Different of Tibhar FX-P VS FX-S
- Thread starter TT Lover
- Start date
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
Well-Known Member
Understand that these are both softer sponged modern rubbers. They both make very good spin, but operate differently.
FX-S has a more dynamic sponge and a thinner feeling topsheet. I suspect the pimple structure is also different. On lower impacts this rubber is bouncier. FX-S is at its best on fuller strokes, whether it is a spinny opening loop or a counter topspin. You can get a little faster pace out of FX-S with a weaker impact as the rubber has catapult, even on medium impacts.
FX-P is a more control oriented offensive rubber (you are getting what you put in and can expect the output in each gear but offensive potential is there) (fancy way to say lower impact direct hits feel like it goes where you put it), but if you have a really fast bat and a good firming, you can get a lot out of this rubber in terms of spin, decent pace and control at hard/fast impacts. Lower and medium impacts result in a more direct feeling ball than FX-S... but do not be fooled, this rubber can also spin it up with a fast bat on a slow, heavy opening topspin. FX-P i easier to receive serves, since it is less bouncy, but one can get used to FX-S. I had great touch on BH receive using this rubber vs Sergey Scoobie Doo's array of short serves. it is more about timing to the ball and close to the bounce loose grip impact than anything.
Both rubbers can counter topsin, obviously FX-S is more dynamic and can make more spin with a medium bat than FX-P, but if you use decent power and a firming at impact, you can REALLY make FX-P spin up and blast it. This rubber almost sounds illegal on this kind of shot.
Not everyone impacts like this, so not everyone would experience that.
Most players have a weak impact and are more easily awed by bouncy modern dynamic rubbers that the player gets something for almost nothing... that is why a lot of the U1500 USATT crowd has liked T05... you get 80% of its spin potential with not even a half-azz stroke... and that level of spin is better than most at 100% of potential spin given the best impact of that U1500 weak impact crowd. (Of course advanced players loved T05 for its feel and ability to counter with insane spin at 70-80 power levels.
FX-S has a more dynamic sponge and a thinner feeling topsheet. I suspect the pimple structure is also different. On lower impacts this rubber is bouncier. FX-S is at its best on fuller strokes, whether it is a spinny opening loop or a counter topspin. You can get a little faster pace out of FX-S with a weaker impact as the rubber has catapult, even on medium impacts.
FX-P is a more control oriented offensive rubber (you are getting what you put in and can expect the output in each gear but offensive potential is there) (fancy way to say lower impact direct hits feel like it goes where you put it), but if you have a really fast bat and a good firming, you can get a lot out of this rubber in terms of spin, decent pace and control at hard/fast impacts. Lower and medium impacts result in a more direct feeling ball than FX-S... but do not be fooled, this rubber can also spin it up with a fast bat on a slow, heavy opening topspin. FX-P i easier to receive serves, since it is less bouncy, but one can get used to FX-S. I had great touch on BH receive using this rubber vs Sergey Scoobie Doo's array of short serves. it is more about timing to the ball and close to the bounce loose grip impact than anything.
Both rubbers can counter topsin, obviously FX-S is more dynamic and can make more spin with a medium bat than FX-P, but if you use decent power and a firming at impact, you can REALLY make FX-P spin up and blast it. This rubber almost sounds illegal on this kind of shot.
Not everyone impacts like this, so not everyone would experience that.
Most players have a weak impact and are more easily awed by bouncy modern dynamic rubbers that the player gets something for almost nothing... that is why a lot of the U1500 USATT crowd has liked T05... you get 80% of its spin potential with not even a half-azz stroke... and that level of spin is better than most at 100% of potential spin given the best impact of that U1500 weak impact crowd. (Of course advanced players loved T05 for its feel and ability to counter with insane spin at 70-80 power levels.
Thank you sir,
What sponge thickness is better for back hand side, 1.9 or 2.1 ?
Best regards,
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
Is this backwards, or am I not understanding what you wrote? FX-P more bounce, FX-S less reactive, less bounce, less alive on lower impact, more spin oriented, and it shines when you put the effort in.
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
Well-Known Member
Carl had just finished a 30 mile sprint to get back home from a freedom ride. He could activate the kickstand on the carbon fiber bike and re-read the last sentence of the first paragraph.
He might need Sherlock Holmes' magnifying glass to see where I wrote FX-X is less bouncy.
Some cat won the Euro TT Championship using FX-P, so it cannot be entirely un-useful.
Similar threads
