I have played with Head racquets exclusively over the last few years and would offer the following observations:

• There is quite a wide variance in the balance point of the current set of Head frames. For example, if you go on the Head website you can see that if you sample a few of the racquets, the balance point goes something like this:
  • Xenon 135 CT - 380 mm
  • 130 CT - 375 mm
  • 115 CT - 370 mm
  • Microgel Extreme - 370 mm
  • Microgel 145 - 335 mm
• The advertised weight of the racquet seems to be much less important compared to other factors like frame stiffness (the Xenon 135 CT is much stiffer than my previous racquet the Microgel Extreme) and balance point (I prefer head heavy, so the 380 mm balance point seems to work for me) and head size (as an example, the 130 CT is 500 sq cm and the Xenon 135 CT is 460 sq cm).
• You need to try a demo racquet before you buy it. Head seems to change their racquet technology every year and it certainly has affected my purchasing decisions.

Back to top

I am in agreement with Ray: the balance is far more important than the actual mass of the racquet.

The reason I mention weight is only because people will say things like "look for a racquet in the 140-145g range" or "I think 155g is far too heavy," while in reality the racquet is heavier than they realize anyway. Rather, it depends on how the weight is distributed once the grip, strings, etc. are added (i.e. the balance).

I don't know that the entire line of current Head racquets are head-heavy, but they certainly have some of the widest distribitions of advertised-versus-actual weight (at the very least, avoid any racquets listed at 150g or above as they will likely feel too heavy for you). I would suggest starting at the "lighter" end of the range and demo as many racquets as possible.

Back to top

hi feyerb

as previous posters identified, the advertised weight is the frame weight and then it is only a target or average weight. eg a racket grip is probably going to add an extra 15 grams.

there is also inconsistencies in manufacture where frame thickness may vary from one racket to another.

absolute weight also does not mean all that much and i think it is more of a marketing tool than anything else. the racket balance is probably more important.

if bosartek is correct and the newer head racket are head heavy then your answer is simple.

older model head rackets used to be head light so if you are used to an older model which is head light, then switched to a newer model which is head heavy, then the feel of the rackets (weight wise) may well be similar.

it is very difficult to "feel" 20 grams of absolute weight, but you can certainly feel it when the weight distribution is different from one racket to another.

in the good old days when rackets were 230 grams we used to think that 220gms was light! i use a racket with 4 grips on it but this weight on the handle does not change the feel of the head all that much even though there is probably an extra 50 grams in grips

don't get too caught up in weight - try to judge the feel (as bosartek suggested) and decide from there.

Back to top

feyerb,

Your racquet is not defective. The problem is that advertised specs are seldom accurate, and some brands are worse than others in terms of consistency. Usually, the numbers represent the bare frame; add the grip, bumper/grommet, and strings and the weight may increase by as much as 20g. For example, the Dunlop Pro models are typically listed as 140g and even balanced, but in reality they are closer to 155g and head heavy.

As for Head, the new Xenon 135 CT is supposed to be 135g. After weighing and balancing a demo racquet, I can tell you that the 135 CT is actually 162g and very head-heavy (even the reps from Head were suprised by this!). This may be an unusually large discrepency, but it is precisely why you must always demo a racquet before purchasing it.

Back to top

I'd say that would be the unstrung weight would it not?

Back to top