| OOAK Table Tennis Forum https://ooakforum.com/ |
|
| 563 vs armstrong attack 8 https://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=28172 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | okiduki [ 02 Jul 2015, 13:21 ] |
| Post subject: | 563 vs armstrong attack 8 |
Hi Guys recently i went into the dark side of pips. Currently using 563 with a relatively soft 1.0mm sponge. I am wonder what is the difference between 563 and Armstrong attack 8. Does it reduce spin or no spin at all when i push underspin? When i attack/block does it have a similar sinking effect that create underspin? thanks in advance! |
|
| Author: | josesiem [ 07 Jul 2015, 11:25 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 563 vs armstrong attack 8 |
okiduki wrote: Hi Guys recently i went into the dark side of pips. Currently using 563 with a relatively soft 1.0mm sponge. I am wonder what is the difference between 563 and Armstrong attack 8. Does it reduce spin or no spin at all when i push underspin? When i attack/block does it have a similar sinking effect that create underspin? thanks in advance! AA8 has wider and softer pips. With a 1mm sponge, however, I doubt there is much of a significant difference. AA8 will produce slightly more spin. Thus pushes CAN be more spinny. Blocks are nasty like 563. All in all, it's a superior rubber, based on sponge and topsheet quality. Will it make you a better player? Doubtful. If you're on a budget, 563 with a custom sponge from somewhere like colestt will be just fine. I've used both rubbers extensively. I prefer AA8, but in reality it makes little difference. Now that I'm in the US, I couldn't be bothered trying to get armstrong products and so I'd use 563. |
|
| Author: | Zhaoyang [ 09 Feb 2016, 02:32 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 563 vs armstrong attack 8 |
I'm posting to this thread because there isn't one with a better title. My two samples are Attack 8L (larger diameter pips), regular version (not Super-I), one with standard red sponge and the other with "53", lavender. Both were sold as "2.0". The following numbers are from the package, from noppen-test, and from me doing my best with digital calipers and a magnifying glass on the one with red sponge. The pips are 1.2mm high (package, noppen-test, I agree), the basesheet is .5mm thick (noppen-test, I agree). So the total topsheet thickness is 1.7mm. You'd expect then that the one sold as "2.0" would have a .3mm sponge (or some have said .5mm). No, it is certainly almost 1.0 (my measurement). [EDIT: It is not less than 1.0] The total thickness of the one labeled "2.0" is actually closer to 2.7mm. Since the one sold as "4.0" must be <4.0mm these different available thicknesses must be closer together than marked; they can't really be .5mm apart. The 53d lavender sponge is very slightly thicker than that red one (maybe just production tolerance), yet should be <2g heavier mounted (see below that the sheet is larger). That's nice to know. Standard red sponge, full sheet: 37.6g, 186x163mm 53d lavender sponge: 40.7g, 184x169mm. I doubt it will be better or worse than 563, just different, as usual. |
|
| Author: | Zhaoyang [ 12 Feb 2016, 02:36 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 563 vs armstrong attack 8 |
Here's a better thread about Armstrong pips-out: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=18862&start=15 This post in that thread confirms what I said above about the sponge thickness and lists the others: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=18862#p207332 |
|
| Author: | josesiem [ 08 Nov 2016, 00:09 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 563 vs armstrong attack 8 |
I've played with both Attack 8s and I currently play with 563. In brief, it seems hard to justify spending so much on AA8. I like it; it's well made, but both rubbers pretty much do the same thing. At colestt.com you customize your sponge with 563. I chose a really soft sponge in 1.3 to chop with 563. It's awesome. Takes practice... but then so does everything. AA8 M-version is more like a long pip rubber. I also attack a lot with the 563. Rarely comes back. |
|
| Author: | iskandar taib [ 08 Nov 2016, 11:58 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 563 vs armstrong attack 8 |
My experience with 563 was.. well, somewhat traumatic. No fault of the rubber, but it truly messed up my game for the few days I tried it. I was thinking of sticking with it for a month but in the end decided I couldn't. I used it on my backhand, it was fine for most things but it forced me to play really close to the table and that totally messed up my forehand strokes. I decided at that point that medium pips wasn't for me. Iskandar |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC + 9:30 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|