Page 1 of 1

New version of actual long pips Reach C-8 & C-801 > Pimple design seems to have changed

Posted: May 4th, 2025, 11:16 am
by baynhan145
Just an FYI
I was looking at the specifications for the new version of Reach C-8 & C-801.
These are two of the 5 Chinese pips that are actually long pips & are also not rteated or cured pips.

The earlier version was mushroom pips. Similar to Yung 63-8A used by legendary Olympic Champion Deng Yaping , before she switched to RITC 755 .
All this was during the 38 mm ball era
63-8a is no longer on current ITTF LARC

Anyway 63-8A & older version of Reach C-8 and C-801 are harder to control because of the mushroom design
But both Reach C-8 & C-801 , being actual long pips (meaning longer than 2.05 mm & also Aspect Ratio higher than 1.1) did have good back spin reversal & back spin generation , much beter thann any social slim pips rubber (listed deceptively as long pips) on ITTF LARC .

There seems to be some new changes with the new versions of Reach C-8 & C-801

1. The pip density has been increased (pips are closer together) . This means less speed but more spin (Remember the infamous 2004 Regulation that reduced tha ITTF maximium allowed pip density from 50 pips down to 30 pips per Sq.cm)

2. The pips seem to be straight cylinderical now instead of mushroom shaped. I may be wrong on this change. But if is indeed cyliderical now, it will have more control & less deception

3. The aspect ratio , pip length & width seem to have changed as well for both C-8 & C-801


Click to view at Ali Express

Warning > Check shipping cost. In USA they cover new tariif swith shipping fees.

Re: New version of actual long pips Reach C-8 & C-801 > Pimple design seems to have changed

Posted: May 4th, 2025, 11:35 am
by Bernardo23
I was always interested in trying this.
If any of you tried, please post a review

Re: New version of actual long pips Reach C-8 & C-801 > Pimple design seems to have changed

Posted: August 7th, 2025, 7:35 am
by Bilge Dogen
----- wrote: ↑August 7th, 2025, 4:21 am Got two Reach C801 today (red and black) and that's it, the pimples are no longer mushroom.
May I ask where you ordered these ? I mean the dealer name
I thought I ordered a new version also on Ali Exprss. But the dealer sent me the olde mushroom version & refused to replace or give refund (take a return)
This is a huge problem with buying from Ali Express
It just is not possible to get refund

Re: New version of actual long pips Reach C-8 & C-801 > Pimple design seems to have changed

Posted: August 7th, 2025, 7:41 am
by Over Slice
----- wrote: ↑August 7th, 2025, 4:21 am Chop is extremely heavy,
How does it compare to Magic 77 for chopping ?
Which one has higher looper torture index ?
Does anyone know ?

Re: New version of actual long pips Reach C-8 & C-801 > Pimple design seems to have changed

Posted: August 7th, 2025, 8:33 pm
by Bilge Dogen
----- wrote: ↑August 7th, 2025, 5:49 pm
Bilge Dogen wrote: ↑August 7th, 2025, 7:35 am
----- wrote: ↑August 7th, 2025, 4:21 am Got two Reach C801 today (red and black) and that's it, the pimples are no longer mushroom.
May I ask where you ordered these ? I mean the dealer name
I thought I ordered a new version also on Ali Exprss. But the dealer sent me the olde mushroom version & refused to replace or give refund (take a reuturn)
This is a huge problem with buying from Ali Express
It just is not possible to get refund
Chinese PingPong
Can you be a little more vague ? Just joking
Is this is a website ? Can you provide a link ?

Re: New version of actual long pips Reach C-8 & C-801 > Pimple design seems to have changed

Posted: August 7th, 2025, 9:50 pm
by Bilge Dogen
----- wrote: ↑August 7th, 2025, 8:54 pm
This is a dealer on Aliexpress. Okay, here is the link.
https://aliexpress.ru/item/32641232275. ... 387982102I don't know if it will redirect you to your version of the site, but links to this seller have been posted here many times.
Thanks for the information.
If you look at the packaging , it looks like the blue package is old mushroom pimples & the new red package is the standard cylinderical pimples.
Am I correct ?