2+ Years with a REVO Shaft.

[surffisher2a]

Do you have any information on that I can look at to do some further reading and research? Or do you want to explain what you mean and why?

Intuitively to me, I’d assume the larger diameter would mean slightly more mass therefore the cueball would deflect more. Or I would assume they balance the foam inside to ensure they both have the same end mass and impart the same deflection on the cueball. I can’t diss out why the 12.9 would have less deflection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The word I heard is that the walls of the 12.9 are thinner due to the taper so the end mass is actually less than what it is in the 12.4.

 

[Cron]

Do you have any information on that I can look at to do some further reading and research? ... I can’t diss out why the 12.9 would have less deflection.

Wouldn't it be nice if Predator gave you the specs like a responsible manufacturer? In the age of open everything, NOT supplying a data sheet is just not caring (especially for such a simple object).

If you ever find the specs, I *think* general beam deflection works like this: cube_root(aD / bD) * aT (D=density, T=thickness, a & b are the materials).

Whatever, it would be nice if Predator would come forth with a data sheet.

 

[RickLafayette]

Wouldn't it be nice if Predator gave you the specs like a responsible manufacturer? In the age of open everything, NOT supplying a data sheet is just not caring (especially for such a simple object).

If you ever find the specs, I *think* general beam deflection works like this: cube_root(aD / bD) * aT (D=density, T=thickness, a & b are the materials).

Whatever, it would be nice if Predator would come forth with a data sheet.

You mean like the other manufacturers do? I can't seem to find that information.

 

[surffisher2a]

Wouldn't it be nice if Predator gave you the specs like a responsible manufacturer? In the age of open everything, NOT supplying a data sheet is just not caring (especially for such a simple object).

If you ever find the specs, I *think* general beam deflection works like this: cube_root(aD / bD) * aT (D=density, T=thickness, a & b are the materials).

Whatever, it would be nice if Predator would come forth with a data sheet.

I don't think the problem is that predator doesn't care, its all about marketing something that can be subjective depending on testing conditions.

If predator comes out and says that the revo has .5" of deflection, another manufacture will vary the test varibles a little bit (say hitting slower) or exaggeration of the swerve effects and say their shaft only deflects .35" and therefore is better than the revo.

These carbon fiber shafts also have a semi implied no deflection marketing to them, which we know isn't 100% the truth. Putting a deflection stat on a shaft that's implied to be no deflection doesn't make any sense.

 

[Rod]

I play with a Vantage 12.9 mm for a year or so. If I ever get to play again I would like a 12.9 Revo.
Like the OP I like the victory tip, because It requires little maintenance. I think the 12.9 would be my
best option because I think the 12.5 is a little to lively for me. To each their own.

 

[Cron]

I don't think the problem is that predator doesn't care, its all about marketing something that can be subjective depending on testing conditions.

If predator comes out and says that the revo has .5" of deflection, another manufacture will vary the test varibles a little bit (say hitting slower) or exaggeration of the swerve effects and say their shaft only deflects .35" and therefore is better than the revo.

These carbon fiber shafts also have a semi implied no deflection marketing to them, which we know isn't 100% the truth. Putting a deflection stat on a shaft that's implied to be no deflection doesn't make any sense.

Well, sure. While I don't disagree with any of that, can all of that not be said about any competitive product whatsoever? Data sheets are still given out by most manufacturers in much higher competitive fields, so why not for this? Besides, we're not asking for the formula to resin and carbon fiber, we just want plain basic dimensional measurements that can be determined by just about anyone willing to destroy 2 shafts.

So what's there to hide, or better yet, what's there to gain? The only answers I keep coming back to is that they simply don't care or that they really are hiding something they shouldn't be, but the answer is most likely the former. No matter what though, in the age where becoming more transparent in increasingly relevant, Predator is most certainly one company who isn't interested in transparency.