PadelTrue

Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025

A all-round build: hybrid shape, medium-hard core, Carbono 15K face. Its highest rating is control at 57. Every figure on this page links to where it was published.

PadelTrue · model v1.0 · built 28 September 2026 · Franco Stupaczuk

all-roundMaker says: PROFESIONAL
WeightNot published
BalanceNot published
CoreMedium-hardsource: siuxpadel.com
FaceCarbono 15Ksource: siuxpadel.com
FrameNot published

Where the build leans

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

What it gives up

  • Comfort 32. Firmness (medium-hard), face material (carbon).

Not published for this racket: balance, weight. 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
ShapeHybridforma híbrida siuxpadel.com
CoreMedium-hardtacto medio-duro siuxpadel.com
FaceCarbono 15KCarbono 15K siuxpadel.com
Textured faceYesacabado arenoso siuxpadel.com
Price€250250 EUR (schema.org offer) siuxpadel.com

Collection note: The page title reads SIUX ELECTRA STUPA PRO ST4, but the description calls it Siux Stupa Electra Pro ST4 2025, so the word order of the name differs. Balance is stated as medio-alto (spec: MEDIO ALTO), which does not map to a single low, medium or high value, so balance.value is null. The spec lists Tacto de pala: MEDIO, DURO, which agrees with tacto medio-duro. There is also an untranslated label, Translation missing: es.hardness, with the value 7.5/10. Carbono 15K is described as the construction, while the spec line Superficie de pala gives only 15K. No core foam, frame material, weight or thickness is stated. Season is listed as SS25.

How each rating was calculated

  • Power 45 = shape (hybrid) 15.7/45 + balance (not published) 17.5/35 + weight (not published) 10/20 = 43.2 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Control 57 = shape (hybrid) 39/60 + balance (not published) 20/40 = 59 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Handling 50 = balance (not published) 25/50 + weight (not published) 25/50 = 50 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Forgiveness 40 = shape (hybrid) 29.3/45 + firmness (medium-hard) 8.8/35 + face material (carbon) 0/20 = 38.1 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Comfort 32 = firmness (medium-hard) 10/40 + face material (carbon) 0/25 + balance (not published) 10/20 + weight (not published) 7.5/15 = 27.5 points, placed on the 10 to 90 scale
  • Value 16 = 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 Bullpadel Vertex 05 Hybrid 2026 · vs Nox AT10 Luxury Genius 12K Alum Xtreme 2026 · vs Nox Genius 12K Alum XTREM 2027 · vs Nox Genius 18K Alum 2027

Similar profile for less money

Questions about the Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025

Is the Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025 a power or a control racket?

On its published specification the Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025 is an all-round racket. It rates 45 for power and 57 for control on the PadelTrue model, mainly because of its hybrid shape.

Is the Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025 good for beginners?

It rates 40 out of 100 for forgiveness. That is a middle value, workable for an improving player. The manufacturer lists its level as "PROFESIONAL".

Is the Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025 arm-friendly?

It rates 32 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 Siux Electra Stupa Pro ST4 2025 cost?

€250 on siuxpadel.com when checked on 28 September 2026.

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.