I've used this racket since 1996 and absolutely love it. I have tried multiple different rackets in that time frame and try to stick with Tecnifibre TF-40 but I find myself going back to the Mono for a bit of nostalgia. String with poly or a hybrid set up and you can't lose. If you grew up playing wood, these rackets work very well.
I have this along with its full thermal cover. The Mono swings through the air effortlessly because of its form factor and it's fun to use in slower rallies. While the sweet spot is puny, the purity of the shot when struck perfectly feels very rewarding. It's not as bad as some make it out to be but then I grew up playing with a Maxply McEnroe and Fischer Powerglass. Thanks for reintroducing these to people, Harry.
I tried it and did not like it. It did not sell well and was not as stable as a racquet with a triangle type yolk. It is nice wall art and a unique conversational piece.
I remember Connors using it. My thoughts on it would be that it would be prone to twisting because the neck is so narrow. This was an issue with wood frames as well but the head was so small and the weight so high that it compensated somewhat for twisting. The steel and aluminum racquets somewhat fixed this problem with a Y-throat and then graphite racquets fixed it with the same approach and with larger head sizes that increased twistweight.
Had 3 of them, one was an all-black EXPERIMENTAL model I got at the Singapore release - Lotsa spin and a surprisingly good feel. Sold them used a year or two later for pretty much what I paid for them new, and then went back to the PS85. Great racket as much as I remember.
I played the mono for a short time, definitely for a flat ball striker, great control on ground strokes, ok on the serve, not especially good vollying. Jimmy Connors played them as well not surprised he liked them with his classic ground strokes.
I have one of these and I like hitting with it! The looks make it feel like a novelty item, but like you guys pretty much concluded; put some modern poly strings on it it doesn't play much different than a typical graphite racket.
I had a Prince Ripstick back in the day. It was basically the Mono but it was 29" long and had a larger head (I wanna say 104). I remember hitting some of the fastest best serves of my life with it. But ground strokes flew all over the place and forget trying to volley with it. I ended up selling it which I regret now. There was a third one, I can't remember the name, which was also 29" long and had a very large head size. The Mono was standard 27" length and had a 97 sq. in. head.
Does anyone remember the Prince Mach 1000 with its mono shaft? 29" long and a massive 124 square inch head size. I still have it in a pretty much new condition and I just tried it with new poly strings a few month ago for fun. It was an interesting but not unpleasant exercise.
I was trying to remember what the name of a throatless Prince racquet was called from the late 90s/early 00s and it was the Mach 1000. I think my HS coach had one and he just destroyed everyone with it. It was maybe $150 or $200? I ended up just buying one on eBay for under $60, living the dream 20+ years later lmao
Have you done a review of the T-2000? I played with a freshly strung one a couple years ago and my (2- hand)backhand was better than on any other racquet (normally my weak side by far). I was running around my forehand to hit backhands, but could not get forehands to land in the court. I felt there was a lesson to learn in there, I suspect that my backhand side prefers a head heavy, heavier racquet than the forehand. Also of interest is the graphite reinforced midsize woodies from the early 80s. I have a midsize Jack Kramer wood. It is an interesting niche, plays a lot easier than standard wood racquets, but I can see why all graphite racquets won...
Harry features the T-2000 as part of an earlier video. th-cam.com/video/AcexrFDu0Cs/w-d-xo.html I started off with a T-2000 but eventually wore out the wire suspension system by scraping it on the court, so replaced it with a T-5000. Ended upgrading to a wood Wilson Advantage - less power but more control.
@@ozmagoo7724 Thanks! Interesting info on the swing weight on that one. I need to try moving the the weight to the tip of my racquet to see if I can get a good backhand (and if it will mess up my forehand)
@@cextine Hi Chris. JC was in his heyday when my brother and I started playing. I remember JC used to weight his T-2000 up with lead. As such, my brother added lead to the 12 o'clock position, but he used a two-hander, so suited him better than it did me.
The Mono design was the beginning of the end for Prince's market domination. Prince had built its brand on technology and design that made tennis easier to play with its oversize and graphite frames ALL with open throat designs. The Mono was a step back to wood racquet design / technology that Prince racquets largely replaced and made obsolete. I was working at Paragon Sporting Goods in NYC when a Prince representative asked me to meet with them to look at a prototype racquet - the Mono. I laughed when I saw it and told them it would not sell. The design undermined all of Prince's prior growth strategy and the Mono was a flop even though Jimmy Connors endorsed it. The design is much less stable than open throat racquets. And, it's odd looking. The thought behind it was sane though because some players preferred flexible frames and that market niche was underserved. It's interesting that Harry should mention the old Wilson T2000 as being an inspiration for the design as Prince's current "O" port technology - which works! - BUT makes those models difficult to string just like the old T2000! Prince had hopes for mass market success with the mono but its playability was really only for a niche market of advanced players and it's uncool looks and limited playability caused consumers to consider other brands.
I have one of these. It's no way close to being one of the lowest RA Prince racquets. RA was about 63 new. Best volleying stick I've ever used, but please, it's not even close to being 'super flexible'. The new Prince Phantoms are more flexible than this.
Haha, I forgot about this. I tried it once at my old club, an older member had it. Man, it was cringing and twisting like mad, stability was horrible, not made for heavy hitters. It was hard as hell to hit top spin shots.
This is the most bullshit I've ever heard on this channel. The shaft that defines the sweet spot.. wow what a bs. I've had this racket last year and it is a very good racket 96 inch² 16x21 pattern. Pretty controlled I measured it and it is a very whippy stable racket. I sold it as i couldn't customize it to my preferred spec, but it was a huge amount of fun to play with it. Ps. People think that because of the 1 shaft it would twist and be unstable. That is not the case. It's fast through the air and stable. It's really feels like a 96 or 95 inch² racket
I've used this racket since 1996 and absolutely love it. I have tried multiple different rackets in that time frame and try to stick with Tecnifibre TF-40 but I find myself going back to the Mono for a bit of nostalgia. String with poly or a hybrid set up and you can't lose. If you grew up playing wood, these rackets work very well.
One of my instructors had this racquet. I’ve always wanted to try one because it looked neat.
I have this along with its full thermal cover. The Mono swings through the air effortlessly because of its form factor and it's fun to use in slower rallies. While the sweet spot is puny, the purity of the shot when struck perfectly feels very rewarding. It's not as bad as some make it out to be but then I grew up playing with a Maxply McEnroe and Fischer Powerglass. Thanks for reintroducing these to people, Harry.
I tried it and did not like it. It did not sell well and was not as stable as a racquet with a triangle type yolk. It is nice wall art and a unique conversational piece.
Such an interesting looking frame. The Gu is In The house. Love it!!
Awesome! Yeah, when I saw Jimmy Connors with that racquet at the US Open, I always wanted to try it out. Could never justify buying it, though...
I remember Connors using it. My thoughts on it would be that it would be prone to twisting because the neck is so narrow. This was an issue with wood frames as well but the head was so small and the weight so high that it compensated somewhat for twisting. The steel and aluminum racquets somewhat fixed this problem with a Y-throat and then graphite racquets fixed it with the same approach and with larger head sizes that increased twistweight.
Had 3 of them, one was an all-black EXPERIMENTAL model I got at the Singapore release - Lotsa spin and a surprisingly good feel. Sold them used a year or two later for pretty much what I paid for them new, and then went back to the PS85. Great racket as much as I remember.
I played the mono for a short time, definitely for a flat ball striker, great control on ground strokes, ok on the serve, not especially good vollying. Jimmy Connors played them as well not surprised he liked them with his classic ground strokes.
I have one of these and I like hitting with it! The looks make it feel like a novelty item, but like you guys pretty much concluded; put some modern poly strings on it it doesn't play much different than a typical graphite racket.
Really cool! Thanks
Have two of those, classic frame!
Lol a buddy of mine played with that frame for years… he played like Conners.. that played like an 280g by rossingnol (sp?) the wind made it flex
Cool video funny thing is that volkl you showed is my main raq
I played with that raquet in college and I actually liked it. But I was the only one jajaja
I used that racquet and really liked it. It was a 107.
I had a Prince Ripstick back in the day. It was basically the Mono but it was 29" long and had a larger head (I wanna say 104). I remember hitting some of the fastest best serves of my life with it. But ground strokes flew all over the place and forget trying to volley with it. I ended up selling it which I regret now.
There was a third one, I can't remember the name, which was also 29" long and had a very large head size. The Mono was standard 27" length and had a 97 sq. in. head.
Thats the Prince mach 1000
Does anyone remember the Prince Mach 1000 with its mono shaft? 29" long and a massive 124 square inch head size. I still have it in a pretty much new condition and I just tried it with new poly strings a few month ago for fun. It was an interesting but not unpleasant exercise.
I knew a Michael Lin in the early to mid 80’s who played tennis with an original Prince Pro. Is your Michael Lin from Moraga?
You guys should try a Prince Woodie.
I was trying to remember what the name of a throatless Prince racquet was called from the late 90s/early 00s and it was the Mach 1000. I think my HS coach had one and he just destroyed everyone with it. It was maybe $150 or $200? I ended up just buying one on eBay for under $60, living the dream 20+ years later lmao
Have you done a review of the T-2000? I played with a freshly strung one a couple years ago and my (2- hand)backhand was better than on any other racquet (normally my weak side by far). I was running around my forehand to hit backhands, but could not get forehands to land in the court. I felt there was a lesson to learn in there, I suspect that my backhand side prefers a head heavy, heavier racquet than the forehand.
Also of interest is the graphite reinforced midsize woodies from the early 80s. I have a midsize Jack Kramer wood. It is an interesting niche, plays a lot easier than standard wood racquets, but I can see why all graphite racquets won...
Harry features the T-2000 as part of an earlier video. th-cam.com/video/AcexrFDu0Cs/w-d-xo.html
I started off with a T-2000 but eventually wore out the wire suspension system by scraping it on the court, so replaced it with a T-5000. Ended upgrading to a wood Wilson Advantage - less power but more control.
@@ozmagoo7724 Thanks! Interesting info on the swing weight on that one. I need to try moving the the weight to the tip of my racquet to see if I can get a good backhand (and if it will mess up my forehand)
@@cextine Hi Chris. JC was in his heyday when my brother and I started playing. I remember JC used to weight his T-2000 up with lead. As such, my brother added lead to the 12 o'clock position, but he used a two-hander, so suited him better than it did me.
The Mono design was the beginning of the end for Prince's market domination. Prince had built its brand on technology and design that made tennis easier to play with its oversize and graphite frames ALL with open throat designs. The Mono was a step back to wood racquet design / technology that Prince racquets largely replaced and made obsolete. I was working at Paragon Sporting Goods in NYC when a Prince representative asked me to meet with them to look at a prototype racquet - the Mono. I laughed when I saw it and told them it would not sell. The design undermined all of Prince's prior growth strategy and the Mono was a flop even though Jimmy Connors endorsed it. The design is much less stable than open throat racquets. And, it's odd looking. The thought behind it was sane though because some players preferred flexible frames and that market niche was underserved. It's interesting that Harry should mention the old Wilson T2000 as being an inspiration for the design as Prince's current "O" port technology - which works! - BUT makes those models difficult to string just like the old T2000! Prince had hopes for mass market success with the mono but its playability was really only for a niche market of advanced players and it's uncool looks and limited playability caused consumers to consider other brands.
What tension did you string the Solinco Confidential at?
He always strings his racquets at 48lbs
I have two or three of them
Nice one!
I used this racket 28 years ago and loved it. I had L4 and L5 grips.
I have a Wilson hammer 5.5
I have one of these. It's no way close to being one of the lowest RA Prince racquets. RA was about 63 new. Best volleying stick I've ever used, but please, it's not even close to being 'super flexible'. The new Prince Phantoms are more flexible than this.
Tennis Warehouse needs to re-release the Prince Mono
Haha, I forgot about this. I tried it once at my old club, an older member had it. Man, it was cringing and twisting like mad, stability was horrible, not made for heavy hitters. It was hard as hell to hit top spin shots.
It belongs in your garage or a museum, but defiantly not on the court!
👍
I never understood this racket. It was weird back in the day and weird now.
I have seen 2 of these in used stores since seeing this video. It's even uglier in person
This is the most bullshit I've ever heard on this channel. The shaft that defines the sweet spot.. wow what a bs.
I've had this racket last year and it is a very good racket 96 inch² 16x21 pattern. Pretty controlled
I measured it and it is a very whippy stable racket. I sold it as i couldn't customize it to my preferred spec, but it was a huge amount of fun to play with it.
Ps. People think that because of the 1 shaft it would twist and be unstable. That is not the case. It's fast through the air and stable. It's really feels like a 96 or 95 inch² racket
Harry, it's a great racquet. You're just nowhere as skilled as Jimmy Connors.
one of the worst rackets ever made. Twisted on every shot Had to hit flat with a straight swing Oddly I played a 4.5 player using it
FIRST