Tag: Badminton Racket

Specifications: 4UG5, no cap, total weight 87.1g in used condition, balance point 303mm, middle shaft length 215mm, moderate hardness, 76-hole string bed, box frame, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, warranty 30 lbs, strung with 26 lbs High God 65 string.

I wonder how other players with the Jin Song feel about its appearance. For me, its design is not particularly appealing. It uses a blue and white base with red lettering and red patterns, which is the main color scheme. The frame has an asymmetrical design (similar to the Sky Blade series), with contrasting colors at 4 and 10 o’clock, creating a visual impact. Although I initially thought this would be a national style racket from the name, apart from the calligraphy-style “Jin Song” near the cone, there’s no other relevant expression. At first glance, I thought it was a racket with many design details but a traditional and unremarkable appearance. Fortunately, the star-like decorations on the frame become more pleasing with time.

While I can find one or two hardcore rackets in the 300 yuan range, in the Jin Song range, they are all friendly, including this one. The combination of a balance point slightly over 300mm and a 4U weight is ideal for me, providing a classic, easy-to-handle feel. It has a slight head heaviness that helps with power but isn’t overly taxing. The 15mm extended middle shaft allows for easy deformation, and the elastic feedback is stronger than previous models, roughly equivalent to titanium, so I estimate the carbon fiber modulus is around 30-35T, which is rare in this price range. Almost any player can hit the backline with it, and the moderate hardness provides better power in defensive positions. This racket has already met my expectations.

For users who use this racket for training or have certain advancement needs, stability in the “first racket” is important. Jin Song is not flashy and uses a traditional box frame and 76-hole string bed. This traditional construction gives Jin Song a representative stable feel. Whether handling small balls at the net or executing clear shots from the backcourt, Jin Song performs consistently in terms of direction and angle. However, with increased power, such as strong smashes or downward shots, the T-head and middle shaft might suffer from material hardness, affecting accuracy. Nonetheless, it remains reliable as long as aggressive techniques aren’t used. I didn’t perform typical warm-ups with Jin Song but found it effective against equally skilled opponents, especially with reliable backcourt clears in crucial points. Therefore, I rate Jin Song positively.

Offensive performance is essential for any racket, and those that fail here are what I call “toys.” Jin Song is a racket with good downward power and a pleasant feel for smashes, similar to its performance in clears. The head heaviness aids in power, and the middle shaft drives elasticity. The frame hardness is moderate, so the ball stays on the string bed longer, allowing even less skilled players to generate power. However, during aggressive smashes, the deformation of the middle shaft might reduce sharpness and accuracy, weakening the threat. The racket’s lower threshold for offense enhances continuity, allowing powerful smashes even in quick setups. If one feels the smash performance is lacking, changing the string configuration could help, as Jin Song supports a 30 lbs warranty. I believe beginners will find it useful even with a slightly higher string tension, and it will remain a good backup after skill development. Overall, Jin Song meets my criteria for excellence.

There are still some issues before reaching a perfect score. The flat drive shots are somewhat sluggish, which is a trade-off in design, as one must choose between light and agile or stable but slow. The paint quality is poor; although it’s an entry-level racket, quality control needs improvement. Jin Song has almost no flawless second-hand options, and the cone cap paint is prone to chipping.

I believe the evaluation of Xun Feng’s products by the Chinese Badminton Equipment Library is overly harsh, largely due to the manufacturer’s marketing methods influencing initial perceptions. I originally intended to give the racket to others for testing, but it was taken by a female player on the test day. For this price range, I consider Jin Song a top choice for entry-level, backup, or loaner rackets.

Introduction

Upon exploring Kumpoo’s range of badminton equipment, one finds that the names of their top models are steeped in tradition and rich with distinctive features. There’s the imposing “Thick Sun,” the powerful “Solar Eclipse,” and the formidable “Pine Peak.” So, how does the “Titanium II” measure up? I wondered why Kumpoo chose this name over something like “Tai Chi II,” and I sought to understand the reasoning behind it.

Through some reflection, I discovered a clue. Titanium is known for its hardness and lightness, often referred to as a “space metal” and widely used in the aerospace industry. The Titanium II is constructed with Toray’s carbon fiber, a top material solution for sports and leisure products, as well as an important component in modern aerospace applications. The consistency in material application hints that the Titanium II is light as a feather but strong as a rock. Therefore, it becomes clear why Kumpoo opted for “Titanium” over “Tai Chi.”

Evolution of the Titanium II

The Titanium II builds on the foundation of the Titanium I but does not undergo drastic changes. To establish the “Titanium” name in the market, Kumpoo had to address the flaws of the previous model. One notable issue with the original Titanium was its overly thin and brittle frame, evoking the phrase, “you fell before I even applied force.”

Thus, Kumpoo made significant improvements to the Titanium II’s frame. The number of grommets was increased from 72 to 76, and the frame thickness was upgraded from 4.7mm to 6mm. This adjustment helps distribute stress and enhance the head frame’s tensile strength, ensuring stable performance. Kumpoo also replaced ordinary grommets with specially designed single-piece grommets, showing attention to detail.

Appearance and Design

In terms of aesthetics, the Titanium II has transitioned from a matte finish to a vibrant gloss. Although this change sacrifices some durability and scratch resistance, it greatly enhances the visual appeal. The racket features a dual-color scheme of red and green, symbolizing both offensive and defensive capabilities. The vivid red and green Taiji patterns on the frame are striking and lifelike.

The design of the shaft continues the theme of the frame, with the number “2” cleverly incorporated into a Taiji symbol. Red and green text at the end of the shaft, marking “OFFENSIVE” and “DEFEND,” visually represent the Taiji philosophy. This design conveys the racket’s dual nature: powerful aggression in “OFFENSIVE” mode and refined defense in “DEFEND” mode.

Playing Experience

The Titanium II tested is a 4UG5 model, with 76 grommets, a total length of 675mm, an unstrung weight of 83.4g (93.2g with grip), and a balance point of 292mm (292mm with grip). The shaft measures 7.23mm, offering moderate elasticity. It is strung at 26lbs, with an official rating of ≤30lbs.

Upon first use, the racket’s slight head heaviness and comfortable grip were noticeable. The medium elasticity of the shaft provided a good rebound feedback, making it easy to generate power. The Titanium II’s low swing weight facilitates effortless maneuvering, making it feel intuitive and familiar even to new users. The direct and clear feedback during hitting allowed for effective adjustments and improved results.

The Titanium II excels in smooth transitions between shots, whether in attack or defense. This fluidity is likely due to its patented dual-hardness shaft. However, it lacks speed and precision in rapid shots and net play. Despite this, the racket’s stability and crisp hitting sensation compensate for these shortcomings, thanks to the SPIRAL design that reduces air resistance during swings.

In doubles play, the Titanium II’s moderate swing speed can be a disadvantage in fast exchanges at the net, though its good feedback still maintains a competitive edge. While it doesn’t provide the explosive power for heavy smashes, it offers a smooth and controlled attacking experience, akin to the refined movements of a Taiji sword.

In defensive situations, there’s no need to worry about the frame breaking under intense pressure. The improved frame stability in the Titanium II addresses past issues, ensuring reliable performance.

Conclusion

After a brief experience with the Titanium II, it’s easy to classify it as a “soft” racket. Its overall feel is gentle yet robust, with a rounded and substantial impact. The reduced entry-level threshold makes it easier to handle, providing valuable assistance to players in their progression. In essence, the Titanium II is an engaging racket that lives up to its name, embodying the principles of Taiji. Taiji represents balance and harmony, and the Titanium II exemplifies these concepts in its design and performance.

I have a badminton friend who is not able to play often. She is about 150 cm tall, with very slender limbs and has not undergone specialized training in techniques or footwork. Generally, such women are positioned as front players in mixed doubles. However, since the other players do not usually hold back, despite having capable partners, dealing with varied shots and intense attacks can be challenging. For her, even though she can return high-clear shots actively, she still often ends up only managing mid-court returns.

The first hurdle for beginner women is the difficulty in handling high-clear shots without proper power techniques. We can’t expect every beginner to use high-end rackets like the NF600 or NRGZ. If relying on equipment, it should at least meet these criteria: 1. Affordable, under 200 RMB; 2. Ultra-light, as some players only use 5U or lighter rackets; 3. Flexible shaft, making the racket easier to handle; 4. Some elasticity to ensure good shot quality; 5. Aesthetic appeal.

The A72 meets these requirements well, despite not being part of the “what more could you ask for” series (it’s more expensive than the K07).

Specifications: 5UG5, full weight 85g, balance point 300mm, 210mm long middle shaft, moderately soft tuning, box frame, strung with about 25lbs training string.

For a racket clearly aimed at amateur beginners, paying some attention to aesthetics can be an effective strategy to boost sales. It features a white base similar to the K520, Y1L, and K07, with colorful rainbow fonts and lines creating a basic sense of layering. Although the paint still feels cheap, it is visually acceptable and suitable for giving to young women (9500 tears). The paint quality is also decent (important for beginners who might hit the frame frequently), and during my testing, despite several frame hits and one collision, there was no noticeable wear. However, if the paint chips, the white appearance and carbon fiber black spots might be visually unpleasant.

The feel of swinging the racket is familiar, having used many ultra-light rackets. It gives a feeling of “light in hand, some weight in swing, overall fast swing speed,” similar to the VTFB, but with a noticeably softer middle shaft, allowing for noticeable deformation.

The middle shaft is interesting—it’s not as excessively soft as some entry-level rackets from Victory. Although my power shots almost max out the potential of the middle shaft, it provides a slightly rare resilience in its feedback, similar to bamboo bending and rebounding. The A72 is described as having a medium-soft shaft, and this resilience may be due to slightly higher modulus carbon fiber. Thus, while smashing may feel a bit stiff, the shots are crisp and fast, suitable for rapid downward shots, with the 300mm balance point being just right for this purpose.

Compared to the 6U WS72, the A72 performs better in the front court. Its faster start-up allows players who have good front court habits to apply more pressure on opponents without fearing shots going out of bounds. The flat drives are crisp, handling various line changes and positioning well in amateur play, and recovery speed is adequate. Directional control is good for rackets in this category.

Due to its weight, the racket has a slight feeling of power loss when receiving smashes. However, using the racket’s own power for smashes makes it easier to handle close-net shots, but lifting shots can be a bit challenging, especially for beginners who might rush their shots. The racket’s crisp shot quality can make it harder to lift effectively.

The reason I’m discussing the high-clear shots last is that this was my primary reason for testing this racket. I believe even advanced players wouldn’t mind using it for high-clear warm-ups. The resilience in the middle shaft makes the power application process more linear. While not comparable to high-end rackets like the NF600, the A72 is more controllable than those overly soft rackets aiming to lower the power threshold. With a 5U weight, it allows for smoother power application, and the middle shaft helps somewhat in the case of insufficient power.

In my opinion, Xunfeng is often criticized mainly because its target market doesn’t align with the forum’s mainstream preferences. Currently, the A72’s performance surpasses the Y1L, B110, and K520, and differs from the K07 and small iron hammer primarily in playing style. I recommend it for beginners with absolutely weak power, and it can be used by men as well. It’s good and offers better performance compared to the “what more could you ask for” series, without compromising. Using a 66U string might improve performance further.

In 2020, Kumpoo once again entered the badminton scene. With endorsements from internet celebrities, extensive promotion on badminton forums, partnerships with world champions, high-quality designs and color schemes, and affordable prices, Kumpoo successfully stood out among many second-tier brands. This series of commercial operations by Kumpoo has been undeniably successful, making the brand shine brightly among its peers. However, the products of the brand have also faced controversy.

Kumpoo Kevlarmor “Shiri”
The asymmetric design of the Kevlarmor series evokes thoughts of the Green Factory’s Ti series. (I personally really like this type of asymmetrical design.) The black and red color scheme is also quite impressive, and when paired with the Red and Black AB strings from the Green Factory, it looks excellent.

Specifications: 4U (82g), 290mm balance point, and a relatively soft shaft. Priced around ¥240, this racket is very beginner-friendly with no significant learning curve—it’s definitely a “sugar-water” racket. It’s also quite suitable for players with some experience, especially for doubles play. Note that despite Kumpoo’s official specs listing it as a 4U racket, it feels closer to a 3U in hand.

Kumpoo positions this racket as a doubles racket, and indeed, in my practical experience, it performs very smoothly in continuous attacking play. It exerts minimal pressure on the wrist, excels in flat drives, and the softer shaft contributes to a smoother swing and power generation. The feel is solid and stable. However, its performance in singles is quite average. It requires more effort for high clears and tends to be somewhat inconsistent in smashes.

The frame strength of the Kevlarmor is quite good, likely due to the special materials used (Kumpoo claims it uses bulletproof materials). The paint quality, however, leaves much to be desired, which is a common issue with smaller brands but is acceptable.

Comparing the Kevlarmor 1 and Kevlarmor 2, the latter has a stiffer shaft and delivers heavier smashes. Despite being only about ¥30 more expensive, I personally find the first generation to be better.

Summary: I recommend the Kevlarmor 1 to students or players with a limited budget who need a mid-range racket with a good feel and to those who want a racket suitable for continuous attacking play. However, it’s crucial to choose a racket that fits your own style rather than blindly pursuing higher tension or more expensive options.

The Reputation of This Racket Might Suffer Due to Quality Control and Pricing Issues

Although this racket should be considered a good mid-to-high-end model based on its appearance, materials, and actual experience, the quality issues have had a detrimental effect on its reputation. This highlights the irreversible impact of quality control on a product’s reputation.

Specifications: 4UG5, total weight 89.0g (with overgrip), balance point 309mm, 6.8mm shaft, length 210mm, moderate hardness, 8-4 o’clock string grooves, 76-hole string bed, three-in-one frame, string tension 28lbs with Aerosonic.

This racket is endorsed by Tian Houwei and comes with a cover featuring his signature, which is quite sincere for fans of Tian. As for the racket itself, I find the frame design more aesthetically pleasing than the shaft. The font on the shaft is a square black typeface with a gray-black stripe resembling a car’s chrome trim, which doesn’t appeal to my taste. However, the frame’s color is richer, with many details and a layered look, making it one of the most attractive Kumpoo products I’ve used recently, surpassing the Taiji in terms of appearance.

Don’t assume that because Tian Houwei endorses it, the racket is difficult to handle. Similar to how Hong Wei endorses the Shiri Racket, the 4U option indicates the target audience for this product. The quality of a product isn’t solely determined by its level; it’s essential to evaluate the actual user experience. Improving the experience can be achieved through better materials, and the 6.6mm shaft is quite impressive. Although the 40T material may not be top-notch, the thinner diameter and graphene technology enhance the shaft’s elasticity. The large 76-hole string bed, especially with the frame’s expansion at the 2 and 10 o’clock positions, gives the racket a “square face” feel similar to those on the TK Falcon and Altius J1, which increases the sweet spot and tolerance.

Before using a new racket, I usually warm it up by hitting a few shots to get a feel for it. Early use of the Tian Houwei racket clearly shows it as a “sugar water” racket. The 4U weight, moderate balance point, and the three-in-one frame with low wind resistance significantly reduce the driving difficulty. The medium shaft hardness makes it easier to flex. The racket is very user-friendly; a few high clears can reveal its character, making it easy to handle. However, the three-in-one frame design is rare, especially the box-like frame structure at the T-joint, which I’ve only seen on the HX900X. While it may improve frame stability and torsion resistance, I wonder why it wasn’t placed at the T-joint, where the wind resistance effect would be more noticeable. The likely reason is to avoid patent issues, but it does work and supports a maximum tension of 35lbs.

The frame stability is good, with above-average directional performance compared to similar products. Except for some extreme power attacks, it can accurately target shots, especially for high flat shots. With the current string setup, it offers good shot speed and effective pressure, with accurate placement.

The Tian Houwei racket also performs well in attacking. Besides the consistent characteristics of a “sugar water” racket, its elasticity and pressure provide a good smashing experience. Despite using 40T material, the shaft quality is impressive, achieving the highest elasticity among Kumpoo products I’ve used. It’s recommended to pair it with a hard, high-elasticity string. Although it doesn’t have the head-heavy feel of the Titanium Extreme, it still offers similar downward pressure with sharp shot placement and powerful smashes.

However, it’s less suitable for general speed play. While stable in mid-front court blocking, it has a slower pace and less crisp response in fast exchanges, often requiring high clears to escape. Fortunately, its defense benefits from a large sweet spot and high tolerance, making it reliable for continuous defensive play. Overall, the Tian Houwei racket is more suited for doubles than singles.

I agree with many players’ opinions that the Tian Houwei racket shows performance similar to some classic mid-range rackets, particularly a box-frame Falcon. It’s visually appealing and, if Kumpoo keeps it under 400+ RMB, it should perform well in the market. However, its rating on the Equipment Library has not exceeded 8, possibly due to initial quality issues with the string holes, which have had a lasting negative effect. This is somewhat unfortunate.

The equipment used by professional players has always attracted the attention of amateur players. The topic of which player uses which outstanding racket is often a hot topic among enthusiasts. Today, we are focusing on the Shanhai racket, specially designed for the Hebei provincial team from Jizhou. Recently, Shanhai made a stunning appearance on the Zhongyu Unboxing column, and now it is in the Zhongyu Online Review Room. Let’s take a look at its performance from various aspects.

—Detailed Specifications

The Shanhai racket I have is 3UG5; the recommended string tension is ≤32lbs; the shaft is moderately elastic with a slightly hard feel; it has a 76-hole string bed with a relatively small frame area, and the total length is 675mm; the unstrung weight is 87.1g (98.3g with overgrip); the unstrung balance point is 308mm (309mm with overgrip); the string setup is Kumpoo-K70, with a tension of 28lbs; and it features a carbon fiber cone cap. Kumpoo is known for its bold use of carbon materials, and this time, even the cone cap is made of carbon fiber, showcasing a significant cost in both carbon materials and the new mold.

—Appearance and Finish

As a domestic brand, Kumpoo’s design is strikingly innovative and vibrant, with a rich use of traditional Chinese elements. Upon close inspection, some bubbles can be seen in the frame stickers and paint. Although Shanhai is positioned as a top-tier gift box racket in the brand’s lineup, the quality of the paint needs improvement.

—On-Court Experience

During practical use, the Shanhai racket leaves a deep impression with its excellent and comfortable medium shaft elasticity. The racket offers a noticeable ball wrap and holding sensation. The slightly higher balance point and low shaft threshold allow the racket to perform well even with incomplete swings. The racket’s concentrated sweet spot and moderately hard frame, combined with the elastic medium shaft, provide ample resilience.

However, despite its attractive exterior, the Shanhai has some drawbacks. The medium shaft exhibits excessive oscillation during rebound, leading to a slower recovery speed, especially in prolonged rallies. While it excels in ball holding, it compromises shot accuracy, making it less effective in fast-paced exchanges and continuous attacks, but well-suited for singles and defensive positions in doubles.

The Shanhai’s use of internal foam molding avoids dullness and excess vibration, creating a surprisingly impressive impact feedback. The high overall swing weight and solid frame shape give it a natural advantage in attacking play, with powerful smashes and long shot placement. The combination of internal foam molding and T800 carbon contributes to its strong smashing performance, similar to most attacking singles rackets. However, the racket finds it difficult to achieve tricky shot placements. Its stability and moderate performance at the net are expected.

—Passive Defense

In passive defense, Shanhai demonstrates its excellent performance as a balanced racket. The return of power and comfort is effective, but the medium shaft’s deformation can affect shot accuracy, resulting in slightly erratic placements. The smaller frame also reduces the margin for error during defense.

—Recommendation Summary

Shanhai focuses on a comfortable attacking experience and high cost-performance. In its price range, it offers a balanced yet offensive racket with superior qualities. While it may be considered a luxury even in practical use, its overall resilience and comfort, along with decent smashing capability, make it suitable for controlled and single/double offensive play. It is recommended to use a hard and thin string for attacking or a soft string for a balanced approach, ensuring control over shot strength to avoid out-of-bounds shots.

Xunfeng has always had some strong products, but the mismatch between these products and the broader market’s needs often leads to criticism. This assessment is personal and not influenced by the brand’s promotional tactics.

The current product is a great example. I’m quite pleased with it, and it works well for casual matches with friends. As long as it’s not used for playing against stubborn teammates or leading games, it can still perform competitively. It’s particularly suitable for beginner players who lack strength, especially female players.

I first encountered Xunfeng with their unconventional 9U and 10U rackets, and this time is no exception. Thanks to a friend for providing the test equipment.

Specifications: 6UG5, with grip tape, total weight 84.0g, balance point 297mm, middle shaft length 217mm, medium hardness, box-shaped frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, warranty for 30 lbs, strung with Xunfeng K70 strings at 24-26 lbs.

The pure white color has been used by many manufacturers, and Xunfeng is no exception, which easily reminded me of the K520. The golden middle shaft and frame sticker, along with minimal parameters or tech details, give it a very clean look. Perhaps due to cost control, there’s not much to say about the appearance. After all, white can cover a multitude of flaws, and the appearance isn’t an issue. But why the name AKA? As known as?

In terms of design, this racket offers only 4U and 6U versions, skipping the 5U version. The current 6U version aligns with mainstream ultra-light racket designs, with a medium shaft hardness and a high balance point that aids in leveraging. The borrowed racket had a thick grip tape, making the balance point nearly 300mm, which is quite notable.

When using it, the AKA provides both a light and powerful feel. The shaft tuning avoids excessive softness, preventing the “hitting cotton” sensation common in some ultra-light rackets. While the AKA’s power isn’t as strong as the K600, it still delivers acceptable speed. For its target audience, being able to hit the shuttle to the backline and maintain basic accuracy is sufficient, and the AKA fulfills this well.

Unlike the K600, which aims to increase downward force while remaining ultra-light, the AKA focuses on being a friendly and consistent tool. It’s understandable that balancing all aspects might be challenging, but for a higher price, one can get rackets that attempt to achieve this balance.

In practice, the AKA excels in mid-court drives and backcourt smashes. Both areas perform similarly to other ultra-light rackets, offering good speed and control. With its box-shaped frame and shaft, the AKA provides speed and control, making it effective for scoring with smashes and net play.

Against higher-level opponents who keep the shuttle deep, the AKA may struggle despite its consistency. However, it’s particularly good for defensive play and casual games. Its large sweet spot, elasticity, and swing weight meet the expected needs. Among the 6U rackets I’ve used, the AKA stands out for its solid base and slightly improved material quality and performance. Although the middle shaft’s explosiveness isn’t the highest, its recovery speed after deformation is excellent, making it more consistent than many ultra-light rackets.

If you’re experiencing aesthetic fatigue with other brands and need an ultra-light racket of this level, consider trying the AKA.