Stiga DNA Pro Rubbers Review

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Apr 2014
1,486
1,087
2,609
Read 3 reviews
People should always try to "read between the lines" when he posts a review (I think he's said as much himself at times) And that's good advice with any review from anyone of course! There is value in there, but important not to get carried away.

Good point.

In a "sponsored" review, don´t be over-enthused. Don´t put the product down, either - try to figure out who might like it/need it if you don´t.
And if there is a quality issue (other than that, there is not really a bad product, just many you don´t find fully convincing) contact the manufacturer instead of spreading the word ;)
 
Sorry to pour cold water on this, but what does "levels above" mean? In your Mantra reviews, you claimed the spin is almost the same level as MX-P. So, by implication, are you also claiming DNA rubbers are "levels above" MX-P in terms of spin?

And how can you make any claims about DNA's durability as compared to MX-P? Unlike DNA, MX-P has been on the market for years, and we know fairly well what its durability is.

Come on, at least make an effort to be impartial.

You seem to have difficulty in your reading comprehension. It is very clear that when you claim a rubber has almost the same level of spin as another rubber, they both do not have the same amount of spin. Also, i never specified in that review how many levels of spin between the mxp and mantra h. Sorry to pour cold water on your conclusion but that is logically wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thomas.pong
It's obvious that yogi has some informal arrangements with the manufacturers which results in some bias. And I don't say that to knock him - it's just the nature of the beast. Most people who receive products regularly from suppliers in return for reviews will have some sort of pressure on them - either explicitly or implicitly. Has yogi ever given a bad review for an Xiom or Stiga product? No. Is everything Xiom and Stiga make 100% amazing? Maybe, maybe not.

People should always try to "read between the lines" when he posts a review (I think he's said as much himself at times) And that's good advice with any review from anyone of course! There is value in there, but important not to get carried away.

I did claim a few times to read between the lines. It is subtle most of the times but people need to read it.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Aug 2014
49
20
80
Why did you not compare DNA m and h with omega 7 series? Nothing in common?

By the way I tried gewo nexus pro 50 and 53 for 10 minutes and I have to say may be we all should go with the 50-53 degree rubbers with off- blades with compact head size.
Those rubbers are firm but not hard at all. Bouncy but nothing like a soft and bouncy rubber. They are spinny and fast.
They are lively.
When I got to back to my tenergy 80 fx it felt like dead.
 
says MIA
says MIA
Well-Known Member
Nov 2016
2,132
1,090
11,017
Why did you not compare DNA m and h with omega 7 series? Nothing in common?

By the way I tried gewo nexus pro 50 and 53 for 10 minutes and I have to say may be we all should go with the 50-53 degree rubbers with off- blades with compact head size.
Those rubbers are firm but not hard at all. Bouncy but nothing like a soft and bouncy rubber. They are spinny and fast.
They are lively.
When I got to back to my tenergy 80 fx it felt like dead.

Big gap between an FX rubber (40-43 deg) and 50-53 deg rubbers!

I'm not so sure we all can play, control or would enjoy playing with rubbers that firm even on an OFF- blade, compact size of not, I know I wouldn't and I've tried a few :)

The short game or openings can be a real bee with hard rubbers if you don't have the technique or simply don't favor them.
 
This user has no status.
The topsheet of these DNA rubbers looks very similar to the topsheet of the GEWO Nexxus EL Pro rubbers. Not too surprising, given they are both recent ESN releases.

Red.jpg

Also, I believe the max thickness of 2.1mm with only a thin topsheet is due to rather tall pimples.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Jan 2019
529
62
607
Hi,

I tried mxp50 on joola Aruna Off blade and it is amazing for the short game.I am excited to try the gewo el pro 53.Can someone expand on its characteristics.My blade has hinoki outer layer and is a soft blade with good feeling so I think 53 hardness should work well.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Aug 2018
180
83
427
Yesterday first 3 hours session with DNA M on my forehand, so a review of my first impressions

For some context about what i'm used to, i played with vari spin, mark V GPS, acuda S3, rakza 7 soft, R42, H3N, mantra S, rakza 7. Mostly with my OSP virtuoso that is a off- blade. I play around 1500 USATT if i convert well, and my style is to do as soon as possible a spinny forehand loop then a forehand loop to get the point

My first impression was that the sponge was harder than rakza 7 that I currently play. About the topsheet i'm not sure, i would say slightly firmer. Also it is indeed a thin topsheet rubber, i find it very visible in my opinion

When i bounced it, i was even a bit surprised that it didn't bounce a lot lot. Maybe because it is a bit harder than other rubbers i've played but it didn't felt crazy bouncy without any engagment

Now about the playing characteristics. First i was a bit surprised that i could adapt almost instantly, really no problem. To give an overall impression, i would say it is an all around offensive rubbers. Here i mean i didn't feel the need to engage very hard to play well with the rubbers and i found it pretty forgiving. Because the ball is well gripped (something i really want and like), the sponge is not too hard and the arc of the ball is, i don't know, i would say medium. Maybe even slightly higher than rakza 7

For me the main attribute was the consistency i would say. It wasn't crazy fast at all, similar to rakza but plenty enough i found. Spin wise, it was good but i was not surprised. I didn't played with my usual partners so maybe they would have seen a difference but i played with players above my level and they still shot out most of my spinny topspin on backspin but it's just the same as usual.

So yes, no crazy spin and speed. But i felt very secure and the contact felt very consistent. What i liked is that i could feel well the ball and it was nice to change from more spinny forehand to more speedy forehand. (I hope i'm clear here)

About serve and short game. Also nothing special i would say but very consistent. Easy to keep the ball pretty short as it's not too bouncy, good spin if required, good

I was about to forget blocking. Yes good also, even maybe pretty good. Not too spin sensitive and easy to do


In conclusion, i was not impressed by the speed and spin of the rubbers but i was impressed by how easy it was to play with it. I quickly forgot it we can say and i did not once thought i missed my shot because of it, despite the fact i was doing a lot of matches against opponent stronger than me. For me it's an all around offensive rubbers that is very consistent and safe. More offensive than all around. I think it's a bit the same idea than rakza 7 but more adapted to the plastic ball (i felt the contact was a bit better). One last point, i really liked the gripiness, something that i found lacking of some new generation rubbers (like the R42, the grip was weird to me).

I will keep it for my forehand, it really played like i wanted. If i get very different impression in a few weeks i will do a quick post about it :)
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Oct 2017
240
85
564
How would this rubber compare to DHS Goldarc 8? Both are ESN rubbers, and I do play sometimes with Goldarc 8 (on both sides) on a Sanwei Fextra which I find a quite good and a not too expensive setup.
 
Top