Tag: Bonny

Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon AtheneⅡ Reviews
The author wants to talk about another series from the UCHU (Wūquē) family—Athena.
The first generation of the Athena racket was one of my favorites, even though it wasn’t a particularly popular model. The only aspect that didn’t quite resonate with me was that, despite being intended as a more female-oriented piece of equipment, it still used the same old clear varnish with exposed woven carbon—a look that I personally find unappealing. Sure, it might seem novel at first glance, but after seeing it a few times, it loses its charm.
This time, I got to try out the Athena 2 in advance, and using it brought back the refreshing feeling of encountering something cool and breezy during a hot summer—a perfect match for the season.
Specifications:
- Weight: 4UG5, with grip and heat-shrink film, total weight in use: 92.1g
- Balance point: 290mm
- Shaft: 6.8mm diameter, made of Mitsubishi M40 carbon fiber, length: 217mm, medium-low stiffness
- Frame: Aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, 9-3 point grooves, 30lbs string tension warranty, strung at 24-26lbs with VBS66N.
Design: Finally, they’ve figured it out—using a glossy white finish significantly improves the overall quality of the racket. The previous design had a purple-red color scheme, while the Athena 2 uses a mint green, replacing the slightly seductive vibe with a much fresher look. This change might also make some male players more willing to give it a try. The overall design language between the two generations remains consistent, with the designer having captured the essence. The large color blocks on both sides of the frame and the scaly treatment at the 4 and 8 o’clock positions have been retained.
Performance and Feel:
The Athena 2 stands out as a rare racket with an 80-hole string bed that doesn’t feel stiff or shock your hand. It’s formed using the UCHU’s signature fiber membrane technology, which seems to be working wonders. Softness, high elasticity, and user-friendliness are Athena’s trademarks. I was initially concerned that the second generation might lose some of the first generation’s charm in pursuit of more competitive performance, but my worries were unfounded.
First Impressions: The first thing that struck me was how similar it felt to the recently tried Wuyingshou (No-Shadow Hand)—both have a similarly rounded aerodynamic structure and a white base coat, making them look like different colorways of the same series from a distance. Even when held and weighed, it’s hard to distinguish between the two due to their similar balance point and swing weight. While this might be an optimized swing weight setting to appeal to a broader audience, the lack of distinctiveness between products is an area where UCHU could improve. The real test, however, comes on the court.
On-Court Performance: After a few high clear rallies, I breathed a sigh of relief—it’s still the same familiar feel. When rallying with a new opponent during warm-up, I often worry about my basic skills being exposed if I miss a shot or misplace it. But the Athena 2 performed admirably. As long as I executed the proper stance and swing, I didn’t even need to exert much force to send the shuttle high and far. The shaft’s elasticity is excellent, highly responsive, and the sweet spot on the frame is large, with high swing speed, making it extremely easy to adapt to.
Interestingly, the first generation had a somewhat head-heavy feel, which has been toned down in the second generation, without compromising the racket’s power transfer. Instead, it feels more agile.
Agility and Control: The second generation also shows marked improvement in drives and blocks. The tuning of the Athena 1 helped avoid issues with the shaft not recovering properly after consecutive swings. In the Athena 2, the phenomenon of the racket wobbling during continuous swings has been reduced, and subjectively, it feels like the shaft recovers more quickly after deformation. Although the shot response still isn’t particularly crisp, the increased continuity during rallies offers more strategic flexibility. From what I’ve gathered, the parameters between the two generations are roughly the same, but the shaft stiffness has been slightly increased, leading to a better sense of control during high-frequency shots, likely explaining the improved performance in fast-paced exchanges. Unfortunately, the cone cap from the previous generation, which I favored, was not retained, making it less stable when using my thumb as a pressure point during power shots.
Offense: I wouldn’t place overly high expectations on Athena’s offensive capabilities, but the latest generation does show an improvement in attack efficiency, thanks to the same grade of carbon fiber, balance point, and stiffness, combined with enhanced craftsmanship. The application of new nanomolecule technology reduces energy loss during power shots and improves energy transfer efficiency, allowing more power to be delivered to the shuttle with each shot. Given Athena’s easy-to-drive characteristics, I can maintain power throughout the backcourt without worrying much about stamina, allowing me to raise the pace of the game as needed. The initial speed of smashes is also quite good, focusing on suddenness. Of course, against more skilled opponents, whether a heavy smash will be effective is another matter—just think of it as a racket with some offensive capability for a more relaxed game. But don’t underestimate this aspect; it already makes Athena 2 a viable option for serious competition.
Defense: I’m also reassured by how it performs in defensive situations. After a heavy smash that’s countered with a deep diagonal or an overhead clear, the Athena 2 allows for a more graceful recovery.
Summary: Unlike other UCHU rackets that emphasize directness, crispness, and stability, Athena sacrifices some competitive potential in favor of user-friendliness and unique feel. The direction of Athena’s iterative upgrade is clear, focusing on enhancing ease of use while maintaining its distinctive experience. Overall, Athena 2 excels within its positioning, and in terms of feel, it even surpasses some of the major manufacturers’ light, soft, and elastic representatives like the NF600. Given its price, I believe the Athena 2 will be an attractive option for players at various levels.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny STAR CLOUD Reviews
The days still begin with caffeine and end with zolpidem. Sometimes, holding a racket I’ve never used before, I no longer feel the excitement and curiosity I once did during tests—just a faint sense of aversion to completing the task. I still haven’t regained the enthusiasm I used to have. But since the “Sky Realm” series isn’t limited to just “Starlight,” I might as well continue exploring these differences with a simple goal in mind.
Specifications:
- Weight: 4UG5, with grip, total weight in use: 91.7g
- Balance point: 278mm
- Shaft length: 220mm, flexible tuning
- Frame: Fluid box-style frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 point grooves
- Tension warranty: 26lbs, strung at 24-26lbs with VBS66N.
Since these rackets are from the same series, there are naturally no significant changes in appearance. The Nebula’s frame pattern has been altered to a wavy cloud design, making it visually more dynamic. The color scheme has shifted to a blue-gray tone, still fresh and appealing. The frame’s grommets have turned yellow, but beyond that, there’s no other difference. However, neither in style nor in specifications do the three models in the Sky Realm series show any differentiation, so are they essentially the same racket?
As the measurement process progressed, the differences between the Nebula and the Starlight began to surface. Once the grip was added, the Starlight’s weight increased, but its balance point dropped. This is likely due to quality control, introducing a certain level of variability. The Nebula’s balance point is as low as 278mm, a parameter I have rarely seen. Perhaps it’s because it’s a product with significant tolerance, making my Starlight a favorite of fate.
When held, the Nebula feels just as solid as the Starlight, making it difficult to distinguish between the two at this stage. However, during swings, the Nebula feels more maneuverable when preparing and executing shots, with slightly less frame deformation. This explains its performance in more competitive situations.
A lower balance point means the current racket is even more maneuverable. During warm-ups with rally shots, the Nebula offers more direct feedback compared to the Starlight, reducing the sluggishness in shot response. It’s equally light, but the Nebula’s power and leverage ratio are slightly reduced. Considering the Nebula’s strings are two weeks fresher than the Starlight’s, it at least suggests one thing: the Nebula’s shaft is slightly stiffer. This is also evident during defensive plays, where the feel of rebounding or flicking shots diagonally is clearer, and lifting shots feels crisper and easier to execute.
This increase in stiffness is significant for enhancing competitive performance.
Starting with clears and smashes, the Nebula delivers a firmer shot response, slightly raising the power threshold, but the shaft can store more energy, providing more direct feedback and a crisper shot. With more focused power, the Nebula can produce fast, flat clears, proving its potential for explosiveness. In the backcourt, whether clearing, slicing, or drop shots, the shuttlecock and string bed often feel a bit stiff, resulting in shots falling short and requiring time to adapt.
The quality of drive shots has also improved significantly. It can handle continuous rallies, with faster shot response giving me more leverage to engage in strategic exchanges near the net. However, the shaft’s deformation recovery time is naturally longer during continuous swings, risking mishits as the pace increases.
The Nebula might be the best in the Sky Realm series for downward shots. The enhanced shaft texture adds power to smashes, making them more effective. In drills with assisted high shots, it’s easy to notice the Nebula’s strong “sweet” feel, reminiscent of the TK15. Despite the low balance point, its lightness makes it easier for me to judge the timing for smashes, reducing the risk of mishits. Whether it’s a smash or a power shot, the shuttlecock clearly carries more force, while maintaining decent continuity. You could think of it as a softer version of the 9001, which should make it easier to understand.
I’m still coasting, but the improved competitive performance is my impression of the Nebula. I’m glad it helped me regain a bit of my previous state.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny J20-010 Reviews
Last October, I received a sample of the 009 racket, and from the moment I tried it, I couldn’t put it down. Its exceptional speed experience still stands as the pinnacle of swing speed among Bonny’s creations. Light yet highly elastic, it offers a sharpness that doesn’t compromise on power, providing me the best comfort after losing the 90S. Despite its initial instability and lack of solidity, I still chose the 009 as my main racket for a considerable amount of time.
However, after trying out the 46w, which shares the same lineage but is tuned for a vastly different style, I was captivated by its fierce aggression. This made me ponder a longer-term question: how far can the 009 truly accompany me?
Specifications:
- Weight: 4UG5, unstrung 84g, balance point at 295mm
- Strung and without grip: total weight 84.6g
- Frame: Fully aerodynamic, 8-4 point grooves, 76-hole string bed
- Tension Warranty: 30lbs, strung at 24-26lbs with VBS66N.
Visually, the 010 and 009 have only a few minor differences: the color of the cone cap (one white, one black), the color drip paint near the T-joint (one yellow, one white), and some localized color changes in the frame’s pattern. It’s still as attractive as ever, with these slight differences not altering its youthful and appealing essence. However, compared to the equally eye-catching 46w/f35a, it exudes a more rebellious vibe.
Here’s a fun fact: Both the f35a and 010, when strung without grip, have a weight difference of just over 1g, with the f35a being slightly heavier. Considering that the 010 was made to an 84g specification, does this mean that both rackets have some deviation?
Last year, I had no idea there was a 010 version of the J20, and based on my limited understanding of Bonny at the time, I was more inclined to think that different series with different numbers released simultaneously only varied in paint and specifications, with essentially the same core. So, when I learned of the 010’s existence, I didn’t care much, nor did I see it as a new racket, and I wasn’t interested in it.
However, when I warmed up with the 010 on the court, I felt a difference—it had indeed changed. Undoubtedly, the 009 is the more nimble of the two, but the 010 offers greater adaptability. Although the slight increase in weight doesn’t visibly affect fast-paced continuous swings, it does provide better control and confidence when rallying high clears. I learned from the retailer that the 009 was made to an 82g specification, while the 010 was 84g. This 2g difference is like adding a pinch of salt to red bean soup—it may seem to counteract the sweetness, but in fact, it enhances the flavor, adding a fuller dimension to the taste.
I was careless, really. It wasn’t until I took the racket to the court and compared them side by side that I realized the performance differences. Not only that, but even though the 009 is still quicker in quick exchanges at the mid-court, the 010 is the one that remains more stable and composed in fast-paced situations, with improved shot feel and better directional control, avoiding rash decisions. The 009 might make bold moves like “Let’s just go for it and see who backs down,” but the 010 is more seasoned, saying, “I won’t be slower, and I’ll leave the rest to you.”
At the net, the 009’s quick response and control feel a lot like Le Coq’s “Let’s go” on a Friday at the French Open, perfectly executing net kills and pushes. But in the backcourt during a rally, without enough experience to find the right pressure/angle for downward shots, its lack of a decisive backcourt winner can easily lead to being toyed with by a skilled opponent. Even if you get emotional, all you can do is shout “Nooooo!” The 010, on the other hand, doesn’t show significant improvement here. Compared to other works in the J20 series, both the 009 and 010’s attacking power is like McLaren’s GP2 engine era—“GP2 engine, GP2… Ah!”
But at least, the extra layer of carbon fiber in the 010 ensures better support for higher string tension and adds more resistance to torsion, giving it an extra edge. Even if it can’t directly score with downward shots, it allows for more control in extended rallies, maintaining the initiative, and through coherent changes in shot placement, tearing open the opponent’s defense.
Furthermore, with controlled swing weight, the added weight of the 010 helps users better find the feel of borrowing power. So, in terms of that “sweet” feeling, the 010 is actually stronger, making it a speed racket that’s more suitable for a wider range of players.
I’m a bit reluctant to admit it, just like a wounded Gilgamesh acknowledging Shirou’s strength in UBW. Compared to the more experimental 009 that I adore, the 010 is the more mature one. No wonder it’s the most well-received J20 model in the equipment library.
So, with the J20 series, which focuses on “speed and attack,” I have now experienced the four derivatives that emerged in the past year, each branching out into speed and attack. Drawing conclusions isn’t difficult—just list and rank them. In my opinion, under the same specifications, in terms of maneuverability and swing speed for quick exchanges: 009 > 010 > > f35 ≥ 46w; in sweetness: 010 ≥ 009 > > f35 ≥ 46w; in attack quality with physical exertion: 46w ≥ f35 >> 010 ≥ 009; in subjective control quality during rallies: f35 ≥ 010 ≥ 46w > 009. For singles players, rackets with a balance point above 300 are definitely the better choice, as they also meet the needs for backcourt attack. But for those who prioritize a comfortable experience, primarily playing doubles and looking to create opportunities at the front court or finish off shots, or for amateurs with less power or female players, the 009/010 might be better suited.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny 1982 B212 & Black Mamba Pro Reviews
I have always been eager to try out Bonny’s new products. Bonny’s offerings have two significant advantages: firstly, the pricing structure is stable, and the launch prices of flagship products online are often more than 50% cheaper than those of the three major brands. Secondly, Bonny’s rackets consistently deliver excellent feel and performance, with products suitable for players at all levels, and there are almost always reliable recommendations that won’t go wrong.
However, these advantages have also led to some of Bonny’s excellent models being more susceptible to supply constraints, resulting in frequent stock shortages, especially with the “boron fiber” upgraded products in the past year. This scarcity has even led to a rare occurrence of certain models selling at higher prices in the second-hand market, proving the old saying, “the sooner you buy, the sooner you enjoy.”
Parameters:
- B212: 4UG5, with grip, total weight in use 93.68g, balance point 295mm, 6.5mm shaft, length 218mm, medium stiffness, box frame, 78-hole string bed, 9-3 point grooves, warranty at 30lbs, strung at 25-27lbs with VBS69N.
- BlackMamba Pro: 4UG5, without grip, total weight in use 90.11g, balance point 303mm, 6.3mm shaft, length 220mm, medium-high stiffness, aerodynamic frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 point grooves, warranty at 30lbs, strung at 25-27lbs with Li-Ning N68.
These two new releases are hot off the press. Due to their different positioning, their color schemes also follow the design styles of their respective series. The B212, like the B213, belongs to the latest 1982 series, maintaining the InterstellaX theme with a sci-fi feel of interstellar travel. The racket frame at the 2 and 10 o’clock positions features a black inner lining, and it has a glossy finish, distinguishing it more from the B213. The paint quality continues to uphold Bonny’s flagship standards.
On the other hand, the BlackMamba Pro stands out with more “exotic” elements. The entire racket is black, with the Bonny logo at the T-joint replaced by a cobra emblem, reminiscent of the Ford Mustang Shelby GT500. The two fangs on the racket head exude aggression, and the frame and shaft are adorned with reflective stickers in purple, bronze, and silver, creating a very layered visual effect. The extremely thin shaft also makes the racket appear more refined, though the design elements at the base of the shaft seem to borrow from the Thunder series. Man, what can I say?
The main upgrade of the B212 is, of course, the addition of boron fiber, and the racket’s stiffness has been adjusted accordingly to match the new material. Although the racket face remains largely the same as previous models, the increased shaft stiffness takes it out of the category of “easy-to-use” rackets, adding a bit of a learning curve. From the feel of long rallies, the B212 offers a more “solid” sensation, making it easy to generate high shuttle speeds after applying power. This version retains the easy power generation and borrowing power advantages, allowing for more aggressive shots on long lines, while maintaining the same level of accuracy and directional control, merging some of the traits from the hard version of the 1982 series.
The BlackMamba Pro, however, is noticeably stiffer. The ultra-thin shaft provides clear feedback on its deformation, with more direct impact feedback, and a sweet spot that is slightly harder to find. The overall difficulty level of using this racket is higher, making it more suitable for advanced players. This might not be immediately obvious when you’re in a good position to take the initiative, and it may even feel like you can hit powerful shots effortlessly. However, in slightly more passive situations, the increased difficulty of generating power requires more from the player. Compared to the B212, the BlackMamba Pro exhibits a more extreme side, consistent with its product positioning.
The B212 is an offensive racket, but its stiffness is slightly lower compared to the B213. The addition of boron fiber makes it a bit stiffer and more elastic than any previous offensive and defensive version of the 1982 series. With the increased shaft stiffness, its capacity to handle explosive power has seen a breakthrough, effectively reducing energy loss and allowing for heavier downward shots. Unlike the B155/152, which relied on frame weight to enhance shot power, the B212 derives its power more from the shaft’s rebound. With the new material, this is finally a racket that I can confidently use for offensive play in mixed doubles, though it did take some time to get used to.
However, the BlackMamba Pro outperforms the B212, as it’s a dedicated offensive racket with a specialized design. Although the BlackMamba Pro feels slightly lighter, its more pronounced head heaviness enhances the downward trajectory of shots, allowing for effective downward drives even when the power isn’t perfectly concentrated. When it comes to aggressive attacks, the new 6.3mm shaft displays impressive explosiveness, with its potential revealed through strong rebounds after deformation, delivering a whip-like feel and sharp sound. This snake’s bite is both sharp and lethal.
Despite both rackets being capable of keeping up with my doubles pace during the trial, there are subtle differences in their swing speed and flexibility. Overall, the aerodynamic frame of the BlackMamba Pro offers a faster swing speed, validated by its performance during extended offensive plays from the backcourt, allowing for a sustained offensive stance. This smooth offensive continuity is a result of both the swing speed and the rapid recovery of the shaft. However, the B212, with its slightly lower head heaviness, has a quicker swing initiation, offering better flexibility, which is advantageous in intercepting and quick exchanges in the mid-front court, thanks to its stable and high forgiveness.
When it comes to net play and backcourt control, there are noticeable differences between the two. The BlackMamba Pro has a stiffer and more direct shot feel, with a smaller margin for error in terms of force and angle, and a relatively smaller sweet spot. This makes it less prone to errors during precise operations, but also leads me to prefer lifting the shuttle out of tricky situations. The B212, on the other hand, offers longer contact time with the shuttle, providing more room for adjustment, especially in executing backcourt drops and slices with more confidence. At the net, I found myself more inclined to play disruptive shots, with a higher probability of hitting quality soft shots. In simple terms, the BlackMamba Pro is better suited for larger swing actions, while the B212 excels in finer, more controlled maneuvers.
In conclusion, the 6.5mm boron fiber shaft on the B212 delivered the expected upgrade in experience, while the 6.3mm shaft on the BlackMamba Pro provided a more powerful punch. I previously expressed concern about the slow update cycle of certain Bonny series, but after testing these two new products with Bonny’s latest shaft technology, I can confidently say that the improvements are substantial compared to their predecessors. The BlackMamba Pro, with its rich heritage from the Pro 2.2/Princess frame, may have become a swan song, as there are no updates on the horizon for the latter two. However, I now understand why this mid-to-high-end model, filled with quirky elements, isn’t as popular as other products, given its more wooden and shock-prone feel. On the other hand, the 1982 series remains evergreen, though the B212’s and B213’s positioning seems to deviate slightly from the official promotional material. Could there be some corrections needed?
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Steel-Wings Reviews
You can always trust the J20 series. If Bonny’s hottest IP is the “Zhan Gui Dao,” then the J20 series is undoubtedly the most reliable flagship product from Bonny—there’s no question about it. Every racket born from the J20 series is easy to handle, and its tuning has developed a very distinct speed-oriented style, different from other brands. The introduction of boron fiber further enhances the playing experience of the “Steel Wings” series. As for the newly released golden “Steel Wings,” is it just a simple reskin meant to cash in? The answer is definitely NO!
Appearance: The J20 series has never been associated with ugliness. The original “Steel Wings” already had an excellent appearance, and with the addition of golden accents, the new version is even more striking! Unlike the graffiti style of the original and the understated elegance of the previous silver-gray color, the gilded wings on the frame, along with the shaft and T-joint logo, give the new version a more dynamic and energetic look. The matte texture of the paint still feels quite comfortable, and the overall color scheme is harmonious without any jarring elements. The cap has also been upgraded from the old flat head to a fishtail cap. I must say, the transition from the frame to the shaft to the handle is seamless, and the aesthetic definitely deserves a nine out of ten.
Specifications: 4UG5, 76-hole wind-breaking frame, fully equipped with grip and overgrip, total weight 92.7g, balance point 303mm, handle length 205mm, strung at 25-27 lbs VBS66N.
Feel: The “Steel Wings” has already proven its superior feel and passed the test of the market. The addition of boron fiber can be said to have injected new life into Bonny’s high-end rackets, with models like Xuanwu, Zhan San, and Steel Wings all being hot sellers. The improvement in feel is mainly reflected in the increased stiffness and toughness on a lighter base. Compared to the original version with the same frame design, it further enhances the stability of the shot. But what impressed me the most is the excellent shock absorption. It not only maintains a stiff and elastic feel with good directional control but also lowers the usage threshold.
Having owned the J20-009, Steel Wings, and Steel Wings-Gold, I’ll boldly give a ranking from a personal perspective: Aesthetics: Steel Wings-Gold > 009 ≈ Steel Wings, Offense: Steel Wings-Gold ≥ Steel Wings > 009, Swing Speed: Steel Wings > Steel Wings-Gold > 009. In previous reviews of the Steel Wings and 009, I mentioned that the latter had a rather troublesome shock issue, which the Steel Wings managed to compensate for with its superior shock absorption. The hitting feel is very comfortable and responsive, and the Steel Wings-Gold naturally follows suit. While the frame and materials haven’t changed much, it maintains the same feedback as the Steel Wings, with a stiff and elastic shaft that offers stability, mainly reflected in the consistency of shots and precision of placement.
Compared to the Steel Wings, the Steel Wings-Gold feels more like a speed-oriented, balanced attack-and-defense racket in the 4U category. It’s not just a simple reskin, and the fishtail cap does contribute to improved stability and swing speed. Although I can’t provide data to confirm upgrades in torsion resistance and deformation without professional instruments, the higher tolerance in real-world play is noticeable. The shots feel solid, and the sharp and precise placement in offensive smashes, with the shuttle not floating but rather hitting hard, prove that this is not just a pure speed racket. The racket excels in slicing, and it’s easy to gain an advantage by repeatedly hitting the same spot—something I didn’t experience with the original and older colorways, indicating that the force transmission in the new color has been finely tuned. Personally, I think the racket’s offensive tuning has been well-executed, capable of delivering decisive shots. At least in its unaltered state, this racket is better suited for singles, with its balanced attack and defense, making it versatile. I would recommend removing the handle cap to fully unlock the true spirit of the Steel Wings, making it light and agile. I might be bold in saying this, but I believe that the Steel Wings truly becomes a “quick blade to slay all ghosts” after removing the cap.
Conclusion: The golden version is currently only available in 4U, and its feel differs slightly from the older colorway. If you prefer extreme speed attacks, choose the original Steel Wings. If your playstyle leans more towards balanced control, with no significant weaknesses in other areas, then the golden Steel Wings is definitely the best mid-range option.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon Infinity IF215 Reviews
When I was still improving my skills, the Infiniti series felt great to use, but after hitting a bottleneck recently, I found this series a bit difficult to handle. It can be said that among Bonny’s series with independently developed frame designs, this one has shown the least progress. Starting from the Infiniti 2 and 003, through to the 016 and Honor 002, after playing with so many models, the development of this series has been more about adjustments and optimizations. Since the 014 introduced the 46T material, the later models have mostly focused on balance point and stiffness. However, now that the series has adopted a new numbering method and reached 215, I think Bonny also hopes to achieve some breakthroughs with it.
Specifications: 4UG5, with grip, total weight in use 95.90g, balance point 300mm, 6.5mm shaft, length 220mm, high stiffness, thin-wing small racket frame, 76-hole string bed, full string grooves, warranty for 30 lbs, strung at 25-27 lbs VBS66N.
The Infiniti series has consistently used a no-filler process, with the rackets decorated using clear lacquer and water decals. Models 008-010 had their own mask themes, but beyond that, I felt this process should have reached its limit after the 016. Some models didn’t even have the same pearlescent finish effect as the earlier Infiniti 2. Recently, however, the situation improved significantly with the 215, which began using more colored paint to decorate the racket. The head transitions from white at the tip to cyan at the 4 and 8 o’clock positions, then to black at the T-joint, creating a natural layering effect. Although the official promotion claims it’s a racing-themed paint job, I think as long as it looks good, that’s what matters.
The current version has adjusted the unstrung balance point to 300mm, which isn’t as aggressive as the Honor series I’ve used before, but the racket still has a noticeable head-heavy feel when in hand. Originally, the Infiniti series was positioned as an offensive racket, but its excellent frame wind resistance made me more inclined to use it as a speed racket in doubles. In fact, the 215’s swing speed is also top-notch. For specifics on how fast it is, you can refer to previous reviews of the series. This full-groove small racket frame has been used by Bonny for many years.
Additionally, the stiff shaft and small racket face make the 215 difficult to handle. Although the sweet spot occupies a relatively large portion of the racket face, the increased net pressure further raises the difficulty of driving the racket, lacking the forgiving feel of the 003/007. When properly engaged, the high balance point allows for powerful, speedy returns, but backhand shots and low-power underhand drives become significantly harder, limiting the racket’s usability for some.
Conversely, the 215 has a very high ceiling in terms of offensive capabilities. The small racket face naturally has a higher power threshold and more concentrated rebound feedback, allowing for explosive shots when the user generates power. When there’s an opportunity for a full-power strike, utilizing body rotation, the shuttle speed can reach quite high levels, with the potential to penetrate the court with a single smash. Moreover, the low wind resistance of the frame allows for faster swings. Although the 300mm balance point isn’t very high, making the placement and downward pressure less intense compared to the Honor series, it’s still much better than the 295mm Lampard.
The current swing weight still gives me a relatively agile feel during use, not hindering the switch between forehand and backhand power or the formation of continuous defensive blocks in fast-paced exchanges. Meanwhile, the racket delivers a certain level of stability, with a clear sense of direction, making it more confident in angled shots and large swings, without the shuttle floating unpredictably. However, it should be noted that the racket still demands constant attention to finger and forearm power during exchanges. When fatigue sets in, the quality of the drive decreases, slowing down the return speed, and giving the opponent an opportunity to press the advantage.
In the past, I mentioned that small racket frames weren’t very suitable for my handling of delicate shots. However, on the 215, thanks to its well-tuned feel, it doesn’t feel unstable in the hand, and its performance in small ball play has improved. Although the current racket face can still cause some over-reaction during fine operations, the stability of its feel has been enhanced. Especially in the backcourt drops, with the increased inertia of the frame, the potential energy during the swing allows the shuttle to drop closer to the net, eliminating the fear of being intercepted.
In defense, the 215 is stiff and elastic, providing a clear feel when borrowing force to push to the backcourt, sideline, or block at the net. However, there are challenges in two areas. First, the small racket face has a low tolerance. When the opponent’s smash speed increases, the reduced reaction time makes it hard to align the racket face correctly, leading to several mishits during my usage, which was quite frustrating. Second, the difficulty in generating power on underhand shots makes it harder to place the shuttle accurately when dealing with drops or soft blocks, especially when fatigue sets in, forcing larger arm swings that can distort my movements.
Given the preference for buying new rather than old, the Infiniti 215 is still one of the small racket frames worth recommending, especially for players looking to try out Bonny’s small racket frames and advance their skills. This model represents the highest level in the series in terms of overall quality. However, I’m left with significant regrets because the Infiniti series still hasn’t made substantial progress. The new model is just another optimization of the original parameters. The boron fiber shaft, which gave Bonny’s new products a significant boost last year, has yet to be applied to the new Infiniti, perhaps due to incompatibility or low production capacity. Regardless, just improving the paint job isn’t enough to satisfy the series’ loyal fans.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny J20 steel-wings Reviews
The mid-cycle refresh and iteration of a vehicle carry different meanings. During a model’s lifecycle, the more outstanding and promising the model is, the more attractive the mid-cycle refresh becomes, approaching a higher level of completion. However, when a model’s life cycle nears its end, iteration becomes a more meaningful approach—one represents a peak, while the other signifies a rebirth.
Bonny’s Steel Wing recently underwent a mid-cycle refresh, and I’ve been using this racket for quite some time. The change in its aura compared to the original color is so significant that it took me a while to adapt. However, it hasn’t yet reached its peak.
Specifications: 4UG5, with a grip, total weight in use 93.18g, balance point 294mm, shaft length 218mm, medium stiffness, aero frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 point string grooves, warranty for 30 lbs, strung at 25-27 lbs VBS69N.
Last year, the J20 Steel Wing, which performed well in the market thanks to the advantage of boron fiber, now comes with a new color scheme and new tuning. Since the new product has changed its appearance from the original silver-white to gold, I’ve grown accustomed to referring to it as “Golden Wing.” In fact, in terms of aesthetics, the only difference between the old and new versions is the color. The design patterns and stickers remain unchanged, so you can refer to the previous Steel Wing for the appearance description.
I forgot to take pictures after this test, so the pictures you see here are just for reference.
There are some changes in the configuration of the Golden Wing, the most notable being the fish-mouth cone cover, which somewhat resembles the Red Factory’s Thunder series. Although I do miss Bonny’s previous flat cone cover. On one hand, this cone cover reinforces the previous version’s smooth cone, which made it difficult for the thumb to stabilize during backhand power shots. On the other hand, the exposed recess also increases the shaft’s deformation length, bringing stronger rebound performance to the racket, which is commendable. The compatibility between boron fiber and the new elements is also worth looking forward to.
This change has made the Golden Wing quite forgiving, while the racket’s elasticity remains intact. With the shaft stiffness adjusted, the “swinging” feeling of the racket happens more easily. The light tone already makes the swing process smooth, and the shaft’s elasticity is more easily activated, so there’s no longer a need to apply extra force to overcome the hardness, as was the case with the original Steel Wing when playing high, far shots. Players who struggled with the original version of Steel Wing will find this a blessing.
The most notable improvement is in handling passive shots. The previous issue where the short, stiff shaft and high-rigidity frame combination made it difficult to return the ball, often resulting in poor placement and vulnerability to net play attacks, has been resolved. No matter how aggressive the opponent’s pressure, the racket’s rebound to the baseline instantly evens out the situation.
The enhanced ball-holding feel of the Golden Wing has brought a significant change in its handling during rallies. Quoting a friend, the racket’s increased tolerance and sticky ball feel represent a “judgment time” change. The greatly improved release adjustment window has given the Golden Wing’s small ball control a surprising advantage, making net play more controllable. This allows for precise net maneuvers, forcing the opponent to lift the ball and giving teammates more opportunities to attack. Its lightweight and speed-oriented attributes still make the Golden Wing agile for intercepting shots and blocking at the net.
However, the racket’s slower ball response during fast-paced exchanges took me some time to adjust to. In defensive rhythm, trying to create opportunities for counterattacks through lateral play also felt a bit cumbersome.
For advanced users, the Golden Wing’s performance in backcourt smashes is indeed lacking in power. Although the reduced power requirement improves the racket’s continuity and endurance, the feel of each attack is somewhat soft. Even when there’s a chance to exert full power, it’s difficult to generate sufficiently threatening high-speed shots, leading to a feeling of underwhelming force. In scenarios requiring powerful smashes and precise placement over long distances, confidence can be lost.
Nevertheless, it should be acknowledged that this is also the most user-friendly racket Bonny has developed in its boron fiber series so far. For beginner players, this season brings a nearly perfect racket option that can be an excellent choice right from the start.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Zhuohua Reviews
How do low-end products achieve explosive sales?
Is it Green’s unparalleled brand appeal? Blue’s extensive product line accumulated over time? Red’s exquisite and high-value paint jobs? Yellow’s unprecedented return and exchange policies?
For second-tier and independent brands without such weapons, their approach is still too conservative, often relying solely on lower prices and better materials for competition. In recent years, some manufacturers have begun to focus on appearance and gift packaging, making the free items feel very sincere. This has indeed made a difference, but it is quickly imitated, leading to a cycle of mutual cannibalization at the same tier, where no one stands out.
Specifications: 4UG5, without a base, total weight in use 87.0g, balance point 292mm, shaft length 218mm, low stiffness, box frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string channels, 26-pound warranty, string tension 24-26lbs Gao Shen Steel Armor 5.
The Peach Blossom and Zhuohua in the same series are essentially the same racket, with only the paint job differentiating them, and both come with gift boxes. Zhuohua is blue, with a deep blue gift box featuring a small amount of design elements. The box itself is of good quality, improving the racket’s protection during shipping and looking nicer when given as a gift. However, the contents are minimal, only including a cover. Although the racket’s price is around two and a half times, I would prefer to pay a bit more for additional surprises like grip tape, strings, socks, towels, or wristbands, which would enhance the sense of sincerity.
Factory B has previously faced many setbacks due to racket design issues, but in recent years, they have finally caught on, placing more emphasis on paint jobs across low, mid, and high-end products. Peach Blossom and Zhuohua feature a national style font and a fresh design, with colors primarily in white, gray, and blue. The gray and white on the shaft and frame use a gradient transition, with a few blue lines as accents. The racket head has a subtle pattern, giving it an aesthetically pleasing appearance. The 2 and 10 o’clock positions feature flowers displaying the racket’s theme.
I did some research, and the Peach Blossom and Zhuohua are based on a racket I previously reviewed, so the entire experience did not reveal anything new. It fits the soft, light, and easy-to-handle positioning. Nevertheless, I brought my team’s captain to force him to use it for a match.
The captain struggled with the new racket throughout the day, and this is where a “sugar water” racket can be useful. I should mention that I handed him the racket only when calculating the score—I’m that confident about its ease of use. As expected, the captain finished the match without complaints or hitting the frame, showing the racket’s low threshold and high tolerance. Playing doubles with him was relatively easy—he handled the backcourt while I focused on intercepting the middle to let him smash, and he handled the frontcourt while I took care of the smashes and net shots. Although there were occasional remarks about mistakes due to ball trajectory and quality, we both had a relaxed experience after winning the match.
The string bed area isn’t outstanding, but the large sweet spot ensures good ball output without becoming too loose, resulting in good hitting performance. The shaft’s softness caters to beginner players and is very forgiving, though it doesn’t feel weak, easily providing elasticity after deformation.
However, as a captain, he naturally expects more than just ease of use—he is very particular about the experience of small net shots and heavy smashes from the backcourt. He has a strong preference for quick returns on serves and often practices them. Initially, I thought he was showing off, but after seeing his low success rate, I realized he was just practicing. Regardless, after using Zhuohua, he seemed to struggle all night with the new racket, but after switching back, he didn’t make a single mistake with net shots. His net play, corner cuts, and low-position returns were flawless. I initially doubted that a racket weighing only 84g would have good feel, but its responsive sweet spot is indeed impressive.
When it was his turn to play aggressively, he didn’t criticize the racket, which was surprising. I originally thought it wouldn’t be a tool for creating opportunities in even-level matches from the backcourt, but the captain found it very easy to use. This might be because Zhuohua was used in the last match of the day, when everyone’s stamina had decreased, making a low-drive threshold racket more suitable for handling court situations. Additionally, Zhuohua, with its low balance point and light weight, has an unexpectedly good downward feel, even if the ball doesn’t have much explosive power, it doesn’t feel floaty and maintains directional control. If the backcourt player fails to break through, adjustments are needed, and when I moved to the frontcourt, I could stabilize the situation by covering potential shots until scoring or losing points.
Another point is that he played very consistently throughout the match. Besides benefiting from Zhuohua’s light and easy handling for flat drives and relentless smashes, its low energy consumption resulted in longer endurance, making recovery easier after long rallies. Considering the oppressive summer temperatures in the south, this is a significant advantage.
After returning the racket, the captain also gave it a positive review. As a reward, I used his 88S Tour for a while, a win-win situation.
Regarding the gift box this time, I think the racket itself doesn’t have issues with product strength. However, since it is presented as a gift box, it should offer substantial value beyond just appearance. I would have preferred more accessories inside, especially when giving it to female players who have some knowledge but are not yet beginners. This would provide a better impression.
Factory B and its retailers, after improving product aesthetics, still need to better understand consumer psychology.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny STAR SHADOW Reviews
4:30 A.M.—this has been my wake-up alarm for the past week. In the early hours, I head from home to the hospital, and from the hospital to various nucleic acid testing sites. The journey involves a lot of commuting, which varies in length. Sometimes I can sleep, other times I can only look at my phone to pass the time. Under the pandemic, everyone is struggling, and after a week of this routine, I feel like I’m trapped in exhaustion, like a small animal stuck in a quagmire, unable to save itself.
Playing badminton has become a luxury and feels out of reach. Even when participating in unit activities, my poor physical condition doesn’t allow me to accelerate or exert force as I used to, and I mostly struggle.
Although it’s not my first time experiencing this situation, a friend recommended the Starry Shadow, Starry Mirage, and Starry Cloud rackets.
Specifications: 4UG5, with base, total weight in use 92.4g, balance point 283mm, shaft length 220mm, soft adjustment, fluid box frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string channels, 26-pound warranty, string tension 24-26lbs VBS66N.
I know Bonny’s recent Sky Series includes three models with slight variations in paint jobs but a consistent style. The Starry Mirage features a rose gold and creamy white color scheme, giving a warm and cute yet cozy visual appeal. The frame is decorated with light orange and light green stars and stripes. Though simple, the design is quite harmonious and avoids being vulgar, highlighting a fresh look. Unfortunately, the paint job doesn’t meet high standards, with a slightly rough texture. There’s a saying that the pinker the racket, the fiercer the smash, but the Sky Series rackets are rare in that they completely lack an aggressive appearance, likely appealing more to players who focus on the joy of badminton itself.
I was aware that this is an entry-level racket, but handling the Starry Shadow still impresses with its lightness. Although it has a boxy frame, the frame thickness is relatively low, and the frame surface features aerodynamic slants, making this 4U racket quite swift. Unlike those with extremely high balance points and ultra-light weights, it retains a normal racket feel, without the “mace” swinging sensation. Despite a soft shaft, it remains responsive, balancing flexibility with a reasonable grip feel. Even female players with less power will find it a racket they can comfortably use.
After experiencing many high-end rackets designed for decisive matches with extreme head heaviness or swing speed, the Starry Shadow’s simplicity seems like a natural approach to creating a highly usable product.
However, every racket should be tested on the court. The Starry Shadow’s long and soft shaft leads to easy deformation during swings, with the shaft’s elasticity participating in high clears and smashes. While the elasticity doesn’t exceed the price range, its easily accessible elasticity can mentally encourage users with various tactical moves. The Starry Shadow is like a beginner’s tutorial in a game. For me and beginners, it easily allows hitting the shuttlecock to the baseline. Only after completing the beginner’s tasks and gaining a sense of achievement can one optimize the high clears. With its good power, high swing speed, and reliable feel, the Starry Shadow can naturally become a great first racket for beginners.
This performance also reminds me of the lower-end NF600 or Bluebird. However, in terms of appearance and subjective feel, the Starry Shadow feels more refined.
Nevertheless, I must discuss its performance in competitive play. Its mediocre elasticity and average head heaviness don’t excel, but the overall tuning of the Starry Shadow provides both agility and stability.
The Starry Shadow has a fast swing speed and offers the best holding feel among recent entry-level rackets, meaning it can handle slightly faster-paced matches. Agility is understandable, but stability is based on its high tolerance. Previously, I attributed increased tolerance to the string bed and sweet spot size, which are indeed advantages of the Starry Shadow, but its ease of use is also crucial. With this racket, there’s no need to be overly tense, and even if you can’t take the initiative, its easy-to-drive nature helps you recover better. In other words, its passive shots and high clears are very comfortable—something I haven’t enjoyed among entry-level rackets in recent months.
The drawbacks are also quite apparent: lack of offensive power and sluggish response in flat drives, especially the former. The confidence in downward smashes cannot match classic entry-level options. However, for beginners or those looking for a relaxed play experience, this is not a significant issue. What matters is finding the feeling of power and ball control outside of serious competition, experiencing the simple joy of swinging and playing, or setting aside technological enhancements to refine technique and ball feel. It can be a toy or a tool, and for a product of this positioning, it is quite suitable and excellent for someone like me who currently can’t approach matches with a competitive mindset.
The current price of the racket is 299. Even considering its appearance, buying at full price might not be ideal. Generally, Bonny rackets offer some discounts at corresponding retailers. If you can get it at a price similar to or slightly lower than HMR, it would be a reasonable choice.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon 2013P II Reviews
First, let me introduce myself: I’m an amateur player who started playing badminton in 2013, around my first year of college. I’ve spent many years playing in local courts and later, during my postgraduate studies, had less time for badminton, averaging about three times a week. My style leans towards speed and aggression, and I rate myself around level 4 on the Zhongyu scale.
I’ve tried various brands, including domestic and the major three, thanks to friends and opportunities to test out different rackets. While I don’t have a strong desire for high-end rackets (mainly due to budget constraints), I’ve used some high-end models and had enough experience to know what works for me. Often, I end up using the XM25 I got for free during a promotion for casual play with friends and coaches. Thus, my reviews are personal and subjective, and everyone is free to have their own opinions.
Currently, my main rackets are the Third Court Black Panther K Supreme Edition and Black Panther C Titanium Edition (which I’ll review later). I’ve always wanted to explore second-tier brands and considered rackets like Kawasaki Lightning, Wolf, Bonny Slash Demon Sword, 2013 series, 1982 series, and J20 series. Despite some hesitation due to concerns about Bonny’s reputation, I decided to order the 2013P II Frost Blue, tempted by PDD’s offer. The coupon price was 305, including the 66N string. The seller was a certain online shop; I wonder if Fat Lou remembers me.
Parameters: I won’t go into details about the 3-in-1 frame, eight-blade edge, etc. You can find those details yourself. Given the 80-hole design, I asked Fat Lou to string it at 25 lbs.
Appearance: Initially, I preferred the 2013L II Purple Gold, but my girlfriend thought both the Frost Blue and Purple Gold were nice, with Frost Blue being better. I did some research on the differences between P and L models and, based on my playstyle, chose the Frost Blue 2013P. Upon receiving it, I found the glossy paint to be quite beautiful, understated yet luxurious, not as unattractive as some forum comments suggest. However, it’s rather unremarkable. By the way, I still think the cloud logo looks better; if it were the cloud logo, it would be a knockout.
Feel: As a singles player, I haven’t used it for doubles. After high-intensity play, I’ve played nearly 16-17 matches of 21 points each. I’m not sure if I’ve improved or if it’s psychological, but my record is 15 wins and 1 loss. My version is without the base tape, using a milk-colored grip, which makes it slightly heavier but still agile. It’s indeed very stiff, as advertised and noted by other players—a “brute” as described by some. It has excellent downward pressure and a strong drive, often making me feel an irresistible urge to smash when facing high balls. With good power and footwork, I can often score with a single hit. It has good directional control, hitting exactly where you aim, and performs well in both offense and defense. In flat drives, it’s impressive and well-suited for continuous attacking players. Despite being a 3U racket, it’s highly flexible, not inferior to my friend’s Speed Series.
Drawbacks: I initially wanted to mention that it’s heavy and stiff, which can be exhausting, especially against tough opponents. If you’re fatigued and your movements are off, the power of this heavy racket diminishes. But this isn’t the racket’s fault—it’s my issue!
Additionally, there’s a lot of talk about water army issues with second-tier and domestic brands, especially in the mid-range price bracket. With potential malicious competition and exaggeration, personal experience is crucial. With the stringing cost of 300, I believe the 2013P II is undoubtedly a solid choice.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Feather 280 Reviews
How to Handle Leftover Rice? I usually fry it up. On the surface, it might seem like a simple leftover meal, reheated just to fill the stomach. But when you add fresh shrimp, crisp peas, premium ham, soaked scallops, and seasonal vegetables, it transforms into a gourmet dish.
When it comes to mastering fried rice, Capcom is the ultimate expert.
Yesterday, I learned that Bonny was actually the first to launch ultra-light rackets (below 5U) on the market, which surprised me a bit. I’ve used three light rackets before, and the latest 280 model has been re-released. Yes, it’s a re-release, which makes me curious about Bonny’s frying skills.
Parameters: 5UG5, with a total weight of 88.0g, balance point 305mm, shaft length 220mm, medium stiffness, box frame, 76-hole string bed, 8-4 point string grooves, warranty for 26 lbs, strung at 25-27 lbs with KT65 string. I remember criticizing the 260, but the 280 has completely improved that.
The platinum black color has a high-end feel, though it doesn’t break new ground in aesthetics. The paint has a smooth, delicate texture, and some parts of the frame use embossed gold stickers, which makes me skeptical about its flaw resistance.
I expected the frame to have the same wind-breaking treatment as previous models, but it actually uses a box frame, which was unexpected. Although the Light Feather series has always focused on lightness and flexibility, Bonny has balanced the lightweight feel with a stable hitting experience, considering the overall design.
Despite Bonny’s good control over racket weight, the Light Feather series doesn’t use ultra-light materials, so there’s a ±3g variation, which might result in receiving a rare 4U model. However, the lightweight feel of the 280 is comparable to some 4U balanced rackets, and it doesn’t negatively impact usability. It continues to offer the excellent driving sensation, making high-clearance shots to the baseline effortless. The change in frame design has improved shot stability and directionality. While it still has some floatiness when trying to control shot placement near the baseline, it performs very well among similarly spec’d rackets.
If you focus your power, it can deliver fast smashes with good speed, similar to using the K600, but with better feedback and shock absorption, the Light Feather’s level is higher.
I believe the 280’s shaft hasn’t changed much, and given the cost constraints, there’s no need to re-tune the already elastic shaft. However, the increased balance point has noticeably enhanced the smash experience. From the Light Feather 68 to 153 to 260 to 280, the downward pressure has improved, and the satisfaction and confidence in heavy smashes have increased. In this version, I even felt a direct feedback of hitting the ball out with the increased head weight. The speed and sound are impressive, and the 280’s strong, continuous characteristics present a greater challenge for opponents who survive the initial hits.
The only issue is that in singles, you still need to fight for back-court smashes yourself, and the 280 feels a bit light and lacking in solid feel during net play. It’s better utilized in doubles, where it can fully exploit its proactive features.
Its capabilities extend beyond continuous attacks; its defense is also exceptional. It’s easy to push back to the rear court with a quick grab during a smash. Even if the ball is hit to your side, you can awkwardly return it with a step back, and it handles backhand and overhead shots well. Even if pushed to the forehand rear court baseline, a step and cross-court return is possible. However, the 280’s flat drive could be crisper. I wonder if Bonny might release a new model with a stiffer shaft.
Most importantly, using the 280, you can maintain a similar rhythm throughout the evening’s matches without worrying about fatigue in the final stages. As Captain America says, “I can do it all day.” This impressive endurance comes from its low weight, low swing weight, and effort-saving elasticity, making it suitable for casual play and capable of wearing down opponents with sustained pressure. When facing similarly skilled opponents, the 280’s continuous smashes and maneuvering are both enjoyable and effective.
This “fried rice” is quite delicious.
August 30, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny STAR MAGIC Reviews
One player said this is the most beautiful of the Sky Series.
If we’re solely considering aesthetics, buying a visually appealing racket around the 200 price range isn’t a bad idea. But since we’re at Zhongyu, a racket that is both nice to look at and functional is even better, and this price range isn’t lacking in beautiful options.
In previous reviews, I’ve clarified the differences between the Starshadow and Starcloud. For the final model, Stardream, I had the opportunity to test it during a period of improved feel. This concludes my parallel review series. Thanks for the support!
Parameters: 4UG5, total weight 93.1g, balance point 285mm, shaft length 220mm, soft tuning, fluid box frame, 76-hole string bed, 9—3 point string grooves, warranty for 26 lbs, strung at 24—26 lbs with VBS66N string.
From the tassel color to gray-purple, and now the bright blue, Bonny has finally learned how to use popular aesthetics in their design. The bright blue of Stardream reminds me of the Speed90F, but some players have mentioned that the matte finish makes it less sophisticated, which is a small regret. The pattern on the sides of the frame has changed to stars and planets, maintaining a fresh look, but it might seem a bit childish—this isn’t a criticism but rather a note that it suits students and is just right for office workers. For me, with more experience, the Stardream’s design is appropriately understated.
Although the three rackets have different weights and balance points, they feel quite similar in hand, all being balanced but not overly light. The sensation of leveraging shots is more pronounced, similar to Starshadow. Apart from this, the moderate swing weight and higher swing speed are comparable across all three. When trying to discern the subtle differences, I eventually gave up. If it’s hard to differentiate between them deliberately, then their differences probably don’t significantly impact usability. The distinction is minimal.
In terms of shot feedback, Stardream gives me more pleasure than Starshadow. While basic materials are used in all three, Starshadow feels the most muddled, and Stardream is in the middle. As I understand, Starshadow is priced slightly lower, reminiscent of Nvidia’s precision.
Switching from Starcloud to Stardream, I found that the latter’s attack isn’t as solid as the former. The deviation in shot angles is slightly greater, and the momentary output is lower. When using Stardream, I felt it was harder to control during multiple competitive games. The softer feel during aggressive smashes means that Stardream’s smashes are more easily defended by opponents, requiring more shots to score in a fully aggressive situation.
However, Stardream seems more durable. Even after intense play for three or four games, Starcloud would have left me exhausted, while the softer Stardream could handle three more games even when fatigue sets in. If Starcloud has a killer feature, Stardream has its elusive charm, making it suitable for rallying and lifting shots.
In terms of small ball control and drives, all three rackets are similar.
After using all three rackets, I have my preferences based on their distinct performance features. For beginners, these differences might not be crucial; it’s better to choose based on aesthetics. For advanced players, these rackets are excellent choices for recommendations or gifts and will likely be favored by female players.
August 30, 2024