Author: Karry

Badminton Racket Victor HYPERNANO X 800 Reviews
This might be the flagship of the HypernanoX series. The HX800 once stood out with its reputation and popularity. As one of Tai Tzu Ying’s former rackets, the HX800 won over many players with its unique feel and excellent performance. However, like many other Victory bestsellers, its destiny was the same—issues such as collapse and cracks ultimately became the main reason why many people hesitated to buy it.
Specifications:
3UG5, with base grip, total weight in playing condition is 92.9g, balance point 305mm, 6.8mm Pyrofil carbon shaft, length 215mm, stiff tuning, diamond aero frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 point string grooves, warranty up to 28 lbs, strung at 25–27 lbs with KT65.
This is a racket with a black base, but its black paint is very pure, like ink, without any grayish tone. The racket features plenty of technology, some of which is exclusive to the HX series. Back in the day, the diamond aero frame offered both swing speed and stability. The appearance of the racket isn’t outstanding, but the additional stickers and purer black color give it a decent texture. However, the stickers and paint are quite fragile and easily show defects.
The HX800 is clearly a high-end piece of equipment aimed at advanced players, and its power threshold is not low. In terms of head weight, it definitely qualifies as a balanced racket, which aligns with my overall impression of the HX series. However, both the shaft and frame feel might discourage beginners. From my perspective, the shaft’s stiffness is comparable to that of the HX900x, but the latter’s more pronounced head weight makes it excellent for leveraging power. In contrast, with the HX800, you’ll mostly have to rely on your own strength—even for warm-up clears, the 3U version in my hand still felt quite stiff.
There are two twin versions of the HX800: the LTD-C and LTD-P. In my previous trials, I noted that in terms of shuttle hold, actual swing weight, and feedback, the HX800 sits between the two. Although the shuttle releases crisply, the 800 doesn’t give me the same surprising swing speed as the LTDC.
One advantage, however, is that this racket has low shock absorption, giving it a raw, hand-to-hand combat feel. For instance, when defending against smashes, the sense of power return to the backcourt feels very effortless—especially when facing opponents who like to hit hard. It’s almost as if you don’t need to use much physical energy to drive them back effectively. This direct feeling also translates well during flat drives, where the response delay is very low, resulting in a high-elasticity and stable shuttle release. The current 3U specs, though, don’t quite offer the most seamless experience in continuous drive-play. Otherwise, this racket would excel at flat exchanges. However, for players who prefer control, the racket’s lack of shuttle hold could reduce forgiveness during delicate net battles, as the adjustment window between high lifts and net errors is very small.
Since the shuttle releases immediately, the heavy smash performance of the HX800 depends entirely on the player’s timing. The more focused the hit, the more lethal it becomes. This aspect is quite unforgiving—similar to the DZS. When hitting sharp smashes, the shuttle releases quickly and unexpectedly, but during heavy smashes, it seems to require much more concentrated power to achieve somewhat satisfactory downward pressure. I recently experienced this same sensation with the first-generation Protech 2013P. I believe this is where the HX800 falls short compared to the MX80N. Personally, I prefer rackets that are more lightweight and easy to generate power with, so I suspect that the 4U version of this racket would be a better option for feeling that drive sensation.
This racket was borrowed from a local friend.
I had previously tested this racket once. Despite my desire to write about it after our first encounter, I knew at the time that I couldn’t fully explore its potential, so I didn’t rush into writing. After borrowing it again recently, I got another chance to experience it. However, this reunion, two years later, was a bit less enchanting than before.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor HYPERNANO X 20H Reviews
HX high-end series has encountered bottlenecks due to acquisitions, and the hx500p/c is in very low supply. If anyone has a good price source, please recommend it.
Since the high-end models are unavailable, adjusting the mood with an affordable entry-level model is a good option. I picked up an hx20h at a “why bother with a bicycle” price—hopefully, there will be some surprises.
Specifications:
4UG5, full setup weight without base grip is 86g, balance point 295mm, 6.8mm shaft, 210mm length, slightly soft tuning, 10-4 string groove, diamond aero frame, strung at 25 lbs with bg80p/vbs68.
In terms of technology, it’s all familiar. Players from the Nano 7 era should be no strangers to this, borrowing from the main Iron Hammer series and using FRS for high tension durability. After all, with an “H” suffix, the racket is guaranteed to withstand up to 35 lbs. The design is youthful, with a white base and blue-black stripes. As an entry-level racket, it’s visually appealing. You can tell that some thought went into its design, like with the Iron Hammer, and it’s visually richer than the YU1L. However, the paint quality might be lacking—it chips easily, and the cone tends to blacken.
Swinging it feels nimble. Although the reduced wind resistance from the diamond frame isn’t much, the 4U balanced racket doesn’t demand much power, giving a sense of control due to its light swing weight. With this user-friendly setup, beginners likely won’t struggle with swinging it. The shaft is on the softer side, easily flexing during swings, but not to the point of feeling unstable like the Iron Hammer. Considering the 7.0mm shaft is a standard for Victory’s entry-level rackets, there’s not much else to add.
On the court during warm-up, it took some getting used to since I’ve been playing less with balanced rackets lately. The power didn’t feel quite right on clears at first. Honestly, while the shaft is easy to handle, you still need to put in extra effort to get good depth and trajectory due to the light head. Given the string bed has been tied with bg80p for over a year, switching to a more elastic string helped—things improved with fresher vbs68 strings.
In doubles, the racket is genuinely easy to pick up. During mid-to-front flat drives, the nimbleness shines through, and while the shuttle doesn’t fly off explosively, the racket follows your reactions well, supporting slightly more aggressive exchanges. As for net kills and blocks, as long as you make small, precise movements, it delivers decent results for windshield-wiper actions. Despite being an entry-level racket, it performs like a superlight racket in fast-paced exchanges.
However, in the backcourt, the smashing power is lacking. The racket is very forgiving, and with correct technique, you can execute smashes with minimal effort, but the speed and power are average, with a noticeable reduction in force. For balanced rackets, the lack of head weight means that power transfer relies more on the shaft’s elasticity, which leaves room for improvement in this entry-level shaft. This also explains why head-heavy entry-level rackets like the Iron Hammer feel more elastic and generate heavier smashes. The threshold for smashing isn’t high, and the feeling is decent, but the quality of the shot isn’t impressive. Pulling higher tensions on the HX20H doesn’t significantly enhance this either.
This classic frame shape still provides a stable feel and is easy to adapt to. At the net, there’s confidence in touch shots, thanks to its hold, even though it has the “soft” feel criticized in the Nano 7. Defense and smash returns are also comfortable.
Another well-behaved, responsive entry-level racket. Honestly, it plays like a younger, more durable Nano 7. Compared to the hx7sp, the cost-performance ratio is indeed good, and it’s worth recommending.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 6000 Reviews
It seems I’ve reached a point where I’m no longer picky about rackets, and I can enjoy even entry-level models that I wouldn’t have high expectations for. Besides the player versions, I believe I’ve now tried all the high-end MX models. However, about a year ago, I frequently saw mid- to low-end MX models being sold second-hand, and in decent quantities. Oddly, despite MX’s high reputation, the non-premium models seem to lack spirit, like something is missing.
Let’s see where its soul went missing.
Specifications:
Weight: 4U G5, with grip, total weight in use: 92.87g, balance point: 293mm, shaft diameter: 7.2mm, length: 213mm, moderate stiffness, octagonal aerodynamic frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock grooves, tension guarantee 22-24 lbs, strung at 26-28 lbs with BS710.
This is a low-end, battle-worn racket, so there’s no need to expect much in terms of visual appeal. Even so, the MX6000 still carries some of the design flavor of the Meteor series. The green color, for example, reminds me of the MX30L. The multi-layered color scheme of the frame is a highlight, with black at the T-joint and head, blending into a gradient dark blue on the wings, giving it a nice layered look. The green accents at the 2, 10, 4, and 8 o’clock positions help break up the monotony. Since it also uses the octagonal aerodynamic frame, the edges of the paint are easily prone to chipping. Without the XT woven carbon fabric, there’s no need to expose the carbon fiber texture.
Although the MX series is typically associated with the 80-hole string bed, the 72-hole frame is also used in high-end models like the MX80B (which I’ve yet to complete testing), so it’s not surprising. The 72-hole string bed narrows towards the head, creating a small flat-top effect that may affect the sweet spot.
When actually holding the MX6000, it feels surprisingly light. The high-end MX models I’ve used were all 3U with balanced configurations, so they didn’t feel too light. But with this 4U MX6000, the feeling is somewhat plastic-like. However, the shaft’s stiffness isn’t too low, so overall the feel isn’t excessively discounted. Similarly, the aerodynamic efficiency of the frame is good, making me optimistic about its stability.
Thanks to the high swing speed, the MX6000 delivers good power when hitting, but the racket’s power transfer isn’t impressive among lower-end models. Players who prefer big arm swings might find it less comfortable because the lighter head, combined with a moderately stiff shaft, requires more active power generation. The sweet spot isn’t unusually large, but it’s distributed evenly, taking up about one-third of the string bed. Once you adjust, you can generate decent power with this racket.
In drives and blocks, the racket performs sharply, allowing for quick, consecutive exchanges during fast-paced rallies. However, the 72-hole string bed doesn’t respond as quickly as the 80-hole ones, and the direct feedback from the shuttle that’s typical in the MX series is lacking here. There’s a slight hesitation in the response.
This hesitation can actually be helpful when dealing with defensive shots, giving a little more time to generate power and buy some breathing room in tight situations. While the immediate feedback might not be as strong, the “wooden” feeling is also less pronounced (lacking spirit, perhaps).
The materials limit the racket’s ceiling in attacking and smashing, but for me, it’s sufficient. Since the shaft stiffness isn’t overly compromised, power transfer remains relatively smooth when hitting the sweet spot during full-power smashes. The loss of energy conversion into shuttle speed is manageable, giving me enough confidence to play aggressively from the backcourt. Of course, this requires a player with decent power generation skills. Beginners might find it easier to wield a hammer-like racket that offers more assistance in attack.
The gap in frame stability, however, is significant. I initially thought the octagonal frame’s stability was purely due to its structure, but without the XT carbon fabric, the MX6000’s lightness doesn’t help control shot placement, making it harder to hit sharp angles. This makes smashes less threatening, and the handling of delicate shots lacks precision. While net shots and placements aren’t too problematic—since I mainly play doubles and prefer direct net kills—the racket struggles in backcourt drops when it’s not a clean opportunity, often sending the shuttle too high and giving the opponent a chance.
There’s no need to delve into other details. Considering the price I got it for, I’m quite satisfied with this experience. It’s not quite at a level where I would recommend it, but I would still give it a positive review. I’m not sure what its brand-new price is, but the craftsmanship involved in the octagonal aerodynamic frame might push it a bit higher.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 5600 Reviews
Among the lower-end MX series, the 7600 and 7000 are the two rackets that have left the deepest impression on me. The former, with its more user-friendly handling, has become one of the recommended entry-level rackets.
However, the 7600 does have the issue of being tuned a bit too soft, which makes it less satisfying on the offensive side. Based on the official specs, could the 5600, with only a difference in stiffness, be a better option?
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, without grip, total weight in use: 91.17g, balance point: 307mm, shaft length: 215mm, moderate stiffness.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, string tension recommendation: 26 lbs, strung at 25 lbs with BG85.
The design is reminiscent of the MX70, with silver and navy blue as the primary colors for the paint job. However, the layering is done very well, and the long blue sections on the sides make the racket appear longer, highlighting the slim aerodynamic structure of the head. The meteorX design at the 3 and 9 o’clock positions is quite distinctive. The racket isn’t flashy, but upon closer inspection, there’s plenty to talk about.
When I got the racket in hand, I realized my expectations weren’t quite met, as this is the only 80-hole racket I’ve encountered in the low-end MX range so far. This means it’s on a different track from the other entry-level MX models I’ve tested. If we’re going to compare it, it should be compared to the MX6000, where the only difference on paper is the number of string holes.
When I first picked up the MX5600, it didn’t feel particularly striking. It has a somewhat average feel, with slightly higher head weight and swing speed, which should assist in generating power to hit solid shots. In actual play, it performs well enough in clear shots, but the 80-hole string bed does require some adjustment, especially for a low-end racket.
This reminded me of a low-end Bonny racket that also used an 80-hole string bed, but without proper material tuning, it amplified the “wooden” feel of the string bed, and the 5600 faces the same challenge. Of course, one could argue that the larger sweet spot of the 80-hole design makes it more forgiving, as off-center hits will have less impact on shot quality. However, this kind of characteristic change in a low-end racket may increase discomfort for a broader audience.
Additionally, even though I encountered the long-missed and beloved BG85 strings, their condition wasn’t ideal and didn’t pair well with the 5600.
As expected, in most aspects of its performance, the 5600 doesn’t significantly stand out from the MX6000. Given the differences in specs, it’s worth focusing on the difference in feel when hitting with power.
The key features likely lie more in smashes or drives, where the 80-hole string bed does feel stiffer. In terms of power generation, the 5600 actually provides an effective sensation of leveraging the frame’s weight to hit powerful smashes. However, in energy transfer, it falls short compared to the 7000. Otherwise, it’s hard to explain why, even with the BG85 strings, the racket still lacks that explosive power after heavy smashes.
Ultimately, it comes down to compatibility. The 80-hole string bed is better suited for use with higher-quality materials to reach its full potential, or else it becomes a limitation.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 30L Reviews
Skipping this series would be a mistake. However, after testing it, I didn’t feel a strong desire to update. These are all classic models from the Blue Factory that are familiar to most. Just the popularity of the original MX80 alone is enough to carry half the positive reputation of Victory’s offensive rackets among enthusiasts.
It would be irresponsible to give a quick review of a product geared toward professional performance before fully adapting to it. However, you also know about my recent intense schedule for reviews. If every racket I test is a hardcore model, the few opportunities I get to test them will be wasted on getting used to them, which isn’t efficient.
Starting with the MX30L was a good choice.
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G6, with grip, total weight in use: 94.9g, balance point: 294mm, shaft thickness: 7.0mm, shaft length: 220mm, stiffness: moderate.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, grooves at 9-3 points, 80-hole string bed, string tension recommendation: 26-28 lbs, strung at 25-27 lbs with Karakal 66F.
Many of the rackets in Victory’s lineup with “3” in their model number use blue elements, like the HX30/300 and Jetspeed 3, and the X30 is no exception, though it has a more elegant feel. The light blue decals really highlight the whiteness of the frame, and the selective covering of the frame reveals the carbon fiber texture underneath, giving the racket a more layered and alluring look.
Covering part of it is more enticing than leaving it fully exposed, right? The frame also features silver elements, enhancing the shine of the X30. Although the specs suggest this racket is more geared toward women, its aesthetic appeal is universal.
Besides the iconic octagonal aerodynamic design, the material used to construct the frame appears to be woven carbon fiber, likely chosen to balance swing speed with torsional resistance. Additionally, the frame’s string holes feature the wave design from the Brave Sword series, enhancing the string bed’s rebound. With the paint and finish added to the frame, this meticulously crafted design is certainly valuable, though the sharp aerodynamic edges might make the paint more prone to damage. Speaking of which, I really wish the Blue Factory’s art department would teach the B Factory how to make their rackets look this good…
Before testing it, I expected the X30 to be a user-friendly, “easy-going” racket, and after holding it for a bit, I could feel its approachable side. Indeed, despite its 3U specs, its balance point and swing weight are both low, and the shaft’s static stiffness is moderate. The racket swings fast, with a sharp sound slicing through the air.
However, when I actually used it, I found the X30 still required some getting used to, and my hopes of quickly taking it into a match were dashed. Its easy-going feel wasn’t as obvious as I expected. Although the shaft isn’t very stiff, the 80-hole string bed requires more effort to drive, and the frame’s high rigidity means the contact time between the strings and the shuttle is short when not generating enough power—before you’ve fully hit the shuttle, it has already bounced off. That said, the sweet spot is large, the shots are clean, and the feedback is rich after each hit.
Taking a bit of time to adapt is definitely worth it. Once you get used to the MX30L’s quirks, you’ll find it’s like a girlfriend who has her own ideas but is also willing to grow with you. The frame’s stability is excellent, and the feedback when using borrowed power is outstanding, making clears highly controllable and relatively easy. Drives can be hit with decent speed and accuracy, and lifts are easy to execute. Overall, its performance in long rallies is excellent, leading me to believe it’s well-suited for playing a control game.
But that doesn’t mean it’s not aggressive. The MX30L still has two weapons—speed and power.
After all this time, I’ve become less picky about racket specifications and have seen plenty of different models. However, this 3U racket still left a strong impression on me regarding speed. The octagonal aerodynamic frame’s wind resistance reduction is excellent, and combined with its relatively light head, it’s perfectly suitable for doubles play when speed is critical. Moreover, the 220mm long shaft prevents excessive shaft flex in fast exchanges, making it reliable for mid-court drives, with quick, stable responses.
Additionally, the X30 isn’t weak in backcourt smashes either. The stability of the shots combined with the shaft’s baseline explosiveness means that, during smash opportunities, it can still deliver powerful attacks scoring around 8 to 9 out of 10. Even if one smash doesn’t finish the point, the second and third shots can follow through seamlessly, maintaining pressure. Despite the shaft having a somewhat wooden feel, reminiscent of older thicker-shaft models, the sensation of energy loss during smashes isn’t noticeable.
After testing it, I was reminded of the Bonny 2013L, which shares similarities with the X30, such as the octagonal aerodynamic frame, woven material, and long shaft. However, the 2013L had better elasticity, though its flexibility caused energy loss during smashes. In contrast, the MX30L has a more rigid feel but better energy conversion efficiency.
And yes, the MX30L is truly beautiful.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 260 Reviews
A racket that ends up stuck in your hands without being able to sell it usually has a few prominent attributes: it’s either in poor condition, lacks recognition, or is a low-end model. These kinds of rackets, no matter how cheaply you buy them, tend to end up being a bad deal.
However, the urge to play is not something easily overcome, and many times, just finding one visually appealing is enough reason to buy it. That’s exactly what happened with this mid-to-low-end MX series racket.
Later, I seriously thought about it, and it seems that several rackets with “60” at the end in the mid-tier lineup were probably designed by downgrading the MX-60.
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, without grip, total weight in use: 89.25g, balance point: 300mm, shaft thickness: 7.2mm, shaft length: 216mm, stiffness: medium to slightly soft.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 26-28 lbs recommended, strung at 25-27 lbs with BS720.
It seems I have little resistance to magenta-colored rackets, and for the MX260, its appearance is definitely one of its strengths. Within the series, it’s the only racket that uses this pink color scheme, leading me to hastily assume it’s a racket aimed at female players. The white paint is accented with plenty of silver stickers, and combined with the magenta designs, it looks quite elegant, completely changing my perception of the MX series’ typically masculine aesthetic. However, the quality of the paint and stickers is still concerning, and the seller hadn’t taken great care of it, leading to its battered appearance being quite shocking.
Unlike the clearly low-end MX6000, the 260 features a proper 80-hole string bed. Not only that, but the frame uses an outer wave design and includes nanotechnology in its materials, pushing it slightly beyond the entry-level tier and into mid-range territory.
Aside from the stiffness of some models, the MX series as a whole doesn’t produce anything too extreme, whether entry-level or flagship models. The MX-260 feels very gentle to use; in addition to its moderate swing weight, its shaft stiffness feels at least half a grade lower than marked, and the frame’s rigidity doesn’t reach the level of the high-end models that use special woven carbon fiber materials.
This makes the racket easier to handle but noticeably weakens its feedback and stability. However, this aligns with its intended positioning.
Whether warming up with clears or practicing delicate net shots, the racket performs its duties well, and its flexibility is decent. Paired with a stiff string, it can perform well in the frontcourt during flat drives in doubles. For a player with good net sense, this racket could help secure an advantage at the net.
Still, it must be said: this racket isn’t difficult to use. I didn’t expect it to offer great elasticity, and the MX-260 is indeed not impressive. Even within the range of what I find acceptable, it’s on the lower end. In this context, the effect of the nanotechnology on the racket’s overall performance is hardly noticeable.
When generating power in shots, the MX-260 has a clear sense of energy loss, primarily due to the frame. I had previously thought the wave design was intended to enhance the frame’s elasticity and improve shot quality by leveraging the frame’s rebound. However, in this racket, it seems more like the design’s purpose was to allow lower-grade carbon fibers to withstand higher string tensions. The frame’s response is not active, and the shaft isn’t stiff enough, so smashes lose speed, and my confidence and desire for offensive play easily take a hit.
Additionally, the information in the equipment database is somewhat inaccurate, mainly because the racket does indeed exist in a 3U specification. However, I never experienced the advertised “high-rigidity carbon fiber” during my testing. If this is due to performance degradation over time, then in some cases, it actually performs worse than previous low-end MX models.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 60 Reviews
Yes, the Meteor X.
This is the third racket, and now I’ve got an MX60. This racket seems to have a slightly better reputation than the 30L, perhaps because its number is closer to the king, the MX80. Moreover, generally speaking, reaching the number 6 usually signifies the transition to true high-end models.
It’s not easy to impress badminton players in 2023 with a product from 2012
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, without grip, total weight in use: 93.0g, balance point: 305mm, shaft thickness: 7.2mm, shaft length: 218mm, stiffness: medium to high.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 28 lbs recommended, strung at 24–26 lbs with BG65Ti.
I have a deep impression of Victor’s yellow rackets, probably due to how striking the color is. On the MX60, I’d describe it unpoetically as “construction vehicle yellow”—or if we use the Colombia 6’s term, “mango yellow”—though to me, it feels more like the HX60. Regardless, the carbon fiber texture beneath the clear coat on the wings of the frame, the bright silver stickers at the paint junctions, and the prominent “X” on the shaft make this niche high-end MX look sharp and stylish.
When I first held it, I had no doubts about its MX series heritage. It feels balanced, with a pronounced sense of stability, regardless of the actual shaft stiffness. Perhaps it’s just intuition, but the sharp “whoosh” sound when swinging the racket is unmistakable.
However, after a few clears on the court, it became evident that the MX60 retains the series’ familiar “wooden” feel—quiet and subtle.
That said, the overall feel remains very good. Despite its muted response, the racket’s stability in initiating shots offers excellent precision. This can be attributed to the denser sweet spot provided by the 80-hole string bed and the stronger torsional resistance of the 7.2mm shaft. The racket doesn’t have a strong drive feel, but it’s not difficult to handle, making it relatively easy to execute beautiful clears.
Is it enjoyable? Compared to the cheap, flexible, and springy rackets of today, it doesn’t aim to please the user. However, this solitary character prompts the player to adopt a more serious attitude toward the MX60, offering the endorphins of self-discipline as a reward.
This is particularly noticeable in smashes; while it doesn’t feel overly head-heavy or elastic, its high energy transmission efficiency pushes you to improve. In powerful smashes, the MX60 doesn’t feel as raw or exhilarating as the MX80, but its consistent output and slightly reduced stiffness provide a longer-lasting sense of assurance in extended rallies, preventing fatigue from setting in too early in a match.
Flat drives are another strong point of the MX60. Besides the well-known stability, its fast swing speed and quick recovery make midcourt duels enjoyable. Although it’s not as agile to the point of being deadly, it’s sufficiently versatile. The ample tolerance of the 80-hole string bed’s sweet spot allows you to confidently rally at high speeds.
When counterattacking smashes or driving to the opponent’s rear court, it shares the MX80’s crisp rebound feel, delivering the shuttle cleanly without unnecessary fuss.
Using this racket means you need to improve yourself to find satisfaction. Although the MX60 is relatively gentle, it doesn’t pander. Its high performance potential becomes its greatest strength, turning even its muted feedback into an asset. Those who shy away from rackets that don’t flatter the user will miss out on the charm of the MX60.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 360 Reviews
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, with grip, total weight in use: 91.38g, balance point: 312mm, shaft length: 215mm, stiffness: high.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 28 lbs recommended, strung at 26 lbs with BG80.
The paint quality of the MX series isn’t particularly good; even the MX80 often suffers from chipping, let alone the mid-range and low-end models. The 360 and 260 only differ in color schemes; the three-way joint and T-joint have been changed to a contrasting black, and the magenta at 2, 10, 5, and 7 o’clock has been replaced with orange. The racket now looks more vibrant, with a neutral appearance and striking colors. I don’t dislike this restrained visual style; there’s nothing overly eye-catching about the racket, but it’s pleasant to look at.
This is a thoroughly offensive racket. After removing the grip, the strong head-heavy feel, noticeable self-weight, and high overall stiffness clearly indicate this. It’s quite different from the more gentle 260 in the same range. The 360 provides a powerful feeling of leveraging, allowing you to use a high arc to send the shuttlecock to the opponent’s baseline with just a casual swing of the handle. You need to control the speed and force to avoid sending the shuttlecock out of bounds. The 80-hole string bed is familiar; it’s easy to find the sweet spot despite the higher tension.
While most users might already be familiar with the racket’s feel, its high swing weight and stiffness still demand significant physical ability from the user, comparable to top offensive rackets.
The racket has a raw power feel, with high shuttlecock speed and good penetration. It works well for suppressing opponents’ baseline shots in singles or targeting the opponent’s female partner in mixed doubles. The high lift and smash actions are consistent, making it harder for opponents to predict the shuttlecock’s trajectory after several rallies. Additionally, the MX360’s string bed offers high tolerance, ensuring reliable performance in rear court lifts, using the racket’s head weight to achieve good shuttlecock release. Combined with the octagonal aerodynamic frame’s torsional resistance and directionality, it exhibits high stability in control.
The benefits of nano-resin are finally evident, with the shaft’s elasticity approaching that of high-end rackets. This, combined with the racket’s strong downward pressure, creates explosive offensive power. When fully utilizing the rear court, the MX360 delivers a substantial smashing force with a low trajectory and fierce intensity, without significant power loss, putting substantial pressure on opponents.
However, the racket’s continuity is quite poor. The high swing weight and long stroke time can be advantageous in rear court doubles, but once the rhythm is set, it becomes ineffective. Flat drives are particularly laborious, and in the mid-front court, if entangled by the opponent, it only remains to “block.” An assertive high lift is a good escape strategy, including in continuous defensive smashes. Even with this strategy, the high power demands during emergencies make the MX360’s performance in passive situations feel somewhat inadequate.
When unable to reach high points at the net, softer blocks and returns become more effective for net play. Fortunately, the 360 has a solid and steady feel, which doesn’t hinder these actions.
Positioned as a mid-range racket, the MX360 reminds me of the Colombia series, with similar pricing. Although MX360 is still far from the quality of the Colombia 6, which remains the king in this category, it’s not easy for a mid-range racket to stand out. Despite its straightforward approach, the MX360 has left a strong impression.
September 13, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 2012 LONDON Reviews
I initially thought the METEOR X series only had the JJS player version left, but a friend suddenly asked me if I had tried the Olympic commemorative edition.
What? I checked the equipment library and indeed found this racket, which reminded me of the unfortunate situation of the hx800ltd.
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, with grip, total weight in use: 95.4g, balance point: 293mm, shaft length: 215mm, stiffness: high.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 28 lbs recommended, strung at 25-27 lbs with High-Tech Steel Armor 5.
It’s very British; you can see that the Blue Factory has incorporated as many elements of the British flag as possible into the commemorative edition, including adjustments in color and lines. The full paint job is also a rarity. But is it visually appealing? I still think the standard models look more imposing. Besides, aren’t the water blue of the 30, mango yellow of the 60, and metallic silver of the 70 more striking than plain white?
When I first held it, it felt very familiar, almost like I had used it recently. Checking the stiffness and head-heavy feel, wow, it’s quite similar to the MX90. Could it be a re-skinned version? But there are differences; the London edition has a 7.2mm shaft, unlike the 7.0mm of the MX90. Also, the London edition was released two years before the MX90, so it would be more accurate to say that the MX90 is a re-skinned version of the London edition.
So, is it a product based on the MX80 with a MX90 tuning? Hey, it does feel that way. The slightly higher swing weight and better driving shaft stiffness are spot on. If we really need to get into details, the racket’s stiffness is between the 80 and 90, but the current High-Tech Steel Armor 5 is indeed stiffer than the KT66F, so focusing on small details might be unnecessary.
For players with good power and technique, it is easy to drive. Even if you can’t feel the shaft deformation, the racket’s inertia and string bed power are enough to hit high-clear shots with a good arc when making proper high-clear movements, as long as you hit the sweet spot. The feedback still carries that slightly rigid MX series feel. Is it wooden? I would have definitely said yes before, but since the perception of “wooden” varies among players, it’s a matter of personal opinion. I still enjoy the stimulation from this hitting feel.
Players who haven’t mastered their power technique should avoid forcing themselves to use it, as there is a risk of injury.
I first assessed its various shot effects. The high-clear shots are good, net play has a solid feel, and net flicks are stable. The flat drives are also effective, but the higher swing weight makes the racket feel clumsy in fast-paced rallies. It’s harder to maintain fluidity in shots and get adequate small power windows, making it difficult to handle passive shots. This really feels very much like the MX90.
September 12, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 7600 Reviews
I suddenly realized that there’s not much to say about low-end old rackets—they’re not readily available anyway. So, I might as well reveal everything during the All England Championship.
Strike while the iron is hot; let’s try the low-end MX models, and this one with the highest serial number is the MX7600. From the first two digits, 76 seems closer to 80, but it’s not named 8000, which is quite puzzling. Since it’s an old model, it’s hard to find more information from other sources, so let’s consider it as an ordinary entry-level racket.
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, with grip, total weight in use: 93.13g, balance point: 288mm, shaft length: 215mm, stiffness: low.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 72-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 24 lbs recommended, strung at 23-24 lbs with NS660Ti.
The racket has its own style in appearance, not following the high-end model’s patterns. It’s rare for a higher-end low-end model to have a unique paint job. The symmetrical paint scheme, with rich color layers from silver gray, fluorescent green, white, navy blue, and back to white, along with an unpolished metal-like finish, makes it visually striking. The racket is almost at the mid-range threshold, evidenced by the nano tec below the T-joint. However, the unchanged 7.2mm shaft remains the same.
The feel of the racket in hand is surprisingly light, with a very low balance point. For beginners, it might be hard to tell if the 3U designation was changed to 4U. It can directly be used as a speed racket. The 72-hole string bed characteristics have been discussed in previous reviews, so I won’t repeat it. The racket is very user-friendly, with low swing weight, high swing speed, and a relatively soft shaft, making it easy to drive the shuttle. Many times, you can even achieve shaft deformation with just a gentle swing. The power feel is good, allowing easy access to a high hitting point and better accuracy on the sweet spot.
However, the softness of the shaft significantly affects its attacking power and consistency.
In practical use, the MX7600 shows its friendly side, quickly demonstrating its potential without a break-in period. In doubles play, it feels like hitting the gas pedal on an A0-level electric vehicle at high speed. The racket’s swing speed and agility quickly reveal their advantages, offering more room for play in doubles.
The quick preparation allows for direct smashes from the front, and the racket forms a frame quickly after each shot. However, due to the string state and shaft stiffness, the response speed isn’t fast enough, making it less effective in drives and blocks. This can be improved with better strings.
In the mid-court, the MX7600 seems to be more flexible and offers more options than just net play. It handles low or difficult shots with acceptable feel for flicks, cuts, and net returns. Perhaps the racket’s solid feel is just average, but its flexible design makes it convenient for performing fancy moves.
Moreover, for handling passive shots or receiving smashes, if the strings were more elastic, it would perform better. I believe its softness and lightness are advantageous in such situations.
Using the MX7600, it’s quite easy to help teammates gain opportunities for rear-court smashes. However, when it comes to taking on offensive responsibilities in the rear-court, the MX7600 feels too gentle. Despite the good power feel and easy access to high points, both sudden short power and powerful rotation will result in noticeable deceleration. Excluding string issues, the 7.2mm shaft is indeed inadequate and should be firmer. Consequently, while it can produce ideal smashes, it’s unlikely to deliver powerful and fast attacking shots. Fans of heavy smashes might want to avoid this racket. If there’s only consistency without threat, implementing various tactics becomes difficult, and sometimes a simple high clear might be better.
However, from the perspective of a beginner’s racket, there are no issues.
September 12, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 7000 Reviews
This should be a low-end MX model that stands out among shorter players.
However, based on my inference from the MX260 review, the MX7000 is likely also a soft model. This is supported by information from the Zhongyu Equipment Library. The stiffness decreases from MX6000 to MX7000, similar to the change from MX80 to MX90. Additionally, low-end rackets rarely feature an 80-hole string bed. It’s not about the cost of adding more holes but rather that an 80-hole string bed requires higher demands on the frame’s structure and materials, making it better to use a 72-hole design.
Specifications:
Weight: 4U G5, no grip, total weight when in use: 85.30g, balance point: 313mm, 7.2mm shaft, shaft length: 220mm, stiffness: low.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 72-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 24 lbs recommended, strung at 24 lbs with Li Ning N9.
The color scheme is similar to the NR750 I mentioned earlier but is actually traced back to the blue, silver, and gray of the MX70. The two-tone gray and four-tone blue give the racket a centralized visual effect. The amount of stickers is considerable, the shaft is relatively plain, and there are no striking technological applications. It has the typical appearance style of a low-end racket. Compared to the previous Yu 09 I used, it’s much better, but the MX6000’s black base still makes me prefer it.
After removing the grip, the head-heavy feel of the racket is quite noticeable. The high balance point makes the swing weight slightly excessive for a 4U racket. Handling active shots at the handle position is not problematic, and the head-heavy feel allows you to generate noticeable shaft deformation and shot power when swinging the head. It’s a racket capable of producing powerful shots, but it does require a significant amount of physical exertion. After about 30 high clears, I started to feel soreness.
Therefore, I’ll directly address the racket’s attacking capabilities. Honestly, the MX7000’s smashing feel is outstanding among entry-level products. It delivers a robust and powerful hit, and with better strings, achieving a powerful smash is not too difficult.
However, its sacrificed consistency and endurance are quite noticeable, especially the former. The MX80 balances both drives and smashes well, whereas the MX7000, being two levels lower, uses high swing weight to achieve shot power, which affects the follow-up shots. Long preparation time, prolonged deceleration after swinging, and higher loads on the forearm and wrist make it uncomfortable in drives and blocks, and these shortcomings are amplified by the subpar strings. In the mid-court and front-court, its down-smashing becomes more coherent with improved swing speed.
The racket’s head and sweet spot areas are moderate, and the 72-hole string bed provides a stronger hold compared to the 80-hole version. Thus, the MX7000 offers better control over small shots and a good margin of error for rear-court lifts.
In passive situations, it relies more on personal skill. It’s not that the MX7000 needs exceptional power techniques; the shaft is actually quite friendly. The high swing weight remains a challenging aspect. In fast-paced rallies where you are stretched from side to side, you need core stability to handle both forehand diagonal drives and backhand clears. Relying only on your upper arm won’t suffice.
This racket has a head-heavy feel similar to the MX70, and it’s an older entry-level model with its own strengths and characteristics.
September 12, 2024
Badminton Racket Victor METEOR X 90 Reviews
In 2014, the MX-90, as the successor to the MX-80, should have become the ultimate masterpiece. However, the MX-90’s popularity and recognition are vastly different from the MX-80’s, and even it couldn’t escape the fate of being overshadowed by the MX-80 like other high-end models in the MX series. However, unlike the other high-end models outside the MX80/90, the MX-90 still has a certain audience, and some of the older MX series players tend to prefer the MX-90.
As the highest-numbered model in this classic series, it may be a more balanced option.
Specifications:
Weight: 3U G5, no grip, total weight when in use: 89.7g, balance point: 295mm, 7.0mm shaft, shaft length: 215mm, stiffness: high.
Frame: octagonal aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, grooves at 9-3 points.
String tension: 28 lbs recommended, strung at 25-27 lbs with KT66F.
Does anyone else, like me, look at some of the top products from the previous era and analyze their appearance, only to find that they lack some of the exquisite stickers, colors, and patterns compared to the new models? But they have a particular sense of power, and the MX-90 is no exception. Setting aside the imperfections due to age, the frame and shaft of the MX-90 have a thickness that exudes strength, providing a great sense of security. The color scheme uses a white base on the T-joint and head, with black or clear lacquer on the frame wings and cone, giving it a regal feel.
Looking through some data, the MX-90’s marked stiffness is indeed slightly lower than the MX-80N, but the head-heavy feel is more pronounced. Back then, this series was known for its solid feel, which I initially thought was due to the thick shaft. Then, I thought it was the inherent property of the 80-hole string bed. Later, I discovered a new clue—enhanced woven carbon fiber. This technology, which later became the reinforced multi-layer structure (FRS), was subsequently applied to some of Victor’s mid- to low-end models, greatly improving their high-tension durability. However, it also made those models’ faces feel more rigid, and to my surprise, this was the origin.
It’s worth noting that the MX-80’s shaft is 7.2mm, while the MX-90’s is 7.0mm.
The differences in frame shape and weight distribution result in a significantly different feel between the MX-90 and MX-80. First, the aerodynamic treatment on the MX-90 is not as sharp, and the frame thickness has increased, which reduces its swing speed compared to the MX-80. Secondly, the head-heavy setup makes the racket feel more solid and substantial. This brings about changes in the string bed performance, with the MX-90 having a stronger hold on the shuttle, making it more user-friendly for players who aren’t yet proficient in power generation. Additionally, the higher swing weight makes hitting long clears during warm-up smoother, as you can send the shuttle flying with ease, though this may negatively affect stamina during intense matches.
The shaft performance of the MX-90 also differs from that of the MX-80. With a thinner diameter, the shaft is more elastic, reducing the stiffness feedback and adding a bit of shaft recovery elasticity to the shots. The MX-90’s control ability has thus improved, with the added hold time providing more maneuverability during shots. Moreover, the head-heavy feel, similar to the MX-70, gave me confidence in the racket’s stability.
The feel in drives and blocks hasn’t weakened, as the MX-90 still offers excellent shot responsiveness and precise direction. However, the higher swing weight places greater demands on the user’s forearm and finger strength endurance. After a high-intensity doubles match, I noticed a bit of soreness in my forearm.
Judging from its feedback, I was very eager to test its attacking performance, and it didn’t disappoint. The actual effect needs no elaboration—its high potential was once affirmed by players like Gideon and Chou Tien-Chen. During powerful smashes, the racket provides an immensely satisfying experience for players with good power. In this area, the differences between the MX-80 and MX-90 become clearer. The MX-90, with its higher swing weight, offers a more intense downward pressure while reducing the difficulty of generating power, but its higher swing weight also makes follow-up shots less fluid compared to the domineering MX-80N.
Ultimately, Victor’s “X” represents a balanced design. From the earliest SupernanoX, to MeteorX, to HypernanoX, and now to ThrusterX, and even among all the X-suffix products in the series, they have intentionally pulled some of the more aggressive rackets toward the middle of the spectrum. The same applies to the MX-90. Compared to the MX-80, after this adjustment, it feels slightly more like an attacking racket.
I originally wanted to say that if I couldn’t get a good deal on the JJS, then the MX series would end here for me. But after reconsidering, I realized the MX80B is quite quirky as well, so let’s hold off on that for now.
September 12, 2024