geez, thanks! but haha, no such luck and money to travel to there... i'll make do with what i have. furthermore, it's a solid racquet and there's nothing much else i could ask from it... kekeke.... merry x'mas to all!
maybe if we can get enough people (at least around 10) to be interested in buying the la fleche rackets, taneepak can help us buy and send it to us? more rackets = less shipping charges for everyone aka Mass Order (MO) oh ya, Merry Christmas!
No, that is not a good idea. With so many budget airlines flying between Singapore and Hong Kong, it might be as inexpensive and certainly more enjoyable for one of you to come here and buy for the group.
I have two La Fleche Ti500, one a red 3U, the other a light purple/pearl white 4U (for my wife), but I don't get to keep them long. My mates keep wanting my second hand LF racquets, even those with a paint chip. And I resold them at the same HK$555 plus the HK$65 of my own stringing. So far five of my racquets have gone this way. I now have a very interesting problem with my regular doubles opponent. He insisted on buying my upgraded 3U LF Ti500 despite a smelly and worn grip, which I eventually agreed. I then bought another new replacement, upgraded to an even better racquet than the one I sold him. He tried it two days ago but thought that the one he bought from me was better. But all the other players thought otherwise. He wants me to make slight changes to my current 3U racquet to match exactly the one he got from me earlier, because he wants another exact replica of the one he has. I told him no because I don't think it makes any sense to downgrade (in my opinion) my racquet's performance. BTW he is a power player and is extremely fit, smashing all the time. The LF he has weighs 89.5g and has a balance point of 31.3cm. The one I now have weighs 89.2g, with a balance point of 30.5cm. Both are strung with New BG66 at 24/26lbs. My racquet has lower second motion and is more maneuverable. I can of course change it to his specs but I must try to convince him first.
We expect to have a visitor, Jurong_twister, from Singapore next week. He will be given an opportunity to test the freh-off-the-shelves La Fleche Ti 500 3U and 4U and then compare them with my own 3U and 4U. If he agrees, I will ask him to meet up with you chaps back in Singapore and try out the La Fleche Ti 500 2U that is already in Singapore. The 3-way comparison will be interesting, although I am confident which ones will come out the winners.
taneepak, what more can you tell us about La Flèche brand? Do they design their own racquets? How long they've been in the market? Where they're located. Just wondering, because there doesn't seem to be anything on them on the net.
I have been told that the design of the La Fleche Ti 500 and its 3-section shaft is a Danish design, from a company that sounds like Denkano. The La Fleche name is also from a Danish company, I believe. Inskysport has the franchise for both the racquet and the name. However, the use of the materials in the racquet, tungsten, nickel and titanium is from another source, probably Japanese, because I do recollect playing with such a racquet which was made in Japan but which played terribly. The proposed grommet change to restrict the bottom grommets 7 to a single string and enlarge the bottom grommets 6 to allow two strings to pass, which will be implemented in the next production run, came from me. A contract racquet manufacturer to a Japanese company also contributed to enhancing the sweetspot for the 4U version of the LF Ti 500. The racquet has been in the market for about 8 months. That is about all I know.
Could you elaborate more on this change. Whats the reason for it? If you can only have one ti500, which will you choose, the 3U or 4U?
Re the grommet thing, I have covered this in some detail in one of the earlier threads. Simply put, it is to put a stop to the tension loss on one side of the mains and to prevent any unevenly balanced tension on one side of the main string. For this I suggest you step back and have a closer look at the 4 knots of a strung racquet. The main string finishes with two tie-off knots, one knot on each side, with each knot exerting a pull-back force at the bottom grommets 8, pulling the string from the edge inwards. This is good as the strung main string is "balanced". Now we come to the cross, starting with the cross starting knot at the top grommet 6 and ending with the cross tie-off knot at the traditional bottom grommet 7. Try to visualize what will happen to the main string at grommet 6 with the starting knot pulling it outwards, compounded by the finishing tie-off knot pulling the main string outwards through the bottom grommet 7. The main string on the side with the two cross knots-starting and tie-off-is literally being pulled one way by these two knots. Transferring the cross finishing tie-off knot from the bottom grommet 7 to 6 reverses the "two chaps (knots) pulling in the same direction" to a "tug-of-war" status, which prevents tension loss as well as avoiding any unbalanced side tension. I hope you are still with me. Even the racquet manufacturer had some doubts initially but has been brought around. The 3U and 4U are both equally good. The 3U is strictly a doubles racquet and the 4U is excellent for both doubles and singles. It is hard to choose between the two, so I got both, the 4U for my wife although I do use it. Although the 2U/3U and the 4U are the same model, they are subtly different. If forced to choose only one, I will choose the 4U.
I HATE YOU! Why did you have to bring up this design flaw? Now I will KNOW the soon-to-be-in-my-hand 3U is DEFECTIVE! I will get this sick feeling everytime I hold it in my hand, and my skills will go down because it's not PERFECT. :crying: Do you have a work around by any chance? And does this affect both the 3U and 4U, or just the 3U? Now that you have pursuade them to change the design, when will we expect to see the new batch with the modified grommets? I like to know because I have already ordered a 3U with 2 other BC members, and if it performs as well as you say, I will ask a co-worker to bring me back a few more in mid-january when she makes a brief stop in HK. Hopefully by then, the new batch would be ready? *cross fingers* By the way, doesn't this mean you helped *design* the Ti500? Maybe I should have you sign my Ti500, and I'll show all my friends and say "look! my racquet is signed by the designer himself! $300USD if you want to buy it." You mentioned that the 3U is slightly longer and more powerful, but the 4U is more maneuverable. That sounds like the 3U is more for singles and 4U for doubles, no?
Almost all racquets, including Yonex and others, are currently designed with larger grommets at the bottom grommets 7, and I wouldn't call them a design flaw. Some even have larger grommets at both bottom grommets 6 and 7. Intentionally making the bottom grommets 7 smaller and 6 bigger is a slight improvement and in the right direction, I think. It could also be the first time it is being done. Don't you agree? BTW, my two LF Ti500, 3U and 4U, do not have the larger grommets 6. I make do with using the bottom grommet 7 for my cross finishing tie-off knot. No, I play no part in the design, simply because the grommet thing is not a fundamental change. The 3U and 4U are exactly of the same length. The 4U, being lighter, had to adopt a slightly shorter shaft (4mm-5mm) and slightly slimmer shaft on one of the 3-sections part of the shaft to make it playable. I understand it costs more to make a LF Ti500 4U than a 2U or 3U, probably because of the tungsten material. The 3U is more of an attacking weapon with powerful smashes that go down at a sharper angle. The designer designs the 2U and 3U for doubles power play. The 4U is not as powerful but it still has amazing repulsion power. Although the 4U, like the 2U and 3U, is also specifically designed for doubles it turns out that it is also ideal for singles, especially for those who prefer lighter racquets. A crude way of describing it is the 2U and 3U represents more of the AT800 OF and some of the AT800DE, the 4U has more of the AT800DE (in fact better) and some of the AT800OF. Both 2U, 3U and 4U are better than the two AT800, in my opinion. I have an AT800DE, AT700, two MP99 which neither my wife nor I now use. The new production batch will take sometime, so don't hold your breath. The racquet manufacturer says that he has to order/fabricate new moulds for the grommet change, which I don't quite understand as I thought the grommet holes are drilled at the finishing stage.
Outlah, the new grommet system on the LF Ti500 should come out within two weeks. As suspected, the new grommet change does not involve any mould change. All it takes is just telling the grommet drillers what to change. The manufacturer was initially reluctant to change something he has been used to, and suggested making just one prototype of the new grommet system for testing before changing wholesale. I told Inskysport this was a waste of time and strongly suggested he should tell the manufacturer to just go ahead, failing that he should then go to other manufacturers who are more enlightened. So, your new TF Ti500 that you intend to get early next year should have the new grommet system. Make sure your friend knows how to tell the difference between the new and the old.
Since you don't use those rackets anymore, how about givin' them to me? *Drools* C'mon, I know you want to! BTW, how do you read Inskysports, is it In-sky-sports or Ins-key-sports?
UGH... so is there a way for those who have already bought a LF-Ti500 to manually enlarge the 6th grommet? I have this sick feeling that the racquet I just bought will be slightly less of a performer than the one someone else will buy in just 2 weeks time!!!!! It took me forever to find the store in Mang Kok and I will be going back to Canada in 2 days time so it's difficult for me to get the updated racquet...not to mention I am not particularly wealthy enough to buy another racquet at this time. Any suggestions tan?
No, there is no way you can enlarge the 6th bottom grommets and at the same time reduce the already enlarged bottom grommets no. 7. You need to have both, enlarged grommets 6 and small grommets 7, to maintain the same structural integrity of the frame. However, it is possible for the racquet manufacturer to enlarge grommets 6 and have them fitted with larger grommets, with the enlarged grommets 7 remaining unchanged. This will weaken the frame at the throat slightly. Besides the extra costs, it is just not worth the while. The manufacturer may not want to do this. You are worrying unnecessarily over a very trivial thing. I don't think you can tell the difference between the two. If it is any comfort to you, all other racquets in the market are in the same boat.
