On Target Tips: low deflection and hybrid tips.

funny.

The Renfro said:
Product and process refinement along with market testing usually means you have to slow your roll a little...

Being first to market has benefits and shortfalls depending on how the market perceives you...

I know you don't want to hear this but if your video was done as a response or to refute Dr. Dave's video I think you will have to redo it with better lighting, a better camera, on better equipment and with the same exact setup as Dr. Dave used. Hole reinforcers and all.. from your camera angle it appears that you are angleing the cue (back hand english) based on the guide stick running down the table which would lower deflection..I am not sure if you are or not because of the camera angle...

Good luck,

Chris
Click to expand...


It is quite obvious from the shadow of the shaft that there is NO BHE being used.

Believe me, I understand where you're coming from.

It wasn't specifically to refute Dave's testing. It was more for my own edification.

I will be happy to duplicate Dave's testing procedure and camera angle.

The camera is plenty good enough. I had started this prior to seeing Dave's results so I didn't know that I was comparing it to anything lol...

I wanted to ensure that the angle provided was able to show the stroke, the hit and the lathe so that there was no question that I was changing the tip and not the shaft and that there were no modifications made to the shaft.

Jaden
 
Jaden said:
It is quite obvious from the shadow of the shaft that there is NO BHE being used.

Believe me, I understand where you're coming from.

It wasn't specifically to refute Dave's testing. It was more for my own edification.

I will be happy to duplicate Dave's testing procedure and camera angle.

The camera is plenty good enough. I had started this prior to seeing Dave's results so I didn't know that I was comparing it to anything lol...

I wanted to ensure that the angle provided was able to show the stroke, the hit and the lathe so that there was no question that I was changing the tip and not the shaft and that there were no modifications made to the shaft.

Jaden
Click to expand...

No worries Jaden was not trying to bust your balls was just trying to offer constructive criticism...

Knowing your video footage was done prior to your seeing Dave's buys you a bunch of leeway on the camera's vantage point...

Anything new is a hard sell in this industry... Future Tips were the first synthetic tips on the market that I am aware of and they ended up closing shop in spite of having a great product.. That was going on 25 years ago and market perceptions have changed greatly.. They even had a tip that required no chalk.. You just have to maintain the perspiration and avoid the exasperation of being a start up.....

Chris
 
From what I could see, Jaden seems to me a clear and honest person and, also to support him in this adventure I have already asked by email to be among the first to be able to buy some of his tips for making "my personal tests".
It is completely right that there is a scientific method to test his invention, but I think the last word will give the on the market and give the 'impression that people will get, each on its shaft..
Mino
 
Last edited:
Thank you for that.

minohc said:
From what I could see, Jaden seems to me a clear and honest person and, also to support him in this adventure I have already asked by email to be among the first to be able to buy some of his tips for making "my personal tests".
It is completely right that there is a scientific method to test his invention, but I think the last word will give the on the market and give the 'impression that people will get, each on its shaft..
Mino
Click to expand...

You will be one of the first to get one. I don't want to send out any more of the prototypes, so unfortunately, you'll have to wait for me to get the production process and quality control completed.

Here is a youtube of my putnam playing cue with an undertip and the same lepro on top of that that I had replaced in the other video, in comparison to the Mezz wd700 using Dave's method.

I don't have the same printout as him but for reference, the printout that I placed has alternating half inch stripes.

http://youtu.be/Jncm27C71lQ

Jaden

If anything, the Mezz actually had more squirt than my standard shaft using the under tip with the lepro.
 
Last edited:
one thing to add on that last video. ..

I have one thing to add about that last video. I was aiming the shaft at the edge of the paper not the ball. So if you're going by the number of half inch segments the balls hit at you'd need to remove one for it to be accurate.

That's the one thing I don't like about that testing method. There's no way to know accurately where the cure is pointing. A mechanical arm eliminate that problem though.

Jaden
 
Last edited:
Jaden said:
I have one thing to add about that last video. I was aiming the shaft at the edge of the paper not the ball. So if you're going by the number of half inch segments the balls hit at you'd need to remove one for it to be accurate.

That's the one thing I don't like about that testing method. There's no way to know accurately where the cure is pointing.
Click to expand...
I didn't show all of the details in my edited video, but we were very careful to orient the CB as perfectly as possible before each shot by having each of the 2 other people look from 2 different directions. The shooter also glanced down and back at the donuts (especially the one on the rail) to make sure the cue was aimed along the same line for each shot. The non-shooters also helped verify the cue alignment. This was all done before the final strokes shown in the video. The donuts, Elephant Practice Ball (or any CB with markings), and non-shooting observers can be very helpful.

Jaden said:
A mechanical arm eliminate that problem though.
Click to expand...
Agreed, assuming it is well designed and built, and assuming it holds the cue as level as possible (e.g., with the near rail removed) to eliminate swerve effects which can vary with shot speed (which can vary with the type of tip).

Regards,
Dave
 
Last edited:
I think in my next tests....

dr_dave said:
I didn't show all of the details in my edited video, but we were very careful to orient the CB as perfectly as possible before each shot by having each of the 2 other people look from 2 different directions. The shooter also glanced down and back at the donuts (especially the one on the rail) to make sure the cue was aimed along the same line for each shot. The non-shooters also helped vefify the cue alignment. This was all done before the final strokes shown in the video. The donuts, Elephant Practice Ball (or any CB with markings), and non-shooting observers can be very helpful.

Agreed, assuming it is well designed and built, and assuming it holds the cue as level as possible (e.g., with the near rail removed) to eliminate swerve effects which can vary with shot speed (which can vary with the type of tip).

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

I think for my next tests I'll have two cameras running simultaneously with both the angle from the second video and the angle from the first or maybe a direct over head view, using the phenolic rod again to give the parallel line comparison.

Then I'll edit the videos to be side by side and in sync.

I'll also be showing it with different tips in future tests as well.

Jaden
 
So after testing, the low deflection tip doesn't really show to be that low deflection after all? I don't understand the graph.
 
x3dnd3x said:
So after testing, the low deflection tip doesn't really show to be that low deflection after all? I don't understand the graph.
Click to expand...
Are you asking Jaden concerning his video, or me and mine? By "graph," do you mean the table of data?

Dave
 
x3dnd3x said:
Yes you Dr Dave. I was refering to your graph. Sorry, I'm just a high school student.
Click to expand...
Watch the video again. It might help to watch it more than once.

The LD shaft had much less deflection than the shaft on which multiple tips were tested. However, the tip type, hardness, and height didn't make much difference in the results for the shaft on which I did the tests.

To answer your question directly, the "low-squirt tip" did not produce less squirt (cue ball deflection) than the others in my tests.

Regards,
Dave
 
Last edited:
Absolutely.

mel_smOg said:
so can I just buy the tip and try it?
Click to expand...

You most certainly can. I know I've said this several times, but I will be officially launching in about 7-12 days. I'm currently waiting on a materials shipment and then I will officially launch.

I will be advertising here on AZ so as soon as you see my banner ad, I will be officially launched. :smile:

I was extremely surprised by Dave's results as every shaft that I had tested it on prior to sending him one had shown a marked decrease by atleast 50%. As I showed in my video, I did later find a McDermott that had marginal results.

If I hadn't been confident in the results, I would've never sent him one. The interesting thing is that he saw little difference in any tip hardness or tip height. There has to be something about certain shafts that prevent it from being affected. I will have to do additional research to find out why and what conditions leads to some shafts not being affected.

Jaden
 
Last edited:
Jaden said:
You most certainly can. I know I've said this several times, but I will be officially launching in about 7-12 days. I'm currently waiting on a materials shipment and then I will officially launch.

I will be advertising here on AZ so as soon as you see my banner ad, I will be officially launched. :smile:

I was extremely surprised by Dave's results as every shaft that I had tested it on prior to sending him one had shown a marked decrease by atleast 50%. As I showed in my video, I did later find a McDermott that had marginal results.

If I hadn't been confident in the results, I would've never sent him one. The interesting thing is that he saw little difference in any tip hardness or tip height. There has to be something about certain shafts that prevent it from being affected. I will have to do additional research to find out why and what conditions leads to some shafts not being affected.

Jaden
Click to expand...

Will there be like sampler packs version like what Chris did?
 
I wasn't originally intending to.

x3dnd3x said:
Will there be like sampler packs version like what Chris did?
Click to expand...

Although I wasn't originally intending to, I am thinking that I will.

I'll initially offer some sampler packs with one or two of each of the tip offerings at a reduced rate.

My J-B/Super Hard tip I offer is also really exciting as it is super hard but doesn't slip as easy as a phenolic when playing with it and using side spin.

I stumbled across the material I used while testing various materials in the development of my other tips.

Jaden
 
dr_dave said:
Watch the video again. It might help to watch it more than once.

The LD shaft had much less deflection than the shaft on which multiple tips were tested. However, the tip type, hardness, and height didn't make much difference in the results for the shaft on which I did the tests.

To answer your question directly, the "low-squirt tip" did not produce less squirt (cue ball deflection) than the others in my tests.
Click to expand...

Dave, thank you so much for that video. It's one of your best, imo. Hope folks realize how much work goes into producing something of that quality and scientific rigor.

I made 20 clips of it with Clippeo, which is a way to deep-link, loop, and share YouTube videos... hope it's useful to someone who may not have the patience to sit through the full 12:40 video:

http://clippeo.com/watch/Trc/653887-653887



Dave, I see you're embedding YouTube videos on your site. PM me if you're interested in embedding them with Clippeo additionally/instead, to give you and your website viewers the same sort of tools. We're working on an embed feature now.

-Ron
 
Last edited:
DeadStick said:
Dave, thank you so much for that video. It's one of your best, imo. Hope folks realize how much work goes into producing something of that quality and scientific rigor.

I made 20 clips of it with Clippeo, which is a way to deep-link, loop, and share YouTube videos... hope it's useful to someone who may not have the patience to sit through the full 12:40 video:

http://clippeo.com/watch/Trc/653887-653887



Dave, I see you're embedding YouTube videos on your site. PM me if you're interested in embedding them with Clippeo additionally/instead, to give you and your website viewers the same sort of tools. We're working on an embed feature now.
Click to expand...
That Clippeo seems like a cool tool. That linked-table-of-video-contents feature is nice.

Thanks for posting this for my video. That's helpful. I'll check out Clippeo more when I can find some time.

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
Watch the video again. It might help to watch it more than once.

The LD shaft had much less deflection than the shaft on which multiple tips were tested. However, the tip type, hardness, and height didn't make much difference in the results for the shaft on which I did the tests.

To answer your question directly, the "low-squirt tip" did not produce less squirt (cue ball deflection) than the others in my tests.

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

It looks like a tip may not be able to overcome the amount of deflection created by a conventional shaft that has high end mass... However if you did have a "zero" deflection shaft then the only deflection would be coming from the tip itself.... If that was the case then what would be a significance difference required before one tip was better????

The next observation I had was that Jaden's low speed testing introduced swerve...

Would it be practical to create a shorter test bed where there was little chance of swerve to establish for sure that squirt doesn't change at different speeds and only swerve is introduced if there is adequate distance and surface friction for the ball to spin back to the original target...

I am wondering this because as synthetics and hybrids enter the arena the old model of squirt being the same for all speeds may not hold up but the swerve aspect is a hurdle to get past to test properly.....

At 6ft 2degrees of squirt shows up on your video as 2.5".... If we only went a foot at 2 degrees we'd have maybe a .42" offset hit on the paper and I am not sure that the differences in the tip would not be masked with stroke variables since the offset differences would be very hard to see as they would be 10ths or 100ths instead of 1/8ths.....

I am wondering if the 6ft model would not be the best solution for visual measurement but perhaps the surface of the table could be covered with paper or poly so that swerve would not be a variable that needs to even be considered...... Would craft paper/or maybe wax paper be slick enough to eliminate swerve or would you likely need something with even less friction??

Chris
 
Jaden, this is genius, mega impressed and can't wait to try some of your tips. It's bleeding obvious that tip materials / design could play a significant role. The days of homogeneity and layering may soon be over thanks to your work.... huge pat on back!
Colin
 
colin colenso said:
jaden, this is genius, mega impressed and can't wait to try some of your tips. It's bleeding obvious that tip materials / design could play a significant role. The days of homogeneity and layering may soon be over thanks to your work.... Huge pat on back!
Colin
Click to expand...

welcome back!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top