Home GearTennis RacquetsRacquet Reviews Dunlop CX 400 Tour Review – First Impressions

Dunlop CX 400 Tour Review – First Impressions

by TN

A new racquet in the Dunlop CX series, here is my Dunlop CX 400 Tour Review – first impressions. In short – surprising!

The average in head sizes is slowly creeping up. Nowadays even control-oriented racquets are 100 sq inches with slightly thicker beams. I was a bit skeptical to see a racquet like the Dunlop CX 400 Tour in the control series, but after playing with it, I understand the thinking a bit more. This is a pretty plush, but more forgiving racquet that gives you good control, but still some free power when needed. I would compare it to the Prince Textreme Tour 100P or the HEAD Gravity Tour in the way it plays.

Spec check

Unstrung specs of the Dunlop CX 400 Tour

Head size: 100 sq inches
Length: 27 inches
String pattern: 16×19 (tighter than many 16x19s)
Beam: 23 mm
Stiffness: 67 RA unstrung
Weight: 300 grams
Balance: 32 cm or 7 pts HL

Strung specs of the Dunlop CX 400 Tour with overgrip and Dunlop Explosive Tour 1.25

324 grams, 32.5 cm or 5 pts HL, 318.5 SW

The Dunlop CX 200 and CX 200 Tour feels like they need lead tape, but the CX 400 Tour was ready to be hit “right out of the box”.

How does it play?

The racquet offers a surprisingly plush and comfortable feel. Despite a sensitive arm, I sensed no discomfort even with a full bed of poly.

It moves through the air pretty quickly as the beam is not as thick as a Pure Drive or Ultra. The string pattern is also tighter, giving you a bit more control on flatter shots. I would still like a bit more bite from the string bed and will probably try a shaped poly next as some balls were sailing a bit on me (that might just be me though).

At the net, it felt stable and offered a good feel. It’s not as precise as the smaller head sizes in the CX family, but good for this type of frame.

On serves, I got decent power, but not as much as more power-oriented racquets. I did miss a little bit of spin on my kick serve.

Slice shots stayed nice and low and like other Dunlop’s I’ve tried – this racquet works well for flatter shots.

Topspin lovers might crave a bit more rotation on the ball, but like I wrote – it might be fixed by a more spin-friendly poly.

All-in-all, the first hit with the Dunlop CX 400 Tour was fun and gave me a positive feel about the racquet. I think many tennis nerds can groove with this one and I was surprised to instantly like this racquet more than the CX 200. How will the CX 200 Tour play? Well, that one is up next!

Have you tried the new Dunlop CX series?

You may also like

3 comments

Tennis Lion February 1, 2021 - 7:25 pm

Quite interested in this frame, for relaxed days rather than a match type stick. As you mentioned it’s a tight string-bed, could you let us know the average cell size please. If you find the central cell, then measure out four cells either side vertically and horizontally to give two figures like 10.5cm and 11cm, multiply those together and divide by 81 to give the average sweet-zone cell size. So far I have observed the following where you can see a 98 16×19 is actually tighter than some 95 18×20. From the pictures I’m guessing around 1.35cm average cell size for this CX-400 Tour?

Six-One 95 18×20 – 1.3cm
PS 97 16×19 – 1.5cm
Six-One 95S 18×16 – 1.6cm
Ultra-Tour 18×20 – 1.1cm
Volkl 10 325 16×19 – 1.25cm

Thanks!

Reply
Caleb February 2, 2021 - 3:10 pm

Would really like to see a review of the oversize!
I don’t play with an oversize but easily could with one like Agassi’s. (Thin beam, tighter pattern, flexible)
And that’s exactly what the CX OS looks like.
I think the future of tennis is heading towards OS frames, anyway. What with the popularity of the 100sq-in and quest for topspin and forgiveness.

Reply
Scott Watson February 3, 2021 - 6:09 am

Caleb, I think you might like the new CX OS. I just committed to it (purchased a 2nd for back-up). Strung both at 50 lbs with new Dunlop Iconic All 17g multifilament. It seems to have power somewhere between the prior CX 200 and CX 400, with a softer feel and greater forgiveness than either. It rewards good technique and penalizes poor, but is not as demanding as smaller head size players racquets. Nice stability due to it’s size and near even balance. Good ball pocketing – connection to the ball, at least with this string, which may be my new favorite multifilament due to it’s power/feel/control balance- a great improvement over Dunlop Silk.

Reply

Leave a Comment