For me, Treiber enables a bit more spin, with a pretty similar feeling and properties overall. Maybe a thing of technique, but I am not the only one to say so.I have played with boll alc for 2 month. Can anyone compare this blade to Treiber CO Off/s. I play near to mid distance from table and allround play for both backhand and forehand. Thanks
The Andro Treiber CO OFF/S is the same composition as most of the Butterfly outer ALC blades (except Freitas ALC and Kenta ALC) but thicker at 6.1mm vs. 5.8mm which means it has a bit more of a wood feel but it also packs more of a punch and is therefore faster.
The Timo Boll ALC's FL handle is indeed quite thin at 100 x 24mm, whereas the Treiber's FL handle is quite large at 100 x 26 mm.
The largest and closest FL handles for similar Butterfly blades will be the Viscaria, ZJK ALC or LGY ALC at 100 x 25 mm. The neck of these blades is actually a bit chunkier than the Treiber's, but their middle and bottom flare are a bit smaller than the Treiber's.
Treiber K | Koto | KVL | Ayous | Kiri | Ayous | KVL | Koto |
Treiber CO OFF/S | Limba | KVL | Ayous | Kiri | Ayous | KVL | Limba |
Treiber CI OFF | Limba | Ayous | KVL | Ayous | KVL | Ayous | Limba |
Viscaria, TB/ZJK/LGY ALC | Koto | ALC | Limba | Kiri | Limba | ALC | Koto |
Innerforce Layer ALC | Limba | Limba | ALC | Ayous | ALC | Limba | Limba |
Ah, it's possible, I'll have to look into this.On another forum I read the Treiber compositions are as follows. Adding Viscaria and IF ALC for reference:
[tbody] [/tbody]
Treiber K Koto KVL Ayous Kiri Ayous KVL Koto Treiber CO OFF/S Limba KVL Ayous Kiri Ayous KVL Limba Treiber CI OFF Limba Ayous KVL Ayous KVL Ayous Limba Viscaria, TB/ZJK/LGY ALC Koto ALC Limba Kiri Limba ALC Koto Innerforce Layer ALC Limba Limba ALC Ayous ALC Limba Limba
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzBoZAnpPOo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiJf6leLhQc
I also read the Treiber CO is thicker. And that it is faster than Viscaria. I played with it shortly and it didn't seem faster, it felt a bit less crisp, very good. I think it is excellent blade. The speed difference I think is because of the weight of the concrete blade.
Exactly! Which means that it really depends how you (KM1976) engage close to the table and what you prefer and want from the blade at that distance. If you want more of a wood feel on the short game and shots close to the table, and either prefer to engage slow and get a slow shot, or engage fast and get a fast shot, then CI is for you. If you prefer to engage slow but still get a faster shot, or like to engage fast and get a banger, then CO is for you. CO is more reactive at short, mid and far distance, CI is a bit less with more of a wood feel but you can still get a lot of speed at any distance, you just have to engage more especially close to the table.The main difference between C(arbon)O(uter) and C(arbon)I(nner) is that the deeper the carbon is the harder You have to hit before it is engaged.
So a Carbon inner blade will be slower on loose hits and just as fast as an outer blade on hard hits.
Cheers
L-zr
The main difference between C(arbon)O(uter) and C(arbon)I(nner) is that the deeper the carbon is the harder You have to hit before it is engaged.
So a Carbon inner blade will be slower on loose hits and just as fast as an outer blade on hard hits.
Cheers
L-zr
Well, perhaps not "just as fast", but certainly fast enough. 🙂
It's also worth noting that the placement of the carbon as either an "inner" or "outer" layer affects more than just how the carbon layer is engaged. All other things being equal (which they hardly ever are), the placement of the carbon layer also affects the overall stiffness of the blade, and the transmission of feedback to the hand (ie. the "feel"). So, in addition to the speed range of the blade, you should also consider whether a stiffer or a more flexible blade is to your liking, and whether you prefer a 'woodier' or a 'sharper' feedback.
For some reason, I felt that with the Treiber blades the "outer" versions give better feedback than the "inner" versions, contrary to the theory. I can´t explain this, but have compared a few FO directly to FI and felt the same about CO and CI. And yes, identical weight, give or take a gram, and all other parameters intact. Outer versions feel clear and crisp, inner - while still good blades - a bit more dull, bit softer yes, but not to their advantage.Well, perhaps not "just as fast", but certainly fast enough. 🙂
It's also worth noting that the placement of the carbon as either an "inner" or "outer" layer affects more than just how the carbon layer is engaged. All other things being equal (which they hardly ever are), the placement of the carbon layer also affects the overall stiffness of the blade, and the transmission of feedback to the hand (ie. the "feel"). So, in addition to the speed range of the blade, you should also consider whether a stiffer or a more flexible blade is to your liking, and whether you prefer a 'woodier' or a 'sharper' feedback.
For some reason, I felt that with the Treiber blades the "outer" versions give better feedback than the "inner" versions, contrary to the theory. I can´t explain this, but have compared a few FO directly to FI and felt the same about CO and CI. And yes, identical weight, give or take a gram, and all other parameters intact. Outer versions feel clear and crisp, inner - while still good blades - a bit more dull, bit softer yes, but not to their advantage.
So, going back to the start of the thread, I´d say replace an ALC with CO at any time, but be careful about replacing an Innerlayer ALC with a CI.
I have tested Treiber FI with R53/R47 and confirm your assertion. Not good feeback . Really strange.
Hi @thomas.pong @Airoc ,Exactly! Which means that it really depends how you (KM1976) engage close to the table and what you prefer and want from the blade at that distance. If you want more of a wood feel on the short game and shots close to the table, and either prefer to engage slow and get a slow shot, or engage fast and get a fast shot, then CI is for you. If you prefer to engage slow but still get a faster shot, or like to engage fast and get a banger, then CO is for you. CO is more reactive at short, mid and far distance, CI is a bit less with more of a wood feel but you can still get a lot of speed at any distance, you just have to engage more especially close to the table.
With that said, you see pros who like to play close to the table favor either inner or outer carbon blades, and others who play further out who will pick one or the other too. It's really a matter of preference.
Hi @Aijaz_000,Hi @thomas.pong @Airoc ,
A new member here from India, was going through threads on Treiber CI/ CO and landed here. (could be a dead thread )
I am planning to get one of these 2. However I am confused If CO would be too fast for me (since it seems to be very similar to BTY ALC blades)
I currently (unsuccessfully) play with Long 5 with Fastarc G1 2mm on FH and Rakza 7 Max on BH. I like these rubbers.
My preference is to get that ball feel while play the stroke, the ball sinking into the rubber I mean.
Playing with above setup, I have worked with a coach and my technique has improved. However my coach is not happy with the blade (am undecided as I have had a string of bad results in local club level tournaments). My coach is suggesting to move to Boll ALC, but I am skeptical whether Ill be able to handle the drastic change in the blade feel. That is why I am considering the Treiber series.
I tend to drift away from the table, however I am looking to improve and focus on close to the table - FH power drive/ drive game play. BH would be more block and some open ups against serves.
What would be the best rubber combinations for the CI and CO for close to the table play. I completely understand when you say the blade "type" is a personal preference but I would like to know which of these blades you prefer.
Note: I am more of a "power" guy, in the sense I have a hard time controlling the amount of power I put into the stroke.
Thanks.
Thanks for the response @thomas.pong .Hi @Aijaz_000,
It'd be good to know why you're not into the Long 5 which is a soft inner carbon blade.
Giving you recommendations otherwise would be too much guessing.
Thanks for response @vittiv . In that case, what is the good weight range to look at for CI? Considering the el pro 50 on the FH. ( I understand that it would be close to Fastarc G1) please correct me if I am wrong hereI work as a trainer and many of my students use andro blades.Ci more flexible, gives more acceleration during snapping blows.Now we mainly use Gewo rubber(Nexus EL Pro 50) and Yasaka Rakza Z for FH , Gewo Nexus Select 45-48 for BH. Unfortunately ANDRO blades can vary greatly in speed and weight even within the same batch, you have to choose and weigh