Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  Help Desk Help Desk  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Same thickness 3+2 vs 5+2
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Same thickness 3+2 vs 5+2

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Eric Fountain View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 12/07/2013
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Points: 108
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eric Fountain Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Same thickness 3+2 vs 5+2
    Posted: 11/16/2020 at 6:38am
What general differences are to be expected of 3+2 vs. 5+2 constructions, all other things being as equal as possible like overall thickness (not much value comparing a 7mm 3+2 against a 6mm 5+2...), ply types, weight?

I tried a thick 3+2 for the first time (Gambler Vector Hinoki, 6.9mm ZLC) and the first impression was eye opening. Very powerful, easy power that you don't have to work for, which was kind of fun, and I think I learned that I like Hinoki top which gave me good touch. But engage the core too much and look out because it can be explosive. I looked and it seems like thick 6.8mm-7.1mm is the classic 3+2 construction, usually Hinoki outer, almost every brand has one like this, way too many such blades to list. I adjusted pretty quickly and was playing well with it but I have a feeling something slightly more modest in thickness would still have plenty of power.

Lower in thickness there are still some 3+2 options (Donic Waldner Legend Carbon 6.3mm C, Xiom Ignito 6.4mm C, TSP Hino-Carbon Power 6.5mm C, Joola Rosskopf Force), and of course infinite 5+2 options.

I am speculating that even at lower, similar thicknesses, 3+2 is still probably a little more extreme in "modes" given the relatively bigger core, with 5+2 being more predictable overall but not as explosive. I also don't know what I am talking about. Anyone with decent experience with both?


Edited by Eric Fountain - 11/18/2020 at 3:20pm
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Makelele View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 11/28/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Makelele Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/18/2020 at 12:47pm
Interesting topic. Looking forward to some replies.
Back to Top
obesechopper View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 04/20/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote obesechopper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/18/2020 at 3:02pm
I have some custom blades, right around the 6.4mm mark. One is 3+2 and the other is 5+2. The 5+2 is slightly thicker overall (due to cutting discrepancies) and weighs 10 grams more than the 3+2. The 5+2 is stiffer and more crisp, along with being faster. 
Back to Top
stiltt View Drop Down
Assistant Admin
Assistant Admin
Avatar

Joined: 07/15/2007
Location: USA
Status: Online
Points: 341
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stiltt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/18/2020 at 3:35pm
I have great memories from the Tibhar H-3-9 that was a beast. I can't imagine how fast and fun it would be with an additional 2 composite plies.

With as many factors remaining the same (weight, thickness are the main ones), I would expect a bit more flex and catapult from the 3+2, especially if the cores are the same and the 4 plies in the 5+2 are all twice thinner than the outer plies of the 3+2. The 5+2 would be stiffer just because more cross grain gluing is involved.
Back to Top
ashishsharmaait View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/27/2013
Location: India
Status: Offline
Points: 814
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ashishsharmaait Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/19/2020 at 1:29am
3+2 has a little more flex compared to the 5+2. That is mostly because of the glue and the cross layering.
In my experience, a 5+2 is easier to play and is more linear. A 5+2 ALC construction in the 5.7-6.1mm range would probably be a good balance between flex and stiffness. With ZLC a but thinner would be better.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Become a Fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Web Wiz News
Forum Home | Go to the Forums | Forum Help | Disclaimer

MyTableTennis.NET is the trading name of Alex Table Tennis Ltd.

Copyright ©2003-2020 Alex Table Tennis Ltd. All rights reserved.