is minimal, however I think the thinner string might provide slightly more friction when lightly contacting the ball. For forceful hits that compact the ball on the strings, friction is negligible, and the thinner strings will definitely stretch more and provide more power.
Did you string the thinner strings at a lower tension? typically 10-20% lower tension is necessary because the same weight put on different-gauge strings will result in higher tension on the thinner string.
As for stringers, a simple drop-weight system is good, but you have to realize drop-weights and electonic machines are constant pull and keep a constant tension until the string is clamped, whereas a crank (lockout) machine does not and will result in a lower stringbed tension. I have a mutual power dropweight with 6-point mounting which is decent for about $350. Gamma and Stringway offer better versions of the same thing but for more $.

From rskting - 18 Mar 2007 - 09:33

treid x one biophase. string is too stiff and not enough bounce. feels heavy too. kinda like an inbetween syngut (lots of pop) and 225 or 305 (soft and bouncy). So i dont like it because it is neither and just kinda inbetween. might be good for tennis, not squash imho.

From Adz - 16 Mar 2007 - 20:05

I think the you meant "powernick" 18 which is actually 1.15mm. And the "Supernick" strings are 1.25mm and are a 17 gauge.

String gauging is approximately:

18 = 1.06mm to 1.16mm

17 = 1.16mm to 1.26mm

16 = 1.26mm to 1.34mm

You can also get an "L" gauge (e.g. 16L) which is usually the thinner end of the gauge range (16L is 1.28 or 1.29mm and 16 is usually 1.30mm in squash strings).

I've never heard of thinner strings losing touch before, but then I've never used a racquet with a fanned string pattern and thin strings.

I haven't tried the X-One Biphase stringing yet, but Toalson have a similar string called Bio-Logic which I have tried (but at too high a tension so I didn't get the best out of it!).

As for stringing machines, you can pick up so very good priced ones on eBay. Always worth hunting around and seeing what you can get for your money.

Adz

From rskting - 16 Mar 2007 - 15:44

i used to play with 225 which is 1.1 thick. I think that is thinner than most 18 gauge (1.25 is supernick 18 gauge). 305 is 17 gauge.

I had the 225 on a head i110 which has a very open string pattern. Actually lost some control because strings were too thin. Imagine at the moment of contact with the ball, not enough string touches the ball. So now went back to thicker string. Same thing with ashaway 18 gauge white string, it is so thin i lose control. So i think there is a thing such as too thing and loses control. but fun experimenting anyways. For myself, mostly 305 now.

I do want to ask those with stringing machine for suggestions on what models to buy. $400 is budget- weight or the manual pull is better? (no electric, i dont want electrical problems later on). Your comments appreciated.

From paul01323 - 16 Mar 2007 - 09:26

Has anyone tried Technifibre x-one biphase? It's listed on the Technifibre web site and is available from pwp.co.uk

From SquashNorthof60 - 16 Mar 2007 - 07:56

I am curious about the various racket stringing machines out there. How expensive are they, can you pick up a good used one at a fair price? What would be a good machine for home use that is also perhaps portable.

How long does it take to get proficient at stringing?

Thanks

From ferris69 - 16 Mar 2007 - 03:29

I too string my own rackets and have tried many different strings. Recently have tried 305 tecnifibre and powernick 18, but nothing compares to 225 tecnifibre. Simply the best. OK, so it doesn't last quite as long as the others, but who cares??!! You might as well have the best you can get, and you can never blame the strings any more. They take a couple of mathces to break in nicely, but after that they're great.

The best thing about stringing yourself is as soon as they break , you can redo it that night and off you go.

From hamburglar - 15 Mar 2007 - 20:41

I have a stringing machine as well, and used 305 for a couple years. I recently tried the 225, and yes it is that much better.

You can generate power much easier with the 225 and i think i can feel the ball better. Maybe it's because the thinner string can grip the ball more easily with less pressure or the string is slightly lighter, but i have a wicked backspin dropshot now.

get it in the reels (130m) for about $120 and it's about $8/racquet to string. lasts maybe half as long or less than the 305 will, but worth it. i've also tried the powernick18, the 225 is better.

From hamburglar - 15 Mar 2007 - 20:41

I have a stringing machine as well, and used 305 for a couple years. I recently tried the 225, and yes it is that much better.

get it in the reels (130m) for about $120 and it's about $8/racquet to string. lasts maybe half as long or less than the 305 will, but worth it.

From Adz - 15 Mar 2007 - 20:38

The thinner the string the more it "bites" into the ball allowing for better control. Also the thinner the string the more is can stretch under tension (think about thick and thin rubber bands). The downside is that a thinner string is more prone to breakage through "notching" as there is less of the string to be worn through e.g. if a string wears through at a rate of 0.05mm per hour, and a string snaps when it gets to 0.1mm left, then an 18 guage string (1.10mm) will snap in 20 hours versus a 16 guage string (1.30mm) snapping in around 24hours.

OK these are just example figures, but the principle is correct. In fact the thinner string will wear through quick due to the smaller string surface area causing a greater pressure (and thus wear) at the string crossing points and so the thin strings will wear even quicker.

All you have to do is decide on whether the improvment in "springiness" and "bite" is worth the lowered durability. I'd buy a set to try and time how many hours it takes you to break them!

ADZ

Sorry, only members can post replies on this and all other Members` Forum items.

Join Here - It`s fast and it`s free!

Check other member benefits here...

Testimonials

"It's a great tip Rita!"

Sorry, logins temporarily disabled

We hope to see you back soon when we launch our updated site.

225 or 305? is 18 gauge that much better?

Tecnifibre - 225 or 305? is 18 gauge that much better?

Replies...

Support Squashgame

Products Now Available

US Squash Shop

Testimonials