What is the metric? 5/5 is how low....1 degree or 2 degrees of squirt?
The OB has a dull hit and the Z2 is more solid. IMO.
Be well
Last edited:
Lowest deflection shaft
- Thread starter Johnboy73
- Start date
What is the metric? 5/5 is how low....1 degree or 2 degrees of squirt?
The OB has a dull hit and the Z2 is more solid. IMO.
Be well
E,
Have you hit with an OB Pro & if so how much?
I find your comparison to the Z2 odd, as most of the better players in my area that have Z2s found my OB Pro to be solid.
Just wondering.
Stay Well,
Rick
I think most thing the OB1 & OB 2 were mushy because of the wood ferrules & foam in them, but the Classics & Pros have short ferrules & no foam.
It might be the stripped ferrule, is it softer?
Predator's Z3
Yes, E. The OB 1 & 2 have the layered wood ferrules.
The OB Classic (Like 314's) & the OB Pro (Like the Zs) have the short white ferrules.
I've only hit a few shots with a Z2. so I can't really speak from experience, but the few very good players that hit my cue with the OB Pro said it had a more solid hit & feel than their Z2s.
Might have had to do with my cue too, I don't really know.
You Stay Well,
Rick
5 being the lowest deflection currently available on the market.
I have played for years with an OB Pro and then the Pro +. My close friend has played with a Z2 for like 8 years. I have hit extensively with both. I think the hit of both OB's is more to my liking. The OB feels very solid for sure, but I think the Z2 does as well. The Z2 for me offers a bit less feel. The Z2 also clearly has less squirt. Overall I think they are both decent shafts. I just don't care for the Z2 taper all that much, and found it a bit lacking in feel compared to the OB. The Pro + is pretty awesome really. Although I will say that the OB2 with the wood ferrule (11.75mm) might be the lowest squirt shaft I've ever tried. That thing is crazy. Not a big fan of the very soft muted hit, but damn is it low squirt!
Hope this helps,
KMRUNOUT
I agree... The OB2+ at 11.75 is crazy good. It hits soft... I never cared about "feedback" or "sound" or "feel" or whatever... if ball goes in pocket, job accomplished, everything else is noise to me. And the only bad noise is when the ball does not plop into the pocket
You may prefer:
RJ, ever try pinball or darts? You may like them. Jk, LD shafts are a marketing ploy, not sure why nobody gets it. You still have to compensate regardless of LD or standard maple. I refuse to pay for a cue, custom or not, and than pay for a aftermarket LD shaft. If you like LD shafts, buy a OB cue like you or buy a custom cue from a maker who builds his own LD. When you buy a custom cue you are paying for the builders ability and acquired skill set, the minute you put a LD shaft on it, you lose what you paid for. If there was a no deflection shaft you would still have to learn how to play with it, than you LD people would bash that. I'm not bashing LD shafts, I just think they have the same value if not less due to materials used as a custom shaft.
I agree... The OB2+ at 11.75 is crazy good. It hits soft... I never cared about "feedback" or "sound" or "feel" or whatever... if ball goes in pocket, job accomplished, everything else is noise to me. And the only bad noise is when the ball does not plop into the pocket
RJ, ever try pinball or darts? You may like them. Jk, LD shafts are a marketing ploy, not sure why nobody gets it. You still have to compensate regardless of LD or standard maple. I refuse to pay for a cue, custom or not, and than pay for a aftermarket LD shaft. If you like LD shafts, buy a OB cue like you or buy a custom cue from a maker who builds his own LD. When you buy a custom cue you are paying for the builders ability and acquired skill set, the minute you put a LD shaft on it, you lose what you paid for. If there was a no deflection shaft you would still have to learn how to play with it, than you LD people would bash that. I'm not bashing LD shafts, I just think they have the same value if not less due to materials used as a custom shaft.
According to Brandon, the billiard guy, the Vantage has more squirt. Here are the links to the videos showing this. Has anyone gotten different results?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2pg3Hm4ItZY
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vcivA-G-Ans
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2pg3Hm4ItZY
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vcivA-G-Ans
Last edited:
Both?
Dr. Dave, PJ and others proffer that it is reduced end mass that determines the amount of squirt for years. I and a very few others contend that reduced end mass is a component of achieving low squirt and that the transverse movement (perpendicular to the axial direction of the forward stroke) caused by the flexing of the shaft away from the CB during contact is also a significant component of achieving low squirt.
The transverse movement also alters the force vectors acting on the CB that contributes to squirt and reduces the resultant angular deviation of the CB path from the axial direction of the shaft - aim line.
I am glad you asked Fran.
More here:
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/PUBLICATIONS/39. squirt.pdf
Be well
here is the answer to what causes squirt........:grin-square:
from the link provided above by LaMas
thanks for the link LaMas
p.s. i am impressed you could read and understand that.....
.....
.....
For more-understandable explanations, illustrations, and demonstrations of what causes squirt (CB deflection), see:here is the answer to what causes squirt........:grin-square:
from the link provided above by LaMas
thanks for the link LaMas
p.s. i am impressed you could read and understand that.....
.....
.....
View attachment 416188
what causes squirt
and concerning the affects of shaft stiffness, see:
shaft endmass and stiffness effects
Enjoy,
Dave
If you don't understand what a LD shaft does compared to a regular shaft, that's ok. Lots of people don't know lots of things. There is nothing to "get". LD shafts increase accuracy. If you don't understand why, then you don't "get" it. It is a very simply explanation that is based on logic and facts. If you care, I would be happy to enlighten you, although that simple explanation is probably found in a million threads on AZ. It is very simple: **If you don't hit the cueball where you intend to (which is the case for ALL players sometimes and amateur players often), you may inadvertently hit left or right of center, get unwanted squirt, and miss the shot. LD Shafts reduce this error significantly."** That, sir, is not a marketing ploy. It is provable, demonstrable, fact.
You should decide if your issue is that they are a marketing ploy, or if the problem is lower quality materials. Because it sounds like you, who believes for some reason that you "get it", haven't really settled on a considered opinion.
LD shafts do exactly what they are supposed to do, and exactly what people who "get it" know they do. If you don't recognize why this is a benefit, your credibility would probably hold up better if you asked some questions about the principles involved rather than claim they are a marketing ploy based on...well, what appears to be very little knowledge about the subject.
If you want to say that you don't believe the quality of materials justifies the price, at least there you have something rational. Although that argument can be easily refuted when you consider R&D costs. But I suppose you think their R&D departments are just their marketing departments.
Not a good post my man.
KMRUNOUT
R&d
I totally understand R&D. Point being LD shafts cannot do what a standard maple shaft can do. So you pick your poison, neither can do what the other does. So why pay exorbitant prices for inferior quality. I personally have no desire to fund the R&D for something that is not needed in the real world. If a custom builder designs his own shaft pay for it, if you buy a Predator or OB cue, I'm fine with it. Just don't screw up what you paid for by buying a custom cue. If I built cues I would refuse to customize a off the shelf LD shaft. It makes the cue not my cue.
I totally understand R&D. Point being LD shafts cannot do what a standard maple shaft can do. So you pick your poison, neither can do what the other does. So why pay exorbitant prices for inferior quality. I personally have no desire to fund the R&D for something that is not needed in the real world. If a custom builder designs his own shaft pay for it, if you buy a Predator or OB cue, I'm fine with it. Just don't screw up what you paid for by buying a custom cue. If I built cues I would refuse to customize a off the shelf LD shaft. It makes the cue not my cue.
I remember that was the contention of Meucci shafts where the extreme bend in the shaft upon contact resulted in lower cue ball squirt. I was an avid Meucci cue user back in the 80's- early 90's, and I agreed with that assessment based on the results I achieved.
But then that would be considered a high deflection shaft causing low cue ball squirt.
On the other hand, Ray Schuler tapered his shafts, mostly for carom players, (I think he actually had about 6 tapers to choose from) and I used one for pool for awhile. That shaft didn't bend much, if at all, and as a result, caused a greater amount of cue ball squirt. Wouldn't that smaller end be considered less mass at the end, but made to react stiffer due to the taper? Well, anyway, that particular shaft was definitely a low deflection shaft causing high cb squirt.
The other type of low deflection shaft I remember. started back with the early Kersenbrocks, which were not sharply tapered ( but slightly more tapered than the typical pro taper) and solid and stiff-hitting, which did cause fairly high cue ball squirt. So there again, we have a low deflection shaft causing high cue ball squirt.
So, labeling seems to have morphed into defining an LD shaft as something different.
Last edited:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
High Fran,
I was shooting with english on nearly every shot & I tried a couple of Meucci cues but never liked the more 'whippy' feel & vibration of the shafts.
So, I never went to one & stayed with my "low deflection" "high cue ball squirting" cue as I was using the different lines required for using english very well & never 'needed' the benefit of the less squirt that the more flexible Meucci shafts yielded.
Now days one can get the benefit of the less squirt & still maintain the feel of a more 'solid' shaft with less flex & less vibration.
I would certainly recommend a "low squirt shaft" to anyone relatively new to the game that intends to use english (as all should intend, IMO).
IMO, it is always better to need to make 'adjustments' of a lesser quantity than a greater quantity.
That said, I might recommend that one use a high squirt cue in order to see & understand what is going on. Not that that is necessary, but it can & might be useful.
I have a Predator 314 CAT shaft that came as an extra with a Helmstetter Made Cue that I bought from an acquaintance that needed some fast cash. It is by far the least squirting shaft I have encountered as it has been 'juiced' by sanding down the tip end to 12 mm & modifying the taper to an hour glass shape & extending the parallel part of the joint end well up toward the joint.
I love it in close quarters but actually will not use it if playing on a 9 ft. table because it will curve the ball across the 'aim' line like a masse for what I call normal 'level cue' english shots.
Anyway, the topic is interesting, but I agree with you that the terminology needs & should be more consistent.
Best Wishes & Be & Stay Well,
Rick
High Fran,
I was shooting with english on nearly every shot & I tried a couple of Meucci cues but never liked the more 'whippy' feel & vibration of the shafts.
So, I never went to one & stayed with my "low deflection" "high cue ball squirting" cue as I was using the different lines required for using english very well & never 'needed' the benefit of the less squirt that the more flexible Meucci shafts yielded.
Now days one can get the benefit of the less squirt & still maintain the feel of a more 'solid' shaft with less flex & less vibration.
I would certainly recommend a "low squirt shaft" to anyone relatively new to the game that intends to use english (as all should intend, IMO).
IMO, it is always better to need to make 'adjustments' of a lesser quantity than a greater quantity.
That said, I might recommend that one use a high squirt cue in order to see & understand what is going on. Not that that is necessary, but it can & might be useful.
I have a Predator 314 CAT shaft that came as an extra with a Helmstetter Made Cue that I bought from an acquaintance that needed some fast cash. It is by far the least squirting shaft I have encountered as it has been 'juiced' by sanding down the tip end to 12 mm & modifying the taper to an hour glass shape & extending the parallel part of the joint end well up toward the joint.
I love it in close quarters but actually will not use it if playing on a 9 ft. table because it will curve the ball across the 'aim' line like a masse for what I call normal 'level cue' english shots.
Anyway, the topic is interesting, but I agree with you that the terminology needs & should be more consistent.
Best Wishes & Be & Stay Well,
Rick
Last edited:
How many cue builders are rated as A-players and above?
How many cue builders have top-rated players actually using their shafts and saying, "these are the BEST shafts available and I prefer them over ANY other?"
If you play with a cue long enough, you'll learn its "characteristics" and become comfortable with it. For FEEL, I prefer a solid maple shaft and I prefer a shorter pro taper than most of the newer model shafts. I use a Predator FAT 314-2 shaft because I have gotten used to it, but it doesn't have the same feel as the shaft I'd design and buy, if I had the money to experiment and time to fiddle around for a bit.
It all depends upon how much deflection you can "control". If your cheap-ass shaft deflects two inches from table end-to-end, you may want to get something that is a bit less.
Last edited: