This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Has anybody tested the difference between Koto vs Limba surfaces for inner fibre blades? If so, what are your findings?
I recently bought a Loki Arthur Pro (Koto-ayous-zlc-ayous) to compare with my favorite blade, the Stuor Harimoto clone (Limba-ayous-zlc-ayous). I was curious how different the overall feeling and performance would be just with the change of the surface. Unfortunately for me, it's not a perfect comparison because the Loki blade's fibre is slightly closer to the surface than the Stuor. But I'll still give you my findings.
The biggest difference is that I find the Stuor blade "catches" or "grabs" the ball better than the Loki. The Stuor feels more comfortable and safe, easily grabbing the ball before launching it with spin and power. Stuor produces arc more naturally. With the Loki, sometimes it felt like I needed to open the racket face more or swing more upwards. Is this difference more from the surface wood? or more from the carbon layer being closer to the surface?
In speed, for 90% of shots I didn't really feel much difference in speed. In theory, the Koto blade should be faster, right? I didn't necessarily feel there was much difference. Is it 2% faster? Maybe, really hard for me to say. However, when I stand really far back and hit loops, I do find there is a bit more rebound with the Koto blade. (But is it the blade that is faster? or is it because I'm opening the blade and hitting the ball flatter?)
I find the Koto blade, essentially is still a inner fibre blade. So it does have some dwell time, more than the Sanwe 75 outer alc for example. But it feels firmer.
Next I want to test the Sanwei inner 75 vs the DHS Fang bo.
I recently bought a Loki Arthur Pro (Koto-ayous-zlc-ayous) to compare with my favorite blade, the Stuor Harimoto clone (Limba-ayous-zlc-ayous). I was curious how different the overall feeling and performance would be just with the change of the surface. Unfortunately for me, it's not a perfect comparison because the Loki blade's fibre is slightly closer to the surface than the Stuor. But I'll still give you my findings.
The biggest difference is that I find the Stuor blade "catches" or "grabs" the ball better than the Loki. The Stuor feels more comfortable and safe, easily grabbing the ball before launching it with spin and power. Stuor produces arc more naturally. With the Loki, sometimes it felt like I needed to open the racket face more or swing more upwards. Is this difference more from the surface wood? or more from the carbon layer being closer to the surface?
In speed, for 90% of shots I didn't really feel much difference in speed. In theory, the Koto blade should be faster, right? I didn't necessarily feel there was much difference. Is it 2% faster? Maybe, really hard for me to say. However, when I stand really far back and hit loops, I do find there is a bit more rebound with the Koto blade. (But is it the blade that is faster? or is it because I'm opening the blade and hitting the ball flatter?)
I find the Koto blade, essentially is still a inner fibre blade. So it does have some dwell time, more than the Sanwe 75 outer alc for example. But it feels firmer.
Next I want to test the Sanwei inner 75 vs the DHS Fang bo.
Last edited: