Dunlop Galactica Pro LS

Photo: extreme-tennis.eu

Dunlop Galactica Pro LS

Dunlop · 2025 · Galactica

Teardrop

Dunlop Galactica Pro LS pairs a low swingweight that feels light and easy to whip around and a teardrop head that splits the difference between power and control.

No price yet

Measurements

The headline figures used in the comparison, with where each sits across the indexed rackets.

Swingweight
165
Higher than 50% of rackets
Twistweight
20
Higher than 91% of rackets
Balance (cm)
26.5
Higher than 51% of rackets
Face stiffness
66
Higher than 79% of rackets
Frame stiffness
85
Higher than 22% of rackets
Foam & trampoline
EVA Medium · Low-medium
Carbon

Measurements by source

Every reading is kept with its source and confidence. Conflicting readings are listed side by side rather than averaged.

SourceConfidenceSWTWBalScrRA
LabExtreme Tennis X-Compareshape TearHigh1652026.56685
ImageProduct image (silhouette inspection)shape TeardropHigh

Values are shown in each source's native scale (X-Compare, official or TWU). A blank cell means that source did not report that metric.

Closest alternatives

The rackets most similar to this one, using it as the reference.

  • Oxdog Hyper Pro 2.0 2026

    Close on swingweight, balance and face stiffness, the same head shape and similar foam.

    Very close100
  • Tecnifibre Curva Power

    Close on swingweight, balance and twistweight, the same head shape and similar foam.

    Very close98
  • NOX NextGen Pro Hybrid 3K 2025

    Close on swingweight, balance and face stiffness, the same head shape and similar foam.

    Very close98
  • Dunlop Galactica Pro

    Close on swingweight, balance and twistweight, the same head shape and similar foam.

    Very close97
  • Bullpadel Hack Advance

    Close on swingweight, balance and twistweight, the same head shape and similar foam.

    Very close97
  • Dunlop FX Pro

    Close on swingweight, balance and twistweight, the same head shape and similar foam.

    Very close95

Data & method

Measurements are third-party readings retained with provenance, and the score is a heuristic comparison, not an authoritative ranking. See the Method and Sources.