If you are spraying your clear coat, it is easier to apply enough clear so that when you sand, the low spots will be filled in. If you're not spraying....you're screwed...JER
A-joint questions
- Thread starter Alan
- Start date
If you are spraying your clear coat, it is easier to apply enough clear so that when you sand, the low spots will be filled in. If you're not spraying....you're screwed...JER
I tried it back in the day while building frankenstein cues. It worked. I used 3/8-10 bullet nose pins from Atlas. Some held just fine, some rattled/buzzed. I never knew why at the time but looking back now I know exactly what the difference was. Easy fix if you understand the issue & know a little about verious adhesives.
But yeah, I agree. There's no reason to not use a tenon. As a newb with no influence or help from a more experienced builder, there was no way of knowing without trying. Next up was the all wood tenon & thread design where I was using a 3/4" tenon threaded 3/4-10 on the ends. That's what I used for a long time & what I was using when I first began offering cues for sale. Over the years I have changed to this or to that, and honestly aside from my theoretical thoughts, in actuality the joint type doesn't really matter much at all so long as it's solid.
True. I like lateral stability, more mechanical bond and less stress on the epoxy. So I like double tenon, high torque threads and industrial epoxy.
Thanks KJ, As you already know and part of the reason this ATCM section is here:
If the points are even just as a forearm and there not after the cue is joined, DING< DING<
Last edited:
Black Baor dosent use a A joint, its one piece of wood from the joint to the bumper, Which I believe makes a better hitting cue.
everything , rings, handle, buttsleeve, etc. is sleeved over a core?
I would still consider these cues to have an A joint. Very different compared to the most common attempt to bring two halves together, but there is still a joint there.
I believe the opposite.
I believe two woods of contrasting density, weight and tone, compressed the right way together, make for better hitting cue.
I believe the opposite.
I believe two woods of contrasting density, weight and tone, compressed the right way together, make for better hitting cue.
I don't like cored handles myself. I feel one-piece tonewood is best.
It's a different method all together, Tony doesn't do what I would call standard Vee Points, He adds his after the butt is all assembled. To me, the word BETTER is defined as better for an individual that it is applied too.
Example:
Let's start here, The 1st thread about Better versus better for an individual.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=2521702#post2521702
Last edited:
Hi,
I also believe this can be true depending on the wood used over the core. By coring the cue I believe you attain more stability from movement. When you take a handle and tenon both sides, your betting the whole shooting match on the stability of that one piece of wood (the handle component). If it moves after construction, game over.
Coring the cue is like having an internal skeleton to support an external structure. The choice of and reliability of the glue for coring brings up an entire different discussion. Unlike gluing and clamping parts together the glue annulus area in coring can't be clamped bringing up the question of "what is the gap or interference fit of the dowel and the cored part"?
After a lot of beta testing of cues in the field. I believe the answer is the expansion coefficient of polyurethane glues today which also solves the problem of glue soaking and the piston displacement factor during glue assembly.
I have been told that the half life of Gorilla glue is over 1000 years. I guess we will have to wait and find out how it works.
Rick G
Last edited:
It's a given that coring has it's place.
It allows us to use woods that would otherwise be unsuitable for cue construction. However, not all woods need be or should be cored.
It's a builder's choice, not a requirement.
Now, I'm aware of several builders who will core everything. It's their choice. Eventually, it becomes part of what defines the hit of their cues.
Then there are some who will core when they feel that a particular pc of wood needs it, to make it stable, lighter, heavier or whatever.
Some woods need to be cored if they are going to be used.
There are also some who will avoid coring unless it's absolutely necessary.
I am of this group. When I'm evaluating the usability of a particular pc of wood and this wood is telling me that it might be better-off if it were cored, I'll probably set that wood aside and look for another pc.
Stability is paramount in cue building and we all want our finished product to stay straight & stable forever if at all possible.
We also look for and use woods that will provide the hit that we strive for that will complement our definition of 'hit'.
My position is, and what I strive for is, the purity of hit.
Ex: When I'm building a Br. Rose cue, I want it to hit and have the unadulterated hit of Br. Rose.
This now begs a question. If a Br. Rose forearm were cored with Maple (5/8-3/4"), which wood is providing the hit? Is it the Maple core which will likely become part of the A-joint tenon system, or is it the varying wall-thickness of the wood that is sleeved over the core?
Or, is it a combination of the two? That's where the word 'unadulterated' comes into play. I choose Br. Rose because of the way it, by it's self, hits. Why would I want to compromise that hit?
Please be aware that I'm trying to avoid stepping on any toes here. Hopefully, we can all learn from a civil discussion.
It allows us to use woods that would otherwise be unsuitable for cue construction. However, not all woods need be or should be cored.
It's a builder's choice, not a requirement.
Now, I'm aware of several builders who will core everything. It's their choice. Eventually, it becomes part of what defines the hit of their cues.
Then there are some who will core when they feel that a particular pc of wood needs it, to make it stable, lighter, heavier or whatever.
Some woods need to be cored if they are going to be used.
There are also some who will avoid coring unless it's absolutely necessary.
I am of this group. When I'm evaluating the usability of a particular pc of wood and this wood is telling me that it might be better-off if it were cored, I'll probably set that wood aside and look for another pc.
Stability is paramount in cue building and we all want our finished product to stay straight & stable forever if at all possible.
We also look for and use woods that will provide the hit that we strive for that will complement our definition of 'hit'.
My position is, and what I strive for is, the purity of hit.
Ex: When I'm building a Br. Rose cue, I want it to hit and have the unadulterated hit of Br. Rose.
This now begs a question. If a Br. Rose forearm were cored with Maple (5/8-3/4"), which wood is providing the hit? Is it the Maple core which will likely become part of the A-joint tenon system, or is it the varying wall-thickness of the wood that is sleeved over the core?
Or, is it a combination of the two? That's where the word 'unadulterated' comes into play. I choose Br. Rose because of the way it, by it's self, hits. Why would I want to compromise that hit?
Please be aware that I'm trying to avoid stepping on any toes here. Hopefully, we can all learn from a civil discussion.
This now begs a question. If a Br. Rose forearm were cored with Maple (5/8-3/4"), which wood is providing the hit? Is it the Maple core which will likely become part of the A-joint tenon system, or is it the varying wall-thickness of the wood that is sleeved over the core?
Mostly maple.
Mostly maple.
Coring v. Hit
:thumbup:
KJ,
I agree with your views in general and I think you have made a concise and accurate description of the reason for coring certin woods over others concerning stability, weight & balance issues and hit from a peticular wood.
Concerning the “unadulterated hit”, my opinion is that I would like my cues to play close to the same as possible wether it is ebony, maple, or lacewood, ect. While I know that no matter what I do, all cues will have their own distintive characteristics as even maple dowels will have different qualities. Coring just tightens up that envelope and I can’t think of a better way of doing it considering all of the variables and permutations cue makers have at their disposal. Whatsmore, there isn't a person in the world who can hit a ball when blind folded that could tell you what the cue is made of. They may guess because the front feels heavier or lighter but it's only a guess.
In a perfect world if all of my butts played the same I would readily accept this and live or die upon my parabolic shaft taper in the hands of a customer. The aesthetic beauty of the wood would be enough for me.
I have been coring all of my cues for the last 4 years now. Before I started coring cues I believe that depending on the species chosen, all of my cues played very different even though the geometry was exactly the same.
In the long run none of this matters if the person buying your cue likes the hit, feel, fit and finish of your end product. Cue making is a very mystical thing to a lot of people. I tend to be an objectivist concerning cue building and will revert to my engineering princpals concerning design build questions. I know that I will never be able to please everyone’s expectations concerning how a cue hits. All the touchy feely topics that are subjective I will leave up to the end user to make that decision. If I am wrong, I can live with that.
Coring all the components of my cues and turning a 30” stepped dowel takes a lot of extra time. I think that time is well spent if I don’t have to worry about the wood moving.
As a side note, I own a large pool hall and do a lot of cue repair and have seen a lot of things concerning cues. There is a very high profile company that makes expensive cues which I will not mention by name and they never post here. A lot of these cues have butts that bump like hell in the lathe. What makes me laugh is that most owners of these cues when confronted with the idea of thier cue being warped make excuses for the "slight table roll" and defend the product because of their high expectations after paying the big bucks. Herein lies the power of name recognition and branding.
At the end of the day every cue maker, like a baseball cap, has their own bend to the brim. If my customer likes my product and engineering techniques, then I will have increased my brand. Coring my cues has helped me in this area very much.
Rick G
:thumbup:
KJ,
I agree with your views in general and I think you have made a concise and accurate description of the reason for coring certin woods over others concerning stability, weight & balance issues and hit from a peticular wood.
Concerning the “unadulterated hit”, my opinion is that I would like my cues to play close to the same as possible wether it is ebony, maple, or lacewood, ect. While I know that no matter what I do, all cues will have their own distintive characteristics as even maple dowels will have different qualities. Coring just tightens up that envelope and I can’t think of a better way of doing it considering all of the variables and permutations cue makers have at their disposal. Whatsmore, there isn't a person in the world who can hit a ball when blind folded that could tell you what the cue is made of. They may guess because the front feels heavier or lighter but it's only a guess.
In a perfect world if all of my butts played the same I would readily accept this and live or die upon my parabolic shaft taper in the hands of a customer. The aesthetic beauty of the wood would be enough for me.
I have been coring all of my cues for the last 4 years now. Before I started coring cues I believe that depending on the species chosen, all of my cues played very different even though the geometry was exactly the same.
In the long run none of this matters if the person buying your cue likes the hit, feel, fit and finish of your end product. Cue making is a very mystical thing to a lot of people. I tend to be an objectivist concerning cue building and will revert to my engineering princpals concerning design build questions. I know that I will never be able to please everyone’s expectations concerning how a cue hits. All the touchy feely topics that are subjective I will leave up to the end user to make that decision. If I am wrong, I can live with that.
Coring all the components of my cues and turning a 30” stepped dowel takes a lot of extra time. I think that time is well spent if I don’t have to worry about the wood moving.
As a side note, I own a large pool hall and do a lot of cue repair and have seen a lot of things concerning cues. There is a very high profile company that makes expensive cues which I will not mention by name and they never post here. A lot of these cues have butts that bump like hell in the lathe. What makes me laugh is that most owners of these cues when confronted with the idea of thier cue being warped make excuses for the "slight table roll" and defend the product because of their high expectations after paying the big bucks. Herein lies the power of name recognition and branding.
At the end of the day every cue maker, like a baseball cap, has their own bend to the brim. If my customer likes my product and engineering techniques, then I will have increased my brand. Coring my cues has helped me in this area very much.
Rick G
Last edited:
After reading the post so far I see a common theme, we all are striving to have solid "unique" hit and feel for our cues and what we feel is solid construction for our cues.
As cue makers we are all creative, very. I see the debate about coring and what I found was, my first 20 or so cues were all uncored, just solid wood turned down. When I decided to use those custom "gun drills" I purchased, I experimented and found gorilla glue did the best job for me, no gaps, It will fill Any voids. I cored a piece of, what I perceived, very solid amboyna burl, after the gorilla glue expanded the piece looked like it had "chicken pocks" the glue filled Every open pore.
I have tried several combinations for my a-joint, and I tried different pins, one being the bullet nose 3/8-10 from atlas. I landed on the Radial Pin connecting screw, I feel it gives me the best wood to pin contact and little chance of a buzz if all is prepared correctly. I use west system epoxy in my a-joint But I use the fiber filler made for thickening west system, and give the glue some "body" not to thick, just a little or glue pressure can be a problem. I feel it again reduces the chance of any voids that could cause a buzz.
Lastly, If the A-joint isn't right the rest of the cue will be off, no matter how well you cut in your points or how even they are, if the A-joint wobbles the problems start. One thing I haven't seen mentioned, I don't think, is that your chuck needs to be as close to "zero" run out as possible as this will greatly help in reducing the chance of a wobble in your a-joint, and in the cutting of points etc if you are proceeding correctly.
If you take your time and have patience, think about what your next step will be and work deliberately, the mistakes will be a lot fewer, no one is perfect lol. Whatever type of a-joint you decide to use for your cues, as long as it gives you the hit and feel you desire and the construction is solid then thats the right one for you. In the end this is what makes every cue maker different from others is the little things they do and that is also why there are so many of us making cues. :thumbup:
As cue makers we are all creative, very. I see the debate about coring and what I found was, my first 20 or so cues were all uncored, just solid wood turned down. When I decided to use those custom "gun drills" I purchased, I experimented and found gorilla glue did the best job for me, no gaps, It will fill Any voids. I cored a piece of, what I perceived, very solid amboyna burl, after the gorilla glue expanded the piece looked like it had "chicken pocks" the glue filled Every open pore.
I have tried several combinations for my a-joint, and I tried different pins, one being the bullet nose 3/8-10 from atlas. I landed on the Radial Pin connecting screw, I feel it gives me the best wood to pin contact and little chance of a buzz if all is prepared correctly. I use west system epoxy in my a-joint But I use the fiber filler made for thickening west system, and give the glue some "body" not to thick, just a little or glue pressure can be a problem. I feel it again reduces the chance of any voids that could cause a buzz.
Lastly, If the A-joint isn't right the rest of the cue will be off, no matter how well you cut in your points or how even they are, if the A-joint wobbles the problems start. One thing I haven't seen mentioned, I don't think, is that your chuck needs to be as close to "zero" run out as possible as this will greatly help in reducing the chance of a wobble in your a-joint, and in the cutting of points etc if you are proceeding correctly.
If you take your time and have patience, think about what your next step will be and work deliberately, the mistakes will be a lot fewer, no one is perfect lol. Whatever type of a-joint you decide to use for your cues, as long as it gives you the hit and feel you desire and the construction is solid then thats the right one for you. In the end this is what makes every cue maker different from others is the little things they do and that is also why there are so many of us making cues. :thumbup: