fbpx
Home GearTennis RacquetsRacquet Reviews Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review

by Tennisnerd
Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review

The hype around the Wilson Clash continues. The feedback around the Clash and the Clash Tour has been very good, but some players are looking for more control. That is why the Clash 98 racquet review is highly anticipated. Does it deliver the goods?

As you, loyal readers of Tennisnerd, already know, I really like both the Clash and the Clash Tour. For a while, I was wondering if I should transition to the Tour, but in the end, I just feel more comfortable with the control of smaller head sizes. That is why I was excited to test the slightly smaller 98 sq inch head size version in this Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review.

So what is different between the Clash Tour and the Clash 98? Besides the smaller head size, the beam is slightly thinner at 24 mm instead of 24,5. The weight is the same and the balance is pretty much the same too. So the Clash 98 will feel close, but those two inches make a difference. How? Well, the Clash Tour is more stable despite having the same weight. You get a bit more control on flatter shots with the 98 and it does not break strings as fast, but the power and spin levels are better with the Tour.

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review – Specs

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review

As you can see, the specs of the Wilson Clash 98 is not far from the Clash Tour. The thing with a smaller head size though is that it needs more weight to play stable. These are scientific truths of tennis that you can find out in the great book “The Physics and Technology of Tennis” (click for Amazon link). If you want to know more about the science of tennis, this is the book to read.

This is one thing that was quite quickly evident with the Clash 98, is that the smaller head size makes it slightly less stable and less forgiving on off-center hits. This is something I really appreciate about the Wilson Clash

(Amazon link) and the Wilson Clash Tour (link to my review), the size of the sweet spot feels very generous. The Clash 98 definitely requires more from the player in terms of generating power and spin on your shots, which is logical.

Wilson Clash 98 Unstrung specs:

Head size: 98 sq inches / 632 cm2
Weight: 310 grams / 10.9 ounces
Balance: 12 pts HL / 30,6 cm
Length: 27 inches / 68.6 cm
Beam width: 24,5 mm
String pattern: 16×19

Wilson Clash 98 Technologies:

FreeFlex
Bends the racket in horizontal and vertical directions so players can swing freely and powerfully while still controlling the ball.

StableSmart
Maintains high-performing stability while also enhancing the flexibility of the racket.

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review – How does it play?

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review

I really loved the response from the Clash Tour, it just felt effortless to play and it was easy to get good depth on your shots. The Clash 98 requires more from the user and did not feel as stable as its sibling. The plush feel is still there, but it is less pronounced in a smaller string bed. One of the main criticisms with the Clash Tour was that it breaks strings quickly and this is definitely improved with the Clash 98. But it comes at the cost of less spin (not by much) and power, which I am not sure is a trade-off I am willing to take.

Don’t get me wrong. The Clash 98 is a good racquet. A competent performer. Offers good control, nice feel and very good comfort. I just feel it lacks the personality of the Clash Tour and risks getting lost in the jungle of many other good 98 sq inch racquets. I missed the free power and spin I got with the Clash Tour and although I did get more confidence to go for my winners, it wasn’t as precise as some of the tighter pattern racquets I use and play my best tennis with.

To get some more stability, I added 4 grams of lead tape at 10 and 2 and counter-weighted underneath the grip and it did respond quite well to that. No matter if I used lead tape or not, I did feel that it offered a bit more pop on the serves thanks to moving faster through the air. But it did not feel as precise as a Blade 98 or Ultra Tour 97 and not as powerful as the Clash, so it ends up in the middle.

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review – Pros and cons

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review

I strung up the Clash 98 with HEAD Hawk Touch (my review) and Kirschbaum Max Power (Amazon). The Clash performed similarly with both setups, so it does not strike me as a particularly string-sensitive racquet. I tested the racquet in stock form and with lead tape at 10 and 2 to get the weight up to 340 grams and 31,8 cm balance which felt closer to my taste in racquets. I liked it better with some weight, but I still could not find that connection to the racquet that I felt with the Tour. So let’s look at some pros and cons compared to its siblings.

Pros +
+ Spin-friendly, but does not break strings as fast as the Tour.
+ Faster through the air, which helped me hit bigger serves
+ Better control than the Tour and more suitable for flatter hitters.

Cons –
– Not as easy to get free power or spin as the Tour
– Not as stable as I would have liked on off-center shots
– Not as precise as a Blade or an Ultra Tour

The Wilson Clash 98 is definitely a good racquet, it offers good control, spin and a comfortable response. If you like the Clash, but feel it is a bit too powerful or lack a bit of precision, this is definitely something you must try. I personally prefer the response of the Clash Tour, but this is, of course, a matter of taste.

If you buy a racquet from our friends at All Things Tennis, you will get 5% off and a free string upgrade if you use the code: TENNISNERD at checkout.

Wilson Clash 98 Racquet Review –  Video review

***

Do you like Tennisnerd? Please also follow and share our other channels. Every like, share and follow is deeply appreciated! You can now also become a Tennisnerd patron and receive unique content and reviews before everyone else!

You may also like

14 comments

Miles Brandt June 1, 2019 - 2:25 pm

Do you know the approximate swingweight of the Clash 98?

The smaller headsize probably gives the 98 a lower twistweight compared to the 100; making it less forgiving outside the sweet spot, but faster through the air.

Reply
Tennisnerd June 3, 2019 - 1:26 pm

I would guess 320 for the Clash 98.

Reply
John June 2, 2019 - 7:28 am

Nice review! How is the sweet spot, control and power compared to RF97A?

Reply
Kostas June 3, 2019 - 8:02 am

Hi Jonas! Do you have any plans on reviewing the new Prince Textreme Tour 100 (310) or the Prince Textreme Tour 100P 2019 version?

Reply
Tennisnerd June 3, 2019 - 1:25 pm

Hi Kostas,
Waiting for the Textreme Tour 100 (310) to arrive any day now! Regards / Jonas

Reply
Kostas June 4, 2019 - 8:55 pm

That’s good news Jonas. Already looking forward to your review!

Reply
Fred August 6, 2019 - 11:34 pm

Can you compare it with Th Blade ’15 16×19? Mainly on power, spin and stability.

Reply
Cedric September 9, 2019 - 8:31 pm

Hey ??
How would you compare the clash 98 and Head Gravity Tour ?
In terms of power, Spin and Feel.

Love your reviews!

Reply
Jonathan Broussard September 19, 2019 - 9:11 pm

Love your content Mr. Nerd! Recently my beloved and very old ncode ntour racquet broke and ive demo’d literally 20 racquets and have no clue what to get since wilson quit making my racquet years ago..do they have a current comparable racquet? I looked at specs at my ntour which surprised me with a 95in head size. Ive been demo’ing 100 square inches and they feel huge. Any input would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,

Jon

Reply
Tennisnerd September 22, 2019 - 3:36 pm

Thanks Jonathan!

The nTour is a nice stick, there is the Wilson Ultra Tour 95 that is a decent stick and relatively similar, but it is crisper and has a bit different weight setup. No reason you need to go to a 100 sq inch racquet.

Cheers / Jonas

PS. If you feel like my advice is really useful, please consider becoming a patron for $2 at patreon.com/tennisnerd and get exclusive content every week. DS.

Reply
GlenS December 12, 2019 - 8:41 pm

Cons –
– Not as easy to get free power or spin as the Tour
– Not as stable as I would have liked on off-center shots
– Not as precise as a Blade or an Ultra Tour

Most of what I have read about the 100T was that it was unpredictable and a bit wild. The “Cons” of the the 98 can be said just about any 98 vs 100: Less free power, less stable on off center hits, and, yeah, less precise compared to more controlled oriented rackets. Sounds like the 98 could be a winner compared to the deluge of 98 inch 305g rackets. If you want less control, more forgiveness and of course power and spin that doesn’t demand strong technique, then go for the 100T.

Reply
GlenS December 12, 2019 - 8:43 pm

Most of what I have read about the 100T was that it was unpredictable and a bit wild. The “Cons” of the the 98 can be said just about any 98 vs 100: Less free power, less stable on off center hits, and, yeah, less precise compared to more controlled oriented rackets. Sounds like the 98 could be a winner compared to the deluge of 98 inch 305g rackets. If you want less control, more forgiveness and of course power and spin that doesn’t demand strong technique, then go for the 100T.

Reply
Glen January 20, 2020 - 1:02 am

I don’t understand why racket reviewers consider the fact that a racket that doesn’t offer free easy power a negative. Not every racket is designed to launch balls into the back screen with a slow swing. I use the 98 Clash and find it to have ample power and spin. The 100 tour to me has too much power. Again, I’d rather take full swings and keep the ball in the court than worry about if I don’t brush the ball enough the ball is going to sail long.

Reply
Jaime February 19, 2020 - 5:49 pm

Having recently experimented with a Clash 100 (weighted up to 330 swing weight, 330 grams), I think the source of string bed inconsistency is pretty obvious: the Clash 100 string pattern is wildly asymmetrical. Unlike the 98 which seems symmetric in your photos, the 100’s strings are MUCH more open in the lower hoop compared to the upper which will obviously create a different response (not to mention eating strings…). This seems a weird engineering decision to me (actually seems like a kludge), probably compensating for some deficiency late in the design process. My mechanical engineering 2 cents. Too bad, I kinda like the frame!

Reply

Leave a Comment

Do Not Sell My Personal Information