Tag: Badminton Racket

羽毛球球拍

  • Badminton Racket Victor CHALLENGER Ti70 Light Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor CHALLENGER Ti70 Light Reviews

    One of the flagship models from the Challenger series, as soon as you see the “Ti” prefix, you know what kind of cutting-edge technology the racket used at the time.

    The positioning and origins of the two flagship rackets can be discussed in the next article. Today, let’s talk about this mango-yellow masterpiece.

    Specifications:
    3UG5, with cap, total weight in use: 95.80g, balance point: 292mm, shaft length: 218mm, medium stiffness, box-shaped frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, tension guarantee of 26-28lbs, strung at 25-26lbs with NBG95.

    I have a deep impression of every racket in mango yellow, especially from Victory. The “Columbia 6” in some ways is also a racket built with this “retro” concept, showing that this color scheme was indeed classic in the past. The head features metallic silver decals on top of a carbon fiber base, transitioning at the 2 and 10 o’clock positions to an entirely yellow base coat. This design is a signature style of the high-end “Ti” models and is reflective of its heritage. Even today, this racket still stands out with its layered, eye-catching, and classic design.

    Although it does come in 4U specs, the “light” back then was more about the balance point, just like the MX30L and Ti70. With a balance point of 295mm in playing condition, it’s firmly in the balanced racket category. So even though it’s a bit heavier, it still feels relatively light in the hand. The racket’s stiffness is rated as medium-high, which by today’s standards is more like medium. The driving force is good and clear, neither too stiff nor too soft. Recently, I’ve been playing with 72-hole rackets—both isometric and traditional oval ones—so in my current state, I found this racket to be easy to use.

    After gaining some familiarity with it, I confidently took it into more intense matches. Its relatively low entry barrier quickly became apparent, on par with the Arc7. It’s not too heavy, has good elasticity, and the box-shaped frame combined with the thick shaft ensures the racket’s torsional stability and precision. While playing clears and flat drives, the racket offers clear feedback upon impact. Adjusting and fine-tuning both angles and power significantly improved the placement of my shots. Even in rushed situations, it didn’t lead to frame mishits.

    Of course, I can only speak to my own experience, as some players have reported that it’s not easy to handle in the equipment database.

    What I found more enjoyable than the Arc7 was that the Ti70 offers a stronger sense of explosiveness in the sweet spot, even though the Arc7 wins in terms of sweet spot size and forgiveness. This gives the Ti70 a notable advantage: when you find the perfect opportunity to exert power from the backcourt, you can confidently go for a powerful smash, regardless of whether the opponent is prepared to defend. While the Ti70 doesn’t offer extreme explosiveness or speed upon hitting the sweet spot, it provides solid feedback and reassurance in terms of shot power. Additionally, it excels at quick, sharp smashes and pushes. However, if you attempt slice smashes, its lower forgiveness will become apparent, demanding more precision.

    I would describe it as a younger version of the Ti98, but the Ti70 has a slightly larger frame, and the shaft material isn’t as densely packed, which limits its overall explosiveness. This slight shortfall actually works to its advantage at the net. With a less stiff shaft and lower frame rigidity, the slightly enhanced ball-holding feel greatly improved my control during net shots. It feels much more solid. When rotating to the frontcourt, the Ti70’s frame allows for smooth net kills and tumbles.

    However, expecting this ease of use to translate into excellence in fast exchanges and drives isn’t realistic. The box-shaped frame, while stable, creates more air resistance, and combined with the longer shaft, the racket’s recovery speed after each short stroke is slower, affecting its ability to keep up in fast-paced exchanges. In such situations, I can usually only hold out for three rounds of flat drives before needing to clear to the backcourt. The 3U version is fairly agile but doesn’t offer the high swing speed or continuous play capability of faster rackets. A steadier, more deliberate playstyle suits it better.

    Despite this, I still prefer the 3U version, as its solidness and stability more than compensate for the slight loss of agility.

    Being steady and patient never goes wrong, especially since the Ti70 is quite forgiving. It’s user-friendly when returning smashes with borrowed power or when recovering from defensive situations. The swing weight isn’t overly taxing, and the moderate stiffness doesn’t raise the power threshold too much. Even with a backhand drive, I can hit a straight shot to the backcourt.

    It’s solid like a seasoned veteran. The Ti70, despite competing in a different category, still has a decent following, which speaks to its popularity. Given its current second-hand market price, this old racket still packs quite a punch.

  • Badminton Racket Victor CHALLENGER 9500 S Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor CHALLENGER 9500 S Reviews

    Here’s why I’m reviewing the 9500 again. The batches available now are mostly later versions, with two upgrades compared to the original release. First, the S/D shaft has become thinner, with some saying it reaches 6.8mm, though actual measurements typically show it at around 7.0mm. Regardless, this is an upgrade from the original (C/F). Second, the number of string holes has changed from 72 to 76. Driven by a sense of achievement, I realized after checking the equipment library on Badminton Central that I had indeed missed one version. Unfortunately, the original version is now quite hard to find for comparison.

    However, throughout my usage, it became clear to me how much my skill level has changed over the past three years. It’s been a journey of self-discovery.

    Specifications: 4UG5, with bottom cap, total weight in use is 93.1g, balance point 298mm, 7.0mm shaft, 220mm length, low stiffness, box-shaped frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, 24 lbs warranty, strung at 24-26 lbs with BG65.

    Like the old version, the new version comes in red and blue paint jobs. Honestly, I believe the paint quality of the 9500 is pretty good. The three-color segments on the frame, the glossy finish, and the well-executed paint application are still not outdated even today. This is something I didn’t mention in my previous review. Some players might not buy it for its looks, but how well something is designed and how well it looks are two different concepts. If you compare the 9500’s paint quality across different brands in the same range or even with higher-end products from Victor, this uncut paint job still holds its own.

    The 4U 298mm balance point is a very honest setup. As some gear reviewers have said, the current state of the 9500 offers just enough swing weight for a powerful hit without losing control or making it difficult to maneuver. This specification is particularly user-friendly. Even with durable strings, players with proper basic techniques should have no problem hitting high-quality clears. The only downside is the relatively low 24 lbs warranty, but this is hardly a flaw given the consistently low price.

    I specifically reviewed my earlier thoughts on the 9500, and while I suspect they were also new versions, the current racket feels noticeably better, possibly due to the string condition. The slightly softer shaft tuning remains, but this time, there is no dead or muted feedback after hitting, though it still lacks power. I believe the minor upgrade to the shaft has made a real difference.

    This review is more thorough than the previous one, especially since I used this challenger racket in both singles and doubles. Considering the context for beginner players, I would more strongly recommend the 4U version. It remains easy to wield, reduces energy consumption, and performs better in doubles. The extra few grams of weight in singles or doubles isn’t as crucial for enhancing attack power or shot stability as proper form and higher swing speeds are for beginners.

    What surprised me is that the 9500 provided a very good experience in the frontcourt during doubles play. The frame is relatively smooth, so the balanced design allows for comfortable performance during fast-paced rallies. I describe it as “comfortable” mainly because its agility helps you keep up with consecutive shots, allowing you to perform well. The 9500’s tendency for a softer hit and the slower recovery speed of the shaft are limitations in high-level fast exchanges, but it’s easy to use, which is already a significant advantage.

    Additionally, the softness of the shaft has its benefits. The shaft deforms more easily in passive situations, and when the material elasticity can’t be further enhanced, this flexibility is key to delivering shots accurately. The 76-hole string bed also provides a larger sweet spot, improving forgiveness and reducing the effort required to generate power, allowing the racket to perform to its full potential in defense and passive situations.

    If you compare the 9500’s offensive power to other products in the same category, it can serve as a benchmark. Over the years, its attack power has remained slightly above average, just enough to be considered solid. It’s a racket that allows for effective downward shots while maintaining continuity. For players advancing their skills, it doesn’t disappoint. Of course, for beginners still fantasizing about smashing through opponents with one powerful shot, I’d advise that due to the frame and shaft material, the safest and most economical way to boost your attacking threat is to upgrade your strings.

    Overall, even though I’ve used many excellent entry-level products and have already used this particular model, I must admit that this racket, which has been praised for years, truly deserves to be called a classic. If you clearly understand your needs, you can certainly find more suitable entry-level products for specific beginners at this price point. However, its success lies in its well-roundedness—it’s naturally a racket that won’t go wrong for beginners. Even if it doesn’t suit you, selling it secondhand would only lose you a few dozen bucks, and everyone recognizes its value.

    This review also led me to discover a more composed version of myself, who can better handle equipment, opponents, and make the most out of them.

  • Badminton Racket Victor CHALLENGER 9500 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor CHALLENGER 9500 Reviews

    As a classic, long-lasting entry-level racket, it remains one of the options recommended by many experienced players to beginners as their first racket. I still remember my first named racket being from Victor’s Explorer series, a product of the same era as the Challenger.

    Although I haven’t played with this racket yet, I’ll make up for it by borrowing it from a friend. By the way, this isn’t from the “what more could you ask for” series, as this racket still costs a significant amount today, and it even retains its value on second-hand platforms.

    Specifications: 4UG5, with overgrip and string installed, total weight and balance point unknown, medium stiffness shaft with a 7.5mm diameter, 210mm in length, suspected to have a fish-mouth cone cap, standard box frame, 10-4 o’clock string grooves, strung at 25lbs with BG65Ti strings.

    In terms of appearance, it’s acceptable. The red stickers on the frame are aesthetically pleasing, but there’s nothing particularly noteworthy to comment on. I could critique the aesthetics of many of Babolat’s high-end rackets, but for this classic design, there’s nothing much to say—it feels standard and ordinary, like when parents wear gold-rimmed reading glasses. The only touch of technology is the “power box” marking at the 5 o’clock position, giving the 9500 a sense of modernity.

    The racket has a slight head-heavy feel, and the box frame leads to slower swing speeds. However, the 4U version doesn’t feel uncomfortable during air swings, with a moderate load. Rackets at this price range often have a plasticky feel, which may be a psychological bias of mine. To give a more precise description in the future, I’d probably need to do blind testing without knowing the price.

    When hitting clears, I immediately sensed the old-school flavor typical of Victor’s mid-to-low-end rackets from the last decade: wood-like and jarring on the hands! The shot quality isn’t bad, and the shaft is easy to drive without being overly soft. As long as the technique is correct, hitting clears is relatively easy, though the feedback isn’t particularly pleasant—it’s akin to using a racket with a slightly higher balance point like the Astrox 99 Tour (see the previous review). It’s passable for an entry-level racket, though—aside from the iron hammer models, I haven’t encountered many rackets at this price range that deliver a truly powerful shot.

    The racket’s performance in handling defensive and passive shots is stable, which I found satisfying. If it were a 3U version, this aspect might suffer, but the 4U version is more suitable for me, especially as someone who mainly plays doubles. The 9500 excels in handling net shots, with its large face and slightly ball-holding nature making it easy to adjust angles and control. In mid-to-front court situations in intermediate-level doubles matches, it can help set up shots for a rear-court partner who can deliver powerful smashes.

    Theoretically, the standard box frame should create a large and consistent sweet spot, but hitting the sweet spot on the 9500 didn’t make me feel like I was getting a higher-quality shot. On the contrary, missing the sweet spot resulted in unpleasant vibrations throughout the racket. Overall, its smashing ability is above average for rackets at this price point. Its moderate head-heaviness and stable box frame provide controlled power for smashes, but its shot speed remains average, and attempts at more explosive shots often feel like they lose power. The vague sweet spot and off-sweet spot vibrations significantly impact the enjoyment of attacking with this racket.

    In terms of drive and block shots, it falls short compared to the cheaper Jujiang K07. The box frame’s high air resistance, coupled with the long, soft shaft that’s slow to recover after deformation, results in less crisp shots, leaving the player somewhat powerless in fast-paced exchanges. It’s puzzling that, despite the extended shaft, the 9500 still requires a fish-mouth cone cap design.

    Having tested many entry-level rackets at this price range, I agree that the 9500 still holds its value with its stable quality, though it’s difficult to call it the best option. All current versions come from Victor’s Nanjing factory, and differences between versions require individual testing. Personally, I think the C/S/D versions, which have had shaft upgrades, may offer better performance. For doubles, both 3U and 4U are viable, though for singles, 3U is a must to avoid more shortcomings. I wouldn’t recommend this racket to female players, and for beginners who don’t favor a power-based playstyle (a rare few), this racket offers some unique advantages for control, net play, and improving front-court techniques. Overall, though, this racket feels somewhat outdated.

  • Badminton Racket Victor ARTERY TEC Ti98 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor ARTERY TEC Ti98 Reviews

    I’m preparing to update the Yu 10 Metallic, but today I want to first introduce what I personally consider the best balanced racket from the Blue Factory that I’ve encountered so far. Some curious readers who treat these reviews like “digital preserved vegetables” might be surprised and wonder, “Hasn’t the Yu 9X already been reviewed?”

    What I’m about to talk about is indeed not that racket. I couldn’t find the exact release date of this racket in my gear collection, but the earliest reviews date back to 2009.

    So, apologies, but in my mind, this antique is more in line with my aesthetic preferences than the Yu 9X.

    Specifications: 3UG5, no bottom cap, total weight in used condition is 91.9g, balance point is 293mm, 7.0mm shaft, length of 215mm, medium-to-high stiffness, small box-frame racket head, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, warranty for 28-30lbs, strung with 25-27lbs Gosen G-Tone 5.

    The appearance of the TI98 bears obvious marks of its era, giving a simple and unpretentious feel, though it doesn’t strike me as outdated but rather as a classic, much like the McLaren from the Silver Arrow era. The entire racket features a silver coating with a few stickers, and the sharp-edged, boxy frame design from Victor’s most primitive models solidifies its austere aesthetic—it truly is old-school, lacking even power grooves, making it a standard box frame. The shaft has some dark ring patterns, somewhat reminiscent of the texture seen on rackets using WOVEN carbon technology, but since there is no official mention of this, I lean towards attributing this to a paint effect. The large areas of titanium at the 10-2 o’clock positions on the frame are quite eye-catching, as titanium tech was highly sought after in rackets from that era.

    Will the 3U version deter people again? At least before I actually used it on the court, I thought it might be an unrelenting weapon. But in reality, its weight feels quite pleasant. For one, its overall weight isn’t particularly high for a 3U racket, and two, the weight distribution in the head isn’t overly significant. Looking at the relatively low balance point reminded me of the website’s description of E-Titanium, which mentioned a weight-boosting effect, though this isn’t very apparent on the TI98. Nonetheless, the swing weight and overall weight make for a racket that feels solid in hand without being too energy-draining or uncomfortable to swing.

    I went straight to the court with the TI98 without any prior adjustment period. Logically speaking, the smaller sweet spot on the 72-hole small-box frame should be harder to find, but I was in good form that day and didn’t encounter too many difficulties with offensive shots. I even took it into doubles play without any issues, which was a stroke of luck and may not reflect a typical experience. The shaft isn’t as sophisticated in construction as modern rackets with advanced technology, but with a diameter of 7.0mm, it looks quite thick. However, the elasticity is still there, similar to the MX60.

    The relatively low balance point gives the TI98 a level of continuity that satisfies me. Though it can’t achieve faster swing speeds, it retains some degree of agility in hand. In doubles, as long as you’re not positioned too far forward and can react to the incoming shots, its performance in flat exchanges and fast blocks is acceptable. The real challenge lies in the lower forgiveness rate due to the small-box head; if you miss the sweet spot, it’s hard to generate a powerful return. Additionally, the shuttle doesn’t fly off the strings with a crisp bounce, which might feel unfamiliar to most users of speed-oriented rackets.

    The lack of crispness is due to its shuttle-holding ability, which actually benefits net play, offering stable control and quick adaptation when performing net shots. The slight shock-absorption effect allows returns to stay close to the net. In the hands of a player with good finesse, the TI98 can deliver some excellent performance. In theory, the feel for drop shots and slices should also be quite good, but due to the smaller sweet spot, its tolerance remains less than ideal.

    However, the lower tolerance does not affect the TI98’s defensive performance. As long as you’re positioned correctly, it’s not hard to defend against smashes, and it offers both the ability to clear to the backcourt with a rebound effect and to softly block shots close to the net. This is rare because it’s difficult to balance hard, bouncy, and shuttle-holding characteristics. This also reflects the excellent balance of this racket. Aside from some fast, overhead clears that are hard to hit the sweet spot and produce quality shots, I believe the TI98 has a high enough floor for performance.

    As for its offensive capabilities, I think the word “shocking” sums it up. Despite not having an extremely high swing weight or a highly elastic shaft, when you hit the sweet spot during a full-powered strike, the shot feels exceptionally solid and stable. The TI98’s ability to deliver speed and power in smashes largely depends on how accurate and forceful your strike is, accurately reflecting the user’s technique and physical strength. Its heaviness is different from that of rackets like the ZSP, with less of a whip-like feeling and a pure, solid strike due to the small-box head. In the backcourt, a well-executed smash can often break through the opponent’s defense. The directional clarity provided by the box frame ensures you won’t miss your mark or struggle to bring the shuttle down, and the excellent feedback allows me to feel both the shaft and string bed flexing and storing energy.

    Currently, the price for this racket and its older sibling fluctuates around 500 RMB. Considering its quality, I think it’s well worth the price, performing half a level or even a full level better than the mid-range offerings from the three major brands in this price range. And this is due to careful tuning and high-quality materials, rather than relying on differentiated designs (speed, offense) to excel. If I had tried it a week earlier, it would have definitely made it into my last roundup post.

    However, after the trial, I’ve developed a bit of mistrust towards the new rackets on the market. Over the years, advancements in production technology and manufacturing processes haven’t fundamentally improved the experience of using rackets. Instead, they’ve only made rackets more varied and specialized as new materials are discovered. Yet, if you were to quantify the overall performance of a racket, I doubt the reference values today would be much better than those of top-tier models from one or two decades ago.

    This racket has once again greatly changed my perspective on balanced rackets.

  • Badminton Racket Victor ARTERY TEC Ti99 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor ARTERY TEC Ti99 Reviews

    Thanks to a fellow badminton player for lending it to me, I have finally completed the two remaining high-end models in the Pulse series that are still on the market. This time, it’s the big brother of the series, the TI99. Based on the specifications, the most notable difference between the TI99 and TI98 is the swing weight. Initially, I thought this would be a difficult racket to use for offense, but once again, I was pleasantly surprised. I love the feeling of unpredictability, yet I can’t deny its excellence.

    Specifications: 3UG5, with bottom cap, total weight 94.39g in used condition, balance point 298mm, shaft length 218mm, high stiffness, box-type frame, 72-hole string bed, 9–3 o’clock string grooves, 30lbs warranty, strung at 28-30lbs with Li Ning L67.

    It’s a classic color scheme: fiery red and metallic silver. The transition in the middle of the frame is very sharp, giving it that straightforward old-school feel. Due to the titanium mesh texture, the entire racket has a great sense of layering, making it both visually appealing and timeless. However, in some details, it remains quite traditional, for instance, it uses almost no stickers, but the glossy paint gives it an excellent texture, like a New World Cabernet Sauvignon, with a refined appearance that enhances the racket’s overall look. Though it’s a reissue, it has successfully retained the charm of the original details.

    Though the racket is said to have a heavier head, I couldn’t help but laugh when I held it. Yes, compared to the TI98, the TI99 does feel heavier, but considering the existence of extreme offensive rackets like the Black Dragon Tooth, TK9900, and Yu 10M, it’s hard to say that the TI99’s swing weight would be too much for intermediate players. In my opinion, the 3U version is still slightly head-heavy but remains balanced overall. The TI99’s elasticity is well-displayed during active shots, and the drive feel from the shaft, aided by the frame’s weight, is relatively easy to harness.

    Since it has a small flat head, some users might find the distribution of the sweet spot unusual. However, after comparing it, I realized the head curvature of the TI99 is actually quite similar to the 100ZZ; it’s just narrower by a frame thickness. For those accustomed to similar rackets, this shouldn’t be an issue. The feeling when hitting the sweet spot wasn’t as explosive as I expected. There’s a rumor that the reissue swapped the original egg-shaped head for a flat one, making the original string bed’s performance something to look forward to.

    Let’s skip over the TI99’s performance in flat drives and fast exchanges. Although I can still manage some continuous shots with it, this racket wasn’t designed for that. Discussions on performance should be framed within its intended use. So, what should we talk about? Of course, the feel!

    The shaft and frame are both stable and elastic. Back in the day, I would even say it performed better than the ArcSaber series. Its stiffness supports a solid feel, providing good directional control. I especially enjoy its stability during long rallies, which saves both effort and stress. Once again, I didn’t find the racket heavy, so its power wasn’t overwhelming. I guess many players who claim the TI99 is too heavy are either long-time users of 4U rackets or are intimidated by the specs.

    However, the racket wasn’t ideal for front-court play, especially when intercepting at the net, where the slower response took some getting used to. Due to its weight, the TI99’s stability in small net shots was actually better suited to my playstyle than the TI98. However, the TI98’s lighter swing weight offers better agility, especially in doubles.

    The increased downward pressure made a noticeable difference in smashes. When I had enough time and space for a full swing, the TI99 outperformed the TI98 in delivering sharper, more solid smashes with powerful placement. If you consistently hit the sweet spot, the offensive experience can become quite addictive. From my perspective, if you can handle the TI99’s swing weight, it’s not difficult to generate offensive pressure with it. Compared to extreme offensive rackets today, it’s still relatively user-friendly. Additionally, after pairing the racket with high-tension strings, its excellent shock absorption became apparent. After two hours of play at high tension, I experienced no discomfort in my arms, which is rare.

    Similarly, in defense, there’s not much difference in feel between the TI99 and TI98. For difficult shots like backhands or underarm shots, the TI99 performed well with soft blocks.

    One more thing to mention: the racket has excellent high-tension durability without the “dead” feel of frames reinforced with FRS. When high-grade carbon fiber is used, the false sense of durability comes from FRS, while true durability comes from E.TITANIUM. Just as I was about to suggest, “If you can’t afford the Platinum Claw, try the TI99 first,” I realized it was indeed once used by TTY, and it’s definitely more fun than the TK7000S. Upon reflection, I was being a bit hasty.

    This is a very fun racket to play with—neither outdated nor compromised. The performance it delivers still holds up today. An excellent choice in terms of value for money, old school, but it’s unlikely to attract many players nowadays.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 1500 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 1500 Reviews

    Parameters: 3UG5, with bottom cap, total weight 94.4g in used condition, balance point 293mm, 7.0mm shaft, length 215mm, medium stiffness, diamond-cut wind-breaking frame, 72-hole string bed, 9–3 o’clock string grooves, warranty 24lbs, strung at 24lbs with VBS66N.

    I like the grass green color. Although the racket doesn’t have too many decorative stickers, I think the unique color choice is very successful and has good recognizability. The transition between green, white, and black on the frame is basic, but it creates a natural layering effect, which is more comfortable than some plain white or pink designs from other brands. It also suits the glossy finish. However, it seems like the 1500 comes in multiple color options, which suggests that there are indeed significant tuning differences in this low-end series from 1100 to 1900.

    Although the materials are limited by cost, the Brave Sword frame is still authentically retained, resulting in very low wind resistance and high swing speed, giving a sense of flexibility during use. When focusing power, you can also hear the sound of slicing through the air. Even though low-end materials are used, they can’t hide the fact that the racket face is relatively hard. Under the current string configuration, the 1500 still shows a crisp and elastic characteristic. Combined with the moderate stiffness of the shaft and the large sweet spot, it provides a good feeling of power when hitting the shuttle, with enjoyable feedback. However, in terms of directional control of shots, it falls short. After the rigidity of the frame is reduced, you can’t expect precise control of the shuttle’s landing point, especially with flat or high shots.

    Even though the swing weight of the racket is relatively balanced, its downward pressure is not bad, performing even better than the entry-level JetSpeed 02 I used previously. While you can’t expect explosive attack power through the elastic potential energy of the shaft, the rigid feel of the racket face still allows you to hit shots that maintain confidence when you get an opportunity for a downward smash. As for the real power, that depends more on the user’s skill level and the condition of the strings. It may not be very friendly to beginners, but intermediate players won’t feel much discomfort using it.

    The racket doesn’t feel as springy as high-end Brave Sword models when performing flat drives and blocks, but this actually makes it more controllable in net play, as it’s less likely to bounce too high. The large racket face provides enough forgiveness, and the high swing speed improves its performance in defensive situations. The racket also feels good when generating power in backhand shots, providing a sense of reliability.

    In conclusion, the 1500 seems to be another racket made with lower-end materials that might not excite entry-level players, but it has no major flaws. I personally like it; both the color and the feel meet my expectations for a racket in this price range.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD LHI Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD LHI Reviews

    A truly remarkable racket, I have encountered many top players who have used various rackets, and almost all of them have left me thinking, “They actually liked using this kind of racket.”

    This one perfectly fits my almost stereotypical understanding of Daoist Long.

    Specifications: 3UG5, without the bottom cap, total weight 92.5g in used condition, balance point 300mm, 7.0mm middle shaft, length 220mm, moderate to high stiffness, diamond-cut wind frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, warranty 28lbs, strung with 25-27lbs KT66F.

    This is a highly attractive weapon, extremely so. The deep black base paint instantly elevates the racket’s premium feel. The LHI on the middle shaft already indicates its exceptional background. The frame’s paint design is symmetrical, with minimal stickers on the wings but extending from 2 o’clock to 5 o’clock. The gold stickers at 3 and 9 o’clock, and the blank spaces at 4 and 8 o’clock, prevent it from being too flashy. The sharp lines give it an elegant sense of layering. After not having handled a Liangjian frame for a long time, I now notice that the 12 o’clock position is indeed very thin. The wind-breaking treatment is as sharp as ever, but this leads to the LHI suffering from poor paint durability, making it prone to chipping, especially on the racket’s head—such a pity for such a high-quality appearance.

    The racket’s tendency to hit the frame before adapting makes its fate even more doomed. The frame’s sharpness and thinness, combined with its high swing speed, make it challenging for many to adjust to initially. This seems to be an inherent trait of the Liangjian series that people both love and hate. Additionally, the low ball feel and the wood-like hitting sensation due to outdated material technology are also characteristic.

    Surprisingly, compared to the more rigid and violent Liangjian 11R/12, the LHI, as a signature racket for singles players, is somewhat softer. The racket’s wings use vibration-damping string grommets and inner waves structure, effectively lowering the force threshold. It seems that Daoist Long’s Tai Chi style does not require such hardcore equipment for support.

    So, is the LHI violent? Not at all. On the contrary, aside from a somewhat unappealing feel (neutral), the racket is very gentle, to the point that some players find it too soft.

    In flat drives, it continues the series’ excellent performance. The current LHI, being a 4U version, can quickly switch in response to sudden flat drives from midcourt, effectively handling challenging shots like those to the back or under the arm—very agile. Although it was originally a singles player’s racket, it is actually quite suitable for doubles play—more so, in fact.

    Initially, I found the racket’s relative neutrality puzzling, but as I continued to use it, the quality of this top-spec Liangjian left me in awe.

    Those familiar with Li Xuanyi’s playing style will recognize it: fluid and Tai Chi-like. In high-level matches, it’s challenging to force him into a particularly passive position, and he doesn’t often show much aggression in prolonged rallies. However, once there’s a crack in the opponent’s patience, he seizes the opportunity to strike decisively. The atmosphere of unknown timing for a sudden attack is quite intimidating.

    The LHI indeed embodies this style.

    Its lightness gives it a sense of keeping up in various rhythm battles. When you feel you can increase the pace, the LHI’s high swing speed and strong continuity allow you to immediately ramp up the pace with added pressure or flat drives. When slowing down is needed, the large racket head and sweet spot provide ample tolerance, making it easy to defend against continuous down-pressure shots and disrupt the opponent’s rhythm with changes in direction and backcourt control.

    Its friendliness allows for spontaneous offensive timing. Daoist Long’s later career rarely featured heavy smashes, but his ability to deliver sharp and effective shots with just a slight lift is formidable. Even without full body rotation or preparation, the racket can deliver a lethal down-pressure shot through the small joints’ explosive power, enhancing the sense of sudden attack.

    In terms of control, the racket’s performance is also impressive. The larger racket head aids in controlling net play, and for advanced players with consistent actions, the LHI’s lightweight makes successful smashes, net shots, and lifts more achievable and threatening. Additionally, its ability to compress the backswing allows for more varied handling of backcourt shots, whether it’s a smash, flat shot, or drop shot—highly deceptive. The racket’s elasticity and torsional resistance may be lacking compared to current models, but its control and attacking versatility remain surprisingly effective.

    This is a racket that becomes more enjoyable the more you use it. On the court, it feels like everything is under control in the midst of the battle.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 09 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 09 Reviews

    I didn’t expect it to be such a Liangjian.

    Six months ago, I wouldn’t have felt the urge to complete a speed racket series that’s been around for over ten years. Although it’s called classic, it can also be considered outdated, especially since the JetSpeed series deeply resonates with me, and there’s no need to go retro if purely pursuing performance.

    Yet, I’ve started using even older models.

    Specifications: 3UG5, without the bottom cap, total weight 92.9g in used condition, balance point 311mm, middle shaft length 215mm, high hardness, diamond-cut wind frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, warranty 28lbs, strung with 24lbs Victor NS880.

    I find the Liangjian 09’s appearance quite dull—silver base paint with a small amount of red at the racket head. The whole racket looks unremarkable and blunt. It seems there are no intentional decorations or many stickers, and the technological applications aren’t indicated. However, the Liangjian frame’s characteristic of easy paint chipping is preserved, and the old issue of paint flaking off the cone cap makes it look worn over time.

    The feel of this racket is surprisingly heavy for a speed racket. This reminds me of the 3U JetSpeed 70k, but Liangjian 09 is clearly stiffer. Initially, I worried that the old strings would make the racket feel too soft, but it turned out I underestimated the string bed’s tension, as the ball response still has a crisp, bouncy characteristic. The Liangjian series’ direct and stiff feel is truly unique.

    Even though the string’s elasticity has significantly decreased, the racket’s head heaviness still provides substantial leverage, sending the shuttlecock to the baseline with a higher arc in clears. Compared to newer products, it doesn’t show any significant lag. I believe changing the strings could improve its shuttlecock speed and overall performance.

    This is my first time using such a heavy Liangjian and experiencing such a solid performance from a speed racket. Besides the enhanced grip from the racket’s weight, the NS880’s ball-wrapping feel helps Liangjian 09 provide an excellent experience in net play. During warm-ups for net play, I could already feel the “closer to the net with each stroke” sensation, and in doubles play, I occasionally managed to pull off a lucky net shot. Even with my basic skills, I began to enjoy working on net play.

    Moreover, the large racket head increases tolerance, reducing the chances of mistakes from overly aggressive shots.

    However, the increased head weight does result in some loss of agility. Agility isn’t the same as swing speed, but the characteristic “whoosh” sound is still noticeable during active play. Liangjian 09 slows down during flat drives and quick blocks.

    In passive play, it sometimes struggles to keep up, and continuous defensive play can be taxing on small joints, increasing the workload and causing forearm fatigue.

    The Liangjian 09’s enhancement in control actually comes at the cost of some continuity and agility, making it more suited for singles play.

    This Liangjian’s attacking feel is very close to traditional offensive rackets—stiff feel with a slightly heavy head, and a solid down-pressure response. Due to the string’s condition, I didn’t push for full power in backcourt attacks, keeping each down-pressure shot to about 70% to maintain continuity for the next shot. Even so, Liangjian 09’s sharpness and power in smashes exceeded my expectations. Despite the decrease in string tension, it can still produce satisfying smashes.

    However, it does have some inherent torsion resistance issues regarding placement.

    In summary, as long as you don’t treat it as an old relic, it remains a capable and reliable racket. I didn’t expect the Blue Factory to release an upgraded version of Liangjian 12 this year in the name of commemoration. I also didn’t anticipate that even a more aged high-end model would still be highly effective.

    Its unremarkable appearance is well-matched with its robust build.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 15 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 15 Reviews

    Curiosity Series 476— Victor BRAVE SWORD 15 is in a somewhat awkward position. It is said that when the Blue Factory secured the sponsorship of the Korean team, Lee Yong-dae chose his equipment. Although Liangjian 15 was intended to be a higher-end model than Liangjian 12, Lee Yong-dae preferred the feel of Liangjian 12, which led to the latter’s prominent reputation and acclaim.

    Another version I heard is that Liangjian 15 was originally intended to be a mid-to-high-end product. Despite its hardness being just below Liangjian 10, its overall quality was not as high. However, this still does not explain the dramatic price drop of this racket.

    Specifications: 3UG5, without the bottom cap, total weight 93.0g in used condition, balance point 296mm, middle shaft length 215mm, medium hardness, diamond-cut wind frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, warranty 28lbs, strung with 25-27lbs BS710/KT66F dual strings.

    The cone cap design is similar to my MX-90, showing its age. From the pricing, it indeed doesn’t reach flagship-level standards; its mid-to-high-end positioning is accurate. Aesthetically, the frame color is banana chocolate, and the Sword at the 4 o’clock position is in dark red, which looks good. The pearlescent paint enhances its appearance, but the Liangjian’s wind-breaking frame is traditionally prone to damage. The sample I have has endured years of abuse, leading to numerous blemishes; the whole series suffers from this issue.

    Upon closer inspection, Liangjian 15 also has a slight flat head, which might reduce its sweet spot area and make it a bit more challenging to handle. However, in practical use, the racket does not perform as aggressively in terms of hardness, and deformation is less difficult to occur. I do appreciate a slightly firmer feedback in doubles-speed rackets, so perhaps the Liangjian 15 has softened over the years. After all, it was once claimed to have hardness just below Liangjian 10… well, I haven’t tried Liangjian 10 yet.

    The large face does not significantly aid in the tolerance of off-center shots, and the difference in shot quality when hitting within or outside the sweet spot is still noticeable, a characteristic of the flat head. With age, this Liangjian feels somewhat fatigued, and the frame doesn’t have a rigid feel. Perhaps the string setup is not ideal, with some ball cling making it feel somewhat awkward.

    However, the swing speed is very fast, and the racket produces a sharp sound when cutting through the air, a feature of the current frame shape. Liangjian 15 performs exceptionally well in the mid-court and front-court, remaining agile despite being 3U in specification. It performs very well in flat drives, blocks, or intercepts with quick response and excellent feel for both forehand and backhand. Liangjian still delivers an impressive speed for doubles, even though it is a mid-to-high-end product.

    Due to its swing weight, it is more flexible than the 09 but still has a lower quality for smashes and tolerance compared to other Liangjian models I have used. The slight power concentration from the flat head is somewhat reduced by the middle shaft’s elasticity and hardness. Its smash quality is mediocre, placing it in the upper-middle range of speed rackets. To achieve effective smashes, one still needs to focus on continuous and aggressive play rather than brute force.

    I rarely consider using this racket for delicate net play; only in front-court situations without aggressive intentions do I make soft shots. Although Liangjian 15 has a good feel for back-court lifts, this is not entirely due to the large face but rather the current string setup that enhances control at the net.

    Have I not compared it with Liangjian’s flagship models?

    Despite its shortcomings, it is very affordable, costing around three times less, and provides exceptional value. For players seeking elasticity and advanced attack experiences in a speed racket, it might not be the best choice. However, Liangjian 15’s versatility and adherence to the Liangjian series characteristics make it a very cost-effective racket priced at 1180. It can outperform newer series like JetSpeed or Rapid in terms of value for money.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 12L Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 12L Reviews

    Generally, in Victory’s rackets, models with the “L” suffix often have substantial meanings, such as the MX-30L aimed at women, the lightweight TK-15L, and the JetSpeed 05L, which merely indicates a different color. However, as the product range expands, I’m not entirely sure if “L” still signifies a special adjustment in that direction.

    At least for the Liangjian 12L, looking at its weight data, I have doubts.

    Specifications:
    Weight: 3U G5, without grip, total weight in use: 100.70g, balance point: 292mm, shaft length: 216mm, moderate stiffness, diamond-shaped aerodynamic frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock grooves, warranty up to 30 lbs, strung at 25 lbs with NBG95.

    Despite the worn-out paint, I can still see its former glory. The silver and white base coat and water blue accents give it a scholarly appearance, making it stand out among the Liangjian series’ standardized designs. It reminds me of the old MX-30L. Upon closer inspection, the blue stickers on the frame at 5 o’clock and the wings feature pearlescent paint. If it weren’t for the Liangjian series’ “flower sword big break” resulting in a damaged aerodynamic part, this would be a very attractive racket.

    As a derivative model of the Liangjian 12, it shares the same technologies, such as the inner wave and shock-absorbing pins, which should theoretically make it a more lightweight product. However, both the 3U and 4U specifications and the total weight of up to 100g were unexpected, leading me to question the “L” designation. Nevertheless, the Liangjian 12L is still a light and swift racket. Compared to the 12, its lower balance point makes for a sharper and more agile feel. Additionally, the overall stiffness of the 12L is lower, allowing for greater shaft deformation during powerful shots, making it more forgiving in terms of driving power.

    So, what’s the trade-off? Difficulty in controlling the ball. The Liangjian 12 was not renowned for its attacking capability, but its higher stiffness and appropriate swing weight allowed it to perform well in consistent downward shots. This was one reason why many experienced players would return to the 12. With the 12L’s adjusted balance point focusing more on consistency, the change in feel has made the ball trajectory straighter and less sharp, with a slower response. While the 12L can still deliver powerful smashes with a 95 tension string, the confidence in shot placement is somewhat diminished.

    I initially thought its net play capabilities would significantly improve, but I found that I had to be more mindful of my power, as I pushed several balls out of bounds when trying to forcefully hit the ball at the net. The transition from other rackets to the 12L made this issue more apparent, leading to frequent mistakes. Most errors at the net, whether hitting out or into the net, were due to over-aggressive movements, exacerbated by the 12L’s tendency to push shots forward.

    However, the flat drives and defensive feel are still quite good, confirming the improved agility as previously mentioned.

    It’s worth noting that the 12L’s ball feel is somewhat similar to the Liangjian 15, with the ball staying on the string bed slightly longer, which boosts confidence in backcourt drops and net play, enhancing its tolerance.

    Other aspects, including the feedback and feel, don’t show significant differences from the 12. For details not covered here, refer to previous reviews for a comparison. Overall, the Liangjian 12L is a more agile and user-friendly version of the 12. While its reputation and circulation are less compared to the 12, its playability is noteworthy. The problem with downward shot performance and the poor paint quality contribute to a significant depreciation in the second-hand market, making it another loss for me.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 12 se Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 12 se Reviews

    Fans of the Liangjian series, take a look at the latest addition. Over the past decade, the Liangjian series has weathered fierce competition and still survives, which is quite remarkable. Despite the excellent performance of the new Speed series, the Liangjian still has its distinctive features, with the 12 being a standout.

    In the new era, where material advancements meet traditional designs, it’s worth anticipating how this combination will perform.

    Specifications:
    Weight: 4U G5, without grip, total weight in use: 90.34g, balance point: 302mm, shaft length: 215mm, medium-high stiffness, diamond-shaped aerodynamic frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock grooves, warranty up to 28 lbs, strung at 25-27 lbs with VBS66N.

    The appearance is indeed elegant. The porcelain blue base coat gives a delicate touch, with a symmetrical pattern but differentiated sticker colors. The gold sticker at 4 o’clock looks very refined, striking a perfect balance. Being a flagship model, the T-head logo features gilded and subtle textures, reflecting light significantly at certain angles. The shaft appears slimmer; although it lacks the robust power feel of the older Liangjian models, it looks particularly sleek.

    In terms of handling, adaptability, and swing speed, it’s fundamentally similar to the Liangjian 12, with no significant differences in these aspects. I’m unsure if there were any adjustments in weight distribution, but the differences in the experience with the 12SE and the 12 are not substantial. Both feature a large head frame and sweet spot, with a diamond-shaped aerodynamic frame providing high swing speed and sharp sound. Both also share the same feel of leveraging the racket and balanced weight during swings.

    The material upgrade, however, has led to significant changes.

    The traditional “wooden” stiffness of the old Liangjian has been improved with the addition of High-Carbon and the floating handle, making the hitting feel more elastic. The deformation of the shaft during forceful shots feels clearer, offering good power storage. This reduces feedback stiffness and difficulty of use while adding a bit of flexibility to the previously rigid shot mechanics. The material update improves the elastic response, allowing shots like backhand low hits or overhead clears to transition to the opponent’s court with higher quality even under compressed power.

    In terms of feel, the 12SE has shown improvement in flat drives and blocks. The old 12 was quite stiff, with fast response in quick exchanges, and the 12SE largely maintains this performance. However, it has become more forgiving, a sign of its more mature design.

    The GB version only offers the 4U specification, which is less favorable, especially for smashes. Despite the new shaft and handle, the 12SE hasn’t significantly improved in explosive power and speed. However, it has better continuity, allowing me to maintain balance even after a powerful smash is blocked. The 4U specification lacks the heavy and stable feeling, and the floating handle further softens the power feedback, making me feel less confident during strong attacks. The 55th’s performance in aggressive smashes shows a sense of compromise, perhaps due to aging.

    Victory has indeed aimed to improve the Liangjian 12 with better materials and enhanced performance in the SE model. The current SE and 55th models are reasonably priced, so fans can buy them for sentimental reasons. The feel difference between the two models is quite noticeable. This isn’t necessarily a question of which is better, but it does remind me of the trend seen with some flagship models from other brands where they’ve taken a more friendly, soft, and non-core route in their updates.

    Overall, I still quite like it.

  • Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 12 Reviews

    Badminton Racket Victor BRAVE SWORD 12 Reviews

    The high-end HX series has hit a bottleneck due to acquisition issues, and the supply of HX500P/C is extremely low. If anyone knows of a good deal, feel free to recommend it.

    Since I can’t play with high-end models, it’s still nice to use entry-level rackets to lighten the mood. I picked up an HX20H for a bargain price, and I wonder if it will be a pleasant surprise.

    Specifications:
    Weight: 4U G5, without grip, total weight in use: 86g, balance point: 295mm, shaft diameter: 6.8mm, length: 210mm, slightly flexible tuning, 10-4 o’clock grooves, diamond-shaped aerodynamic frame, strung at 25 lbs with BG80P/VBS68.

    In terms of technology, it’s all familiar. Those who’ve played since the Nano 7 era should be acquainted with this. It references the brand’s hammer series and uses FRS to make it a high-tension durable racket. As a model with the “H” suffix, it’s rated for up to 35 lbs of tension. The paint job looks quite youthful, with a white base and blue-black stripes. For an entry-level racket, it’s visually appealing, showing that thought was put into the design, similar to the small hammer series. It’s certainly more layered than the YU1L. However, the paint quality seems a bit lacking—chips easily when bumped, and the inherited cone cap tends to darken over time.

    The swing feels nimble. Although the diamond-shaped frame only marginally reduces wind resistance, a 4U balanced racket doesn’t demand much power, so with its light swing weight, it gives the user a good sense of control. With this friendly setup, beginners shouldn’t find it hard to handle. The slightly softer shaft makes it easy to achieve deformation during swings, though it doesn’t whip around like the small hammer. Considering the 7.0mm shaft is a standard Victory entry-level feature, there isn’t much more to say about it.

    During warm-up, I initially struggled a bit because I hadn’t played with balanced rackets much lately, and I hadn’t adjusted my power for clear shots. To be honest, the shaft is easy to drive, but the light head requires a bit more force when hitting, or else the shot might lack depth or height. Given that I had a year-old BG80P on the string bed, switching to a more elastic string should improve things. Sure enough, after switching to a fresher VBS68, things got better.

    As for doubles, the racket is indeed easy to handle. In mid-to-front court exchanges like drives and blocks, the nimbleness persists, and even though the shots aren’t particularly sharp or crisp, the racket keeps up with fast reactions, allowing for slightly stronger rallies. As for net kills or blocks, as long as the small power movements are well-executed, it can handle windshield wiper shots well. Despite being an entry-level racket, it performs similarly to an ultra-light model in fast-paced exchanges.

    The backcourt smashes, however, aren’t as impressive. The racket feels rather soft, and with the right movements, you can execute a smash without much effort, but the shuttle speed and power are mediocre, and there’s a noticeable loss of energy transfer. With a balanced racket, the lack of head weight means that the power transfer relies more on the shaft’s elasticity, and this entry-level shaft still has room for improvement in that regard. This explains why sometimes, with head-heavy entry-level rackets like the small hammer, the elasticity feels better, and the smashes pack more punch.

    While the barrier to effective smashes is low and the downward shots feel smooth, the shuttle quality leaves much to be desired. However, this isn’t typically a key selling point for entry-level rackets, and similarly, increasing the string tension on the HX20H won’t make a big difference.

    This classic frame shape still provides a stable feel that’s easy to adapt to. For net play, the shuttle-holding sensation gives decent confidence, although this feel is what the Nano 7 was often criticized for as “mushy.” It’s also quite handy for defense against smashes.

    All in all, it’s another well-behaved, easy-to-use entry-level racket. To be honest, it plays like a younger, more tension-resistant version of the Nano 7. Compared to the HX7SP, its price-performance ratio is indeed pretty good and worth recommending.