"Anwar Cues" LD shaft review....

Thanks for the review Realism...all the 7 shafts are using tiger medium tip as I said in the thread.

Is there anything that I have to improve more on the shaft? is it worth buying or selling? are you interested in using it? what is the difference between other LD shaft that you have tried or using?

Thank you

Realizm said:

Ok i feel that the tip is too hard for me . I'm playing with a med soft tip .
I feel it can and will be a great shaft . The whole shaft is great . It did everything it needed to as far as selling nope . i will not sale this one is a keeper.. .
Still would love to see your cues ..
Email me if you like ...

Click to expand...

try changing the tip that is suitable for you...so that it is a great shaft to play with.

Ok I will take photos this week end...

Thank you Realizm

About the shaft... Could you post up a few pics as I have never seen this one. Is it a radial laminated shaft?

Anwar LD shaft

Hi Realizm,

I personally prefered a stiff shaft with a medium soft tip, so I`m looking forward to test it out and compared it with my Schon / 314 shaft.

I saw allot of possitive reviews so far, I can`t wait anymore.

I will send a review eventually.......I`ll keep everyone post.

Good luck with your shaft my friend. :thumbup:

Lucas Comtois

Anwar shaft arrived today.
I put 6 hours of play on it. The idea was to compare it with OB-1, 314^2, Lambros Ultra, OB-Classic. All on a 16oz predator butt. I recently switched from very light to a heavy cue.

Took Lambros out of the equation, while LD is as good as 314^2, the shaft fails to move the ball around as well as the other shafts.
Perhaps at 3.8oz it is too light, it is also slightly shorter than 29 inches which doesn’t’ help.

Took OB-Classic out because it has more deflection.
The shaft is supposed to feel more solid than OB-1 and it does but still feels like a foam shaft, doesn’t have a normal shaft sound so why bother.

OB-1 moves the ball extremely well, the spins and draw are extreme, even someone with crappy stroke can look good as it is really easy to move the ball around.
The shaft has flex and is not very forgiving. The sound is muffled due to foam or whatever it is. I like OB-1 shaft they are tough, stay straight.

314^2 (4.4oz) this is my favorite shaft I consider it as the standard.
The sound is muffled, lots of spin, draw, follow.
More predictable than OB-1and a little more forgiving than OB-1.
Moves the ball around with absolute ease.

Back to Anwar:

Packaged in a thin tube, bubble raped, sock, very nice, Axio must have made his own box.
I didn’t specify the length and the shaft came at 30 inches (ed. 29.5) instead of 29 but that’s not a problem.
I didn’t get a chance to check the weight but approximately 4.2- 4.3 oz.
Ferrule was flush, no separation from wood, glue line thin, all good.
Everest tip well done as well.
Logo is burned into the shaft, nice touch.
The wood is dark which I like but grain not the straightest. I’m no wood expert but not AAA wood.
However, it does have nice character.
The finish on the shaft is very good, smooth, the entire shaft feels nice and looks good too.
Tight fit on the unilock, very secure, better even than the original predator.
Anwar collar fitting very well, my Lambros Ultra shaft has a lip.

The transition from 314^2 to Anwar was easy and happened extremely fast which leads me to believe that LD on this shaft is equivalent to both 314^2 and OB-1.
I didn’t have to make any adjustments and was loading up on inside English in no time.

Anwar shaft is more forgiving than 314^2 and OB-1, what that means is that it doesn’t induce as much English for the same tip displacement.
There is plenty power to move the ball around on a 9ft table.
Anwar is not weak in this department just that nothing puts more spin than Ob-1 and 314^2 is close behind.
Draw and follow, once again OB-1 and 314^2 generate a little more spin.
Anwar shaft has no problem generating that nice spring like effect on the draw and would generate more action than shafts like Lucasi 0-flex, Lambros Ultra, OB-Classic, Katana.

Anwar shaft feels and sounds like a regular shaft as it probably should. The sound is very pleasant.

Conclusion:

I’m very impressed with this shaft. I enjoyed playing with it and didn’t put my predator back on.
The real test is if in real battle would I switch to the predator.
I will need more time to decide this but today I didn’t feel the need.
Anwar shaft allowed me to use all the spins without having to think what the hell is going to happen.
The results were pleasantly predictable from shot to shot, the shaft did not create surprises.
I would say it was easier to control the CB with Anwar than OB-1 or 314^2.
Did I mention this shaft just feels nice.

I would recommend Anwar shaft.

great review

very thorough and thoughtful.

i'm sure many people, including myself, were patiently waiting for someone to make a good review on the newest batch.

glad to hear that some of the issues from previous were ironed out.

hopefully will get mine soon.

i might also put this either in cue review section, as i'm not sure many people come around to the product review section (though appropriate).

thanks again.

You welcome. Let us know what you think when you get it.

A thoughtful review I do not agree with in detail (to each their own), thanks!

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

acousticsguru said:

A thoughtful review I do not agree with in detail (to each their own), thanks!

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

Click to expand...

I'm very interested in your thoughts on different shafts.
Cheers!

Wolven said:

I'm very interested in your thoughts on different shafts.
Cheers!

Click to expand...

I have many thoughts on the subject, but it's late at night here, so I'll just concentrate on the most important one. Thanks to instructing, I've had the opportunity to try many students' cues in addition several LD shafts I bought and tested (or still use) on my personal playing cues. I'm curious, thus usually play for quite some time with cues I'm retipping for people (another service I offer). I'm saying all this because it immediately struck me that it's relatively speaking truer to assume e.g. different 314-2 deflect and "feel" about the same than it is to assume they move the cue ball identically. In my experience, the latter isn't quite true. They differ widely enough that one can get get lucky and buy the same brand and model of LD shaft over and over again, and although one needs little "adjustment" for the deflection itself, one may easily come away thinking that there are good and bad ones. Apart from the fact that one particularly popular brand managed to sell up to 80% warped ones at least for a while…

For reasons of popularity and availability in our neck of the woods, I could try out more Predator 314-2 and Z shafts than other LD shaft brand or model, and those include custom-fitted ones (ring work, phenolic insert e.g. by KJ Simpson and others, especially of course the original custom cue makers themselves, many of whom offer this service in addition to making their own regular or laminated shafts). Ever compared/measured tapers with as simple an instrument as a slide gauge? That alone would put any claim that "that's how they play" to rest.

Given this experience, I cannot agree that e.g. a Lambros Ultra shaft will move the cue ball "less easily" than other LD shafts. I'd have to ask which? I currently have three, differently tapered, one weighing 3.45 ounces and that plays almost like a 314-2 shaft except for its superior hit and feel (it's not hollow, after all), and two that weigh an identical 3.75 ounces but play so differently, and yet each so well that I could easily find a player each who loves one and hates the other and vice versa. Mind you, this is not so by mistake. Mike made them that way on purpose, picking woods of differing density/hardness and tapering the shafts individually. The latter two weigh the same in grams! Reminds me of the statistician who, before collecting data, asks what point or theory one wishes to be proven or disproven.

Also, "easily" (= moving the CB, that is) isn't always compatible with consistency or control in everyone's mind. In my opinion, as both a player and instructor, I happen to find equipment useless that makes it difficult to repeat any given type of shot (in other words, it may seem fun to get more draw, but if one can't control it, i.e. get a consistent result, it would seem pretty useless in match play), especially a cue whose behaviour is in any way erratic (that's objectively speaking worse than a cue that merely "feels" bad).

Too many LD shafts, and that includes the most popular ones, lend themselves to getting low deflection at soft to medium speed, whereas shooting hard especially on foreign equipment leads to such unpleasant surprises that more than a few players I know have decided to go back to using "regular" shafts.

The reason for this is simple: those who play position well enough that their average target is an object ball one to three feet away from the cue ball, plus usually a cut on the natural side (= cue ball's natural path takes it automatically into the direction of the next ball, with the best angle being that which allows the player to play yet another medium-speed shot), will all tell you they don't need a cue whose deflection helps them out of trouble shooting slow to medium speed shots - those are the type of shots they'd be able to play to perfection using the proverbial broomstick! Much less do they want a cue or shaft that, when they finally have to jack up from the rail, fire a ball in at warp speed with a ton of side spin, of course all of this with their back to the wall and no easy safety option (= no choice), leaves them guessing, indeed wondering what the heck is going to happen, because it's got nothing to do with that nice little deflection they get on those average easy, close shots.

Basically, a great-playing cue is a confidence-building cue - and one doesn't need "assistance" from the equipment to play shots one deems "easy" with the possible exception of straight-in no-english ones (the to many people unknown greatest advantage of LD shafts - that one will get away mishitting centre ball shots more often, because they're more forgiving in this regard).

Since it's physically impossible to build a cue that doesn't deflect, what one would need is one that does so perfectly gradually from soft to hard speeds, and/or increasing side spin by measurable fractions (such as a "half tip plus/minus" for beginners to intermediate players, or "one sixteenth tip plus/minus for an eagle-eyed world beater).

In other words, define the term "easily": get "a lot" (= of cue ball action), or get "precisely what one wants", or a combination of both? If it's the latter, and it better had be, gradual (versus erratic) deflection behaviour at different speeds and amounts of side spin will seem more important than maximum anything (including maximally low deflection).

It's partly the combination of both factors that appears to make building the "perfect" cue or shaft such a challenge. Perhaps the comment (or question) I hear most often is why one can't get "both": low deflection and the hit and feel of a traditional-style custom cue - as if these characteristics were placed at opposite ends of the same spectrum. Or are they?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I probably should have stipulated in my review that my findings are in regards the shafts I use.

I have had numerous shafts of the same kind and I agree that just because they have the same logo it doesn’t mean playability is the same. The ball movement varies from shaft to shaft.

The more lively the cue the more outcomes and more surprises and less forgiving the cue.

There is a happy middle where liveliness and consistency balance, at that point is the shaft I like.

My Lambros Ultra shaft is a laminated shaft. It is loud and extremely stiff. Predictable hit but not enough CB action.
I’m sure there are other Lambros shafts that could be better, I just don’t have one of those.
I can only go by one shaft and in this case I’m not impressed.

What I like about Anwar shaft is predictability, feel, sound, LD action at various speeds, type of movement.

Cheers

Wolven said:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I probably should have stipulated in my review that my findings are in regards the shafts I use.

I have had numerous shafts of the same kind and I agree that just because they have the same logo it doesn’t mean playability is the same. The ball movement varies from shaft to shaft.

The more lively the cue the more outcomes and more surprises and less forgiving the cue.

There is a happy middle where liveliness and consistency balance, at that point is the shaft I like.

My Lambros Ultra shaft is a laminated shaft. It is loud and extremely stiff. Predictable hit but not enough CB action.
I’m sure there are other Lambros shafts that could be better, I just don’t have one of those.
I can only go by one shaft and in this case I’m not impressed.

What I like about Anwar shaft is predictability, feel, sound, LD action at various speeds, type of movement.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Also, it appears you have a Lambros shaft with a UniLoc joint - I wasn't even aware Mike makes shafts for other cues than his own, and I feel his unique Ultra Joint design (maybe the finest in terms of providing through-vibration like and the hit and feel of a one-piece) makes comparisons somewhat unrealistic. Given the weight of yours including a UniLoc insert, it must be from less dense wood just like mine at 3.45 ounces (the one that plays much like a 314-2, yet isn't my favourite - so same as you, I do have one I'm not too impressed with). That wood quality is somewhat more reminiscent of e.g. Predator, whereas the other two Lambros Ultra shafts I have were made from (again very different from each other!) wood qualities one never sees in laminated shafts elsewhere (he made those to prove a point, and to me, he has: he can build anything one likes, provided one were able to tell what one needs - which is harder to do than it may appear at first!). Perhaps surprisingly, the stiffest and lowest deflection of the three I have is the thinnest (12.5 mm at the tip end of the ferrule) which, logically, was made from the densest and hardest wood. Of course the tapers are all fractionally different, each (it appears) carefully chosen according to the choice of wood.

Note I've tried and owned some exceptional 314-2s, too. Just to mention I'm not against anything on principle. If I sounded in any way negative then only because for a while, they were extremely hit-and-miss, and I'm not sure that phase is over.

Of the LD shafts I have not tried yet, the most popular is the Tiger Ultra LD. I'm just now re-testing an OB Classic that fits my Southwest (but belongs to a student, retipping it for him) - those appear to be somewhat more consistent, for example. I won't say that aspect alone would make me prefer a product per se (it's different, can't say I like it better, let alone best of the ones I've tried), but it isn't very helpful if one can't just reorder a laminated shaft and expect to get more or less the same again (I know players who literally have to replace their 314-2 or Z-shafts every one to three years maximum, because they start rattling and eventually fall apart - but note they love the product, and have no intention to change habits!) - I mean, back before lamination, one simply had to accept the fact that each piece of wood is individual/different. But since lamination is supposed to guarantee radial consistency, it's tempting to expect greater consistency off the shelf, too. But no, in my experience, laminated shafts vary as widely as any.

(EDIT: in the meantime had the opportunity to try Tiger's Ultra-X LD shaft, too. My opinion on the subject remains unchanged: of all the laminated shafts I've tried, those made by Mike Lambros may not have the lowest deflection, but provide the best hit and feel, thus I find them to be a good compromise. Personally, my preference continues to lie with particularly well-chosen, slow-turned, hard and tight grain regular maple shafts.)

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

any Canadian buyers here, boys? my shaft got stuck on customs 9 days ago, ff. Anyone with same problem?
Axio, what value you put on the package?
thanks

mel_smOg said:

any Canadian buyers here, boys? my shaft got stuck on customs 9 days ago, ff. Anyone with same problem?
Axio, what value you put on the package?
thanks

Click to expand...

Yeah, customs took forever. Value was what I paid for.

Apart from the "wrong orders", manufacturing defects and warpage.... for the people who did receive their Anwar shafts "properly", any further feedback?

Considering it is a non-laminated shaft and is priced at $100, I was very surprised at its performance.

I am currently awaiting my 2nd shaft and hope it arrives "properly".

acousticsguru said:

Also, it appears you have a Lambros shaft with a UniLoc joint - I wasn't even aware Mike makes shafts for other cues than his own, and I feel his unique Ultra Joint design (maybe the finest in terms of providing through-vibration like and the hit and feel of a one-piece) makes comparisons somewhat unrealistic. Given the weight of yours including a UniLoc insert, it must be from less dense wood just like mine at 3.45 ounces (the one that plays much like a 314-2, yet isn't my favourite - so same as you, I do have one I'm not too impressed with). That wood quality is somewhat more reminiscent of e.g. Predator, whereas the other two Lambros Ultra shafts I have were made from (again very different from each other!) wood qualities one never sees in laminated shafts elsewhere (he made those to prove a point, and to me, he has: he can build anything one likes, provided one were able to tell what one needs - which is harder to do than it may appear at first!). Perhaps surprisingly, the stiffest and lowest deflection of the three I have is the thinnest (12.5 mm at the tip end of the ferrule) which, logically, was made from the densest and hardest wood. Of course the tapers are all fractionally different, each (it appears) carefully chosen according to the choice of wood.

Note I've tried and owned some exceptional 314-2s, too. Just to mention I'm not against anything on principle. If I sounded in any way negative then only because for a while, they were extremely hit-and-miss, and I'm not sure that phase is over.

Of the LD shafts I have not tried yet, the most popular is the Tiger Ultra LD. I'm just now re-testing an OB Classic that fits my Southwest (but belongs to a student, retipping it for him) - those appear to be somewhat more consistent, for example. I won't say that aspect alone would make me prefer a product per se (it's different, can't say I like it better, let alone best of the ones I've tried), but it isn't very helpful if one can't just reorder a laminated shaft and expect to get more or less the same again (I know players who literally have to replace their 314-2 or Z-shafts every one to three years maximum, because they start rattling and eventually fall apart - but note they love the product, and have no intention to change habits!) - I mean, back before lamination, one simply had to accept the fact that each piece of wood is individual/different. But since lamination is supposed to guarantee radial consistency, it's tempting to expect greater consistency off the shelf, too. But no, in my experience, laminated shafts vary as widely as any.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

Click to expand...

Well David,

great posting- well choosen words.
I also agree with you, that s it is very hard to make a *staying* statement for a shaft (no matter which brand). But for sure there are a few cuemakers/manufacturers who are coming up with a real good repeatable quality.

With the LD shafts i had many expiriences- i tested them over a long time distance (7 different). And for me personally from the production-made shafts just the Tiger and the OB1 had been really good in my opinion.
I m not saying that you can t play with this or that shaft-but i see it absolutley like David, too! What sense doest it have, if you re not really able to produce repeatable reactions? Just to be able to draw a ball perhaps a diamond more now and then- even as a less skilled player?.
Furthermore Low Deflection does not really make a difference for me. I have to take a shaft and it has immediatley to feel good for me. the rest ist just a bit practice. Every shaft has LD- For some LD Shafts are maybe the easier way to go. For myself i have another opinion.

The best shafts for me had been shafts from 2 cuemakers- one is a regional cuemaker in my near, and the other one (my overall favourite from all shafts i played) is a *half-time-cuemaker* who just builds cues in his freetime. His shafts and cues are a bomb. Unfortunatley just able to make it his freetime as a hobby.

lg
Ingo

Ratta said:

The best shafts for me had been shafts from 2 cuemakers- one is a regional cuemaker in my near, and the other one (my overall favourite from all shafts i played) is a *half-time-cuemaker* who just builds cues in his freetime. His shafts and cues are a bomb. Unfortunatley just able to make it his freetime as a hobby.

Click to expand...

Ingo

Thanks for your kind words! Needless to say, you've now made me curious what cuemakers and types of shafts you're talking about. Feel free to PM me if you'd like to keep it a secret. :wink:

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti

good review and comparison..
just curious where anwar located?? anyone knows??