Difference between Andro Treiber CO and FO?

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Apr 2016
141
56
247
Read 1 reviews
I have the FO variant of this blade. At first, I thought that the blade was way too stiff for me and I was finding it difficult to get enough dwell and spin on the ball to make my shots consistent. I thought that maybe the blade was only good for flat hitting. However, after a while, I started to learn how to grip the ball using this blade and I find myself using it from time to time when I'm feeling tired and not up to using my Timo Boll ALC, as I feel the TB is a bit less forgiving and requires more effort to be consistent. I use Rasanster R47 on both sides of all my blades.

Now that I am getting used to the FO, I was wondering if anyone can give a direct comparison, in terms of how the two blades play and feel, to it's brother the Treiber CO? As I understand it, the FO is some kind of TXL Fibre and the CO is using KVL Carbon. Don't ask me what the difference is, as I'm just parroting what I've read online. I assume that this is the only difference between these two blades, but I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Apr 2014
1,495
1,093
2,625
Read 3 reviews
I assume that this is the only difference between these two blades, but I could be wrong.

You are ;)

The FO and FI blades have Hinoki as outer veneer, the CO and CI blades don´t. There may be other differences in the construction, but that is the obvious one, apart from the fibres used.

The CO plays very crisp and less bouncy than the FO. In my opionion, like some of the BTY ZLF blades, the FO/FI blades have a bit more all-wood character, while the CO is more traditional carbon/aramid carbon. The only one I haven´t played is the CI.

So I guess if the FO makes playing easier than your ALC, the CO probably wouldn´t as much.
 
Top