Donic rubber similar to mx-p

Original M1 is very close.  Same sponge IMO, same factory boost smell, slightly different topsheet.  The others all involve newer bits of ESN technology and are less similar.

Thanks for reply guys! Ans yeah.. Was gonna go with the regular m1 but then Was just wondering whether jp01 and m1turbo are anywhere close in spin and power Atleast in all out looping or loop driving?

JP01 throws lower (a nice medium arc) is less bouncy in the short game, and has lower catapult than M1 (more linear).  It still has loads of power, especially in the higher gears, and is easier to use over the table IMO.  Different characteristics to M1 (and MX-P) - closer to Tibhar 1Q if you've ever tried that.

yogi_bear wrote: None of the donic rubbers come close to the performance of mxp especially in spin and durability

I think the M1 has a higher speed to spin ratio than the MX-P, so on a slow spiny loop I can generate the same spin, but on a fast hard loop, the MX-P gives me more spin.

AndySmith wrote: yogi_bear wrote: None of the donic rubbers come close to the performance of mxp especially in spin and durability [DIV] [/DIV][DIV]I have to say that I'm not so sure about the durability issue either.  I did see a lot more early topsheet wear on my last sheet of M1 when compared with a sheet of MX-P I had a while back.  But I can't agree with the rest - M1 and MX-P are [B][I]really [/I][/B]close IMO.  Not that I'm a tuned instrument or anything, but there you go.[/DIV]

Nope. The tenergy users in my area shifted to the mxp and tried the m1 but found it lacking in punch. The speed maybe the same but other areas especially the spin and power away from the table, the evolution rubbers especially the mxp is the rubber to beat among tensors. All others cone short.

yogi_bear wrote: AndySmith wrote: yogi_bear wrote: None of the donic rubbers come close to the performance of mxp especially in spin and durability I have to say that I'm not so sure about the durability issue either.  I did see a lot more early topsheet wear on my last sheet of M1 when compared with a sheet of MX-P I had a while back.  But I can't agree with the rest - M1 and MX-P are really close IMO.  Not that I'm a tuned instrument or anything, but there you go. Nope. The tenergy users in my area shifted to the mxp and tried the m1 but found it lacking in punch. The speed maybe the same but other areas especially the spin and power away from the table, the evolution rubbers especially the mxp is the rubber to beat among tensors. All others cone short.

The evolution rubbers were released years before the current rubbers. As early as 2012 I think there are already evolutions rubbers in the ittf larc and we could assume they improved the rubbers before the sold it commercially.

I think I my be wrong but I do not think it is the dye, I think it is more of the mixture between the natural and synthetic rubbers for the topsheet. If you have observed among esn rubbers, there are those that have the bright red rubbers and those that have a dull red color. I do not know why a lot of the cherry red ones are very spinny or can be easily used to produce spin.

yogi_bear wrote: The speed maybe the same but other areas especially the spin and power away from the table, the evolution rubbers especially the mxp is the rubber to beat among tensors. All others cone short.

I disagree - I've played with MX-P & M1 on both sides of 1 blade for over a year. M1 is at least as powerful as MX-P from mid-distance. It is a bit harder, has a bit more catapault on slow strokes and a shade less spin on full strokes. But it is the most similar rubber to MX-P from the Donic line.

To add a bit, M1 is a bit easier to spin with.

A difference is that in MX-P, you derive most of the spin from topsheet. In M1, it is from topsheet + sponge.

I prefer MX-P on FH and M1 2.0 on BH.

The m1 is easier to spin that is correct but it doesnt have the same feel as the mxp. Overall feel, spin and power m1 is different from mxp. I would rather take hexer hd over m1. People do not realize that the evolution series are a bunch of special rubbers. They are just above every other euro rubber in their class but the drawback is they need a better set of playing skills to use them fully as they were originally designed for sponsored players only. Speed is just one factor that m1 and mxp are almost the same but if you add in feel, spin, trajectory, gears and even durability you would only be looking for a rubber substitute that has something to offer which is a few notches lower.

nv42 wrote: Been using mxp since 2 years and havnt seen anything that could make me change Hehe.. I'm asking this for a friend who was recently sponsored by donic and he can't ask for too many rubbers to try out for some reason, he Hasta just choose two.

The mxp topsheet doesn't crumble or chip as easy as t05 but xiom rubbers are the most durable in this aspect from what iv tried. Well, for me, once both mxp and t05 are past their prime, I find mxp more controllable and easy to use and it also gives me more confidence to go all out whereas as an old sheet of t05 sends the ball out or on the net sometimes unless I tone down my shot. I found mxp better for serving when old ( when new, both are insanely spinny, so couldn't make up my mind). Also, mxp shrinks more than t05 I guess.

Stavros wrote: Tibhar has made a revolutionary rubber and it became, by far ,the most popular rubber of the brand. This is MX-P. On the other hand , Donic's more popular rubber is still the old classic, Baracuda.

+1

I've always wondered, do the pros use 2.0 rubber so they can boost it?