Certainly not on First and Second Catalog cues.
Taking apart a Palmer Cue?
- Thread starter runscott
- Start date
Certainly not on First and Second Catalog cues.
I see what you are saying.
I would never attempt to refinish a modern cue - all of my experience is with old Brunswicks, primarily 1940's Hoppe Pros, so my comments reflect that experience. Often the finish is so thin on those cues that there is blue chalk rubbed into the forearm wood, so there are only limited options with such cues for 'cleaning them up' - typically I'm either scrubbing off all the finish and adding my own, or I'm leaving them as-is (preferable option). So the only reason I was able to try 'cleaning up' the finish on this cue, was that there was a thicker layer of finish...than I was used to finding on old cues.
I have only owned three Palmers that I can think of - all Titlist blanks. One was all-original and near-mint - I found it in an antique store for $10. Compared to the Hoppe Pros I had handled, the finish did look 'thick'. Compared to modern cues, obviously not. I personally don't like the heavy clear finish on modern cues as it takes away from the beauty of the wood-grain, but that's a whole different discussion - I have asked two cue-makers to create a satin finish for my new cues and the results of both were amazingly beautiful cues (they were less glossy and more satiny than the SW plain janes). The other Palmer I had was completely refinished and looked very similar to the near-mint original - I had them both at the same time, so they were easy to compare. THIS Palmer's finish looked very similar to both of those cues, only it was beat-up.
If you ever get to handle a near-mint Hoppe Pro from the 1960's or earlier, you will find that most of them have almost no finish - they are like satiny wood. I think they are gorgeous, but I doubt the finish is very sturdy. The more well-used ones with such a light finish end up with nasty forearms. I have also seen Hoppe Pros whose finish more closely resembles the three Palmers I've had, including some from the 1940's, but it's not so often.
I hope the above makes it clear that I know next to nothing about Palmers and only have other Titlist-blank cues from earlier eras to compare them to. But I do love the Palmers I've owned, especially this one as it has a more antique look to it and hits great. Unfortunately, the end of the yellow micarta ferrule has been shaved in a little on one side, but it doesn't seem to effect play (at my level).
Taking pictures when done with this post...
The laquer finish is also why it was easy to clean up and simply add another light coat. I have all sorts of options - wipe-on poly, rottenstone, shellac, etc. I generally get out my woodworking book and study up before I do any refinishing, as my memory is not great, but with this cue a French polish shellac was an easy choice (it's also my favorite finish). The only time I don't use it is when the cue has extremely white wood; otherwise I like to seal with natural Danish oil, then shellac. If you have never used Danish oil, it's amazing at bringing out wood-grain, but then you have a permanently 'highlighted' forearm.
Thought I would also mention - with 50+ year old cues I can never be certain the finish is 'original'. Pool players of old liked having new cues just like we do, and they had resources for getting their cues refinished, with all qualities on the spectrum and probably different finish options, depending on when the finish was done. If a finish looks horrible and I am not certain that it's original, I see no problem with refinishing the cue to bring back to life the qualities of the wood that were originally intended.
Last edited:
Some pics. Difficult to tell the finish differences - the color is the same but mainly all I did was remove some of the colors (white, blue, black) that had been scratched into the finish, and soften or fill in some of the dents and bumps. If you look closely you can see various scratches and chips in the finish that were softened by the additional finish layers. Tough to tell, but the yellower top forearm pic is the 'after' pic - you can see a long light blue scrape at the top near the joint, on the bottom pic. That is almost entirely gone, but still a hint of the blue color. I think it was a lot better than removing the old finish completely.
Attachments
Thanks for the pictures.
Looks like a damn fine job to me.
Looks like a damn fine job to me.
I like it. We see so many old cues stripped and redone with modern finish, it's nice to see something that is more of a preservation and restoration.
I have a number of old cues with very thin or almost no finish so I understand what you mean when you say a newer finish...even late sixties and into the seventies looks relatively thick by modern standards.
I have thought about doing what you did here rather than send any out. A couple or three I have could stand sprucing up. You have inspired me to perhaps try. I would hate to send them out and get them back with a modern finish. I rarely let anybody work on my old cues because of this. I have particular feelings about such things.
I have done little touch up jobs, as well as polishing, and waxing, but have not gone as far as you have. I like your results, so I may try.
Thanks for the pics and thoughts on the matter. I appreciate it very much.
Modern auto finish, urethane, UV, CA, and polyester are super durable compared to the old stuff. But to me they look like tits on a bull on an old cue.
Varnishes and shellacs will not only look period correct but will age gracefully and only look better with passing time IMHO.
Yes, it will yellow. Yes, it may craze. Yes, it is not as durable. But it is right in my mind.
.
I have a number of old cues with very thin or almost no finish so I understand what you mean when you say a newer finish...even late sixties and into the seventies looks relatively thick by modern standards.
I have thought about doing what you did here rather than send any out. A couple or three I have could stand sprucing up. You have inspired me to perhaps try. I would hate to send them out and get them back with a modern finish. I rarely let anybody work on my old cues because of this. I have particular feelings about such things.
I have done little touch up jobs, as well as polishing, and waxing, but have not gone as far as you have. I like your results, so I may try.
Thanks for the pics and thoughts on the matter. I appreciate it very much.
Modern auto finish, urethane, UV, CA, and polyester are super durable compared to the old stuff. But to me they look like tits on a bull on an old cue.
Varnishes and shellacs will not only look period correct but will age gracefully and only look better with passing time IMHO.
Yes, it will yellow. Yes, it may craze. Yes, it is not as durable. But it is right in my mind.
.
Last edited:
Very nice job on the cue and keeping the old school look, really enjoy this thread :thumbup:
Thanks guys. I wish I had taken better 'before' pics.
Someone mentioned 'crazing' - I really don't believe that will happen with this cue. I've handled plenty of 100+ year old cues that had French polish, and even those never crazed - that generally happens with more modern refinishes (old refinishes not done by professionals) where the finish is wiped on or sprayed on too thick (as opposed to many thin layers). The technique I use involves extremely thin layers of finish that are so thin that any cuts or dings never fill in completely, whereas wipe-on finishes can fill in the dings after just a few coats.
Someone contacted me after researching 'French polish' and expressed his concerns regarding durability and also the fact that 'no one' does it. Certainly the thick modern finishes are more durable. As far as 'no one' doing it - he is also correct. There are a few people refinishing antique cues without spray and you can find examples if you look around. Hand-rubbed finishes are not easy to do - they are not the same as wipe-on finishes. Considering labor, I could never get my money back for cues I refinish this way. The good news is that French polishes around 1890-1900 took 20+ layers (that's my understanding), whereas now you can buy wipe-on finishes for hand rubs that only require a few coats. Also, if you have an interest in learning how to do it, you can practice on any old one-piece cue that has little value. I can also direct you to a book that I consider the bible of woodwork finishing. I will post the title when I find the book.
This pic shows the finish a little better. I have some beat-up 90+ year old house cues - I'll find a good candidate for a restore and post pics of the process in another thread.
Someone mentioned 'crazing' - I really don't believe that will happen with this cue. I've handled plenty of 100+ year old cues that had French polish, and even those never crazed - that generally happens with more modern refinishes (old refinishes not done by professionals) where the finish is wiped on or sprayed on too thick (as opposed to many thin layers). The technique I use involves extremely thin layers of finish that are so thin that any cuts or dings never fill in completely, whereas wipe-on finishes can fill in the dings after just a few coats.
Someone contacted me after researching 'French polish' and expressed his concerns regarding durability and also the fact that 'no one' does it. Certainly the thick modern finishes are more durable. As far as 'no one' doing it - he is also correct. There are a few people refinishing antique cues without spray and you can find examples if you look around. Hand-rubbed finishes are not easy to do - they are not the same as wipe-on finishes. Considering labor, I could never get my money back for cues I refinish this way. The good news is that French polishes around 1890-1900 took 20+ layers (that's my understanding), whereas now you can buy wipe-on finishes for hand rubs that only require a few coats. Also, if you have an interest in learning how to do it, you can practice on any old one-piece cue that has little value. I can also direct you to a book that I consider the bible of woodwork finishing. I will post the title when I find the book.
This pic shows the finish a little better. I have some beat-up 90+ year old house cues - I'll find a good candidate for a restore and post pics of the process in another thread.
Attachments
Last edited:
As far as finishes go, the worst were the spray epoxy finishes. Palmer tried them for a few years. I occasionally see these cues and it's pretty obvious a clear coat disaster. If you see one of these cues it's pretty obvious. They are typically yellowed and cracked. The clear is thick and not very elastic, so as the wood moves beneath it, eventually the clear coat cracks off taking with it the decals.
No Palmer butt was ever glued at the factory but many were glued in the aftermarket. If it doesn't come apart relatively easily, go no furher unless you're prepared to rebuild the butt section. The acrylic tubing is readily available but things can go south in a hurry. If everything else moves, Mike is probably right that the bolt is rusted.
The cue looks great!
Last edited:
I truly appreciate all you are doing to keep the faith, Jay. If I see something and can help, I'm glad to. Most of the time, by the time I read something, others, like you, have competently answered.
Here is a fine example of an alternative route for restoration.
It states the previous owner "had weight added".
Check out the pics.
WARNING: People sensitive to the abuse of cues should not look.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Palmer-Cus...155775?hash=item213b9e5fff:g:ZuEAAOSw5ipasCHx
Can't help but laugh.
.
It states the previous owner "had weight added".
Check out the pics.
WARNING: People sensitive to the abuse of cues should not look.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Palmer-Cus...155775?hash=item213b9e5fff:g:ZuEAAOSw5ipasCHx
Can't help but laugh.
.
Here is a fine example of an alternative route for restoration.
It states the previous owner "had weight added".
Check out the pics.
WARNING: People sensitive to the abuse of cues should not look.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Palmer-Cus...155775?hash=item213b9e5fff:g:ZuEAAOSw5ipasCHx
Can't help but laugh.
.
Deduct 300 for the wrap they tried to do.
You being a cue maker I would have thought you would have jumped on the "weight added" first. A bunch of steel washers screwed onto the end.
But it sure is hard to get past all the neon.
I can't help but wonder if this might be some of Earl's earlier work....
.
You being a cue maker I would have thought you would have jumped on the "weight added" first. A bunch of steel washers screwed onto the end.
But it sure is hard to get past all the neon.
I can't help but wonder if this might be some of Earl's earlier work....
.
The washers ain't nothing but a thing. When I, as a Cue maker, and you, a person of logic, we both look at this cue and know the extant of knowledge the person who did it.
Last edited:
Thanks for posting, Chris, and I hope you are doing well. I was hoping we would get some feedback from you and Jay.
Here is a fine example of an alternative route for restoration.
It states the previous owner "had weight added".
Check out the pics.
WARNING: People sensitive to the abuse of cues should not look.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Palmer-Cus...155775?hash=item213b9e5fff:g:ZuEAAOSw5ipasCHx
Can't help but laugh.
.
This was actually a very nice cue. It has the original period correct shafts, a back-end that is not abused, and possibly a forearm in decent condition.
All it probably needs is a rewrap and removal of the aftermarket washers.
It sold for a best offer of $375 which is quite a deal in my opinion.