31 comments on “Head Corrugated Technology Squash Racket Review – Microgel CT115 – CT130 – CT135 – CT150 – Xenon 135 CT – Vector 155 CT – Review

  1. Hi its great to find all these comments which certainly can help in finding the right type of a racket by someone.
    Can anyone please help me with any knowledge about Head CT 120 Pro. Have recently purchased one from sweatband.
    Thanks

  2. Hi All, does anyone know what is the original string tension on HEAD CT 130.
    I really loved the factory string and the tension, however after the strings broke, I got it restrung at 26/24 with Ashway PowerNick®18 but not really happy with the feel and touch. Would anyone know how to find the original string tension and where to get the original replacement strings from? cheers

  3. I am really unhappy with the head racket. I have a flexpoint and its really giving problem to me i think i need to switch over as i am losing my game.

  4. Hi,

    I am looking to purchase a new racquet this summer, and am deciding between the Head Xenon 135 CT and the Technifibre Carboflex 130 Basaltex. Could anyone compare these two racquets in power vs touch. I am looking for a racquet that is durable, has good power, but also good touch. Thanks in advance for any help.

    Tanya

  5. BUENAS TARDES, QUISIERA SABER SI LA CT 115 O LA CT 135 TIENEN EL MISMO BALANCE QUELA CT 130 O SI ME PUEDEN DECRI CUAL ES LA QUE ES MAS PARECIDA.
    LOS SALUDO DESDE LA PATAGONIA ARGENITNA.-
    MUCHAS GRACIAS!!

  6. The OEM string on the Head CT 115 is really nice but they dont last at all. For someone who almost never breaks a string, I broke strings on both my 115s in a month.

  7. CT 135 Xenon is the most useless racket I have ever played with. The Racket is very stiff very hard on the wrist . More Importantly the grip I felt is small and grabing the racket put starin on the wrist.

      • 26/24? I never heard this combination. I always ask my stringer to use one tension. Never knew that tension for mains and crosses could be different 🙂

  8. I bought a 135 CT xenon a couple of weeks ago, after a long period of deciding what to replace my Technifibre Supreme NG130 with (which I thought was a bit underpowered for my game – see review elsewhere on this site).

    The adjustment took a little while. Most of my rackets thus far have been quite head light, a balance point around 345mm when fully string. This one weighs about the same (130 – 135g), but the balance point is around 380mm – which I’d call head heavy. Its only a few cm, but it really makes a huge difference when you try to give the racket a full swing, or maneuver for a delicate touch shot.

    The result? Well its certainly not lacking power! Finding length is easy, and doesn’t require over exertion or strength through my swing, which makes for easier control. The racket feels incredibly stiff on contact, I’ve had others that flex a bit – its a subtle difference, but those shoot ever so slightly off to the side, though you do learn to adjust. Most of the time I feel no vibration at all coming from the racket, though on occasion I do – its not enough to cause any concern for me personally though. After a few weeks of playing with it I feel like I’m finding my touch well, and its very accurate when you play the shot right. I probably have the slightly smaller head size (along with some other technology I won’t pretend to understand) to thank for that.

    The more head-heavy feel has had a couple of effects that I’ll scrawl here for those who are interested. Firstly, in comparison to my last racket, I found that my accuracy was initially off. Since it feels slightly heavier to swing and maneuver than the head-lights I’m used to, I felt that I wasnt hitting the fast reaction/reflex shots to well. The flip side of this is that it forces you to prepare earlier, get on your toes as your opponent hits, and have the racket in good position as they do. This can only be good for my game. Secondly, it’s required me to re-examine some aspects of my swing a bit. I’ve had my coaches tell me that I over-emphasize the forearm pronation of my swing, and that power should come from the follow through and swing of my shoulder too. This racket carries a lot more momentum than I’m used to. That naturally leads me into trying to harness and control the weight of the racket through the ball, rather than swiping at it with too much might. Again, ultimately I think its a good thing. Especially on the touch shots (drop shots in particular) I find myself really trying to feel the ball on the strings and gently stroking it to the wall, rather than hitting with too much slice and power.

    So, all in, I think its a fantastic racket, though the weight has taken a few weeks to really get a handle on (and I’m not sure I’m completely there yet). Not to say that its like swinging an axe, just that my last rackets have been a lot more like swinging a feather! Its taken some practice on my own to find my touch. I think that it will promote me to develop a technically better swing, and the early preparation parts of the game are really essential.

    I hope that this review helps others make their decisions. I will say that if you’re used to head light rackets, make sure you swing this one around in a shop a bit first (rather than buying online without having ever picked the thing up), and ideally go to a court and try it out before making a final decision. Its a very different beast to what I’m used to, but I’m playing well with it so far…

    • Mark, I couldn’t agree more with your comments. I bought the Xenon 135 for Christmas, and I still haven’t fully adjusted to the racket yet, but I’m getting there. I played with a Microgel 125 before, and the feel is completely different.

      The weight difference (and balance) in the racket made me reconsider my forehand swing a bit, and I feel like I need to remember to keep my wrist locked in perfect position to hit the ball properly. It certainly helps, because the end result is that my shots are both harder and more accurate now than before, but it took me more than a month to get the hang of it.

      I also felt I originally underhit most of my dropshots the first few weeks, due again to the change in weight and balance. Nothing that some solo practice couldn’t cure.

      Where this racket really shines, IMHO, is when hitting volleys, both to bury them in the back of the court or in volley-drops. The racket is steady as a rock, so it is easy to place the ball accurately no matter how hard, low or high the opponent hit a shot.

      As a summary, I thought I made a mistake when I bought it, I had mixed feelings the following month, and now I love it. It takes a while to get used to and requires (very) good technique.

  9. Head Cyano 115 CT

    After playing with the 115 CT, I felt I had to try the latest racquet in this line-up. The Cyano has not disappointed: it has great lightness and maneuverability, and the grip width has been improved (on the 115 CT it was a little too rectangular and “pinched”, now it has been rounded–big plus). I would say that the Cyano is slightly less powerful than the 115 CT howitzer, but there is still ample power (and I mean get ready for CRUSHING power if you haven’t played a racquet like this before). Also, the “loss” of power is more than made up for with improved touch and feel: perfect drop shots are really easy (well, if you know how to play them in the first place). The sweet spot is indeed huge and the racquet is quite forgiving of off-centre hits. This is the kind of weapon that can “save” you when you’re hitting the ball on the run–a lower quality racquet sprays the ball into the tin or floor. I can’t wait to restring it with Ashaway Supernick string and see how much better it plays then. I’m not saying this is the greatest racquet ever made (I doubt you’ll see pros play this racquet because it does not give you perfect control), but if you’re a good player looking for the best out there for an amateur and willing to pay for it, give this one a try.

    • Response to “Head Cyano 115 CT” by Tavish
      This racket is used by real pros. The racket is used currently by Rachel Grinham (AUS). She is usually in the top 5 of the WISPA. She has used this “model” from the very beginning Metallix 130 –> Microgel 125 and now the 115CT. She has a very spectacular old-school style of playing; huge amounts of drops and volleys. I like this kind of game since it is more spectacular and physic. Recent PSA (male) tournaments are somewhat boring with eternal crosscourts and drives.

  10. Head YouTek Cyano 115 CT (Review)
    Best racket of the year. It combines superior control with a huge amount of power. How can this irony can be achieved?
    The racket’s frame is a extra stiff one, combining stiff carbon fiber, corrugated shaft and d3o. This stifness allow milimetric precision in the shots. Almost all the time, stiff frames are uncomfortable, vibrate, have limited power and reduced sweetspot. This situation is reversed by the design of the stringbed; very long main strings, open string pattern (12m x 17c) and Teflon in the grommets. All this gadgets enable a powerful, forgiving stringbed with a massive sweetspot (mainly for the new Teflon grommets). The racket can be soften even more with a pro string like PowerNick (zyex) or a premium nylon like X-One Biphase.
    The manoeuvrability is outstanding, mainly by the reduced weight (more thatn 115g according to my scale) and the balance point. The balance point was improved from the 115 CT, now at 365mm.
    As the main review says: “this racket is Jekyll and Hyde”

  11. Anyone used the Dunlop Aerogel Pro? website says 140g and even balance, be interested to hear any feedback. Had a go with a Dunlop Hotmelt Pro which felt v head heavy.

  12. ive tried the xenon 135 and 135 ct.i guess both rackets are good depending on what type of play that suits you.the xenon 135 feels a bit heavier than the 135 ct(i dunno why) but it has more power with the shot. truthfully, the 135 ct is the best, good balance(shots and drop shots), and i ended up buying the 135 ct.

  13. Thinking of purchasing the CT 150 or Vector 155. Found both online at good prices but am a bit confused ref balance? Currently using the Flexpoint Instinct (150g) and am looking for a racket that will help with accuracy/ touch. Do the higher balance stats mean the racket is head light or heavy? e.g. 335 mm/ 380 mm. Anyone had chance to use the 150 or Vector? Many thanks….

    • It is the distance from the base of the handle that is the balance point. Lower numbers means the balance point is closer to the handle and therefore head light.

  14. The CT 135 (red) gives loads of power
    a nice even balance and good touch when you need it.
    I love the new handle shape which is rounder.

  15. Hi,

    i would like to know if you have already hear about “Head Cyano 115” , it’s a brand new model with “d3o” material, do you know something about it?

    Regards,

    * Max *

  16. Just purchased the xenon 135, feels heavier than the more evenly balanced vector 155…i feel a lot of strain on my wrist. Decent power, havnt had much chance to determine accuracy yet. Still getting used to it. Have also played with the amazing 115, which is very easy on the wrist with perhaps a little too much power. For now, im hoping that i’ll learn to love the xenon…and maybe soon look into the buying the 115 youtek. I would like to hear about other experiences with these racquets.

  17. Head CT 115 is a super racquet. I agree completely with the review here: I’ve tried a few Head racquets before and didn’t like them at all, but this one (and probably others in this line I haven’t tried) has a great mix of power, control and lightness. I’m interested in trying out the new Dunlop 4D Evolution for the sake of comparison–would love to hear from someone who has played both racquets.

    Cheers and good squashing!

  18. Can anyone comment on difference between CT 115 and CT 135? (apart from the weight). I own CT 115 and think is great. Wondering, apart from slight difference, what is difference between the two rackets.

  19. I currently own the CT115 and love it. Does anyone have a view on the difference between CT 115 and the CT 135? Apart from weight, they seem the same?

    Cheers

    • I currently use the 115 and personally don’t care what the other rackets are like because I don’t plan on changing in a hurry – absolutely the best racket I have ever used (and I have use a lot of rackets)

      I play a very varied game that incorporates power, touch, lobs, kills etc . . . and I find the CT115 to be just awesome in all areas.

  20. …have a suggestion. Since the original string tension in a new squash racket somehow feels the best, and may serve as a reference for future stringing, it would be useful to have that stated on either the racquet or the attached specs card or on the Head display webpage. I am a fair club player and find Head squash rackets most suited to my style of play. Thnx.

    • I agree and would like to know the original stringing tension for the CT 150 which felt just right from new. Usually I restring a racquet when new but didn’t bother with the CT 150 as it felt great with the new strings from head having plenty of bite. If someone could let me know it would be appreciated – Thx

  21. Great post again.

    Maybe start confirming stiffness in the statistics of the racket? I know it’s a subjective thing but it’s very important!

    • Thanks for your comments Steve.

      Its a good point and its great to get people’s feedback on extra information I might have not covered.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s