Yonex Astrox 100ZZ Kurenai vs Axelsen (VA): same DNA, different demands
Yonex's Viktor Axelsen edition (called on Chinese forums) isn't a recolor — Volume Cut Resin replaces Black Micro Core in the frame, and the on-court behavior shifts more than the marketing implies.
Parameter
| Measured / stated | |
|---|---|
| Origin | Taiwan (no JAPAN on cap) |
| Rated tension | 20–28 lbs |
| Overall length | 674 mm |
| Bare weight | 84.5 g (93.1 g strung with overgrip) |
| Balance point | 310 mm bare and strung |
| Swing weight | 89–90 |
| Handle to cap | 215 mm (+10 mm handle, +5 mm cap) |
| Shaft diameter | 6.6 mm (non-Hyper Slim) |
| Shaft length | 205 mm |
| Flex | Medium-stiff |
| Head size | ~354 cm² |
Context and first impressions
In 2020, badminton discourse was dominated by the pandemic-postponed Tokyo Olympics and, shortly after, the launch of the Astrox 100 line. When the last Super 1000 before the Games—the All England in Birmingham—concluded, Viktor Axelsen and Yuta Watanabe both won their first All England titles wielding the new Astrox 100ZZ in men's singles and men's doubles. With world rankings frozen from March 2020 onwards, the racket arrived at a moment when gear chatter had unusual room to grow. Even I, who normally ignore star endorsements and hype reported buying both the Astrox 100ZZ and 100ZX early, largely out of loyalty to Yonex's "Z" lineage. After roughly a month of steady court time during the outbreak period, I felt ready to compare the flagship Japanese model against its Taiwanese sibling—and, in separate reviews, to revisit the Astrox 100ZZ in alternate colourways and weights.
Design and cosmetics
Both the Astrox 100ZZ and 100ZX share a deep navy primary palette and the Astrox family's yin-yang paint split. Unusually, the frame centre axis uses mirror gloss on one side and matte spray on the other, marking the line's status within the range. Wave-pattern ukiyo-e graphics wrap the frame sides and continue onto the shaft, prompting jokes about an "Alpine lollipop"—blueberry for the navy, strawberry for the vintage red Kurenai. From a distance the two models are easy to confuse. The clearest cosmetic differences sit at seven to eight o'clock: model marking and ukiyo-e tint. The 100ZX uses solid deep-blue gloss in the main colour; the Astrox 100ZZ adds a brighter, shifting star-field ink finish that reads more premium in hand. Some worry the asymmetric paint might cause left-right weight imbalance, as rumoured on early Astrox 77 frames, but simple dynamic balance checks suggest that concern is unfounded. The Kurenai (vintage red) colourway adds another layer. In photos it looks like straightforward black, red, white and cyan; in person the black base carries a red tint, with asymmetric red-side black-hole decals and cyan model lettering at eight o'clock. I describe the wine red as more upmarket than navy, with pearl-effect "ZZ" branding that gives the colourway distinct visual appeal. Same model, different paint—yet long-term users still notice meaningful differences once weight class and frame resin change.
Frame geometry and sweet spot
Compared with Astrox 99, the Astrox 100ZZ frame is subtly slimmed. Visually the head looks tightened and the sweet spot pulled inward, but total head area did not materially shrink; instead the sweet zone extends vertically. That makes early adaptation harder: even players comfortable on Duora Z-Strike cannot swap seamlessly, though mishit frequency tends to stay lower than first sessions on Z-Force II Speed or DZS. The narrowed profile improves swing speed relative to a conventional box frame, though not to true aero levels. Swung bare, the medium head and 4U mass keep pace reasonable—mid-tier among offensive frames, slightly faster than Astrox 99 at the same spec, slower than small-head DZS, and behind dedicated aero or compact speed designs. If you know DZS, the Astrox 100ZZ's instant burst and clear trajectory on forehand lifts feel almost uncannily similar—dense carbon in both frames likely explains the shared stiff, precise face feedback.
Shaft, cone and handling
Yonex markets a 6.2 mm Hyper Slim solid shaft: diameter reduced, interior filled with new material to raise elasticity and damping while lowering the drive threshold. Hand-flexing shows the Astrox 100ZZ shaft softer than DZS, with a flex point nearer the head for easier downward loading. On court, expectations of a revolutionary "solid shaft" sensation were partly tempered: versus Astrox 99 and DZS, the Astrox 100ZZ is easier to bend and recoil, but the difference is incremental rather than transformative. The engineering trade-off is clear—thinner shaft, shorter effective lever, higher demand on timing precision. Pop without control was the design problem Yonex had to solve. Handling upgrades include E.B-CAP PLUS, a longer fish-mouth cone cap (+5 mm) that sits more ergonomically in the palm. Because overall racket length stays fixed, the extended handle and cap shorten usable shaft length—part of why the 6.2 mm Hyper Slim setup can rebound accurately despite being both shorter and thinner than the 100ZX's 6.6 mm shaft at the same 205 mm shaft length and 674 mm total length.
Astrox 100ZZ on court
Attack and continuity: Forward balance, a head-near flex point, and stable face direction give the Astrox 100ZZ stronger attacking efficiency and rally pressure than same-spec DZS—enough that 4U ZZ can trade with 3U DZS. Fluid box geometry remains slower than mainstream aero frames, but the stability rewards players who commit. Point kills benefit from the shortened shaft; full-court smash weight is strong without reaching true one-shot floor-kill territory. Net and touch: Extended cone geometry encourages a forward grip—excellent for doubles net interception, almost a physical cheat for early take-offs. Stiff frame feedback plus a high-tension bed demands careful net touch; shots pop easily and invite counters. Defence and escape: Surprisingly, this may be the Astrox 100ZZ's standout versus older "Z" models. Vertical sweet-spot extension raises forgiveness; paired with new-generation carbon, rear-court lifts and defensive redirects feel confident where DZS backhands could feel hollow. Both Astrox 100ZZ and 100ZX rank among the best defensive tools in the "Z" family on borrow power, lifts, splits and pushes—though I did not always find backhand drive equally obvious. Stringing: Flat-drive and rear-court attackers often prefer BG-80 (28 lbs cited); control-oriented players favour BG-66UM (27 lbs) for softer drop slices. Aerobite at 25–27 lbs helped me salvage flat exchanges. Weight class note: A 3U Kurenai sample felt almost balanced in hand—unusual among flagship Astrox frames—and only marginally heavier than DZS, confirming that Astrox 100ZZ difficulty is not purely swing-weight driven. Yet 3U demanded more effort to reach peak shaft elasticity; passive rear-court escapes often landed mid-court. Threshold to "fully drive" the frame remains high in most situations.
Axelsen edition versus Kurenai (Astrox 100ZZ variants)
Chengzhen's comparison treats the Axelsen colourway as more than paint: official materials list Volume Cut Resin instead of Black Micro Core on Kurenai/navy, with frame shape, head size, grommets, shaft diameter and length unchanged. - Volume Cut Resin trims or redistributes resin to lower frame weight while preserving structure—optimising swing weight for lighter handling. - Black Micro Core stiffens the carbon matrix to limit frame deformation, favouring sharper smash speed and placement. Machine shaft-hardness readings (higher = softer) gave Axelsen 8.23 versus Kurenai 8.09—a small gap. In play, Axelsen swings lighter and faster; front-court drives, push-pounce, defence and passive shots feel relatively easier. Kurenai's higher swing weight and slightly stiffer profile should, in theory, deliver clearer feedback and heavier smashes; alternating rackets, many players struggle to feel more than subtle output differences unless power levels are high. Axelsen is essentially a lighter, slightly softer Astrox 100ZZ—not a fundamentally different racket. Rear-court attack is not obviously weakened, but the drive threshold remains demanding.
Doubles suitability and broader comparisons
I ranked 4U offensive frames for doubles—AxForce 90 New, AxForce 100 Gen II, 88D Pro new colour, Astrox 100ZZ Axelsen, Astrox 100ZZ Kurenai—finding Kurenai the hardest (highest swing weight, stiffest shaft among them), 90 New the most approachable, and Axelsen closest to AxForce 100 Gen II for front-drive and rear continuity with stiffer feedback. Personal preference split: crisp, fast-output frames (90 New, 88D Pro) suit flat-drive specialists; wrap-heavy, placement-first players may prefer AxForce 100 Gen II or either Astrox 100ZZ. Yet the same I ultimately returned to speed frames for elite men's doubles—offensive rackets with high swing weight often lose the first three shots against top opponents, and defensive lift depth suffers when swing speed cannot match shuttle pace. That is a philosophical split, not a flaw unique to the 100 line—but it explains why some call the Astrox 100ZZ a singles-first weapon while others happily use it in mixed or men's doubles front court.
Who should buy what
Astrox 100ZZ (4U): Loyal "Z" fans, doubles front-court players who value intercept and chain attack, and singles players wanting DZS-like precision with better continuity and defence—provided they accept a learning curve and prefer 4U swing speed. Astrox 100ZZ (3U): Stronger players seeking slightly more mass without abandoning the narrowed frame; higher stamina cost and harder peak elasticity. Astrox 100ZZ Axelsen: Players who want standard Astrox 100ZZ character with measurably lighter swing weight and slightly softer shaft—often the better Astrox 100ZZ for doubles among power-capable users. 100ZX (4U): Budget-conscious buyers wanting rear-court smash weight and "Z"-line defence without Japan-market pricing—if they can handle higher swing weight than the Astrox 100ZZ. Avoid heavier specs unless you prioritise raw mass over swing speed; both models punish slow swings.
How my take evolved
4U navy shaft: easier than DZS/AX99 at first without a clear wow moment; elasticity and anti-torsion confidence built over time — expectation vs incremental gain and my strength level. Drive threshold: 4U manageable with defence as the surprise highlight; most scenes get hard to fully drive over time, 3U especially tiring — weight spec and technique. Backhand: among the best “Z” defences early; passive lifts can feel flexible without obvious drive and escapes land mid-court — string setup and active vs passive defence. 100ZX: imagined as a mid-price easier alternative; swing weight 89–90 vs 85–85.5 on ZZ makes it harder to handle despite lower price. Doubles: excellent net intercept and continuity weapon; high swing-weight offence loses flat-drive races vs speed frames depending on opponent level and front vs rear role. Axelsen vs Kurenai: Kurenai lighter and doubles-friendly in theory; smash/placement edge barely perceptible — small shaft-hardness gap, similar strung swing weights. Sweet spot: vertical extension still demands adjustment from DZS; by 2025 homage frames lowered the hurdle as reference frames evolved.
Closing verdict
The Astrox 100ZZ and 100ZX carry Yonex's "Z" DNA forward: dense, precise frame feedback, demanding timing, and offence built on continuity rather than a single hammer blow. The Astrox 100ZZ's Hyper Slim 6.2 mm shaft, shortened lever, and E.B-CAP PLUS cone make it the more agile, doubles-friendly flagship; the 100ZX trades shaft technology and origin for higher balance and swing weight, becoming a rear-court cannon that is paradoxically less forgiving. Neither is a casual pickup racket. Patient string tuning—BG-80 for crisp attack, BG-66UM or Aerobite for softer control—and committed practice unlock what I consider among the most complete modern "Z" frames: attack, defence and placement in one demanding package. Whether that package belongs in your bag depends less on marketing colourways than on whether you need 4U agility, 3U authority, or the 100ZX's budget smash weight—and whether your game rewards swing weight or swing speed in the first place.