PadelTrue

Dunlop Galactica Pro

A all-round build: hybrid shape, high balance, carbon 16K face. Its highest rating is power at 60. Every figure on this page links to where it was published.

PadelTrue · model v1.0 · built 28 September 2026

all-roundMaker says: Advanced

Where the build leans

No rating reaches 65. This is a middle-of-the-road build.

What it gives up

  • Handling 26. Balance (high), weight (370g).
  • Comfort 31. Face material (carbon), balance (high), weight (370g).

Not published for this racket: firmness. Each missing input counts as the neutral midpoint, so treat these ratings as less certain than for a racket with all five.

Every spec, with its source

SpecPublished valueEvidence
ShapeHybridHead shape Hybrid dunlopsports.com
Weight370 gWeight 370 dunlopsports.com
BalanceHighBalance description High dunlopsports.com
CorePro EVAEVA Pro EVA / Pro EVA: Optimal feel. / With Sonic Core Infinergy by BASF, enjoy additional rebound for more power and vibration absorption dunlopsports.com
Facecarbon 16Kcrafted with 16K Carbon construction for maximum consistency / Main material type Graphite Material 2 type Glassfibre dunlopsports.com
Price€279.99€ 279,99 dunlopsports.com

Collection note: No model year printed on the page; listed in the current racket range on dunlopsports.com. Weight is published as a single figure with no tolerance, so min and max are both that figure. Price is shown in EUR on the en-gb site. The page lists "Extra Grip: Improved spin." but does not say the face is textured or rough, so roughSurface is null. Core hardness is not stated. Product number 10359940. A search snippet of the US Dunlop page described this model as 12K carbon; the en-gb page fetched today says 16K.

How each rating was calculated

  • Power 60 = shape (hybrid) 15.7/45 + balance (high) 35/35 + weight (370g) 12/20 = 62.7 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Control 41 = shape (hybrid) 39/60 + balance (high) 0/40 = 39 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Handling 26 = balance (high) 0/50 + weight (370g) 20/50 = 20 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Forgiveness 47 = shape (hybrid) 29.3/45 + firmness (not published) 17.5/35 + face material (carbon) 0/20 = 46.8 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Comfort 31 = firmness (not published) 20/40 + face material (carbon) 0/25 + balance (high) 0/20 + weight (370g) 6/15 = 26 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Value 15 = mean of the two highest ratings, divided by the price in euros, scaled so the best value in the index is 100

A rating describes what the build favours. It is not a lab measurement or a play test. Full methodology and evidence.

Closest rackets by rating profile

vs Oxdog Hyper Pro 2.0 2026 · vs Wilson Bela Pro V3 2025 · vs Kuikma PR Hybrid Carbon Coki Nieto · vs Babolat Counter Viper 2.6

Similar profile for less money

Questions about the Dunlop Galactica Pro

Is the Dunlop Galactica Pro a power or a control racket?

On its published specification the Dunlop Galactica Pro is an all-round racket. It rates 60 for power and 41 for control on the PadelTrue model, mainly because of its hybrid shape and high balance.

Is the Dunlop Galactica Pro good for beginners?

It rates 47 out of 100 for forgiveness. That is a middle value, workable for an improving player. The manufacturer lists its level as "Advanced".

Is the Dunlop Galactica Pro arm-friendly?

It rates 31 out of 100 for comfort, a rating built from core firmness, face material, balance and weight, describing feel and physical demand. That is on the demanding side of the index. This describes the build, it is not medical advice.

How much does the Dunlop Galactica Pro cost?

€279.99 on dunlopsports.com when checked on 28 September 2026.

How much does the Dunlop Galactica Pro weigh?

The published weight is 370 g.

How this site makes money, and how it does not. PadelTrue may earn a commission when you buy through a retailer link on this site. A commission never changes a rating. Every rating comes from the manufacturer's published specification through the formula printed on the methodology page, and every specification links to where it was published. Found a wrong figure? Send the source and it gets corrected.