schuler & schuler slc shafts

[doubletrouble]

i own both schuler and schuler legacy shafts. the question concerns the insert. on the schuler the hole only goes a bit beyond the insert. and on the slc's the hole goes well beyond the insert. so much so that the slc's
will fit onto a schon butt which has a pin quite a bit longer than a schuler. so 2 questons: any idea why the slc shafts would have been made this way? and does this larger than neccesary cavity on the slc's shaft insert degrade the shaft? just wondering if corners were cut and i've purchased an inferior product.

 

[Lexicologist71]

I wouldn't sweat it. The bending stresses are at the perimeter of the shaft, not the core. Schuler's joint is also the fattest joint in pool, so there is plenty of wood there.

 

[doubletrouble]

schuler shaft

thanks paul, good point, overlooked the size of the schuler shaft. didn't think it would be critical much but never know.

 

[KJ Cues]

I wouldn't sweat it. The bending stresses are at the perimeter of the shaft, not the core. Schuler's joint is also the fattest joint in pool, so there is plenty of wood there.

Correction oh great Schuler fan.
Schuler, IIRC is .865".
Until just recently (the past couple of years), Pechauer JPs were .875-.885".
I did ring-work on a factory built Schmelke years ago that was .905".
Client wanted my signature ring-work at the joint. Problem was, I make my billets at .880".
I had to make a new billet to accommodate. I won't do that again.
Three hrs work for two $15 rings. I won't get out of bed for $10/hr.

KJ

 

[Lexicologist71]

It's still a pretty robust design. Wouldn't have guessed Pechaur as being that thick. Actually owned a Schmelke bat. Forgot all about them. Thanks for the info.