Nanoflare 800 Pro vs Nanoflare 700: speed upgrade or lost sweetness?
Two Nanoflare 800 Pros I pre-ordered — one month in, four games a week, mainly doubles: two casual, two competitive, ~4 hours per session. Both 4U G5, 27 lb BG8…
Overview
Head-to-head Nanoflare 800 Pro vs Nanoflare 700 — not the multi-model 800 Pro/Tour/Game review. Two Nanoflare 800 Pros I pre-ordered — one month in, four games a week, mainly doubles: two casual, two competitive, ~4 hours per session. Both 4U G5, 27 lb BG80, cap removed, SP version, ~1180 RMB converted. I usually play Bladex 800 and Nanoflare 700 (same spec and tension). Serious Nanoflare 700 fan; Bladex 800 is past tense for me. Call it Nanoflare 800 Pro, not a close cousin of old 800 — handle and shaft length match 700's. Frame size same as 700 but much sharper; swing speed faster. Shaft and frame fully hardened; copper foil adds stability. Overall feel clearer than 700. Fish-mouth cap — honestly hardest feature for me to pin down. 78 holes — bed pressure clearly higher. Same stringer, same line, same tension same day — playing surface much harder than 700. 800 Pro improved 700's soft/meaty criticism but is not as forgiving as 700. I customised 700 as balanced — large frame, moderate shaft, slightly faster swing: not bad anywhere, not outstanding anywhere. 800 Pro is standard speed shot — fast swing, hard shaft. Shaft as hard as ever — normal boss level. Hit sound still good; copper foil underneath adds to sound — bit like an audio filter, especially flat drives and back court, quite crisp. Front court very good — 90. Frame and shaft stiffer than 700 on first use; T-joint much thicker. Most outstanding first impression: directionality really very good, much better than 700, feel much clearer. Very fast swing, very good directionality, flat drive very comfortable. Ball wraps a little after contact — good direction and high bed pressure make small wrap ignorable. Defence sometimes surprising — depends on level; in normal defensive position similar to 700, but in very passive moments probability of catching good balls much higher than 700. Catch and block feels clear and comfortable — take advantage, light stroke, done. Defence improved a lot after changing racket; racket still has benefits. First half month uncomfortable — face so hard, hit feels weird. After ~two weeks: something inside. After ~one month adapted — not much difference versus 700 on surface, but careful feel shows improvement. Price declining — buy now or wait. Purchase suggestions: 3U unknown — have not played. 4U: maybe not for amateur hunks — still a hindrance. Power player bought it, uncomfortable on smash, gave to partner. Mostly doubles, want clear front-court feel, some back-court shots that are satisfactory — try it. Want to improve defence via racket — try it too. Questions welcome in comments.
Appearance
Paint texture good; stickers and overall look average — passing 60. Bright spot: shaft paint near cone cover, nice shiny finish. Surface film a bit brittle — 7 o'clock paint film cracked on one unit. Blunt take: paint nothing special. Polite take: low-key design.
Performance
Back-court offence okay — satisfactory 80. Back-court offence: personal ability 80%, string and racket 10% each. Not as comfortable as typical offensive shot — still a bit of hindrance. Not much different from Nanoflare 700 or even slightly weaker. Nanoflare 700 offence really not bad — if you say 700 offence is weak, look inward first (joking). Splits and drops still good. Face directionality very accurate — better than 700.