Joint Pins - What and why

PickPocket

PickPocket

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What is the difference between joint pins. Obviously threads per inch etc... I'm not asking the difference in physical properties, I'm asking why use one over the other..

What are the MAJOR differences?

Why use a Radial over a 3/8-10?

Why use 5/16-14 over 18?

Is one QR better than another?

if you were handed a cue already assembled and hit balls with it, could you determine it's pin type before seeing it broken down?
 
I think Pins are like Baskin Robbins Ice Cream. Everyone has favorite flavor.

My buddy had a great Mike Bender, not sure what Pin was but took many turns to assemble & disassemble.

Some Cuemakers do their own modified pins.

So it all personal choice, imho.😁
 
PickPocket said:
What is the difference between joint pins. Obviously threads per inch etc... I'm not asking the difference in physical properties, I'm asking why use one over the other..

What are the MAJOR differences?

Why use a Radial over a 3/8-10?

Why use 5/16-14 over 18?

Is one QR better than another?

if you were handed a cue already assembled and hit balls with it, could you determine it's pin type before seeing it broken down?
Click to expand...

Radial is garbage.

The -14 threads together in fewer revolutions for the same length.

QR is basically a gimmick. It doesn't take long enough to put a cue together to worry about.

Loads of people will claim they can feel the difference. I believe they are fooling themselves.
 
A well constructed cue should play well, no matter the pin. Some can be used to reduce weight (like G10) but even then... if you can tap into the benefits of a tenth of an ounce difference, you maybe should be doing brain surgery rather than playing pool.
 
I guess I am not really qualified to say what is best, but I have shot with a few and have my opinions.
- Schon's 3 of them - 5/16"-14, Really like, nice crisp hit & ballance, I have 4 Schon shafts and 3 Jacoby Schon shafts - 2 ultra and 1 carbon, all use same brass insert
- DZ one cue one shaft - 3/8"x10 modified, great hit, not as crisp as my Schons but cue feels like a one piece cue, I really like this pin for a joint, it feels so perfectly fit and snug going together.
- McDermott 3 cues 3 G core shafts, 3/8"x10, felt a little sloppy screwing on as from the factory, much better fit after super gluing the shaft threads, solid but somewhat muted hit
- Jacoby - Radial pin, great solid feel screwing together, great hit also, cue felt as a one piece, really liked this cue as much, possibly more than my DZ
As to what pin is the best, and just based on fit, it for me it would have to be the 3/8"x10 modified as the pin seems to be such a perfect match for the shaft threads. As to the hit of the cue, to my way of thinking first it would be how accurate the joint facings were of the shaft and butt, then I guess what joint materials are facing together. I do know that I really like my Schons, my DZ is fantastic but softer hit, and the Jacoby, I really wanted to buy from my friend but my wife had to mention that I had just bought that DZ. As none of the cues used the same shafts, I'm sure that had some bearing on the hit of ea, although it's hard to explain how different the DZ, and the Jacoby felt in comparison to the others. Could just be imagining it, but they felt like they were a one piece cue.
 
Last edited:
tomatoshooter said:
Is there really something wrong with it or just no advantage?
Click to expand...

The fit is generally so tight that the friction on the threads reduces the clamping/axial force, which is basically the only thing a screw is made for.

The tap is expensive.

The angles of the thread will exert more radial force on the wood threads and the shaft.

No advantage, some disadvantages, expensive. Wouldn't touch it.

Standard 60deg v-threads are used basically everywhere. BMW, Rolls Royce, Boeing, Airbus, NASA, SpaceX, Sig Sauer, Rolex, etc. all use 60degree v-threads for holding things together. DIN, ASME, JIC all have standards for v-threads. This didn't happen by accident, it was a standard developed by very smart people evaluating a bunch of data. It happened about 160yrs ago and has been going strong ever since. Some cue maker looking at the ballscrew (look it up, it is a power transmission screw which utilizes recirculating ball bearings to move loads, not hold things together) isn't right, regardless of how pretty he thinks it is, or how many people buy the lies they have been told.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
The fit is generally so tight that the friction on the threads reduces the clamping/axial force, which is basically the only thing a screw is made for.

The tap is expensive.

The angles of the thread will exert more radial force on the wood threads and the shaft.

No advantage, some disadvantages, expensive. Wouldn't touch it.

Standard 60deg v-threads are used basically everywhere. BMW, Rolls Royce, Boeing, Airbus, NASA, SpaceX, Sig Sauer, Rolex, etc. all use 60degree v-threads for holding things together. DIN, ASME, JIC all have standards for v-threads. This didn't happen by accident, it was a standard developed by very smart people evaluating a bunch of data. It happened about 160yrs ago and has been going strong ever since. Some cue maker looking at the ballscrew (look it up, it is a power transmission screw which utilizes recirculating ball bearings to move loads, not hold things together) isn't right, regardless of how pretty he thinks it is, or how many people buy the lies they have been told.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Curious to get your take on the 3/8-10 modified (as compared to the standard 3/8-10)? Thx
 
phreaticus said:
Interesting. Curious to get your take on the 3/8-10 modified (as compared to the standard 3/8-10)? Thx
Click to expand...

I don't have anything really bad to say about it. The threads are a steeper angle which probably isn't horrible for wood. I think the flat minor diameter is an interesting theory for using it as a concentricity locator. Can still use the standard v-thread tap, but kinda wastes the locating function a bit.

I've used them. I don't know if I will use them when I get set up to build again. I'm testing other joint designs that should minimize the metal in the joint, increase the clamping force and completely eliminate the reliance on the pin as a locating device.
 
DeeDeeCues said:
Radial is garbage.

The -14 threads together in fewer revolutions for the same length.

QR is basically a gimmick. It doesn't take long enough to put a cue together to worry about.

Loads of people will claim they can feel the difference. I believe they are fooling themselves.
Click to expand...
I had a customer offer to put several hundred dollars on the table which was the cost of the cue and I put a shaft with brass insert on the cue and a shaft with no brass insert on the same butt. He said if he could not tell the difference after hitting some balls with each I could keep the cue and money. But if he could he keeps the cue and money. I refused the bet because I know in my twenties and thirties I could have told the difference myself just by sound and feel.
 
Last edited:
It's all about prefrence, practicality and cost. I do prefer Radial and 3/8-10 flat bottom, as there is a big selection in pin material, which means I can dial in the balance by choosing the right pin. Paying for sanding and finish size carbide sanding mandrels also factors in, each set is $300 or more.
It's also fairly common threads, so it's easy for customers to test out other shafts. All my cues are .840" at the joint, so they work well with most production shafts on the market.
 
I am wondering if there could be some sort of a difference in wear if the threads go into wood (no insert).
 
Kim Bye said:
It's all about prefrence, practicality and cost. I do prefer Radial and 3/8-10 flat bottom, as there is a big selection in pin material, which means I can dial in the balance by choosing the right pin. Paying for sanding and finish size carbide sanding mandrels also factors in, each set is $300 or more.
It's also fairly common threads, so it's easy for customers to test out other shafts. All my cues are .840" at the joint, so they work well with most production shafts on the market.
Click to expand...

How long do sanding mandrels last?
 
PickPocket said:
if you were handed a cue already assembled and hit balls with it, could you determine it's pin type before seeing it broken down?
Click to expand...

Proven time and again: NO

You may be able to tell a compression fit joint over a sloppy piloted setup, but quality machining is the primary driver.

I tried the classic blind joint test with 3 house cue conversions with identical production shafts, and taped over the joint areas. Wrote 1/2/3 on each cue. 3 different joint setups (3/8-10 ivory, radial wood, 5/16-14 steel)

Only 1 person guessed correctly what any of the cues were. At least 50 tried them all.

One guy, who absolutely swore by steel joint cues, loved the radial cue. Normally, he felt radial pins were just a money grab, were awful, didn't play right, etc.

Actually agreed to buy it. Played phenomenal pool with it. Once the tape came off and he saw it was a radial pin, he started missing balls and blamed the pin. Didn't buy it after all.

People are stupid, that's the major difference
 
Last edited:
thoffen said:
I am wondering if there could be some sort of a difference in wear if the threads go into wood (no insert).
Click to expand...
The only one I've found is a G10 pin acting like a piece of sandpaper. Any metal pin "properly polished", as long as it is started correctly into the shaft cavity, will generally just burnish the inside hole of a maple shaft and will not wear the wood fibers away making for a future sloppy fit.

I gravitated to the flat bottom minor diameter style pin years ago and have never looked back. For my builds it has all the advantages I look for in a way to connect the 2 halves together.

And I can guarantee you my pin is not floating in a puddle of epoxy because I don't know how to install it straight and concentric.;)
 
HawaiianEye said:
So, why do some cue makers not use them?

If they only cost a few hundred dollars a cue maker could always ensure that their shaft and joint collars match up.
Click to expand...
A few different reasons I would believe.....
Cost being one....It's a tool that some just can not afford to purchase yet. 300 dollars would purchase a lot of wood for someone just starting out.
The builder has not yet decided on "their" pin.....lots of options in the pin dept. The mandrel is built to a specific diameter size and pin configuration.
Some builders will bow to whatever pin/joint size the customer is requesting.....in that case, you could possibly have 1000's wrapped up in mandrels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top