"A" joint

Guerra Cues

Guerra Cues

I build one cue at a time
Silver Member
Just brainstorming a little bit...
As many of my friends cuemakers told me before there are many ways to skin a cat... Having said that, I have been experimenting several different ways of doing the "A" joint and none of them are wrong, I noticed however a difference on the "hit".
I noticed that if I do an "A" joint with 1" tenon I get a stiffer feel and if I do 0.5" tenon I still get a stiff but I think I get a more solid feel... Either way I am happy with the results and the only thing I haven't tried was a wood tenon threaded with no metal or G10 screws at the "A" joint.
I have made up my mind on the method that I will use and I have built 5 cues that way and have 4 more in the oven...
Just wondering what are the other cuemakers feelings about this subject.
 
Last edited:
movie-popcorn-could-kill-you.jpg

This is gonna be good.
 
you gotta do it this way

" if you don't do it like billy-bob then you are doing it wrong "

that is what i have been told ever since i joined this forum, my answer is, i do it the way i want to do it, if you don't like it please don't buy my cues.
do you want to be a cue builder or a cue copier?
 
Curious, how could you notice a difference in feel and stiffness? Did you first put it together with a 1" tenon, then cut and rejoin with a 1/2" tenon? If you are referencing two separate cues then you cannot assume the 1/2" difference in "A" joint tenon made the difference you felt. The only way to know if there is a difference in feel is to test various "A" joints on the same cue. But that's not logical unless you don't ever glue up the "A" joint, and then you won't have the strength dampening affects of the glue so it's not a trusty "feel" test, anyway. So in essence, you can really only get an accurate assessment of different "A" joints by building lots & lots of cues using same woods in each category, and then test them all against one another at the same time so you don't get clouded results. And every cue has to be the same weight, dimensions, balance, etc. and using the exact same shaft on every butt. Only then can you even begin to quantify the difference in feel, stiffness, hardness, performance, etc. from one joint type to another.

Just some food for thought ;)
 
My q's are;
If that 1/2" is displacing wood, is it displacing a stiffer wood or softer wood ?
Where is the tenon ? Part of the handle or forearm ?
When you say stiff, what do you really mean ?
1/2 less wood replaced by a stiffer material like steel should be stiffer .
 
qbilder said:
Curious, how could you notice a difference in feel and stiffness? Did you first put it together with a 1" tenon, then cut and rejoin with a 1/2" tenon? If you are referencing two separate cues then you cannot assume the 1/2" difference in "A" joint tenon made the difference you felt. The only way to know if there is a difference in feel is to test various "A" joints on the same cue. But that's not logical unless you don't ever glue up the "A" joint, and then you won't have the strength dampening affects of the glue so it's not a trusty "feel" test, anyway. So in essence, you can really only get an accurate assessment of different "A" joints by building lots & lots of cues using same woods in each category, and then test them all against one another at the same time so you don't get clouded results. And every cue has to be the same weight, dimensions, balance, etc. and using the exact same shaft on every butt. Only then can you even begin to quantify the difference in feel, stiffness, hardness, performance, etc. from one joint type to another.

Just some food for thought ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks Eric :)
Plenty of food for thought as always.


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
A-joint

In my humble opinion, the best A-joint is no joint at all. Use a one piece full length core and all your A-joint problems disappear. (Might even be good for arthritis):grin:. Of course you have to know the tricks of making that full length one piece core, and the secret handshake.:D
 
QMAKER said:
In my humble opinion, the best A-joint is no joint at all. Use a one piece full length core and all your A-joint problems disappear. (Might even be good for arthritis):grin:. Of course you have to know the tricks of making that full length one piece core, and the secret handshake.:D
Click to expand...


That's assuming the "A" joint is a "problem" for you. For me, it's another opportunity to tune the weight/balance/playability of the cue. Why would I want to eliminate that? Being well versed in building one piece butt cues, I can attest to the difficulty of tuning weight/balance/playability. Having an "A" joint gives another dimension to the build that can be utilized to enhance the cue.....or possibly another dimension that can be utilized to screw the cue up. I guess that depends on the builder. In my humble opinion, of course. Not arguing, just disagreeing.....partially.
 
Qmaker

i saw the photos of a builder doing just what you described. i believe the photos were in the cue builder section sometime last year, i really do not remember, but i liked the idea. i made a couple cues that way and really liked the results. i did a variation of that idea with the elk handle cues. i turned a piece of bocote as if i was building a one piece butt, then turned it to .625 leaving a 12 inch forearm, drilled the elk and another piece of bocote, using slow drying epoxy slipped them over the back of the butt. after drying, took a tune up pass, and i now have a cue that looks like a merry widow, but has one solid piece of wood from joint to butt.
i do not know the first builder to do so, but i want to thank him. i think its a great way to put a butt together.

chuck
 
qbilder said:
That's assuming the "A" joint is a "problem" for you. For me, it's another opportunity to tune the weight/balance/playability of the cue. Why would I want to eliminate that? Being well versed in building one piece butt cues, I can attest to the difficulty of tuning weight/balance/playability. Having an "A" joint gives another dimension to the build that can be utilized to enhance the cue.....or possibly another dimension that can be utilized to screw the cue up. I guess that depends on the builder. In my humble opinion, of course. Not arguing, just disagreeing.....partially.
Click to expand...

Eric,

You make a good point and disagree with panache and class as always.

I am of the same school and thinking as Bob Flynn and full core all of my 5 point cues which is 80% of my work. Since I have been full coring I have not seen 1 cue bump between centers or move. I credit this to the core element and the Gorilla Glue's expansion aggregate in the annulus gap between the dowel and the cored wood.

As far as the extra dimension with The A-Joint I understand and concur with your method. In the past I spent way too much time to land my cue weight by calculating a ton of things. When the person who orders a custom cue from me says I want 18.5 that's what it should be.

After building a fully cored cue without the A-Joint and tapering to final size I simply put the cue, shaft, bumper and pin on the scale. Then I add the known weight for my coatings and wrap. What ever is left from the 18.5 for example, I add that weight bolt size. Real simple!

I screw in and epoxy my weight bolt behind my pin and glue in an insert which will accept my pin after curing and facing. I generally do not use my rear weight bolt position unless the cue wood is so light the forward bolt makes the cue too front heavy. It that case I will put a bolt in the back which is about 1/3 lighter than the front one to keep the moment arm of my weight and balance envelope in my design wheelhouse. My cues are designed to be forward balance about 1" to 1.5" more than the normal or conventional standards.

When I do an A Joint on my 4 pointers, my A-Joint bolt is installed on a 18 1/2" dowel not a tenoned handle and I core everything aft of the A-Joint.

I have been fully coring my cues for 5 years and before that I always cored aft the A-Joint. Because of coring I put in extra time and effort but I think it is worth the peace of mind to know my cues stay straight and nail the weight objective every time within a few grams.

After cutting my 5 point grooves on the dowel between the indexer and the live center my machined points always stay perfect from .920 to .838. No air brush or sharpie pen on these babies. I never have to shim adjust them as they never move between the dowel centers when tapering the whole butt down. I know there are some ( you have to talk to the wood ) nay sayers that will question this and if you do, look closely at the secondary point elevation on the first cue that was turned on the 30" dowel. That is where the rubber meets the road. Holding concentricity is truly a wonderful thing. Full 30 inch dowels and coring got me to 100% repeatability except when if make a human mistake not wood moving beyond my control.

I don't disagree with a tenoned handle method of cue building as is has been a standard for many many years but I do listen to many discussions here about handle and forearm wood moving and resting for time after light cuts. Like you Eric, "I would quit making cues if I had to do all of that stuff". After glueing up my points, my cues goes from .920 to .850 within 20 minutes and is sealed and hung ready for inlays and/or final cuts. I just choose not to put all of my eggs in one basket (the handle or forearm moving) concerning straightness down the road. Now shafts, that's a different story, I may talk to them just a little. :help: Just my take on the subject.

Respectfully,

Rick


Fully cored 5 pointer with forearm faced at 12 1/8". Grooves were cut after the forearm is glued to the dowel. Before turing and facing, the milled pockets are filled with epoxy and the dowel is turned and returned to .738.
IMG_3257.jpg

5 pointer before points glue up, epoxy fill, turning, facing.
IMG_3258.jpg

4 pointer before A-Joint Closure. Parts aft of the A-Joint are cored and glued. I don't cut grooves on the dowel on 4 pointers because it goes too deep into the continuous dowel and I wish to glue all of my points in at the same time.
IMG_3251-1.jpg

IMG_3250-1-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
qbilder said:
That's assuming the "A" joint is a "problem" for you. For me, it's another opportunity to tune the weight/balance/playability of the cue. Why would I want to eliminate that? Being well versed in building one piece butt cues, I can attest to the difficulty of tuning weight/balance/playability. Having an "A" joint gives another dimension to the build that can be utilized to enhance the cue.....or possibly another dimension that can be utilized to screw the cue up. I guess that depends on the builder. In my humble opinion, of course. Not arguing, just disagreeing.....partially.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
Imho opposing contrasting woods threaded together can be made to reasonate better than one-piece wood . Sorta like the way guitars are made .
Purpleheart bottom house cues would never play as good as they are if they were all maple imo.
 
QMAKER said:
In my humble opinion, the best A-joint is no joint at all. Use a one piece full length core and all your A-joint problems disappear. (Might even be good for arthritis):grin:. Of course you have to know the tricks of making that full length one piece core, and the secret handshake.:D
Click to expand...

Bob,

Did not work for me as I do have arthritis in my hands. When we meet in person and do the secrete handshake please don't squeeze too hard.
And by the way don't forget to have your secret decoder ring. :yeah:

Rick G
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali said:
opposing contrasting woods threaded together can be made to reasonate better than one-piece wood . Sorta like the way guitars are made
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, logic not unlike stringed instrument philosophy. I apply the same logic to coring. I don't core with just maple shaft rejects. I core with various woods. I don't know the difference when compared to other cues built using different methods. But it works well for getting me where I want to be with my cues. And I don't think it's a stretch to assume every builder feels that way about their methods. They do what works for them, I do what works for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top