Nexy Fitting Racket Order (Custom rackets)

[Salote]

on August 18, 2025 #1
Hello,
This is Oscar, a designer at Nexy.
I am running the brand Nexy in Korea, and in this article, I would like to introduce Nexy’s next-generation service — the custom fitting racket production service.
Nexy was founded in 2007.
At first, it started as an agency for the German company Tibhar, in order to offer products that Tibhar did not have.
Since then, we have gone through a total of seven generations of product evolution.

Now, we are manufacturing rackets together with Korean factories in a completely new way.

Fitting Racket, simply put, means custom-made racket production.

I am not sure if the term “Fitting Racket” perfectly describes our service.
At first, we considered using the term “Custom Racket Production,” but finally decided on “Fitting Racket.” We thought this would better reflect the desire of passionate table tennis players who want a racket tailored exactly to them.

Definition of the Fitting Racket Service

Table tennis lovers have a special affection for their rackets.
However, the products they purchase cannot always meet all of their needs.

Moreover, their requirements are not always the same — they change as their skills evolve.
When their skills are still developing, they may want the ball to travel faster than their own power. But as they improve, they may prefer a racket that responds exactly to their control.
In other words, their needs continuously evolve.
And making rackets that adapt to these evolving needs — that is the very definition of the Fitting Racket Service.

________________________________________


Why Nexy’s Fitting Racket Service is Special

There are two major patents applied to this service:



1. A patent related to racket manufacturing methods
2. A patent related to bonding technology

All of Nexy’s recently made-in-Korea rackets are produced using these two technologies. Let’s take a look.
________________________________________

1. Patent on Racket Manufacturing Method

Nexy rackets are manufactured with small holes drilled into the plies (see diagram below).


These holes serve as a standardized guide throughout different machines during production.
As a result, products are consistently mass-produced with high precision.

After the drilling process, the handle is attached.
At this stage, the holes again serve an important role: wooden pins are inserted to firmly secure the two sides of the handle.

When the handles are attached top and bottom, a small wooden pin is placed between them.
As shown in the photo, this pin remains inside the handle after completion.
Through this process, the handle becomes firmly fixed and will not easily come off under any circumstances.
________________________________________
2. Patent on Bonding Method

The second patent is one of the core technologies also applied to the Fitting Racket.


Typically, two types of glue are used in racket production. Nexy, however, developed and uses an additional type: polyurethane adhesive.

By using polyurethane, bonding is achieved with almost no weight increase. This allows Nexy rackets to gain elasticity through multiple gluing processes.
In other words, by applying the gluing process two or three times, we can significantly increase the elasticity of the racket.
For example, Nexy’s “Eiger” blade is often evaluated as being more powerful than standard rackets. One user mentioned that while it was too bouncy in a regular training hall, it turned out to be extremely powerful in tournament play — evidence of its strong elasticity.
________________________________________
Production Process After Ordering
1. Based on the customer’s basic information, our engineers select the appropriate wood composition and adhesives using accumulated sampling data, and produce the blade.
2. According to the customer’s details, processing such as balance adjustment, sanding, grip shaping, and additional part assembly is carried out.
3. After external inspection and bonding inspection, a first sample is delivered to the customer.
4. The customer tests the first sample, then sends feedback for improvements. They may also consult directly with our engineers to finalize the racket. Based on the sample data and feedback, a new final racket is produced.
5. The customer’s production data is securely stored at Nexy and used as a reference for producing identical or improved rackets in the future.
6. The customer receives both the first sample racket and the final finished racket (two rackets in total).
o For the first sample, the grip is supplied in a single color. If a preferred color is specified at the time of order, it will be produced accordingly. (Available colors: black, bright red, orange, gray, sky blue)

How the Nexy Fitting Racket Service Works
The full process will proceed in the following four steps:
Step 1: Place Your Order
Visit www.nexy.com and fill out the fitting form with your desired specifications.
Step 2: First Sample Delivery
Based on your input, we will create and send a first sample racket.
This package will also include a feedback form where you can further refine your preferences for the final product.
Step 3: Provide Feedback
Try playing with the first sample and let us know how it feels.
Then, fill out the feedback form and send it to us via email with any specific comments.
Step 4: Final Racket Delivery
We’ll produce the final racket incorporating your feedback and deliver it to you.
Service Cost
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

At the moment, our website is not fully functional, so online ordering may not work properly.
If you send me your order by email, I will carefully communicate your requests to the factory and make sure everything is handled properly.
Please send your order to the following email address:
defunct@hanmail.net

[Latian]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

But how does this compare to other major manufacturers like Sanwei.

What about Butterfly's service ? Is it still available ?

[Ningad]

I have some major concerns with this custom orders

1. Do they make smart blades (different layer composition for backhand & forehand)

2. What about blade head size
If the size cannot be at least 170 mm by 170 mm ?
What is the maximum blade size they can go to ?
A classic defender with OX pips for Side X & a light spinny inverted rubber for Side Y could go as high as 175 mm by 175 mm

Any blade that does not meet above two conditions is utterly useless for a chop defender in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era m considering the
(click link >) 14 rule and regulation changes since 1977 by the ITTF to limit & oppress mostly chop defenders but also block style players

[Ebtisam]

I have some major concerns with this custom orders

1. Do they make smart blades (different layer composition for backhand & forehand)

2. What about blade head size
If the size cannot be at least 170 mm by 170 mm ?
What is the maximum blade size they can go to ?
A classic defender with OX pips for Side X & a light spinny inverted rubber for Side Y could go as high as 175 mm by 175 mm

Any blade that does not meet above two conditions is utterly useless for a chop defender in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era m considering the
(click link >) 14 rule and regulation changes since 1977 by the ITTF to limit & oppress mostly chop defenders but also block style players

This is correct

I realize Joo SaeHyuk is the REAL GOAT of ALL OF TABLE TENNIS .
But his NEXY defensive blades are a colossal failure because his blades did not meet above two conditions

Joo SaeHyuk designed his blade for mostly pro players.
But I do not think a blade that does not meet above 2 conditions is maximally the best even for a pro modern chopper

Even for a classic defender who may use an all wood (click link >) dumb blades , the blade head has to be at least 170 mm by 170 mm

[Yoona]

No defender, whether chop or block should ever use dumb blade unless they attack a lot more using the defensive side.

For block type players slightly smaller blades are fine but for chop defenders anything less than a head size of 170 mm by 170 mm is an absolute NO NO with the increased ball size & material & so many other rule & regulation changes

[nexydesigner]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

But how does this compare to other major manufacturers like Sanwei.

WHat about Butterfly's service ? Is it still available ?

Thank you for your question.
As the operator of Nexy, I have been designing and producing various types of table tennis rackets since 2007.
The Fitting Racket Service we are now launching is a natural continuation of the production process we have been refining over the years.

If I were to highlight the main difference between our service and others, it would be that our sample rackets are made using the exact same production method as our mass-produced rackets.
Most companies hand-craft their prototype rackets, resulting in a higher level of finish than their mass-produced versions.
In contrast, even though our rackets involve some degree of hand-crafting, most of the manufacturing process is carried out using precision machinery, allowing us to produce multiple rackets with consistent quality and identical characteristics.

In particular, two of our patented technologies play an essential role in this process.
First, during manufacturing, two alignment pins are used to fix the blade in place across several machines, ensuring standardized and repeatable production.
Second, our unique gluing process (the second patent) directly affects the racket’s trajectory and feeling at impact.

Because of these two innovations, Nexy’s fitting rackets are completed through a process distinct from that of any other company.

That concludes my explanation.
Thank you for your interest in Nexy.

[nexydesigner]

I have some major concerns with this custom orders

1. Do they make smart blades (different layer composition for backhand & forehand)

2. What about blade head size
If the size cannot be at least 170 mm by 170 mm ?
What is the maximum blade size they can go to ?
A classic defender with OX pips for Side X & a light spinny inverted rubber for Side Y could go as high as 175 mm by 175 mm

Any blade that does not meet above two conditions is utterly useless for a chop defender in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era m considering the
(click link >) 14 rule and regulation changes since 1977 by the ITTF to limit & oppress mostly chop defenders but also block style players

I learned today, through an email, that my post had been shared here.
I apologize for not realizing earlier that some of you had questions.
Although my reply comes a bit late, I would like to respond now.

The racket size is not a major issue for us.
However, creating a new size requires making a new mold, which takes additional production time.
The 170 mm size you mentioned can indeed be produced.

That said, I cannot agree with the idea that the racket must be 170 mm to perform properly.
Coach Joo Sae Hyuk and I have been collaborating on defensive racket design since 2008,
and we completed our first model in 2021.

That racket is still being sold successfully today.
You can find it by searching “Nexy Joo Sae Hyuk.”

After further testing with Coach Joo, we released one more model,
which you can find by searching “Nexy Joo Sae Hyuk 2.”

During the development of these two rackets, our main concern was whether a player could
generate enough power from mid-to-long distance so that the ball could travel deep and land effectively on the opponent’s court.
Of course, considering Joo Sae Hyuk’s aggressive playing style,
it was also important that he could drive well near the table.
However, what mattered even more was maintaining sufficient power from a longer distance.

I believe the shape of the racket is determined through this kind of process.
A defensive racket must be slightly larger than a typical offensive blade
to provide more stability when stepping back from the table.
At the same time, it must not feel uncomfortable when moving forward to attack.

The current Joo Sae Hyuk rackets were created by balancing these two priorities.
Of course, if you prefer a different shape, we can produce it upon request—
but please note that the production will take more time.

That’s all I wanted to explain.

[James Z]

The racket size is not a major issue for us.
However, creating a new size requires making a new mold, which takes additional production time.
The 170 mm size you mentioned can indeed be produced.

This is good to know
I know changing mold size is a big problem for just making a custom blade for a few people
As far the size and composition I disagree with you but that is fine.

I was a higher level chopper when I used to play but I am neither a pro nor semi-pro.

But I have gone thru literally thousands of iterations blade & rubber combinations

I can easily tell the significant loss of back spin even with a 4 mm blade head size especially with the 40+ plastic ball.

Also I absolutely hate (click link >) dumb blades .
I explain below

Of course, considering Joo Sae Hyuk’s aggressive playing style,
it was also important that he could drive well near the table.
However, what mattered even more was maintaining sufficient power from a longer distance.

You see, this is the problem. An an average amatuer is no GOAT ( Joo SaeHyuk).

An average amaeteur chopper needs more back spin not not more power like the GOAT
A blade with at least 170 mm will provide that

An average amaeteur chopper needs more spin contrast & variations than the GOAT
Only a (click link >) smart blade can provide that .

I am sorry. We disagree . That is OK

[Latian]

Thank you for your question.
As the operator of Nexy, I have been designing and producing various types of table tennis rackets since 2007.
The Fitting Racket Service we are now launching is a natural continuation of the production process we have been refining over the years.

If I were to highlight the main difference between our service and others, it would be that our sample rackets are made using the exact same production method as our mass-produced rackets.
Most companies hand-craft their prototype rackets, resulting in a higher level of finish than their mass-produced versions.
In contrast, even though our rackets involve some degree of hand-crafting, most of the manufacturing process is carried out using precision machinery, allowing us to produce multiple rackets with consistent quality and identical characteristics.

In particular, two of our patented technologies play an essential role in this process.
First, during manufacturing, two alignment pins are used to fix the blade in place across several machines, ensuring standardized and repeatable production.
Second, our unique gluing process (the second patent) directly affects the racket’s trajectory and feeling at impact.

Because of these two innovations, Nexy’s fitting rackets are completed through a process distinct from that of any other company.

That concludes my explanation.
Thank you for your interest in Nexy.

Thank you for your detailed answer

[James Z]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

If I was still playing in tournaments, I definitely would have ordered a 173 mm smart blade but I hardly play much if any, even outside tournaments
Anyway Nexy's two racket refinement strategy is a great concept.
Could be extended to 3 or 4 rackets

[nexydesigner]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

If I was still playing in tournaments, I definitely would have ordered a 173 mm smart blade but I hardly play much if any, even outside tournaments
Anyway Nexy's two racket refinement strategy is a great concept.
Could be extended to 3 or 4 rackets

I will check if we could produce a blade with 173mm head size.

[James Z]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

If I was still playing in tournaments, I definitely would have ordered a 173 mm smart blade but I hardly play much if any, even outside tournaments
Anyway Nexy's two racket refinement strategy is a great concept.
Could be extended to 3 or 4 rackets

I will check if we could produce a blade with 173mm head size.

Thanks
But as I said earlier I am no longer playing.
But it would be cool to see a 173 mm by 173 mm or even 170 mm by 170 mm smart blade.
For most two winged loopers (at least those who fantasize they are) a smart blade is not that important
But for any defender even a close to the table (zone 1 or Zone 2) , let alone a zone 3 or Zone 4 chopper , it MUST be a smart blade not a dumb blade.
My design would be 6 layer blade with an outer layer composite but on one side (usually forehand) ONLY
(Wood-Off-Outer / Composite/wood-Off-Inner/wood-core/wood-Def-Inner/wood-Def-outer)
I heard complaints that the rackets may become heavy but that is far from the truth because when you use only OX pips (as most amateur defenders should…not the semi-pro or pro defenders) the blade won’t be heavy at all.
For example the Giant Dragon Kris Carbon with abovementioned design was a whopping low 60 grams or so but it was a standard head size (which was kind of useless for a chopper) . If you make it for 170 mm head size it would still be 80 grams (70+10 grams) if add say 10 grams for design (60+10) challenges and another 10 grams for going from 160 mm to 170 mm . So at 173 mm it may be like 85 grams , still a very decent weight.
You could reduce some more of the weight with something like a cybershape blade . Chopper Pete May , father of USA ex-National chopper Derek May has such as blade. Pete May's blade is t least 170 mm. Probably little more than that
Quick arm (& wrist) movements are not as important for an away from the table chopper (Zone 3) as compared to a close to the table or even mid distance (Zone 2) blocker or chop-blocker. This is why I am quite sure Blades like Butterfly or Victas Koji Matsushita or Butterfly Joo SaeHyuk or Nexy Joo SaeHyuk are useless for even Zone 1 at the table quick blockers & chop-blockers since they are dumb blades.
Though to some extent Zone 1 players can get away with dumb blades because racket angle is more vertical whereas Zone 3 racket angle is more horizontal. But I feel even their blocks and chop-blocks could be more lethal & more spinny (whether chop-block back spin or punch-block top spin as done by the likes shakehander Manicka Batra though penholder Zhou Xintong does not punch block like Manika Batra using slim pips side of her forehand TPG on backhand) . This is also why I also have to wonder if Manika Batra and her 700 million Indian women clones would be better off with a smart blade such as the new Sanwei smart blade I believe or even a Yinhe T9-Pro (Anything is better than the Butterfly Viscaria in the blocker / chop- blocker mode even if it is the best for forehand only)
The key to best design of the defensive side is maximizing dwell time to maximize back spin reversal & additional spin amplification (using ITTF slim pips or non-ITTF actual long pips) . Ability to attack on backhand using pips is not important & unrealistic though almost all amateurs crave for it. From my personal experience however any OX pips (wide or medium or slim or long) is good enough for (flat) hitting because it can be so lethal & I personally have rarely seen it returned & even if it did I am ready & in position to put it away with my forehand again. Also side swipes with OX are more than good enough to initiate an attack with my forehand. Of course it is not easy with long pips because you have to pick the right ball (opponents weak pushes against your heavy chop against their loop…………..this is why (click link >) robotNazis absolutely hate choppers…….because most loopers usually cannot return such balls and drop it to the bottom of the net on their side) to open up with your backhand OX .
But maximizing dwell time on defensive side may be countered by a composite material on the offensive side. This is why the biggest challenge in designing a smart blade for a chopper is isolating the stiffening (& speeding up) effect of the composite material on the offensive side from the requirement of maximum dwell time on defensive side. This is probably why the layer below the core layer even of offensive side have to be more of an isolation layer in addition to core layer & the layer next to core on the defensive side as well
So the question I am often posed is > Is a smart blade that important to a chopper ? From my personal experience a definite yes. But even if not for everyone else , the outer layer of composite material on the defensive side is counter_productive for an away from table (Zone 3 & 4 ) chopper ………..because it kills the backspin significantly even in the relatively more horizontal (& more open) racket angle & motion.
As for as head size goes, other choppers may not even understand how much backspin they are losing by going from a 170 mm blade to a 165mm blade. Simply because there aren’t even any production 170 mm blade to compare with LOL. I have played with 170+ mm blades starting with the 40- celluloid ball era from year 2000. That is 25 years. So I more than fully understand (with extensive comparison testing) how choppers are getting ripped off by the (click link >) 14 rule and regulation changes since 1977 by the ITTF though these choppers don’t have a freaking clue. That 2 mm size in ball plus the material change from celluloid to plastic is almost as bad as previous rule changes. Offensive blade designs have been well adopted to these 2 mm change etc because most of the product market R & D is well done for offensive playing styles

[Satsuky]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

But how does this compare to other major manufacturers like Sanwei.

What about Butterfly's service ? Is it still available ?

Can I also get the blade autographed (actual signature with a marker like by DJT .......not printed like Joe Biden) by the REAL GOAT of all of table tennis (Joo SaeHyuk) ?
It would make resale value of the blade sky rocket as a collector's item

It would have to be on the defensive side of this smart blade where you won't be changing long pips rubbers often.
Because if you have it on the spinny inverted side , a real autograph would come off after few rubber changes ........you know like if the autograph was on certain places of human anatomy

[nexydesigner]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

If I was still playing in tournaments, I definitely would have ordered a 173 mm smart blade but I hardly play much if any, even outside tournaments
Anyway Nexy's two racket refinement strategy is a great concept.
Could be extended to 3 or 4 rackets

I will check if we could produce a blade with 173mm head size.

Thanks
But as I said earlier I am no longer playing.
But it would be cool to see a 173 mm by 173 mm or even 170 mm by 170 mm smart blade.
For most two winged loopers (at least those who fantasize they are) a smart blade is not that important
But for any defender even a close to the table (zone 1 or Zone 2) , let alone a zone 3 or Zone 4 chopper , it MUST be a smart blade not a dumb blade.
My design would be 6 layer blade with an outer layer composite but on one side (usually forehand) ONLY
(Wood-Off-Outer / Composite/wood-Off-Inner/wood-core/wood-Def-Inner/wood-Def-outer)
I heard complaints that the rackets may become heavy but that is far from the truth because when you use only OX pips (as most amateur defenders should…not the semi-pro or pro defenders) the blade won’t be heavy at all.
For example the Giant Dragon Kris Carbon with abovementioned design was a whopping low 60 grams or so but it was a standard head size (which was kind of useless for a chopper) . If you make it for 170 mm head size it would still be 80 grams (70+10 grams) if add say 10 grams for design (60+10) challenges and another 10 grams for going from 160 mm to 170 mm . So at 173 mm it may be like 85 grams , still a very decent weight.
You could reduce some more of the weight with something like a cybershape blade . Chopper Pete May , father of USA ex-National chopper Derek May has such as blade. Pete May's blade is t least 170 mm. Probably little more than that
Quick arm (& wrist) movements are not as important for an away from the table chopper (Zone 3) as compared to a close to the table or even mid distance (Zone 2) blocker or chop-blocker. This is why I am quite sure Blades like Butterfly or Victas Koji Matsushita or Butterfly Joo SaeHyuk or Nexy Joo SaeHyuk are useless for even Zone 1 at the table quick blockers & chop-blockers since they are dumb blades.
Though to some extent Zone 1 players can get away with dumb blades because racket angle is more vertical whereas Zone 3 racket angle is more horizontal. But I feel even their blocks and chop-blocks could be more lethal & more spinny (whether chop-block back spin or punch-block top spin as done by the likes shakehander Manicka Batra though penholder Zhou Xintong does not punch block like Manika Batra using slim pips side of her forehand TPG on backhand) . This is also why I also have to wonder if Manika Batra and her 700 million Indian women clones would be better off with a smart blade such as the new Sanwei smart blade I believe or even a Yinhe T9-Pro (Anything is better than the Butterfly Viscaria in the blocker / chop- blocker mode even if it is the best for forehand only)
The key to best design of the defensive side is maximizing dwell time to maximize back spin reversal & additional spin amplification (using ITTF slim pips or non-ITTF actual long pips) . Ability to attack on backhand using pips is not important & unrealistic though almost all amateurs crave for it. From my personal experience however any OX pips (wide or medium or slim or long) is good enough for (flat) hitting because it can be so lethal & I personally have rarely seen it returned & even if it did I am ready & in position to put it away with my forehand again. Also side swipes with OX are more than good enough to initiate an attack with my forehand. Of course it is not easy with long pips because you have to pick the right ball (opponents weak pushes against your heavy chop against their loop…………..this is why (click link >) robotNazis absolutely hate choppers…….because most loopers usually cannot return such balls and drop it to the bottom of the net on their side) to open up with your backhand OX .
But maximizing dwell time on defensive side may be countered by a composite material on the offensive side. This is why the biggest challenge in designing a smart blade for a chopper is isolating the stiffening (& speeding up) effect of the composite material on the offensive side from the requirement of maximum dwell time on defensive side. This is probably why the layer below the core layer even of offensive side have to be more of an isolation layer in addition to core layer & the layer next to core on the defensive side as well
So the question I am often posed is > Is a smart blade that important to a chopper ? From my personal experience a definite yes. But even if not for everyone else , the outer layer of composite material on the defensive side is counter_productive for an away from table (Zone 3 & 4 ) chopper ………..because it kills the backspin significantly even in the relatively more horizontal (& more open) racket angle & motion.
As for as head size goes, other choppers may not even understand how much backspin they are losing by going from a 170 mm blade to a 165mm blade. Simply because there aren’t even any production 170 mm blade to compare with LOL. I have played with 170+ mm blades starting with the 40- celluloid ball era from year 2000. That is 25 years. So I more than fully understand (with extensive comparison testing) how choppers are getting ripped off by the (click link >) 14 rule and regulation changes since 1977 by the ITTF though these choppers don’t have a freaking clue. That 2 mm size in ball plus the material change from celluloid to plastic is almost as bad as previous rule changes. Offensive blade designs have been well adopted to these 2 mm change etc because most of the product market R & D is well done for offensive playing styles

In response to your question,

I must admit that I am not very familiar with this community.
However, I would like to provide information that may be helpful to everyone here, considering the nature of this forum.
It seems that many members prefer rackets larger than 170 mm in size.

If we were to choose the most suitable racket size for table tennis players, what would that be?
In my opinion, as of now, the most appropriate size for defensive players would be around 165 mm.
Let me explain why.

The idea of using a larger racket makes sense if you mainly play away from the table.
However, many defenders also play close to the table,
and in modern defensive play, drive attacks are becoming increasingly important.

I would like to share a video of Joo Sae-Hyuk here:


Please watch from 7 minutes 56 seconds onward.
In this part, Joo Sae-Hyuk performs short wrist movements over the table using long pips,
and he generates an impressive amount of spin.
Modern defensive play increasingly focuses on how defenders move and respond near the table.

Joo Sae-Hyuk’s technique is characterized by compact, low-rise racket movement that still creates heavy spin.
This ability to produce strong rotation with such a short stroke is one of the key strengths that distinguishes him from most long-pips players.
He also hopes that more defensive-style players will learn and practice this type of play.

From this perspective, using an oversized racket would actually be disadvantageous for such play.
Therefore, I believe that increasing the racket size beyond 165 mm is not desirable.

There are also practical manufacturing reasons behind this conclusion.
Most racket factories use standardized pre-cut wood sheets when producing blades.
These materials are typically supplied in 170 mm sizes.
Our Nexy fitting-racket factory also uses some of these 170 mm pre-cut materials.

Furthermore, the machinery used to process and shape these laminated sheets is also designed to handle that standard size.
Although some hand-crafting is involved, many steps in racket production rely on machines whose internal operating dimensions are fixed.

If we were to go outside these standardized limits, the result would no longer be a mass-production-compatible product,
and the manufacturing cost would increase significantly.
The Nexy Fitting Racket Service is designed to manufacture products that can be mass-produced consistently.
In this respect, it differs from other purely custom-made rackets.

Taking all these factors into account, we have concluded internally that producing a 173 mm racket is not feasible.
I regret that this may disappoint some of you.
However, I assure you that even at 165 mm, our rackets perform exceptionally well in modern defensive play.

That is all I wanted to share.

[nexydesigner]

on August 18, 2025 #1
You will receive two rackets in total (sample + final version), and the full service including shipping costs is $250 USD.

$250 for two blades is quite reasonable

But how does this compare to other major manufacturers like Sanwei.

What about Butterfly's service ? Is it still available ?

Can I also get the blade autographed (actual signature with a marker like by DJT .......not printed like Joe Biden) by the REAL GOAT of all of table tennis (Joo SaeHyuk) ?
It would make resale value of the blade sky rocket as a collector's item

It would have to be on the defensive side of this smart blade where you won't be changing long pips rubbers often.
Because if you have it on the spinny inverted side , a real autograph would come off after few rubber changes ........you know like if the autograph was on certain places of human anatomy

If you order a Nexy Fitting Racket,
I will personally meet Joo Sae Hyuk and get his autograph for you.
www.nexy.com

[nexydesigner]

I have a question.
Most commercial rubbers are smaller than 170 mm, so what happens if a blade is made larger than 170 mm?

[Stofoulos]

If you order a Nexy Fitting Racket,
I will personally meet Joo Sae Hyuk and get his autograph for you.
www.nexy.com

[James Z]

I have a question.
Most commercial rubbers are smaller than 170 mm, so what happens if a blade is made larger than 170 mm?

Good question
I have 3 blades at 173 mm.
I have no problem finding Chinese slim pips or actual long pips OX rubbers
Most Butterfly rubbers I believe are 175 mm
I think there a few Tibhar rubbers
Only all Chinese inverted rubbers are useless at 165 mm
This is somewhat of a problem for me because Mercury 2 is only around 165 mm
But I am more concerned about chopping on long pips side . So I was fine with my loops and lobs though my side-loops & counter side loops on forehand could use the extra 8 mm . But I do not play much anyway.

But Giant Dragon submarine (Chinese) is 175 mm

It is actually not a problem but actually may be a huge business opportunity for Nexy & Chinese manufacturers. You can sell a 175 mm rubbers at a premium price in addition to the standard 165 mm size. Same goes for defensive blades (I stand by my choice of large smart blades .......sorry)

Take a look below for rubber and blade sizes database
https://yattdb.pabuisson.com/rubber_measures
https://yattdb.pabuisson.com/blade_measures

[nexydesigner]

I have a question.
Most commercial rubbers are smaller than 170 mm, so what happens if a blade is made larger than 170 mm?

Good question
I have 3 blades at 173 mm.
I have no problem finding Chinese slim pips or actual long pips OX rubbers
Most Butterfly rubbers I believe are 175 mm
I think there a few Tibhar rubbers
Only all Chinese inverted rubbers are useless at 165 mm
This is somewhat of a problem for me because Mercury 2 is only around 165 mm
But I am more concerned about chopping on long pips side . So I was fine with my loops and lobs though my side-loops & counter side loops on forehand could use the extra 8 mm . But I do not play much anyway.

But Giant Dragon submarine (Chinese) is 175 mm

It is actually not a problem but actually may be a huge business opportunity for Nexy & Chinese manufacturers. You can sell a 175 mm rubbers at a premium price in addition to the standard 165 mm size. Same goes for defensive blades (I stand by my choice of large smart blades .......sorry)

Take a look below for rubber and blade sizes database
https://yattdb.pabuisson.com/rubber_measures
https://yattdb.pabuisson.com/blade_measures

Thank you for the information.

I think all comes with the printing mould for rubbers.
I will check that with my factory.

With thanks, Oscar.

[Badsac]

Here is another database
https://tabletennis-reviews.com/referen ... -database/

[nexydesigner]

Here is another database
https://tabletennis-reviews.com/referen ... -database/

Thank you.

[nexydesigner]

Nexy Fitting Racket Service: Clarifying Limitations

Hello,

I am Oscar from the Nexy Fitting Racket Service.

I feel it is important for the benefit of future customers to clearly define the limitations of our fitting racket service, so I would like to take this moment to summarize these details.

I came across a post here discussing the overall size of rackets and learned that this is a community with a high level of interest in racket dimensions.

I heard that the racket size some of you desire might be 173mm or larger, and about the various advantages that could be gained from such a large racket size.

Our Manufacturing Constraints

Mechanized Production: All processes operated at our factory are carried out by fixed, automated machinery. If our factory relied on manual labor, this discussion would be easier. However, the entire process—from cutting and shaping the racket to the final varnishing—is fully mechanized.

Irreversible Investment: While there is some human involvement, the vast majority of our work is done by machines. It took four years to design and manufacture this specialized equipment. Therefore, producing a special-sized racket would require completely changing all those machines. This is currently impossible.

Raw Material Size: Additionally, some of the wood we source is already pre-cut to a size suitable for manufacturing a single racket. As this wood is supplied at around 170mm, this also presents a significant limitation.

Korean Player Preference Insight
Beyond our factory's machinery issues, I have also gathered feedback on racket size from both Korean professional players and amateur enthusiasts. Their consensus is that they do not prefer such large rackets.

If a larger racket unequivocally led to better performance, the entire situation would be different, but that result has not been demonstrated in our experience.

Final Conclusion
Our factory has deeply considered and discussed this matter.

Our conclusion is that while we would need to entirely re-tool our facilities if a significant volume of overseas orders were guaranteed, the current demand is too uncertain to justify this massive investment.

Therefore, although this will be very disappointing to those who desire a larger racket, we at Nexy cannot manufacture them. We ask for your understanding.

Rest assured, our efforts to continuously produce better rackets within our current capabilities remain ongoing.

Thank you.

[James Z]

Beyond our factory's machinery issues,

I completely understand & respect & accept the fact that you are not interested due to to your provided valid reasons related to manufacturing & market conditions. I fully understand the chopper market is quite small
No problem for me since I do not play much anymore

I have also gathered feedback on racket size from both Korean professional players and amateur enthusiasts. Their consensus is that they do not prefer such large rackets.

This, I completely do NOT understand.

Explain to me 2 things.
1. Who made these 170 mm to 173 mm (click link >) smart blades for the above amateur or pro players ?
2. Let us assume they did indeed make these smart blades that were also 170 mm to 173 mm. How were they tested ? Please provide me in detail the test conditions , how many players of what playing style tested these etc

[nexydesigner]

Beyond our factory's machinery issues,

I completely understand & respect & accept the fact that you are not interested due to to your provided valid reasons related to manufacturing & market conditions. I fully understand the chopper market is quite small
No problem for me since I do not play much anymore

I have also gathered feedback on racket size from both Korean professional players and amateur enthusiasts. Their consensus is that they do not prefer such large rackets.

This, I completely do NOT understand.

Explain to me 2 things.
1. Who made these 170 mm to 173 mm (click link >) smart blades for the above amateur or pro players ?
2. Let us assume they did indeed make these smart blades that were also 170 mm to 173 mm. How were they tested ? Please provide me in detail the test conditions , how many players of what playing style tested these etc

Thank you for your question.
What I conducted was not exactly a well-structured survey.
However, I did post an article about a related case that occurred overseas, and there were comments on that post suggesting that a large racket was not necessary.

Additionally, I asked the administrators of the table tennis community I manage, and their opinions were also negative.
This may be because players in Korea are heavily influenced by coaches like Joo Se-hyuk and a few other players.
However, I was able to confirm that the general sentiment is that there is no preference for large-sized rackets.

[James Z]

Explain to me 2 things.
1. Who made these 170 mm to 173 mm (click link >) smart blades for the above amateur or pro players ?
2. Let us assume they did indeed make these smart blades that were also 170 mm to 173 mm. How were they tested ? Please provide me in detail the test conditions , how many players of what playing style tested these etc

[/quote]
Thank you for your question.
What I conducted was not exactly a well-structured survey.
However, I did post an article about a related case that occurred overseas, and there were comments on that post suggesting that a large racket was not necessary.

Additionally, I asked the administrators of the table tennis community I manage, and their opinions were also negative.
This may be because players in Korea are heavily influenced by coaches like Joo Se-hyuk and a few other players.
However, I was able to confirm that the general sentiment is that there is no preference for large-sized rackets.
[/quote]
Thanks for your reply.
However it does not answer my specific 2 questions
1. Who made these blades to test ?
2. How were they tested

I am afraid I cannot be influenced by subjective claims such as their "feelings"
I have been testing large defensive blades from 1990 to about 1998 (just before the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio reduction massacre ) & before the 40 mm ball of 2000 in tournament situations against highest level players (including wins such as over current USATT CEO Virginia Sung in an actual USATT tournament in 1994 when she was on the USA National team) .
After that I have made many large blades 170 mm & 173 mm made & continued my testing for another 25 years now against players in the 2000-2300 range in actual test and match sessions. (I can no longer play due to various normal aging reasons)
I have posted my exact test methods and conditions in several mosts in many forums and were deleted by angry forum administrators and got banned,

I need objective evidence to disprove me from actual zone 3 to zone 5 choppers who have actually used large and smart blades in actual tournament & league playing conditions under the current 40+ plastic ball ONLY era after the
(click link >) 14 rule and regulation changes since 1977 by the ITTF to oppress choppers

As far as Joo Sae Hyuk goes , yes he is the indisputable real GOAT of all of table tennis but I do not think Joo himself understands why he is the REAL GOAT.
His prime years were after just after the Durban Aspect Ratio reduction Massacre when about 12 to 15 top choppers were banned from using Feint Long Classic. Then can more rules & regulations.
I am not going to repeat the whole history of brutal chopper ITTF by the robotNazis controlled ITTF as I actually started transitioning into table tennis from tennis during the two color rule change of 1983 -1985 . So I haved & endured the brutal abuse