Is a Carbon–Glass–Carbon Layer Structure Worth It for Pickleball Paddles?

A carbon–glass–carbon layered pickleball paddle is technically feasible but generally not worth it for mass production. This design brings no noticeable improvement in paddle control or feel, yet it raises production costs by at least 40%

Why Do Brands Request a Carbon–Glass–Carbon Paddle Structure?

In the highly competitive pickleball market, brands are constantly looking for unique features to make their paddles stand out. Many of our brand clients specifically inquire about a carbon–glass–carbon sandwich structure as an innovative twist they can advertise. The idea of combining carbon fiber and fiberglass layers sounds cutting-edge and is thought to offer a new selling point in terms of technology and performance

For example, a company might envision that carbon fiber’s stiffness and fiberglass’s flexibility could combine to deliver the best of both worlds in one paddle. From a marketing perspective, being able to claim a novel multi-material construction can also be very attractive for branding and storytelling. In short, this kind of request often stems from a drive to innovate and differentiate, giving consumers something new and exciting

Can a Carbon–Glass–Carbon Paddle Be Manufactured?

Yes, no problem. For an experienced manufacturer, adding an extra fiberglass sheet between carbon fiber layers doesn’t pose any major challenges. We can utilize the same curing and pressing processes to produce this structure, and the end result will be a solid, well-bonded paddle. In other words, it is technically feasible to build a carbon–glass–carbon paddle in the factory.

Why We Don’t Recommend a Carbon–Glass–Carbon Design

However, just because it can be made doesn’t mean it should be. In practice, this carbon–glass–carbon configuration does not deliver a significant performance boost over conventional paddle designs. The carbon fiber outer layers essentially dominate the paddle’s behavior, so adding a fiberglass layer in the middle yields almost no noticeable difference in how the paddle plays. You likely wouldn’t feel any meaningful improvement in control, touch, or power that couldn’t be achieved with a simpler construction.

On top of the underwhelming performance, the cost drawback is major. Carbon fiber material is significantly more expensive than fiberglass, and using both in one paddle means extra material and labor. Our estimates show that this layered build would raise production costs by roughly 40% or more, which is a substantial increase.

For a brand, that translates to either a much higher retail price or a squeezed profit margin on each unit. And since the player isn’t getting a big benefit in return, it’s hard to justify this added expense for any mass-market product line

Alternative Paddle Structures to Consider

Fortunately, there are other paddle constructions that can deliver innovation or performance improvements without such a cost penalty. Brands can consider the following alternatives, each of which is better suited to a particular market segment:

• Full Carbon Fiber (Thermoformed + Foam Core): A high-tech all-carbon construction that uses a thermoformed frame with foam filling (often in the core or around the edges). This design provides exceptional power, stability, and a larger sweet spot, making it ideal for advanced players and premium product lines.

• Full Fiberglass Construction: A traditional all-fiberglass paddle face. Fiberglass surfaces are known to offer easy power and a more forgiving feel. This construction is much more cost-effective, which makes it great for entry-level or recreational paddles and any line where a lower price point is important.

• “Cold-Pressed” Carbon Fiber Face: A modern standard where carbon fiber is used for the faces but cured with a special low-temperature or “cold-press” technique to maximize surface texture and ball grip. This yields excellent spin and control (favored by competitive players who rely on spin) without needing any exotic layering.

When Might a Carbon–Glass–Carbon Paddle Make Sense?

For the most part, this expensive hybrid design isn’t practical, but there are a few niche scenarios where a brand might still consider it. One example is if you are launching a crowdfunding campaign or a special edition product and need a flashy, headline-grabbing innovation to draw attention. In a Kickstarter-style launch or a limited-edition release, the sheer novelty of a carbon–glass–carbon paddle could help justify a higher price to a small group of early adopters or collectors.

Another potential scenario is using it as a demonstration or concept piece to showcase your company’s R&D capabilities,essentially as a marketing showpiece rather than a mass-market item. In these cases, the goal is not high volume sales but rather branding and buzz, so the high unit cost can be tolerated

Conclusion: Feasible But Not Worth it for Mass Production

To wrap up, our team can certainly manufacture a carbon–glass–carbon layered paddle if you really want this design. However, our sincere advice to brand partners is that it’s not a wise choice for a mass-production model. The modest performance gains simply don’t justify the steep increase in cost and complexity

You’re usually better off investing in the more practical paddle innovations we discussed above that genuinely benefit players. We are always ready to support your vision, even if that means making a special hybrid paddle – but for your core product line, we recommend focusing on proven constructions that offer a balanced mix of performance and cost-effectiveness.