I’ve had the privilege of testing out the two newest additions to the Ronbus paddle lineup – the R1 Pulsar and R3 Pulsar. Both paddles have generated a lot of buzz in the pickleball community for their high-performance construction and use of premium materials.
In this comparative review, I’ll be analyzing the key differences between the R1 and R3 Pulsar paddles across a range of playing attributes including power, control, spin, feel, aesthetics, and more. My aim is to provide pickleballers with a detailed yet digestible overview to help inform your purchasing decision between these two great paddles.
Overview of the R1 and R3 Pulsar paddles
Contents
The R1 and R3 Pulsar paddles are part of Ronbus’s first thermoformed paddle series. Both paddles share some key features:
- 16mm thickness – Gives great touch and control.
- Thermoformed unibody design – Creates uniform feel across the paddle face.
- Premium Toray T700 carbon fiber face – Provides power and spin.
- Edge foam injected perimeters – Enhances sweet spot and durability.
However, there are some notable differences between the two models:
R1 Pulsar
- Hybrid shape – Slightly elongated with a curved top edge.
- Coarser carbon weave – More texture and grip.
- 2 handle length options – 5.25″ or 5.5″.
- Lower swing weight – Increased maneuverability.
R3 Pulsar
- Elongated rectangular shape – Similar to Carbon 1X.
- Ultra-tight carbon weave – Very smooth finish.
- 5.5″ handle only – Better reach and leverage.
- Higher swing weight – More power and stability.
Now let’s do a deep dive into how these distinguishing factors impact playing performance and preferences.
Power
Power refers to the paddle’s ability to generate ball speed with full swings from the baseline or transition area. This attribute is important for drives, third-shot drops, and put away shots.
The R3 Pulsar has a notable edge in power over the R1:
- The R3’s elongated shape provides more reach and leverage for powerful swings.
- Its higher 121 swing weight loads more mass into shots compared to the R1’s 114 swing weight.
- The R3 felt like it had more plow-through and penetration on hard-hit drives and smashes.
That being said, the R1 is no slouch in the power department thanks to its thermoformed construction. It produced plenty of pop off my shots, just not to the same hard-hitting degree as the R3.
When adding lead tape to the R1’s neck, I was able to increase its power to match or potentially exceed that of the stock R3. So the R1 can be customized to have similar power to the R3.
Advantage: R3 Pulsar for its innate, stock power.
Control
Control refers to the paddle’s stability and how easy it is to place shots accurately. This attribute is crucial for drop shots, dinks, blocks, and keeping the ball in play.
Both Pulsar paddles offer excellent control, but they achieve it through slightly different means:
- The R3’s bigger sweet spot instills confidence in gently placing shots thanks to added forgiveness.
- The R1 has a stiffer face that provides a more accurate, predictable response off the center.
- The R3’s extra weight (121 swing weight) enhances stability through shots.
- The R1’s lighter weight (114 swing weight) makes it easier to maneuver and redirects shots.
While the R3 felt more naturally controlled, I was able to add lead tape to the R1 to match or potentially exceed the R3’s stability.
Overall, both paddles are impressively controlled for their power level. However, I’ll give a slight edge to the R3 for its forgiving sweet spot.
Advantage: R3 Pulsar by a small margin for its sweet spot forgiveness.
Spin Potential
Spin refers to the paddle’s ability to impart underspin or topspin on balls to send them curving. Spin is essential for keeping shots low or shooting dinks that arc over the net.
My spin testing showed the R3 Pulsar generated 1970 RPMs while the R1 produced 1617 RPMs.
The R3’s incredibly tight carbon weave seems optimized for grabbing and flinging the ball, while the R1’s coarser weave has less friction.
Both paddles utilize premium Toray carbon fiber, so they should retain their spin for longer than cheaper materials.
The R3 is the clear winner when it comes to sheer spin capabilities. However, the R1 is still ahead of many other paddles.
Advantage: R3 Pulsar for its remarkably grippy face texture.
Maneuverability
Maneuverability refers to how easy it is to whip the paddle through the air for quick reactions and exchanges up close. This trait is vital for hand battles at the kitchen line.
The R1 Pulsar’s lighter 114 swing weight gives it a responsive, feather-like feel through the air. In comparison, the R3’s 121 swing weight makes it feel slightly more sluggish.
The difference is small but noticeable, especially in faster rally exchanges. The R1 provided a nimbler overall experience.
However, some players may prefer the R3’s extra heft for keeping shots deep and powering through counters. It comes down to playing style and preference.
Advantage: R1 Pulsar for its lighter swing weight and maneuverability.
Comfort
Comfort involves subjective factors like the feel off the paddle face and how the grip fits your hand. Comfort can impact perceived control and confidence.
The R3 Pulsar has a certain plushness and softness to its impact feel thanks to its tight carbon weave and foam edge guard. There is a satisfying “pocketing” of balls.
Meanwhile, the R1 has a stiffer face that provides a more rigid and consistent pop. There is less of a cradling sensation on contact.
This comes down to personal taste. I lean towards the R3’s softer face feel, but some may prefer the firmer feedback of the R1.
The R3’s grip runs slightly narrower than I like at 4.125″, while the R1 offers a wider 4.25″ option better suited to my hand size.
Overall, I give the comfort edge to the R3, but grip width should be considered.
Advantage: R3 Pulsar for its plusher face feel, but grip size matters.
Price and Value
The Pulsar line is $150 normally or $30 with a discount code. Given their outstanding performance, construction quality, and use of high-grade materials like Toray carbon fiber, I think both paddles offer good value.
Of the two, the R3 Pulsar gives you more for your dollar with its added power, control, and spin capabilities.
However, the R1 Pulsar holds its own and can be customized to achieve power on par with the R3.
Advantage:Â The R3 Pulsar provides more performance for the price point.
Durability
Durability considers how well the paddle can withstand impact force and wear and tear over time. Premature cracking or dead spots can ruin a paddle.
Ronbus subjects both Pulsar paddles to intense 6,000 hit durability tests, showing no signs of delamination, disbonding, or core crushing.
Their unibody foam/carbon fiber construction should offer long-lasting playability and resistance to dead spots.
The R3’s incredibly tight carbon weave is an unknown regarding durability over the coarser R1 weave. I suspect the R1’s texture is more damage-resistant.
But both paddles should provide better, longer-lasting performance than cheap quality control paddles.
Advantage:Â Both seem extremely durable, but advantage to the R1 for a more proven standard weave.
Final Verdict: Which is better?
Based on my comparative analysis, here is my verdict on which Pulsar paddle has the edge:
- The R3 Pulsar is the best choice if you prioritize power, control, spin, plush feel, and getting the most bang for your buck.
- The R1 Pulsar is ideal for players wanting more maneuverability and pop with the option to add weight and power.
- Either paddle is a phenomenal option that outshines most of the competition.
For my playing style emphasizing control, spin, and finesse, I personally prefer the R3 Pulsar as my go-to paddle. But I always keep an R1 Pulsar with added weight handy for when I want to add some zing.
Hopefully, this detailed comparative review gives you a comprehensive sense of how the R1 and R3 Pulsars differ and align with your game. Both paddles are impressive frontrunners that reflect Ronbus’s commitment to innovation and performance.
Let me know if you have any other questions! I’m happy to offer my first-hand insights as an avid player and reviewer.
