Does the butt influence deflection???

[bbb]

i know its the end mass of the shaft and taper that play major roles in squirt/deflectiom but in a thread in the main forum there was reference to meuccis studies and videos
apparently usinf a robotic arm and sophisticated measuring system
he found differring amounts of deflection using a black dot shaft on several manufacturers butts (all results had less deflection with the black dot vs the cuemakers shaft)
so
if the shaft was a constatnt
how does the butt come into play????
i am not a cuemaker so pardon my ignorance.....:embarrassed2:

 

[scdiveteam]

Great question!

I hope that Chris Hightower or other super experienced CMs comments about this because I am all ears for sure.

I have my own views on the subject but will refrain from giving up my research and views in this area until the ice as been broken.

Rick

 

[whammo57]

I don't see how it possibly could but, that's just me.

Kim

 

[JoeyInCali]

i know its the end mass of the shaft and taper that play major roles in squirt/deflectiom but in a thread in the main forum there was reference to meuccis studies and videos
apparently usinf a robotic arm and sophisticated measuring system
he found differring amounts of deflection using a black dot shaft on several manufacturers butts (all results had less deflection with the black dot vs the cuemakers shaft)
so
if the shaft was a constatnt
how does the butt come into play????
i am not a cuemaker so pardon my ignorance.....:embarrassed2:

Meucci also claimed their butt design reduced deflection.

Imo a good butt, transfers energy to the shaft efficiently.
Meaning more cueball action. The better it is, the less english you will need.

 

[Michael Webb]

i know its the end mass of the shaft and taper that play major roles in squirt/deflectiom but in a thread in the main forum there was reference to meuccis studies and videos
apparently usinf a robotic arm and sophisticated measuring system
he found differring amounts of deflection using a black dot shaft on several manufacturers butts (all results had less deflection with the black dot vs the cuemakers shaft)
so
if the shaft was a constatnt
how does the butt come into play????
i am not a cuemaker so pardon my ignorance.....:embarrassed2:

Not all cues are constructed the same, reason being. Everyone has a different opinion of how they want their cues to play. Joints, joint screws, -A- joint construction, length of the tenon at the -A- joint, bolt at the -A- joint and of course butt tapers, Every single bit of it makes a difference. Just my opinion because the people who were here before me, said. Don't take any one's word for it, Do your own research and development and you'll feel the difference. I thank them for not giving me the easy answer. All of it has made me quite versatile in the different joints and tapers I use. It would be impossible for me to say which style is actually better, when there are so many great cues across the board and of course the final deciding factor of better would be, What is better for yourself. It's even okay to disagree with me. Your shop, your rules, my shop, my rules. I can live with that.

 

[GBCues]

Meucci also claimed their butt design reduced deflection.

Imo a good butt, transfers energy to the shaft efficiently.
Meaning more cueball action. The better it is, the less english you will need.

I would agree with this, but I would add that energy transfer is a two-way street - a cue that transfers energy to the shaft efficiently will also transfer the feel of the hit back to the butt and hence the shooter's hand/fingers.

Joey, or anyone else, do you think this is not necessarily the case?

Gary

 

[Russell Cues]

About a year ago a guy came into the pool hall with a custom cue, dont remember the maker as they werent a well known maker, BUT this cue, the action was fierce !

If I had to guess the tennon at the a-joint was very short as the butt section had all kinds of "movement if you tapped it on your palm. It played nice and you didnt need to put alot of english on purpose as the cue had all that flex, the shaft had noticable flex. So I'd have to say it is possible to have some impact on the deflection of the cue. And this wasnt a lite cue it weighed 19oz. But hit, feel and "action" etc of the cue is subjective and what one person likes another will hate, its what makes the custom cue world go round. IMO.

 

[whammo57]

About a year ago a guy came into the pool hall with a custom cue, dont remember the maker as they werent a well known maker, BUT this cue, the action was fierce !

If I had to guess the tennon at the a-joint was very short as the butt section had all kinds of "movement if you tapped it on your palm. It played nice and you didnt need to put alot of english on purpose as the cue had all that flex, the shaft had noticable flex. So I'd have to say it is possible to have some impact on the deflection of the cue. And this wasnt a lite cue it weighed 19oz. But hit, feel and "action" etc of the cue is subjective and what one person likes another will hate, its what makes the custom cue world go round. IMO.

If the tenon was short and there was movement at the A joint.......... wouldn't the finish crack.

Has anyone actually measured the flex in a butt???? Is there any??

Kim

 

[rhncue]

I don't feel the butt has any discernible affect on cue ball deflection or squirt. I feel it is all in the tip, ferrule and shaft, especially near the front of the shaft. The butt, of coarse, has very much to do with the cues feel and playability but as far as the cue ball - it is long gone before the tip/ball makes it through the cue to the hand. If this contact feels good to you you of coarse will play better as your confidence in your cue will be better. A bad playing cue usually can be attributed to a noise or a vibration heard or felt after the cue ball is long gone but had been anticipated by the shooter before hand causing him to pull up or flinch his stroke causing a bad shot.

Dick

 

[scdiveteam]

i know its the end mass of the shaft and taper that play major roles in squirt/deflectiom but in a thread in the main forum there was reference to meuccis studies and videos
apparently usinf a robotic arm and sophisticated measuring system
he found differring amounts of deflection using a black dot shaft on several manufacturers butts (all results had less deflection with the black dot vs the cuemakers shaft)
so
if the shaft was a constatnt
how does the butt come into play????
i am not a cuemaker so pardon my ignorance.....:embarrassed2:

Hi,

I truly believe that the geometry of the butt has a causation effect on the deflection of the cue. JMO however.

My friend Darrin Hill makes a very fine full splice cue and he was at my shop and we did a little test.

Darrin's A-Joint is about 1.020 on the FS and has a straight taper about .400 in 29 inches. Joint .850 and butt 1.250. Of coarse Darrin has no A-Joint as it is spliced joinery.

My cue has the same .850 joint and the butt is 1.254 but A-Joint is only .984 as I have a Parabolic butt taper that starts at the butt and ends at the A-Joint and then is a straight taper to the nose. I do not have an A-Joint bolt as my cue is fully cored on a .738 dia. laminate maple dowel. I like the thinner handle of some Phillipino cue I have seen hence my design of my butt geometry is a hybrid so to speak.

Back to our little test:

We took 6 cues, Darrin's FS, My Full Cored, a Mcdermott, a Players, a Schon and a Omega DPK with the 3/4" phenolic A-Joint const. We then put them all between centers and put hand pressure on the A-Joint area and pressed down to observe deflection in the butt with this lateral pressure.

Here are the results of our observations but the were not done using a device that would measure the downward force only out mussle memory as best we could judge. Not too scientific but a very close comparison just the same.

Hills Full Splice was the stiffest with just a slight deflection of the butt.

Esoteric FC was stiff but deflected a little more than the Hill.

Omega DPK with the 3/4" A-Joint was about the same as my cue.

The other three cue with A-Joint bolts all deflected about the same and in was a dramatic difference and those cues were able to bow significantly in the middle.

So there we are, all we proved was that cues with A-Joint bolts had more deflection in the butt which does not mean they play any better or worse than the other stiffer cue construction. Just different. As it was pointed out here, eack player has a differnt kind of stroke and each cue gives a different action.

The resilience of the cue when joined can be seen by holding the joined cue upright and bumping the side with your palm, then watch the tip and see ho long it take for the vibration to stop. The Omega, Hill and my cue stopped vibration very quickly after the shock load of the palm while the the other cue with a conventional A-Jpint pin continued to vibrate about twice as long.

All of the shafts were 13 mm except the Hill was as 12.75. We did interchange Darrin's shaft and the Mcdermott which were both 3/8 10 pin and even though his shaft was slightly smaller we did not see any noticeable difference in the tip vibration durations.

So from this little test we observed that the butt has a huge effect on the resilience factor of the cues which I believe has an effect of the inertia and transfer of the force to the cue call. I believe that the stiff cue gets through the ball in a few milliseconds faster than the cue with more resilience. Because there is a ever so slightest degree of an elastic collision or cushioning during impact this may have an effect on the deflection of the tip and the deflection of the entire cue's straightness behind the bridge hand while doing the deed.

As a room owner I have noticed that most 9 ball and 10 ball higher skilled players who use a lot of spin tend to also like thinner shafts when they load the juice. The one pocket, straight pool and banks guys seem to like a stiffer hit.

Nothing I have said here is a collection of data numbers and was done just for our curiosity.

Like Mike Webb said, "It would be impossible for me to say which style is actually better, when there are so many great cues across the board and of course the final deciding factor of better would be, What is better for yourself". Great player will adjust and can play with any cue given enough time at the table but over time they learn what thats really like though trial and error.

Efren his a tip under 12mm with an Elk master tip and spins everything with that skinny shaft. I am sure if you gave him a 13 mm FS with a Kamui Med he would not be a happy camper. You still would not want to bet against him though.

Just like golf clubs today, the pool player has so many different choices because all CMs have their own standards and all cues are different.

To the OP, I do believe that the butt makes a big difference.

JMO,

Rick

 

[JoeyInCali]

Hi,

I truly believe that the geometry of the butt has a causation effect on the deflection of the cue. JMO however.

My friend Darrin Hill makes a very fine full splice cue and he was at my shop and we did a little test.

Darrin's A-Joint is about .920 on the FS and has a straight taper about .400 in 29 inches. Joint .850 and butt 1.250. Of coarse Darrin has no A-Joint as it is spliced joinery.

My cue has the same .850 joint and the butt is 1.254 but A-Joint is only .984 as I have a Parabolic butt taper that starts at the butt and ends at the A-Joint and then is a straight taper to the nose. I do not have an A-Joint bolt as my cue is fully cored on a .738 dia. laminate maple dowel. I like the thinner handle of some Phillipino cue I have seen hence my design of my butt geometry is a hybrid so to speak.

Back to our little test:

We took 6 cues, Darrin's FS, My Full Cored, a Mcdermott, a Players, a Schon and a Omega DPK with the 3/4" phenolic A-Joint const. We then put them all between centers and put hand pressure on the A-Joint area and pressed down to observe deflection in the butt with this lateral pressure.

Here are the results of our observations but the were not done using a device that would measure the downward force only out mussle memory as best we could judge. Not too scientific but a very close comparison just the same.

Hills Full Splice was the stiffest with just a slight deflection of the butt.

Esoteric FC was stiff but deflected a little more than the Hill.

Omega DPK with the 3/4" A-Joint was about the same as my cue.

The other three cue with A-Joint bolts all deflected about the same and in was a dramatic difference and those cues were able to bow significantly in the middle.

So there we are, all we proved was that cues with A-Joint bolts had more deflection in the butt which does not mean they play any better or worse than the other stiffer cue construction. Just different. As it was pointed out here, eack player has a differnt kind of stroke and each cue gives a different action.

The resilience of the cue when joined can be seen by holding the joined cue upright and bumping the side with your palm, then watch the tip and see ho long it take for the vibration to stop. The Omega, Hill and my cue stopped vibration very quickly after the shock load of the palm while the the other cue with a conventional A-Jpint pin continued to vibrate about twice as long.

All of the shafts were 13 mm except the Hill was as 12.75. We did interchange Darrin's shaft and the Mcdermott which were both 3/8 10 pin and even though his shaft was slightly smaller we did not see any noticeable difference in the tip vibration durations.

So from this little test we observed that the butt has a huge effect on the resilience factor of the cues which I believe has an effect of the inertia and transfer of the force to the cue call. I believe that the stiff cue gets through the ball in a few milliseconds faster than the cue with more resilience. Because there is a ever so slightest degree of an elastic collision or cushioning during impact this may have an effect on the deflection of the tip and the deflection of the entire cue's straightness behind the bridge hand while doing the deed.

As a room owner I have noticed that most 9 ball and 10 ball higher skilled players who use a lot of spin tend to also like thinner shafts when they load the juice. The one pocket, straight pool and banks guys seem to like a stiffer hit.

Nothing I have said here is a collection of data numbers and was done just for our curiosity.

Like Mike Webb said, "It would be impossible for me to say which style is actually better, when there are so many great cues across the board and of course the final deciding factor of better would be, What is better for yourself". Great player will adjust and can play with any cue given enough time at the table but over time they learn what thats really like though trial and error.

Efren his a tip under 12mm with an Elk master tip and spins everything with that skinny shaft. I am sure if you gave him a 13 mm FS with a Kamui Med he would not be a happy camper. You still would not want to bet against him though.

Just like golf clubs today, the pool player has so many different choices because all CMs have their own standards and all cues are different.

To the OP, I do believe that the butt makes a big difference.

JMO,

Rick

Might wanna check those numbers.
DH's a joint would be closer to 1.020", not .920".
Also deflection is not really flex or bend in pool terms.
More like cue ball squirt.

 

[whammo57]

Might wanna check those numbers.
DH's a joint would be closer to 1.020", not .920".
Also deflection is not really flex or bend in pool terms.
More like cue ball squirt.

only if it's a linear taper............

Kim

 

[JoeyInCali]

only if it's a linear taper............

Kim

Darrin's A-Joint is about .920 on the FS and has a straight taper about .400 in 29 inches. Joint .850 and butt 1.250. Of coarse Darrin has no A-Joint as it is spliced joinery.
I don't know what the difference is between linear and straight taper.

I also didn't know a parabolic taper can involve a straight line. I thought it had a curve from joint to the bottom to get a fatter A-joint section and thinner collar/bottom but fatter middle .
I might need to read DPK's journal again.

 

[scdiveteam]

Yeah it's about 1.020 I typed too fast.

 

[scdiveteam]

Darrin's A-Joint is about .920 on the FS and has a straight taper about .400 in 29 inches. Joint .850 and butt 1.250. Of coarse Darrin has no A-Joint as it is spliced joinery.
I don't know what the difference is between linear and straight taper.

I also didn't know a parabolic taper can involve a straight line. I thought it had a curve from joint to the bottom to get a fatter A-joint section and thinner collar/bottom but fatter middle .
I might need to read DPK's journal again.

The curve is from the butt end to just before the A-Joint, then a straight taper from the A Joint to the nose. Not from any book. It was actually an initial shaft taper bar I had and modified after some tweaking. It gives me the thinner handle I want but the butt and joint are .850 and 1.254.

 

[JoeyInCali]

The curve is from the butt end to just before the A-Joint, then a straight taper from the A Joint to the nose. Not from any book. It was actually an initial shaft taper bar I had and modified after some tweaking. It gives me the thinner handle I want but the butt and joint are .850 and 1.254.

I'm sorry Rick. I'm really lost on that .
Your forearm equates to about 11 thou per inch taper ( assuming it's 12" ).
The handle equates to about 15 thou per inch ( 1.254-.984/17 ).
I don't know how that curve makes it skinnier.
Unless there is a huge curve right before the gripping area then curve dies down.
I have DPK's numbers at .823-1.08-1.254.
That gets really fat down to the A-joint then dies down to the bottom.
The handle is skinnier b/c it has less curve than the forearm. Not a bigger curve.
I have SW at .832-.1.057-1.248.
I have Bender at .848-.1.057-1.228
All reputed parabolic tapers and appear to have fat A-joint and slim handle ( relative to the forearm angle/curve ).
Assuming those numbers are right of course.
Btw, I like Bender's numbers better.

 

[scdiveteam]

I'm sorry Rick. I'm really lost on that .
Your forearm equates to about 11 thou per inch taper ( assuming it's 12" ).
The handle equates to about 15 thou per inch ( 1.254-.984/17 ).
I don't know how that curve makes it skinnier.
Unless there is a huge curve right before the gripping area then curve dies down.
I have DPK's numbers at .823-1.08-1.254.
That gets really fat down to the A-joint then dies down to the bottom.
The handle is skinnier b/c it has less curve than the forearm. Not a bigger curve.
I have SW at .832-.1.057-1.248.
I have Bender at .848-.1.057-1.228
All reputed parabolic tapers and appear to have fat A-joint and slim handle ( relative to the forearm angle/curve ).
Assuming those numbers are right of course.
Btw, I like Bender's numbers better.

Joe,

I am not sure about the math and geometry about these other cues you enumerated but a compound may be a better description. My cue is a compound and a parabolic taper. I have not measured a Bender or a SW and am not sure exactly of their attributes. I measured my cue unfinished at different areas to show you. I also have a finished Omega DPK to illustrate differences.

The whole point of my post was to say that the A joint and the tennon of an A-Jonited cue has just as much to do with the deflection and resilience factor of the cue butt as much as the physical geometry. Here is my cue that is very small at the A Joint but is was as stiff as the Omega DPK when Darrin and I applied pressure at the A-Joint when the cues were suspended between centers. The Omega has a .810 x 3" large phenolic A Joint and my cue has a .738 x 29" laminated core. It is not just the taper geometry that dictates the out come.

Having a stiff playing cue is not always the ideal of every player and I am not saying any way is better, just different as was posted here by others also.

JMO, Good Cue making,

Rick



Here is a picture of a cue un sanded with a sealer coating before the wrap groove is cut. When a wrap is installed it is harder to notice. If you notice the handle area you will see the slight curve in the white maple underwrap that extends into the butt. The A joint is about .985 before sanding,epoxy and finish coating. Also notice how the forearm which is a conical taper does not have a fat look like an Omega or SW.

If you take a straight edge from the butt to the A joint you will see an air gap from the curve.

Joint

Butt

Omega DPK Finished A-Joint - Because Omega used the big .810 A-Joint made of threaded phenolic rod their A-Joint needed to be larger because of the wall thickness where the veneer lives would be very weak and fragile.

Typical Omega A Joint Construction

Butt

Joint

As you can see the Omega is much fatter at the A-Joint and butt dimensions but lands very close to my cue at the joint