[Update on 13th October 2023] The values of Nittaku ‘Violin’, ‘Acoustic’ and ‘Tenor’ have been adjusted a bit.
1. Introduction
In table tennis, the power of ball has been reduced by continuous change of regulation such as the increase of the diameter of ball from 38mm to 40mm, the ban of speed glue, and finally the change of the material of ball from celluloid to plastic. Many table tennis players have tried to compensate the loss of speed by replacing their blades by faster ones. This situation hasn’t been friendly to 5-ply wood blades because 5-ply wood blades are slower than 7-ply wood blades or fiber blades in general. At present, fiber blades are very popular not only among amateur players but also among top professional players.
However, there is wide variation of strategies and playing styles in table tennis. Speed isn’t always the most important factor in table tennis. Spin is more important than speed in table tennis, because of the existence of the net. Precise placement is also an important factor for better table tennis. Therefore, for the players who don’t especially pursuits speed, 5-ply wood blades are still worthy. Also, in case the level of the skill of a player is low, faster blades may give much worse result than slower blades in table tennis matches, because speed without control causes many mistakes.
Although 5-ply wood blades are not the mainstream of these days, probably there will be many table tennis players who ‘love’ 5-ply wood blades. And, there are some ‘classic’ 5-ply wood blades those have been famous and popular among table tennis players for long time. It will be interesting to examine the mechanical characteristics of those blades by Performance Indices.
2. Blades to be compared
Eleven 5-ply wood blades are selected for comparison.
- Stiga Allround Classic (avg.weight = 84.3g) – Reference for Performance Indices
- Stiga Offensive Classic (avg.weight = 79.9g)
- Stiga Rosewood NCT V (avg.weight = 90.8g)
- Butterfly Primorac (avg.weight = 88.1g)
- Butterfly Korbel (avg.weight = 88.7g)
- Butterfly Mazunov (discontinued) (avg.weight = 94.1g)
- Nittaku Violin (avg.weight = 83.9g)
- Nittaku Acoustic (avg.weight = 90.6g)
- Nittaku Tenor (avg.weight = 91.4g)
- Tibhar Chila OFF (avg.weight = 74.6g)
- Tibhar IV-S (avg.weight = 89.3g)
‘Allround Classic’ is the representative of traditional all-round blades. And, it is the reference blade of Performance Indices in TTGear Lab.
‘Offensive Classic’ and ‘Rosewood NCT V’ are popular in China. ‘Offensive Classic’ is a traditional offensive 5-ply wood blade for close-to-table topspin. And, it had been used by many Chinese top players such as Wang Liqin. ‘Rosewood NCT V’ is a recent blade, and it is much faster than ‘Offensive Classic’. Maybe it can be considered as the modern version of ‘Offensive Classic’. It has been used or is being used by Chinese top players.
Three Butterfly blades are popular in Europe. ‘Primorac’ is similar to ‘Allround Classic’ but it is thicker and faster than ‘Allround Classic’. ‘Korbel’ is the most popular 5-ply blade from Butterfly, and has been used by or is still being used by some top players. It is faster than ‘Primorac’. Currently discontinued ‘Mazunov’ is an extremely fast 5-ply blade. It is even faster than most of fiber blades or 7-ply wood blades. ‘Mazunov’ had been used by many East European top players.
‘Violin’, ‘Acoustic’ and ‘Tenor’ are 5-ply blades from Nittaku. Nittaku calls this family as ‘musical instrument’ series. Among those three, ‘Violin’ is the slowest one, and ‘Tenor’ is the fastest one. This series has been loved by many top players and amateur players.
Two Tibhar blades are very unique blades. ‘Chila OFF’ is a very thick blade. But, thanks to its Balsa center layer, it is a very lightweight blade. With its sufficient speed and excellent stability, it is good for aggressive attack at close-to-table area. ‘IV-S’ is one of representative blades from Tibhar. It is a thick blade which is constructed by five Ayous layers. It is a very powerful blade. But, its unique ‘5-ply Ayous’ construction makes it very easy to use.
Eleven blades will be compared by performance indices. Concerning the detail of four performance indices, please refer to following articles in ‘Background’ section :
- Performance indices : the way to evaluate blade by measurement
- The example of comparison by performance indices
3. Comparison by Performance Indices
Fig.01 Comparison by Elasticity Indices
Fig.01 shows the comparison graph of Elasticity Indices
Ep is directly concerned with the rebound speed of blade. In general, Ep of 5-ply wood blades is in the range of 1.0 and 2.0 with the exception of ‘Mazunov’. About 1.5 can be considered as the standard value of Ep of 5-ply wood offensive blade. The examples are ‘Rosewood NCT V’, ‘Korbel’ (Ep = 1.55) and ‘Chila OFF’ (Ep = 1.44). Ec is concerned with additional ‘kick’ when player hits ball very hard. In general, Ec of 5-ply wood blade is lower than Ep of that blade. This makes the feeling of most of 5-ply wood blade even softer than its actual softness.
Among three Stiga blades in this comparison, ‘Allround Classic’ is the reference blade of Performance Indices, and all the values of ‘Allround Classic’ are 1.0. Ep and Ec of ‘Offensive Classic’ are higher than those of ‘Allround Classic’. And, the Ep and Ec of ‘Rosewood NCT V’ are much higher than those of ‘Allround Classic’ and ‘Offensive Classic’.
Among three Butterfly blades in this comparison, the lease elastic one is ‘Primorac’, and the most elastic one is ‘Mazunov’. Ep’s of ‘Primorac’, ‘Korbel’ and ‘Mazunov’ are respectively 27%, 54% and 134% higher than Ep of reference blade – ‘Allround Classic’. Especially Ep of ‘Mazunov’ (= 2.34) is high than that of ‘Timo Boll ALC’ (= 2.14) and that of Mizutani Jun ZLC (2.24). ‘Mazunov’ is faster than most of fiber blades and 7-ply blades.
Among three Nittaku blades in this comparison, the slowest one is ‘Violin’ (Ep = 1.23), and the fastest one is ‘Tenor’ (Ep = 1.88). ‘Acoustic’ (Ep = 1.51) can be considered as a standard 5-ply offensive blade. ‘Violin’ is a bit faster than ‘Allround Classic’ and ‘Offensive Classic’. ‘Acoustic’ is one step faster than ‘Violin’. ‘Acoustic’ is a bit slower than Korbel’, but the difference is not big. ‘Tenor’ is noticeably faster than ‘Korbel’. Although ‘Tenor’ is not as fast as ‘Mazunov’, its Ep (= 1.83) is a very high value as that of a 5-ply wood blade.
Because ‘Chila OFF’ is a very stable and safe blade, we may expect that its Ep is not that high. But, its Ep (= 1.44) is higher than that of ‘Acoustic’ (= 1.38). Also its Ec (= 1.39) is also higher than that of ‘Korbel’ (= 1.27) or that of ‘Rosewood NCT V’ (= 1.32). ‘IV-S’ is quite fast blade whose Ep is 1.85. The speed of ‘IV-S’ can be compared with that of ‘Tenor’. ‘IV-S’ is a bit faster than ‘Tenor’, but the difference is very small.
Examining Ec/Ep is an easier way to understand the tendency of elasticity of blades. Fig.02 shows the relationship between Ec/Ep and Ep.
Fig.02 Ec/Ep vs. Ep
Ec/Ep expresses the ‘tendency’ of the elasticity of blade. By examining Ec/Ep and Ep at the same time, we can easily understand the behavior of blades.
Except for ‘Allround Classic’ whose value is fixed to 1.0, all blades in this comparison are placed under the line that Ec/Ep = 1.0. Differently speaking, all those blades can be classified as ‘Hold’ blades. 5 blades among those blades are even classified as ‘Deep Hold’ blades whose Ec/Ep is under 0.9. It coincides with our general thinking that 5-ply wood blades tend to hold ball.
Among 10 blades, ‘Chila OFF’ and ‘Tibhar IV-S’ are located in ‘Mild Hold’ range. Those two blades can be also considered as ‘Close to Linear’ for strength of impact. And, ‘Violin’ and ‘Tenor’ are placed on the border between ‘Mild Hold’ range and ‘Deep Hold’ range.
The other 5 blades – ‘Primorac’, ‘Acoustic’, ‘Rosewood NCT V’, ‘Korbel’ and ‘Mazunov’ can be classified as ‘Deep Hold’. And, 4 blades except for ‘Mazunov’ are placed at the range that 0.8 < Ec/Ep < 0.9 and 1.2 < Ep < 1.6. I.e. ‘Deep Hold’ and ‘Mild Speed’ range. This range is what we can easily expect when we imagine ‘5-ply wood’ blade. We can call the blades in this range as ‘Typical 5-ply wood’ blades.
Then successively, let’s compare Vibration Indices. Fig. 03 shows the comparison graph of Vibration Indices.
Vibration Indices are concerned with feeling. Vp indicates primary feeling which is transferred to player’s palm. And, Vl is the feeling at the wing of a blade. It is felt by player’s inderx finger or middle finger.
The Vp’s of six blades – ‘Offensive Classic’, ‘Rosewood NCT V’, ‘Primorac’, ‘Korbel’, ‘Violin’ and ‘Acoustic’ – are not different from the Vp of ‘Allround Classic’. Those are in the range of 1.0 ~ 1.1. It means that those six blades (seven blades including ‘Allround Classic’) are soft. It coincides with our common sense that 5-ply wood blade is soft.
But, there are also four blades in this comparison whose Vp is over 1.2. Of course the blades whose Vp is in the range of 1.2~1.3 is not that hard. However, as 5-ply blades, those blades are relatively hard.
The Vl’s of blades in this comparison are quite high, and in most cases higher than Vp’s of those blades. It means that the feeling that transferred to finger is somewhat sharp.
The Vl’s of ‘Offensive Classic’, ‘Rosewood NCT V’, ‘Korbel’, ‘Acoustic’, ‘Tenor’ and ‘IV-S’ are close to 1.2. Those blades have been popular among top players. ‘About 1.2’ may be optimum value of Vl of 5-ply wood blade for top players. And, they may feel that the blade is unique if Vl of that blade is bigger than 1.3 or smaller than 1.1.
The blade whose Vl is the highest in this comparison is ‘Chila OFF’. This is very high value for its moderate values of Elasticity Indices. Players may feel that Chila OFF is very sharp and fast blade.
The Vl’s of ‘Tenor’ and ‘IV-S’ are close to the ‘Vp’s of those blades. That tendency is close to that of ‘Allround Classic’. It is related to the examination of Vl/Vp.
Examining Vl/Vp is an easier way for the comparison of the tendency of feeling. Fig.04 shows the relationship between Vl/Vp and Vp for easier comparison.
Fig.04 Vl/Vp vs. Vp
Vl/Vp of ‘Allround Classic’ is 1.0. We can consider that this blade provides uniform feeling. And, ‘Tenor’ provides the same tendency. In case we want to select a faster blade while keeping the tendency of feeling of ‘Allround Classic’, ‘Tenor’ may be very good choice. ‘Mazunov’ and ‘IV-S’ are also close to the line that Vl/Vp = 1.0.
Except those four blades, all the other seven blades in this comparison are placed in the range that Vl/Vp > 1.1, i.e. in the range that the feeling is relatively sharper at finger and relatively softer at palm. Further, five blades among those seven are placed in the range that 1.0 < Vp < 1.1 as we have already examined. Those five are ‘Korbel’, ‘Rosewood NCT V’, ‘Acoustic’, ‘Primorac’ and ‘Violin’. Although each blade among those five has its own characteristics, those five blade share basic feeling. And, the blades in this range can be considered as ‘typical’ 5-ply wood blades.
Three high-speed 5-ply wood blades – ‘Mazunov’, ‘Tenor’ and ‘IV-S’ – are in the range that 1.2 < Vp < 1.35 and 0.9 < Vl/Vp < 1.1. Basically those three are somewhat hard, but uniform. Differently speaking, those three are not sharp at finger. If the feeling at finger of those three blades is also sharp, players may feel that those three blades are uncomfortable. The range that 1.2 < Vp < 1.35 and 0.9 < Vl/Vp < 1.1 may be the optimum range for fast 5-ply wood blades.
4. Summary
- Ep’s of typical 5-ply wood offensive blades are generally in the range of 1.3 ~ 1.6. However, there are also 5-ply wood blades with higher elasticity which is close to or even higher than the elasticity of typical 7-ply wood blades or fiber blades.
- All 5-ply wood in this comparison except for reference blade is placed in the range that Ec/Ep < 1.0. That is, those blades hold ball deeply when we hit ball very hard. This coincides with our common sense that 5-ply wood blade tends to hold ball easily.
- The typical 5-ply wood blades those are popular among top players are placed in the range that 1.0 < Vp < 1.1 and Vl/Vp > 1.1. Top players may feel the blades out of this range unique.
- High-speed 5-ply wood blades are in the range that Vp is close to 1.25 and Vl/Vp is close to 1.0. Maybe this is the optimum range for fast 5-ply wood blades.
INCREDIBLE REVIEW !!!!! Thank you !!!!
LikeLike
Thank you a lot for reading my posting!
LikeLike
Amazing, quite impressed! Never seen such deep reviews. Looks more like a research work. I am a kind of Xiom adept so hope to see there equip here some day! Subscribed!
LikeLike
Thank you for comment. By the way, at present I have only one Xiom blade – Solo. I don’t like Xiom blades after that generation. But, I think that Solo is still excellent 7-ply wood blade, even for poly ball. Last week I tried Stiga Mantra M/S with Solo, and it was fantastic combination.
LikeLike
Fantastic review! wondered if you could offer any advise. I’m looking for a blade with a range of gears and feedback. I was considering buying the solo myself looking for something with more feedback than my current Stradivarius. . I tried Xiom Offensive S which gave good feedback from vibrations but was to bouncy in the short game due to thick core. I like 5 ply diva which i really like as is a notch slower than strad but still lacking in feedback from vibration.
LikeLike
Also, I’m still trying to understand correlation between Ep and Ec. is kick referring to catapult of blade? Will a blade with higher Ep than Ec be more bouncy and have less ‘gears’? Therefore, it would be worse in short game but better flex for looping? I’ve heard the word ‘kick’ be used to describe forward acceleration of spin after first bounce on opponents side.(As described by EmRatThich table tennis coach) i think your using the term slightly differently here. Thanks in advance!
LikeLike
I have lost this comment so far. Ep and Ec are only concerned with the character of blade, and there isn’t any direct relationship with rubber. So the kick isn’t concerned with the acceleration by spin. Please just think it as the increase of elasticity of blade.
LikeLike
How would you estimate Xiom Solo compared with tibhar samsonov CB in performance indices?
LikeLike
Xiom Solo is faster and harder than Stratus Samsonov CB. Please refer to the article https://ttgearlab.com/2020/01/01/xiom-novus-series/ on the data of Solo.
LikeLike
Amazing review! It’s better if you open a youtube channel or post your review on TT website such as TTdaily or mytabletennis.
(Out of topic) Do you have rubber suggestion for stiga clipper wood?
Request : Please do 7-ply wood comparasion ^^
LikeLike
Thank you for comment! For Clipper Wood I basically recommend Tibhar Aurus Prime because it is soft and versatile while it provides excellent spin performance. That is in case you don’t have any special preference. If you prefer harder feeling or higher speed, of course other rubbers will be recommended.
I’m also considering similar article for 7-ply wood blades. But, in fact already there is similar article. Please check following posting :
LikeLike
Thanks for another great review. I’ve played with several of the reviewed blades. All have excellent control characteristics and are great blades for learning the game. Primorac was one of my favorites and the Mazunov was a monster. I moved on to composites for greater mid-range speed but am considering going back to a 7 ply because I miss the control and feeling. Always tradeoffs when it comes to equipment selection.
LikeLike
Thank you for comment! I also think that composite fiber blade isn’t always the solution for increasing speed of shot from mid-range. 7-ply blade such as Clipper Wood can also be very good solution.
LikeLike
Thanks you again for this great review.
Do you have a recommendation for a spin, control/placement (à la Samsonov) wood blade setup with inverted rubber that would be 170 gms or less? Thanks!
LikeLike
You mentioned previously you have Tibhar Status Powerwood but it’s not included here?
LikeLike
What about the uniqueness of each blade you sampled ? Did you just sampled a single blade of each blade model ?
Because a 88g Stiga allround classic would be probably faster than a 78g Accoustic per exemple.
LikeLike
Thank you for comment!
My values are average values of multiple samples except for some cases.
In general I measure 3~5 pcs. of same model. In case I can’t get multiple samples due to some reasons, I try to find and measure the sample whose weight is close to the average of that model.
Heavier Allround classic is faster than lighter Allround Classic. I can’t tell the speed of 88g Allround Classic because the weight range of my samples of Allround Classic is 74~82gram. However, there is a limit of speed increase by weight increase. I don’t expect that 88g Allround Classic will be faster than 78g Acoustic.
If the difference of average speed between two models is small, there may be the chance that heavy Allround Classic is faster than light Acoustic. However, the speed gap between two models is sufficiently big. If the example you mentioned is not Acoustic but Violin, there may be more chance of reversal.
LikeLike
Wonderful review TTgear. Thank you for sharing this nice guide for 5ply blade.
LikeLike
Thank you for reading my article and comment!
LikeLike
Hey, great reviews and source for digital equipment junkies 😀
What are the specs of the Primorac an Korbel you compared ? I guess those are the old versions. I want to buy another Primorac or Korbel, but I mostly see bad reviews on the new European (grey handle) blades.
I either want to go for a very heavy Primorac or for a medium heavy Korbel. However, I’m currently very unsure because of the bad reviews on the new variants. And the old variants online are all expensive…
A reply would be greatly appreciated! Keep up the good work! And greetings from Germany!
LikeLike
Vielen Dank! Both of Primorac OFF- and Korbel OFF are old versions of course. 😉
I also have newer versions, and I’m not satisfactory with them. (I don’t use the measured data of newer ones.) However, the newest Japanese version of Korbel seems to be similar to old version although its handle looks different from older ones. (I don’t have it.) It can be easily distinguished because its handle is made of brighter-colored fineline. The handles of older ones are made of dyed Ayous wood.
Concerning weight. I think that 86g and 92~93g are the optimum weights of Primorac and Korbel respectively.
LikeLike
I think it is very interesting for many players to see how differs perfomance indexies for JP/EU versions of Primorac and Korbel from each other.
LikeLike
I also think so. I’m considering to especially get current version of Korbel from Japan and Europe sooner or later. 🙂
LikeLike
That is great! But comparison of EU vs JP versions of Primorac also is very interesting, especially for beginners due to slower speed.
LikeLike
BTW, If you mean ‘Primorac Classic’, there has alreay been the data.
Following is the data of Primorac Classic :
Ep = 1.31
Ec = 1.29 (Ec/Ep = 0.98)
Vp = 1.11
Vl = 1.17 (Vl/Vp = 1.05)
LikeLike
Currently I can found two versions of all wood Primorac blades.
1) Zoran Primorac with grey handle, made in EU
https://en.butterfly.tt/zoran-primorac.html
2) PRIMORAC FL (Made in Japan) with brown handle
https://en.butterfly.tt/zoran-primorac-fl-made-in-japan.html
I am curious about performance indexes of that blades.
Does ‘Primorac Classic” mean an old Japan version?
And in this article we have modern Japan version?
How about perfomance indexies of “Zoran Primorac” with grey handle?
LikeLike
Thank you for information. The two models you mentioned are newest versions with refined design. The name of both of two are just ‘Primorac’. Probably they are calling the EU version as ‘Zoran Primorac’ to distinguish it from Japanese version.
What I have are much older versions. ‘Primorac Classic’ is the original name of the European version made in Hungary. So, I think that it is same as current ‘Zoran Primorac’ you meant.
LikeLike
I would request you to add another wood to this collection, the nittaku-DHS hurricane wang liqin.. its a classic 5-ply wood which was discontinued by nittaku many years ago.
LikeLike
I once had that blade. Its right name is Nittaku-DHS Wang Liqun. Nittaku didn’t use ‘Hurricane’ for three DHS blades – Wang Liqin, Wang Nan and Liu Guozheng – at that time, although original names of those three were H-WL, H-WN and H-LG.
I didn’t directly measure Nittaku version. However I have the data of original DHS version.
Hollowing is the data of DHS H-WL :
Ep = 1.38
Ec = 1.16
(Ec/Ep = 0.84)
Vp = 1.07
Vl = 1.30
(Vl/Vp = 1.21)
LikeLiked by 1 person
thank you 🙂 i do think that the DHS-WL is one of a kind, they dont make woods like that anymore.. a 5 ply wood that is fast and yet spinny.
LikeLike
I also think that WL is a great blade. DHS is now conncentrating on fiber blades such as Hurricane Long 5, and probably that is because most of customers want fiber blades. It is regrettable.
LikeLike
Thank You for all your work. May I ask if You’re planning to test 5-ply woods Stiga Defensive Wood NCT and Stiga Defensive Classic?
LikeLike
Thank you for comment. I don’t have Defensive Classic. But, I have Defensive Wood NCT. I haven’t measured it yet. But, I have plan to measure it.
LikeLike
Hello,
thank you very much for your exceptional reviews. I was wondering do you also have the elasticity and vibration indices of the Yasaka Ma Lin Extra Offensive, another classic 5ply blade?
Kind regards,
LikeLike
Thank you for comment. And, I’m sorry that my reply has been seriously delayed. I have the data of Ma Lin Extra Offensive.
Ep = 1.66
Ec = 1.31 (Ec/Ep = 0.79)
Vp = 1.11
Vl = 1.33 (Vl/Vp = 1.20)
LikeLike
hello, I realize I am a bit late with my comment, but it would be nice to know how the Tibhar Samsonov Premium Contact (both versions) compare to the models here. Also, even if you don’t like the new Primorac and Korbel, it would be really really helpfull to add them also to this….
LikeLike
Hi, I am enjoying your reviews very much. Do you maybe have data for yasaka sweden extra and dhs h301? They are quite popular. Also, do you think that Yasaka MLC and Butterfly innerforce ALC are comparable in speed and feeling judging by your data? Thank you very much.
LikeLike
Thank you for the comment! I don’t have new Yasaka Sweden Extra. But, it is the same blade as ond Gatien Extra. The indices of Gatien Extra is as follows:
Ep = 1.13
Ec = 0.93 (Ec/Ep = 0.83)
Vp = 0.96
Vl = 1.15 (Vl/Vp = 1.20)
And, the indices of DHS Hurricane 301 is as follows:
Ep = 1.88
Ec = 1.64 (Ec/Ep = 0.87)
Vp = 1.20
Vl = 1.29 (Vl/Vp = 1.07)
Finally, the indices of Yasaka Ma Lin Carbon is as follows:
Ep = 1.38
Ec = 1.26 (Ec/Ep = 0.91)
Vp = 1.09
Vl = 1.16 (Vl/Vp = 1.07)
And, the indices of Butterfly InnerForce ALC is :
Ep = 1.62
Ec = 1.45 (Ec/Ep = 0.89)
Vp = 1.15
Vl = 1.26 (Vl/Vp = 1.10)
The Ep of MLC is much lower than that of Butterfly IF ALC. So MLC is noticeably less elastic than IF ALC. However, the differences of relative values (Ec/Ep and Vl/Vp) are not that big. Therefore, although there is noticeable difference in primary Elasticity, we can expect that we can easily replace our MLC by IF ALC and vice versa. The adjustment will not be difficult.
LikeLike
Very interesting, thanks. I was using Yasaka Sweden extra (i like the feel, but it is too slow), and switched to H301, but it is too fast for me. I want to upgrade the YSE with some speed and limba top ply. I am thinking about korbel or Yasaka ma lin carbon. What do you think? Or can you recommend a third option? Many thanks.
LikeLike
H301 is much faster than Sweden Extra. Ma Lin Carbon will be good because it is moderately faster than Sweden Exrra. Considerable 3rd option is Hurricane Long 5 or Fang Bo B2 because those are not as fast as H301 although faster than Ma Lin Carbon.
LikeLike
Any clue about the size of the Ma Lin Carbon, both in terms of blade size and handle size? And the wood layers – can I assume a classic limba-limba-carbon-ayous-carbon-limba-limba?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The head size of Ma Lin Carbon shakehand is 157mm x 150mm. Both of FL and ST handle are flat and wide, and a bit longer than 100mm.
Its construction is as follows:
Layer 1 & 7 : Limba
Layer 2 & 6 : Akazie
Layer 3 & 5 : Carbon Fleece
Layer 4 (Center) : Ayous
LikeLike
I am surprised the performance data of the Yasaka Ma Lin Extra Offense and the Stiga Legacy Carbon is so similar. I have tried a YEO with a Tibhar EL-P and a Xiom Omega 7 Europe on the forehand and I did not find the YEO very fast. I never try a Legacy Carbon, but from what I read in different chat groups, the legacy Carbon is very fast.
Ep = 1.66
Ec = 1.31 (Ec/Ep = 0.79)
Vp = 1.11
Vl = 1.33 (Vl/Vp = 1.20)
The Stiga Legacy Carbon
Ep = 1.63
Ec =1.32 (Ec/Ep =0.81)
Vp =1.12
Vl = 1.37 (Vl/Vp = 1.22)
LikeLike
Do you have data for the Sitga allround evolution by any chance? Thanks.
LikeLike
Thank you for comment. The data of Stiga Allround Evolution is as follows:
Ep = 1.10
Ec = 1.09 (Ec/Ep = 1.00)
Vp = 1.03
Vl = 1.09 (Vl/Vp = 1.06)
LikeLike
Thanks TTGearLab.
I started with Stiga Allround Classic for a year (Hurricane 3 FH, Hybrid tacky rubber BH) then switched to OSP V- for half a year. But I found it relatively very dead compared to Stiga. So I recently tried Offensive Classic and Allround Evoltuon. I found the Allround Evolution pretty close to Stiga ARC in the kind of feeling but maybe a 25% jump in speed (its about .5mm thicker).
I was not aware that the Ec/EP value of 1.04 or Vl/VP value of 1.06 of the Allround Evolution compared to 1 for all values for Allround Classic would make such a difference. I find the Allround Evolution a good jump from Allround Classic but OSP V- felt too fast for my level (yes, even with Hurricane 3). I lose consistency and cannot land loops endlessly with V- like with the Stiga ARC.
LikeLike
I don’t have the sample of OSP Virtuoso OFF-. But, I think that it will be as fast as Butterfly Primorac OFF-. Primorac OFF- is an offensive blade, and is of course faster than Allround Evolution which is an all-round blade. The indices of Primorac OFF- are 1.27/1.09/1.01/1.12. 🙂
In my opinion, you’d better select slower blade blade if Virtuoso OFF- feels too fast.
(BTW, the problem of some classic blades such as Allround Classic and Allround Evolution is the difference by pieces is somewhat too big. I have many pieces of Allround Classic and Allround Evolution. But, I’m not sure whether those pieces are similar to your blades.)
LikeLike
Thanks TTgearlab. After continually using the Stiga AREvolution since the last comment, i would say your data is pretty accurate on a feeling level too. But it still surprises me how much difference a EC value of 1 vs 1.04 can feel in ones hand. Perhaps thats because I am aiming for 100% consistency in my practice and practicing one shot for 2 hrs in a row at times.
Amazing work. (Some say Osp V- is faster than Korebl and Acoustic. It pings really really pitched on bare ball bounce. North of 1300hz according to my phone.)
LikeLike
Thank you for another comment. The 1,300 Hz is probably the 4th frequency. And, in fact we need more data to determine the elasticity of blade. For example the 1st frequency which is much lower than 4th frequency. But, anyway the OSP V- will be even more elastic than Korbel, if I assume only from the 4th frequency. It seems that it is much faster than Primorac OFF-. 🙂
LikeLike
Thank you for this clear review. I’ve learned so much from your work and am only now appreciating how unique each blade really is.
I have two questions 1) I often see blades varnished. Does a coat of varnish impact any of measures?
2) If cost wasn’t a factor and you had to pick one forever blade of all these 11, which would be your pick for yourself?
Thanks again.
LikeLike
(1) If the varnish is too thick, it can affect the characteristics of blade. However, the impact by most of varnish is ignorable because those are not sufficiently thick.
(2) For me, it is difficult to say that there can be a forever blade. 🙂 But, my current favorite is Butterfly InnerForce Layer ALC. I personally think that the blade which is more expensive than this one isn’t needed.
LikeLike
Thanks for your reply. What I meant was if you had to pick your forever blade from the 11 blades mentioned in this study, which would it be 🙂
LikeLike
Ah! I’m sorry for misunderstanding.
Then I will pick Tibhar IV-S. 🙂
LikeLike
Hi. I have a Nittaku Violin in my collection. It seems, based on the above measurements, that Violin is practically identical in speed and feeling with the Primorac blade, even though they are pretty different in composition and size.
If two blades have the same performance indices, will they play/feel the same regardless the composition (type of wood, thickness, plies, all wood or not)? If so, some blades may have a much better value compared to others.
A second question – while Violin has a clear measurement frequency peak, other 5 plies OFF- blades I have provide a very broad/unclear peak response (eg. Donic New Impuls 6.5 – top spruce, Neottec Amagi Off- – top hinoki, Victas Award Offensive). All these have a soft feeling. Any idea why and how this translates into playing? Many thanks
LikeLike
As you mentioned Primorac is very close to Violin. If we think about costperformance, Primorac will be absolutely better. But, there is something that we can’t express in performance indices. (I have to explain other features that I’m not mentioning in four indices. In fact there are more features, but I’m not showing becuase those are less intuitive and somewhat difficult for most of users.) The special something is thanks to the special glue used for the production of the plywood of Violin.
And, I don’t have the samples of three other blades you mentioned. But, I have the experience of using Donic Impuls 6.5, and its feeling was really mild and comfortable but not clear. In general, those are better for smash and block. On the contrary Violin and Primorac are better for continuous topspin.
LikeLike
Thank you. Indeed, Donic New Impuls series and Victas Award offensive are great for block, while the Korbel of my son (Japan version) is great for topspin.
LikeLike
Now I have interest in Victas Award Offensive because I haven’t had it yet. It seems that I have to get Impuls 6.5 and Award Offensive for checking the performance indices. 🙂
LikeLike
Sorry for disturbing, don’t you have perfomance indexies for Victas Balsa series?
LikeLike
No problem. But, I don’t have the sample of Victas Balsa series. I’m considering to get some samples, but I wonder whether it will be possible in short time or not.
LikeLike
Hello, can I ask about the comparison of these two blades ? Tibhar IV-S vs Xiom Offensive S, are they similar, only is Xiom a little slower ?
LikeLike
Tibhar IV-S (avg.weight = 89.3g)
Ep = 1.85
Ec = 1.75 (Ec/Ep = 0.95)
Vp = 1.28
Vl = 1.23 (Vl/Vp = 0.96)
Xiom Classic OFFENSIVE S (avg. 86g) :
Ep = 1.60, Ec = 1.54 (Ec/Ep = 0.96), Vp = 1.20, Vl = 1.25 (Vl/Vp = 1.04)
I think, you are almost right. Ec/Ep is almost identical and IV-S is faster than Offensive S. Offensive S has slightly softer primary feel compared to IV-S and Vl/Vp >1. IV-S has Vl/Vp <1, but both of them has Vl/Vp very close to 1. So on my taste they are very close in feeling to each other. Whilst IV-S is harder in feeling and faster than Offensive S.
Maybe TTGEARLAB has slightly different
thoughts?
LikeLike
Vasyl has already given you the answer. (Thank you, Vasyl! :-)) I will add some things.
If you think about absolute feeling, IV-S is harder than Offensive S. Also IV-S is more elastic than Classic Offensive S. (Even there is difference in top layer, thickness, handle shape, head size and so on.)
And, the relative values (Ec/Ep and Vl/Vp) are more important that absolute elasticity of feeling when we change our blades. Between two blades, the difference of Ec/Ep isn’t significant. So if the player will be able to use those two in the same way although Offensive S is slower. However, the difference of Vl/Vp is noticeable. Because of the noticeable difference in Vl/Vp, some player will have a hard time for the adjustment if the player replace one between those two to another. But, other players will think that this gap isn’t significant, and will experience little difficulty in adjustment. It differs case by case.
Anyway, I don’t recommend players the replacement between those two. That is mainly because of the other differences.
IV-S is a very thick blade. But, Offensive S is much thinner than IV-S. The difference is around 1mm. That isn’t an ignorable difference.
And, the top layer of IV-S is Ayous, and the top layer of Offensive S is Limba. So the ball touch of those two are quite different from each other. Of course the player can adjust if the performance indices are not that different. But, different ball touch at blade surface will prevent the player from quickly adjusting to new blade. And, the head of IV-S is compact (= smaller than regular), while the head of Offensive S is a bit bigger than regular. The difference of head size will cause significant difference in weight balance when rubbers are attached to the blade. Further, the handle shapes of those two are totally different from each other. The player have to also adjust the ball touch of surface, weight balance and handle shape while adjusting to the mechanical characteristics of new blade.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for exhausting answer
LikeLike
Hi there TTGear,
Awesome as usual.
I was a bit confused abt concept of Ep and Ec. I imagine that Ep is comparable across blades. So blade A of Ep 1.5 means its about 50% faster than Allround classic but Ec is only in comparison to itself? Like Cybershape wood Ec is about 1. Does that mean when hit hard, it is only as fast as Allround classic (which has Ec of 1)?
LikeLike
Also, im really curious abt data for OSP virtuoso off- and expert ii. Let me know if you want to buy mine. I can sell both for $100 excluding shipping
LikeLike
Probably I will be able to get samples of OSP blades sooner or later. Then I will first ask Virtuoso OFF- and Expert II.
BTW, are you managing table tennis shop?
LikeLike
Thanks for the quick reply. Haha. No. I just bought a few blades for myself. I am relatively new to TT and am really curious about the difference between the subjective feel vs what you are awesomely doing here in terms of the objective. E.g. everybody says Virtuoso Off- is like the best feeling Off- all wood blade, better than Acoustic. I have only tried a friend`s acoustic and much preferred the softer feeling than the OSP. So I was really curious about the objective measurements.
I bought the Expert II 5.4mm hoping I would like it but I found it way too flexible and unpredictable.
Interesting, I did try my friends Cybershape Wood and what you said around long hold was true. It felt as controllable as my Stiga Allround Evolution (though my caliper shows my Evo blade to be 5.6mm rather than the advertised 5.4mm).
Do you have data on Stiza Azalea Allround and Offensive? If my Allround Evo is 83 grams and 5.6mm, would it really be that different from the Stiga Azalea Allround?
Also curious about your thoughts what blade relative beginners ought to use if using Hurricane on forehand and backhand? I found Evolution to have the best control but want more speed. But the Osp V- is too stiff and too linear for my taste. Expert is too flexy and unstable for loop-drive.
Heres some of my play footage:
LikeLike
In fact personal preference is concerned with the feeling of blade. For that reason there is the case everybody feel differently. 🙂
I have Azalea Offensive, but I don’t have Azalea Allround. So I can’t compare those two. But, Azalea Offensive is clearly different from Allround Evolution. Azalea Offensive is much more elastic but holds ball more deeply than Allround Evolution. And, it gives sharper feeling to you index finger. Regarding feeling, I think that the feeling of Allround Evolution is somewhat tough, but on the contrary the feeling of Azalea Offensive is much clearer.
Following is the data of Azalea Offensive (avg. weight is 82.6g)
Ep = 1.55, Ec = 1.11 (Ec/Ep = 0.72)
Vp = 1.06, Vl = 1.34 (Vl/Vp = 1.27)
Following is the data of Allround Evolution (avg. weight = 83.2g)
Ep = 1.10, Ec = 1.09 (Ec/Ep = 1.00)
Vp = 1.03, Vl = 1.09 (Vl/Vp = 1.06)
We can find big difference in Ep’s and Vl’s. So Azalea Offensive is totally different from Allround Evolution.
Regarding Hurricane series, I don’t recommend using Hurricane rubber on backhand side. You will experience serious difficulty in making fast ball from your backhand side. It requires long back swing to accelerate the racket before the moment of impact, but there isn’t sufficient room in our backhand side to accelerate racket. That is the reason why so many Chinese top players use non-sticky rubber on their backhand sides. (Hurricane 8 or some new German sticky rubber are all right. They can be attached on backhand side. But, Hurricane 2 or 3 are not.) The only one advantage of Hurricane (2 or 3, normal or Neo) is that the ability of making knuckle or backspin block that will give much trouble to your opponent.
LikeLike
Dear TTGearLab,
I have noticed a large discrepancy in your data in the comments on the Stiga AR Evolution between March 21 and Dec 11? Have I misread something, was there a typo or did you measure two different pieces of the Stiga AR Evolution? Keep up the great work!
Best regards,
Christian V
LikeLike
Thank you for comment!
I checked it and made correction. The mistake sometimes happens especially when I write comment.
Sometimes that is just because of the update of parameters by further measurement of new pieces. But, this case wasn’t that one but just mistake.
LikeLike
Ep is directly related with the bending elasticity, and Ec is directly related with the central elasticity. The overall elasticity is expressed as the combination of the bending elasticity and the central elasticity. But, because central elasticity is much bigger than bending elasticity, central elasticity doesn’t seriously affect the overall elasticity of light hitting. But, the stronger the hitting the more the influence of central elasticity.
By the way 50% higher elasticity doesn’t always mean that the ball speed will be 50% faster. There is the influence of the deformation of ball and the elasticity of rubber. Also the speed of player’s swing influences the speed of ball. So the portion of the elasticity of blade is much smaller that we expect. But, not ignorable.
LikeLike
Thank you TTGearLab for the amazing review. Do you happen to have the data of tibhar Stratus Power Wood and Gewo Power Offense? Thank you in advanve for your answer!
LikeLike
Thank you for comment. I have the data for Stratus Power Wood, but there isn’t data for Gewo Power Offense.
The data for Stratus Power Wood (avg.weight = 89.7g) is as follows :
Ep = 1.80
Ec = 1.54 (Ec/Ep = 0.85)
Vp = 1.17
Vl = 1.32 (Vl/Vp = 1.12)
LikeLiked by 1 person
OK, I probably found the answer already in this review: it seems to be the japanese Korbel, not the european one.
I use the european one, which is referring to the Butterfly catalogue a little bit slower than the japanese one.
It might be interesting, what values you would figure out to the european version.
This might be an explanation, why the step from european Korbel to Ovtcharov ALC could be a little bit too big for me.
LikeLike
It seems that I have to anyway get the European version of Korbel and check its characteristics.
LikeLike
This would be really really nice. Specially when you choose one with the same weight as your japanese one.
LikeLike
I also think so. 🙂
LikeLike