PDA

View Full Version : diamond pro am rails


sr 9ball
09-28-2010, 04:26 PM
I bought a new diamond pro am 7 ft. Glen installed it about 2 years ago. the table played great. I always keep the humdity at about 55%.
I've heard alot of people talking about the rails responding too fast. but my rails always played great. now, about 6 months ago the rails seem too fast. I didnt post it because I thought maybe it was in my head, or the humdity was different or something. Now I'm sure they play fast. I'm not sure if the rails settled and now playing a little lower on the balls(cb). I dont think if the cloth is worn some that would effect the rails. the whole table would play fast... right?
Did anyone have this problem?

smoooothstroke
09-28-2010, 06:06 PM
Ask Glenn.

Just a shot in the dark;have you played on other tables and maybe got used to much slower rails?

realkingcobra
09-28-2010, 07:10 PM
I bought a new diamond pro am 7 ft. Glen installed it about 2 years ago. the table played great. I always keep the humdity at about 55%.
I've heard alot of people talking about the rails responding too fast. but my rails always played great. now, about 6 months ago the rails seem too fast. I didnt post it because I thought maybe it was in my head, or the humdity was different or something. Now I'm sure they play fast. I'm not sure if the rails settled and now playing a little lower on the balls(cb). I dont think if the cloth is worn some that would effect the rails. the whole table would play fast... right?
Did anyone have this problem?

Same cloth on the table now that it had on it when I delivered it new?

Glen

comebac
09-28-2010, 07:51 PM
This has been discussed on here occasionally before. The rubber they use is known to play a bit too springy as well as shorten the rebound angle of balls coming off the rails. Now that these tables are everywhere, some people think this is normal. It is a fundamental change to how balls move on the table. I do understand why Diamond does this, though. They can't exactly use the rubber of their main competitors. It would be like Ford getting Chevrolet to build their engines. The table construction and the one piece slate on the 9 footers is AWESOME - no slate seams to work with. You could have a qualified table mechanic (Glenn)install Brunswick Superspeed - a bit of work, but then you'd have a perfect table !

real bartram
09-28-2010, 08:14 PM
I bought a new diamond pro am 7 ft. Glen installed it about 2 years ago. the table played great. I always keep the humdity at about 55%.
I've heard alot of people talking about the rails responding too fast. but my rails always played great. now, about 6 months ago the rails seem too fast. I didnt post it because I thought maybe it was in my head, or the humdity was different or something. Now I'm sure they play fast. I'm not sure if the rails settled and now playing a little lower on the balls(cb). I dont think if the cloth is worn some that would effect the rails. the whole table would play fast... right?
Did anyone have this problem?

when the cloth gets old the rails bounce hard.
thats just the way they play .
only problem i see with diamonds.
they have just changed the rails im going to try the new 1s soon.

Grilled Cheese
09-28-2010, 08:30 PM
This has been discussed on here occasionally before. The rubber they use is known to play a bit too springy as well as shorten the rebound angle of balls coming off the rails. Now that these tables are everywhere, some people think this is normal. It is a fundamental change to how balls move on the table. I do understand why Diamond does this, though. They can't exactly use the rubber of their main competitors. It would be like Ford getting Chevrolet to build their engines. The table construction and the one piece slate on the 9 footers is AWESOME - no slate seams to work with. You could have a qualified table mechanic (Glenn)install Brunswick Superspeed - a bit of work, but then you'd have a perfect table !


Brunswick Superspeed are garbage. Notorious for becoming dead, or even turning into rock (see Gold Crown III). Cheaper quality rubber.

Artemis (what Diamond uses) made in Germany are the best. People think the Diamonds bounce too much because the Artemis retains it's bounce throughout most of its life. Doesn't change much from my experience. I feel most of the change is the cloth wearing down, not the cushions. Superspeeds when brand new, non-defective, and installed right play just like the Artemis - fast and strong rebound. For a while that is, until they get broken in and they deaden a little bit. Then they become what people think is the standard of Superspeed play. I've played on new Superspeed. They are quite fast. But that doesn't last. Artemis stays the same longer. Relative to the Superspeeds, the Superspeed's deadening gives the illusion that the Artemis plays faster than normal. It's not. That's regular. It's the Superspeed becoming Superslow.

Playing on a well used or older Gold Crown shows this well. You have to pound the ball a lot more to get around multiple rails than does a pro player, playing in a tournament on Diamonds with Artemis cushions. They don't have to juice it as much to get action off the cushion.

I was so used to regular slower play worn down Superspeeds that when I had played on a table with new SS cushions, I had a hard time with control. Rebound was significantly greater. Goes to show the difference.

The best cushion isn't necessarily the fastest - but the one that stays the same for the longest period of time. My guess is the main factor in that is the composition of the rubber. What they put in and what they don't put in.


Artemis is my favorite, but expensive. For cushions on a budget, the Diamond Black are pretty good. I have these on my Gold Crown. Very good rebound. Time will tell how they hold up. At 1/6 the price of the Artemis, and 1/3 of the Superspeed, they are price performance winners.


Compared to the Superspeed, which run about $150 and up and will play slow after a couple of years. Seen this also on GC IV's when they came out. Played wonderful the first year to two years at most. Then got slow. If I'm going to risk cushions that will deaden prematurely, I'd rather spend $50, than get the Superspeed and have the same result. Superspeed are suppose to be a premium cushion, but don't last any longer than budget cushions and in many cases are worse than budget cushions.


Today's Brunswick isn't the Brunswick of the past that earned them the good reputation. Diamond is the table with the all-around quality. Diamond will be my next table.

Mikjary
09-28-2010, 09:06 PM
I put Diamond black cushions on my Brunswick about 6 months ago with Simonis 860 HR. They were really live and banked a little shorter than I thought they should at first. Now they've eased up a little bit on the rebounds and are banking pretty true to the diamond systems. Shots down the rail (4" pockets) would rattle if you hit the rail first. Now they go in about 50% of the time.

Best,
Mike

sr 9ball
09-28-2010, 09:28 PM
Glen, yes its the same cloth. no one has touched the table since u installed it. The cloth seams to play fine. No need to replace it. At least I would'nt think.
real bartram is right. the rails bounce hard(more springy). is it possible that when the cloth on the rails wears theres less cushion between the cb and rubber? or just the rails settleing and cb contact point is lower?
I have played at the varcity club and the carom room in wi. they each have at least 10 7' diamond tables and a lot of the time the cloth appears to be alot more worn then my table. and the rails play equal with the cloth speed.
Glen, I hav'nt looked at the table yet. but do u think i should raise the rails a 1/16 or what ever it takes to get the rails to play = with the cloth. I'd hate to buy new rails. Especailly when they hav'nt had enough time to get accurately reviewed. Do u know what the carom room or varcity club did?
thanks
scott

comebac
09-28-2010, 10:07 PM
Artemis may RETAIN bounce for a long time, it's just the WRONG bounce. Many "natural" , common kicks and banks have been about the same forever require second-guessing and adjustment with Artemis due to their problem of shortened rebound angle. Maybe the rubber compound just needs tweaking.
In a conversation between 2 Hall of Famers and Diamond guys at the U.S. Open last year the same subject was brought up. Several examples were cited by the playersincluding a common 3-rail kick one of the players said he'd shot the same way for 40 years. "But on a Diamond, you have to aim here", he said, pointing 6-7 inches down. The Diamond guy said they were aware of the shortening effect and looking into it. Props to that.
I guess I'm saying know that some shots require u to adjust conventional wisdom and normal aiming points on Artemis.
Many younger players that came up on Diamonds learned that rebound to be normal, not realizing that some shots play considerably different than before Artemis.

realkingcobra
09-28-2010, 10:08 PM
You guys are killing me:grin: it's not that there's a problem with the Diamond tables or their choice of cushions. There's a minor change that has already taken place...so all of you are going to have to wait and see the outcome, I'm not at liberty to openly talk about the change...but I guarantee you...no one will ever have a complaint about the way Diamonds play when you see what Diamond has done. As I've said, any table can be made to play like a Diamond...or a Gold Crown...or even better than either if you know what you're doing as a mechanic;);)

Glen

PS. Just so all of you know, there hasn't been one GC ever built that I couldn't make play better....than when it was built and sold brand new...it's all in the rail design, which is my secret...so what does that say about Brunswick?...They didn't build any of their tables wrong...they just didn't build the rails as good as they could have....because they just didn't know what changes to make....Diamond now does, so....lets see what happens next...at the US Open;)

comebac
09-28-2010, 10:19 PM
Great to hear, Glen. That's what Ilike about Diamond - always looking (and willing ) to improve.

realkingcobra
09-28-2010, 10:37 PM
Great to hear, Glen. That's what Ilike about Diamond - always looking (and willing ) to improve.

That's why I stick with Diamond and give them 100% of my support in any area I can...because they're not willing to just sit back and sell tables and call it a day. Greg and everyone involved with Diamond...want's that PERFECT table...but you don't get there building last years model of table so to speak...you build TOMORROWS pool table today...and everyday you go to work you look for better and better, that's how you build a PERFECT pool table...and you listen to what others have to say....even if it's just me;)

Glen

mdavis
09-28-2010, 10:42 PM
It's pretty clear to me that diamond is making a very high quality tournament table. I spent considerable time researching this and am convinced that the 9' single-piece slate Pro-Am is right for me.

...I'm going to use this thing for 30 years.

-mark

realkingcobra
09-28-2010, 10:44 PM
It's pretty clear to me that diamond is making a very high quality tournament table. I spent considerable time researching this and am convinced that the 9' single-piece slate Pro-Am is right for me.

...I'm going to use this thing for 30 years.

-mark

then pass it down to whom ever you want....because it's a 100+ year pool table:grin:

sr 9ball
09-29-2010, 03:26 AM
glen. back to the orginal post. I'm not talking about banking. just simple 1-2-3 rail shape for the cb. hitting the first rail and sometimes the second rail the cb picks up speed. On a 7' in 8 ball its critial to get shape. on a 9' playing 9 ball 10" to 15" isnt that bad. I just think the rails should = the cloth speed.
I know a couple years ago u talked about changing the angles of the rails. u said all the angles/tapers/widths. but it was all greek to me at the time.

should i raise the rails?
call jeremy from varcity club and see what they did?
or buy the new rails whenever they come out and pray they have a warrenty that the rails will match the cloth speed all throughout a resonable cloth wear and tear?

gulfportdoc
09-29-2010, 06:18 AM
...They didn't build any of their tables wrong...they just didn't build the rails as good as they could have....because they just didn't know what changes to make....Diamond now does, so....lets see what happens next...at the US Open;)
RKC, will they have any of these new tables ready for the DCC?

Doc

realkingcobra
09-29-2010, 07:14 AM
glen. back to the orginal post. I'm not talking about banking. just simple 1-2-3 rail shape for the cb. hitting the first rail and sometimes the second rail the cb picks up speed. On a 7' in 8 ball its critial to get shape. on a 9' playing 9 ball 10" to 15" isnt that bad. I just think the rails should = the cloth speed.
I know a couple years ago u talked about changing the angles of the rails. u said all the angles/tapers/widths. but it was all greek to me at the time.

should i raise the rails?
call jeremy from varcity club and see what they did?
or buy the new rails whenever they come out and pray they have a warrenty that the rails will match the cloth speed all throughout a resonable cloth wear and tear?

Warrenty has nothing to do with the play of the table changing over time, if the cloth was changed to new again, the cue ball would slow down again coming off the cushions because there would be less traction so to speak to want to climb up the nose of the cushion before changing direction on a bank. Call me, I'll explain what needs to be done.

702-927-5689

realkingcobra
09-29-2010, 07:15 AM
RKC, will they have any of these new tables ready for the DCC?

Doc

My guess would be yes:grin:

Black-Balled
09-29-2010, 08:45 AM
My understanding of the matter is that Diamond has tweaked the nose height of its rubber. I think Glen alluded to that by his 'climbing' comment.

I never thought I'd use rubber and nose in the same sentence, but there it is.

realkingcobra
09-29-2010, 08:56 AM
glen. back to the orginal post. I'm not talking about banking. just simple 1-2-3 rail shape for the cb. hitting the first rail and sometimes the second rail the cb picks up speed. On a 7' in 8 ball its critial to get shape. on a 9' playing 9 ball 10" to 15" isnt that bad. I just think the rails should = the cloth speed.
I know a couple years ago u talked about changing the angles of the rails. u said all the angles/tapers/widths. but it was all greek to me at the time.

should i raise the rails?
call jeremy from varcity club and see what they did?
or buy the new rails whenever they come out and pray they have a warrenty that the rails will match the cloth speed all throughout a resonable cloth wear and tear?

The nose height is correct on your table, so raising it would only deaden the bounce off the rails. I've been correcting Brunswick Gold Crowns for years for this very same issue...it's just that it hasen't been as noticable on GC's as it has been on Diamonds....but that also depends on which GC's...as some had the sub-rails a little more out of alignment than others. There's a little more to making a cushion play correct, than just getting the nose of the cushion to the 1 7/16" height, you have to also pay attention to the position of the cushion body behind that nose height as well. It would have been great if the cushion manufactures would have had some imput to this alignment years ago to help the table manufactures with the play of their tables...but I don't think they know either, as all they do is manufacture the cushions...they don't actually put them on and sit back and watch how they play.

I haven't come across one table yet that has it all together right when it comes to the alignment of the cushions with the sub-rails...there have been some that were close....but not 100% right, but that don't make the manufacture wrong....it just means they're not informed is all.

As I've said before, Diamond is the only table manufacture that is always looking for improvement in their tables...until there's nothing left to improve upon.

The Diamond ProAm is the mortal nuts in more ways than one because not only can it be improved to play even better, any table that has already been built and sold can be updated as well...but like I said...making a product better don't make what's already been sold...a bad production model.

No one can expect Diamond to upgrade their already owned tables to todays standard as a warrenty issue, if that were the case...Diamond would be still trying to upgrade tables they built 25 years ago. But, yes...even those tables can be outfitted with the playability of todays Diamonds...just not through Diamond...as that's an after market change, and that's where I, or one of my trained table mechanics come into play. Diamond has to keep looking forward, making improvements along the way or they'd soon be out of business, sooner of they had to keep updating everything they've already built, so...it's the job of the "trained" table mechanic to bring your tables up to date...which is why I've been busting my butt to work on "this" side of the industry, to be able to give great service to all those that already own their pool tables, provided their tables are worth upgrading...as I don't support a lot of the junk built out here today, some of them tables just need to be burned...or at least...thrown away:grin:

realkingcobra
09-29-2010, 10:23 AM
My understanding of the matter is that Diamond has tweaked the nose height of its rubber. I think Glen alluded to that by his 'climbing' comment.

I never thought I'd use rubber and nose in the same sentence, but there it is.

No, actually the nose height is the same at 1 29/64"ths, so that hasn't changed:grin:

Robert Raiford
11-09-2010, 12:00 PM
No, actually the nose height is the same at 1 29/64"ths, so that hasn't changed:grin:

From a table mechanic's perspective, why do you suppose pool cushions are proportionally so much higher relative to ball diameter than carom cushions?

UMB carom regulations (http://umb.org/Rules/Carom_Rules.pdf) specify a 37mm nose height for 61.5mm balls, which gives 37/61.5=0.602 or 60.2% of the ball diameter. WPA pool regulations (http://www.wpa-pool.com/index.asp?content=rules_spec), for example, specify a nose height of 63.5% of the 2.25" ball diameter +-1% (Diamond's 1-29/64 falls slightly above that range at 64.6%).

If pool players think Diamonds play shorter than normal, us 3-cushion players think they do even more so (we already think all pool tables play short :)). I just accept the difference and adjust to whatever conditions I'm playing under, but I've always been curious about the evolution of the height discrepancy. My theory is that it's there to help accommodate the conflicting playability goals of 3-cushion vs pool.

In billiards, we love super-fast long-angled tables with slippery cloth so we can easily move the cue ball 2 or 3 times around the table for 5-9 rail shots and still get nice back-ups off the last rail to make targets bigger. We want to be able to shoot with max reverse english into a rail and still have enough left on the ball to spin 3-5 rails around the table.

In pool, fast slippery conditions make it very hard to control the cue ball, so they use higher-friction cloth that's not stretched as tightly in order to slow things down and make it more playable by increasing the margin of error for the much shorter distance the CB tends to travel. It seems to me that raising the nose height for pool evolved to contribute to that effect (or carom rails were lowered, depending on your perspective:)).

Robert

Black-Balled
11-09-2010, 12:28 PM
whAT rOBERT SAID (i WANNA KNOW TOO, gLEN!)

dAMN cAPS lOCK!:mad:

realkingcobra
11-09-2010, 04:19 PM
From a table mechanic's perspective, why do you suppose pool cushions are proportionally so much higher relative to ball diameter than carom cushions?

UMB carom regulations (http://umb.org/Rules/Carom_Rules.pdf) specify a 37mm nose height for 61.5mm balls, which gives 37/61.5=0.602 or 60.2% of the ball diameter. WPA pool regulations (http://www.wpa-pool.com/index.asp?content=rules_spec), for example, specify a nose height of 63.5% of the 2.25" ball diameter +-1% (Diamond's 1-29/64 falls slightly above that range at 64.6%).

If pool players think Diamonds play shorter than normal, us 3-cushion players think they do even more so (we already think all pool tables play short :)). I just accept the difference and adjust to whatever conditions I'm playing under, but I've always been curious about the evolution of the height discrepancy. My theory is that it's there to help accommodate the conflicting playability goals of 3-cushion vs pool.

In billiards, we love super-fast long-angled tables with slippery cloth so we can easily move the cue ball 2 or 3 times around the table for 5-9 rail shots and still get nice back-ups off the last rail to make targets bigger. We want to be able to shoot with max reverse english into a rail and still have enough left on the ball to spin 3-5 rails around the table.

In pool, fast slippery conditions make it very hard to control the cue ball, so they use higher-friction cloth that's not stretched as tightly in order to slow things down and make it more playable by increasing the margin of error for the much shorter distance the CB tends to travel. It seems to me that raising the nose height for pool evolved to contribute to that effect (or carom rails were lowered, depending on your perspective:)).

Robert

The nose height you're talking about for billiards is actually 1 9/16"s where as pool cushions are at the top end, 1 29/64"ths...so there's actually about a 1/16"th of an inch difference in nose height, but there's a little more to it than that. Such as the cushions used for billiards, way different than pool cushions...much harder, which means more consistent banks on a billiards table vs a pool table. The balls are also much different, not just in size...but in weight too. The billiards cushions are designed for consistent rebound with little transfer of spin, combined with very thin cloth equals distance of object balls traveled. Pool cushions are different in that they're softer because the cue ball needs to be able to spin off the cushions to get to a certain spot on the table, and without cushion compression that's very hard to do, as the more the cushion compresses the more the angle can be changed coming off the cushions. So, the two are totally different games, even to the point that different cues are used. No one I know of plays pool with a 55" long cue, yet on the other hand, I don't know anyone that plays billiards with a 58" cue either. The 1917 Brunswick billiards table I rebuilt in AZ...on my second shot...banked 11 rails, with an unheated slate, and T-rail mounted rails...so, wait until you see Diamond's 3C billiards table later next year...the play on it'll blow your mind if you like 3C;) But before that table comes out, the 9ft ProAm straight rail billiards table is just about ready for market right now, so I'll be posting pictures of that table shortly. :D

Glen

bob c
11-09-2010, 06:56 PM
I have Diamond's new rail/cushion design and I have not taken an oath of silence. As I understand it, they have changed the angle at which the cushion is attached to the rail. It just adds a little more meat to the ball when it impacts the rail. The height at which the ball meets the rail is unchanged. It should, again as I understand it, make the rebound a little more lively and slightly increases the angle of reflection to respond to comments that their rails bank short. The new blue Diamond logo which replaces the red one, indicates that a table has this new feature.

Another relatively recent Diamond change is that they have replaced their leather basket drop pockets with a black, heavy duty, Cordura-like nylon. A real improvement in my opinion. It makes for a nicely defined target and they also hold quite a few more balls than the old leather baskets.

Bob C

Robert Raiford
11-09-2010, 10:25 PM
The nose height you're talking about for billiards is actually 1 9/16"s where as pool cushions are at the top end, 1 29/64"ths...so there's actually about a 1/16"th of an inch difference in nose height,
That's probably the older American specification, but 37mm +-1mm is definitely the current height specified by the UMB in the doc I linked to. It's used for all international competition these days. 1-9/16" is 39.7mm, which is definitely above the acceptable range.

but there's a little more to it than that. Such as the cushions used for billiards, way different than pool cushions...much harder, which means more consistent banks on a billiards table vs a pool table. The balls are also much different, not just in size...but in weight too. The billiards cushions are designed for consistent rebound with little transfer of spin, combined with very thin cloth equals distance of object balls traveled. Pool cushions are different in that they're softer because the cue ball needs to be able to spin off the cushions to get to a certain spot on the table, and without cushion compression that's very hard to do, as the more the cushion compresses the more the angle can be changed coming off the cushions.
These are excellent points. That confirms my thoughts that the higher friction between ball and cushion on a pool table is intentional from a playability perspective. (3-cushion under such conditions would be unbearable :)).
So, the two are totally different games, even to the point that different cues are used. No one I know of plays pool with a 55" long cue, yet on the other hand, I don't know anyone that plays billiards with a 58" cue either.
Now you do ;) I played billiards with a Schuler for 15 years or so. A few years ago, I bought a Predator P2 with a 30" Z2 shaft for pool and now use it exclusively for both games. My stance has lowered over the years in 3C so I appreciate a longer cue now, and I really like the low deflection shaft, which is not too different from the european taper on the Schuler I played with. The Schuler pool shaft OTOH was high deflection, which is what made me eventually try the Predator in the first place.
The 1917 Brunswick billiards table I rebuilt in AZ...on my second shot...banked 11 rails, with an unheated slate, and T-rail mounted rails...so, wait until you see Diamond's 3C billiards table later next year...the play on it'll blow your mind if you like 3C;) But before that table comes out, the 9ft ProAm straight rail billiards table is just about ready for market right now, so I'll be posting pictures of that table shortly. :D

Glen
The Diamond 3C table sounds very promising - I hope to try one when they're released. I don't think I've ever seen a Brunswick that plays on par with the modern European tables like Verhoeven, Chevillotte, Gabriels, Soren Sogard, etc., but I wouldn't be surprised that certain models can with careful attention by a top mechanic. No heater in FL would be pretty brutal with our high humidity, though. If the Diamond 3C tables work out, I'm sure many here in the States will be happy to be able to buy top quality equipment without the high import costs.

Robert

Robert Raiford
11-09-2010, 10:32 PM
I have Diamond's new rail/cushion design and I have not taken an oath of silence. As I understand it, they have changed the angle at which the cushion is attached to the rail. It just adds a little more meat to the ball when it impacts the rail. The height at which the ball meets the rail is unchanged. It should, again as I understand it, make the rebound a little more lively and slightly increases the angle of reflection to respond to comments that their rails bank short. The new blue Diamond logo which replaces the red one, indicates that a table has this new feature.
Thanks for spilling the beans, Bob ;) I was wondering about the difference since they had a few blue logo tables at the Seminole event this weekend.

Another relatively recent Diamond change is that they have replaced their leather basket drop pockets with a black, heavy duty, Cordura-like nylon. A real improvement in my opinion. It makes for a nicely defined target and they also hold quite a few more balls than the old leather baskets.

Bob C

Does the new material prevent those annoying black marks on the balls that the leather ones sometimes made? They didn't seem to affect ball-ball friction from my tests, but they sure didn't look so great.

Robert

bob c
11-10-2010, 04:05 PM
Does the new material prevent those annoying black marks on the balls that the leather ones sometimes made? They didn't seem to affect ball-ball friction from my tests, but they sure didn't look so great.

Robert

As you might imagine, Diamond is working on that issue but, so far as I know, nothing is firmed up as of yet.

Bob C