I was getting excited when the reference to the icon standard and XL and would the edge be only in 1 shape and then just like that I was disappointed with the edge still not going to come in a standard (8x16 shape). Guess I'll be sticking with the CRBN 2x.
Wow - you guys really are showing how little you know about composite materials. It's such a shame to spread misinformation that way. The errors are significant - but lemme clarify at least two big ones 1. T700 is a FILAMENT not a weave - it can be woven into 2K/3K/8K or even 18K - and of course (no surprise) it can be unidirectional 2. The Carbon Fiber is NOT WHAT HITS THE BALL - the resin surface (imprinted with the peel ply texture) is what hits the ball. And guess what the peel ply is a woven patterned material (it's not a unidirectional)
Beyond the inaccurate technical info you've pointed out, the tri-axial weave seems like a gimmick anyways. Because the ball makes contact with the paddle face at 1 location, and the weave at that point can only be oriented along any 1 axis. (While ball compression and slippage increases that contact surface area, it's unlikely the ball contacts more than 1 weave axes with significant force). It's not like the weave is oriented along all 3 axes at every location simultaneously. So at best, the weave is maybe somewhat more effective at imparting spin, but only for 33% of hits. And this assumes the validity of the underlying premise that weave axis orientation has a measurable positive effect on spin, which is dubious.
@@nickbicanic6910 Oh I totally agree with you, I was just saying that even if you forget about the technological blunder, even the general concept itself makes no sense.
Beyond the inaccurate technical information about filaments vs fibers vs weave and disregard of the resin that is applied afterwards, the tri-axial weave seems like a gimmick. Because the ball makes contact with the paddle face at 1 location, and the weave at that point can only be oriented along any 1 axis. (While ball compression and slippage increases that contact surface area, it's unlikely the ball contacts more than 1 weave axes with significant force). It's not like the weave is oriented along all 3 axes at every location simultaneously. So at best, the weave is maybe somewhat more effective at imparting spin, but only for 33% of hits. And this assumes the validity of the underlying premise that weave axis orientation has a measurable positive effect on spin, which is dubious.
