ProKennex Ki 5 (320) Racquet Review

Groundstrokes - Score: 81

For the most part, our playtesters enjoyed the plush comfort and control that the Ki 5 (320) provided on groundstrokes. "I really enjoyed this racquet from the baseline," Andy praised. "I loved the forgiveness that the rounder head shape offered on my forehand; it allowed me to swing big without fear of missing the sweetspot. I also thought the racquet offered good heft and control for my flatter backhand. It felt solid, but it was still super plush and comfortable at impact. My only criticism would be that the somewhat tight 16x20 string pattern did not lend itself to hitting with spin, making it a little challenging to generate lots of topspin or slice on my shots. That was a minor issue, though, because for the most part I was very comfortable and confident when I was hitting groundstrokes with this racquet."

Troy liked the maneuverability of the Ki 5 (320), but he would have liked a bit more plow through and spin potential. He commented, "Even though the Ki 5 (320) weighs around 12 oz strung, it felt very maneuverable when I was swinging away from the baseline. Because this racquet has a swingweight that is 10-15 points lower than my current racquet of choice, I had to adjust my strokes to get my timing down. The fast feel was helpful when hitting shots on the run and when I had to use a lot of wrist to flick the racquet. Also, the directional control was good, and I was finding that I could move my opponent side to side with ease. The downside for me, though, was that I was having to work harder to get depth on my shots. I also found that the lack of mass in the head of the racquet made it harder for me to put away groundstrokes. This was mostly due to the fact that I'm used to a racquet with a swingweight in the 330-340 range. In addition, I found only average topspin due to the semi-dense 16x20 string pattern. My slice backhand had good control but lacked the plow through and easy depth that I get from a heftier racquet like the Wilson Pro Staff RF97 Autograph."

Since they have similar tastes when it comes to racquets, it was no surprise that Michelle, like Troy, wished for a bit more heft in the hoop. She shared, "This was my first ProKennex playtest so I wasn't sure what to expect. I was pleasantly surprised after my first hit. Although I didn't feel like this racquet amplified my game, it was a comfortable racquet that was easy to hit with. It played super fast, and I could get the racquet going quickly through the air. This spec is slightly outside of my wheelhouse (about a full ounce lighter than my customized RF97 Autograph), and to be honest, I thought the swingweight was much lower than what the specs indicate. It lacked put-away power, and I was craving more plow through. However, it was a great defensive racquet, and it could be perfect for a counter-puncher. I found it to be a good alternative when I was doing isolation drills and I was focusing on getting every ball back. When I was playing points with the Ki 5 (320) I could get the ball back in play, but it wasn't hurting my opponent. The feel was great, it was pretty stable, and I didn't notice too much of a drop off in power when I hit outside of the sweetspot, but this just isn't the racquet for my game."

Interestingly, Chris found ample power with the Ki 5 (320) but not enough control for his liking. He said, "The big pluses for me when I was hitting groundstrokes with the Ki 5 (320) were power, comfort and a solid response. The response of the Ki 5 (320) felt comfortable even when the racquet was strung up with a firm co-poly string. The stiff beam, solid weight and swingweight pushed the ball through the court well. I had no issues getting pace or depth. When I moved in to hit a short ball I got caught off guard a couple of times by the racquet pushing the ball with more depth than I anticipated. I would have like to have had more feel on my approach shots, and I had a tendency to hit them long if I wasn't careful. I had better results when I was going from defense to offense. I found the power more useful and had some solid success bailing myself out from a position deep behind the baseline."

Volleys - Score: 83

Our testers appreciated the plush feel and good maneuverability the Ki 5 (320) offered around the net, but at times we would have liked a bit more mass in the hoop for more stability and to help our volleys move through the court more. "The best attribute of this racquet when I came to the net was the maneuverability," Troy shared. "When I was playing doubles it was easy to get it in position during quick net exchanges. Touch and feel seemed to come with ease, too, whenever I needed to drop a volley short or put the ball near the lines. However, I also thought there were times when the racquet was getting pushed around a bit. When I had to hit volleys against heavy hitters I found that the lack of mass in the head made the Ki 5 (320) feel unstable. I was craving more mass in the hoop to help provide some easier depth on my volleys."

Echoing Troy's sentiments, Michelle said, "There were times when I was just hoping for a little more punch behind the ball when I was at the net. However, the racquet did feel stable. Touch was great, and because of how maneuverable it was, I had no issues blocking back big balls."

Chris put the racquet's solid feel to use at net, but he also found room for improvement when volleying with the Ki 5 (320). He explained, "I was impressed by the solidity and comfort offered up by the Ki 5 (320) at net. Digging out tough low volleys and finding stability on stretch volleys was made easier thanks to this racquet's stable response. Anything above the height of the net could be punched away with authority. The only volleys where I was left wanting were my touch shots. I felt a little too disconnected from the ball with this racquet when I was hitting finesse volleys."

Of the group, Andy was the most impressed with the Ki 5 (320) around the net. He said, "This racquet felt very solid around the net. The feel was, once again, plush, yet responsive and solid, leaving me in complete control of my volleys. It offered good touch for feathering a drop shot just over the net and a solid enough feel to make punching deep volleys easy, too. Maneuverability was good, and I had no trouble getting it into position during quick exchanges. The dense string pattern gave me plenty of control as well. This was a very fun racquet to hit volleys and overheads with."

Serves - Score: 76

There were some mixed feelings when it came to serving with the Ki 5 (320). Andy appreciated the control but thought the racquet lacked easy power and spin for his service game. He critiqued, "I struggled the most during this test with the serve. I found decent control, but I found that the lack of mass in the hoop affected my ability to generate both pace and spin. Thus, I had trouble getting my kick serves jumping off the court or my flatter serves moving through it. I ended up adjusting and serving fine with it, but it took some effort to serve well during this playtest."

Michelle thought there was good control and plenty of power, but she also noted the lack of spin potential. She said, "I could get the racquet accelerating pretty quickly through the air, but my serves weren't as heavy as they can be with heavier racquets. However, I was still happy with the speed I could generate on my first serves, and I enjoyed the kick and spin I could generate on my second serves."

Troy thought the maneuverability of the racquet allowed him to generate good spin, but like Andy, he thought there was a slight lack of power on flatter serves. He said, "Racquet head speed was in abundance when serving with this racquet. Its whippy feel allowed me to achieve easy RPMs on my kick and slice serves. My favorite serve to hit with it was my kick serve. I could get a lot of shape on this serve, and there was enough control to help me find the corners of the service box. The command that this racquet provided allowed me to place my serves with confidence. I was able to generate plenty of racquet head speed on flat first serves, but I found the lack of plow through made it harder for me to get the power that I typically have with my Pro Staff RF97 Autograph. I was able to be an effective spot-server with this racquet, but I was craving more power on flat first serves."

Chris liked the easy power that he got from the Ki 5 (320), but he didn't feel that he was getting all that much spin on his second serves. He said, "I served well with this racquet. Getting pace was pretty easy, and I liked the way my serves were pushing through the court. I was hitting a pretty heavy ball, and I was able to set points up well with the Ki 5 (320). The amount of spin I was getting was OK. I found enough spin to serve aggressively on second serves, but I was not getting monster spin by any means."

Returns - Score: 78

For the most part, our team really liked how this racquet's maneuverability and control translated into their return games. This was perhaps Chris' favorite shot to hit during this playtest. He praised, "The solid and stable response worked well on returns. I liked the way the Ki 5 (320) responded on both offensive and defensive shots. I was able to drive the ball deep cross court with impressive pace. Again, I felt like I was getting good weight of shot. I hit some solid returns with this racquet, and the return was probably my favorite shot of the test."

Michelle also liked the controlled response for her aggressive returning style. She commented, "As I've mentioned in other playtests, my return is an area where I can use a lower-powered response and pair it with the adrenaline and big swing I take when returning. The racquet swung fast, and I could really attack returns. I liked the controlled response, but I felt like there were times when the racquet was getting ahead of me or swinging too fast (if there is such a thing), which led to some erratic shots."

The racquet suited Andy's return game, too, and he raved, "I really liked this racquet for returning serve. The rounder head shape gave me good forgiveness off-center, allowing me to attack serves with confidence. The control and maneuverability the racquet offered let me go for the lines and be aggressive, putting my opponent on the defensive. I thought the racquet lacked a bit of mass in the hoop that would've made hitting chip returns a little easier, but all in all, I was pretty dialed in with my favorite shot in the game -- the return of serve."

On the other hand, Troy struggled with his returns. He would have liked a bit more heft for blocking back defensive returns. He said, "I struggled the most with my return of serve. Because of the short, compact swings that I use on my returns, I found the lack of plow through caused many of my returns to land short in my opponent's court. On my backhand returns, especially the slice, I found that I rarely was getting the ball to land as deep as I would have liked. When I play singles I often rely on my backhand slice return to get me into the point against big servers, and I just never felt confident that I was going to get the ball deep enough to keep my opponent from putting the first ball away. When I played doubles with the Ki 5 (320) I found good directional control on my returns that helped me pick my spots and play keep away from the net man."

Overall - Score: 81