Measuring shaft deflection

S

slach

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Is there any independent 'lab' anywhere that actually measures/compares shaft deflection (or is it squirt?) from different makers?

In golf there's a number of independent (in theory) places that use high tech equipment (flight monitors, mechanical stroking machines, etc.) that test out and report on equipment.

Bigger cue shaft makers might have a scientific way of measuring, but I haven't seen any details about what/how they do this. It's like you have to take their word on it - 'mine deflects less'.
 
G

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
slach said:
Is there any independent 'lab' anywhere that actually measures/compares shaft deflection (or is it squirt?) from different makers?

In golf there's a number of independent (in theory) places that use high tech equipment (flight monitors, mechanical stroking machines, etc.) that test out and report on equipment.

Bigger cue shaft makers might have a scientific way of measuring, but I haven't seen any details about what/how they do this. It's like you have to take their word on it - 'mine deflects less'.
Click to expand...
Bob Meucci's device works like pool's version of IronByron. It would be nice to test the current crop of LD shafts. If you have a fairly consistent stroke you can do the MD tests yourself. When i compared a Schon shaft to a OB Classic+ i wasn't expecting such a difference but it was HUGE. Cue-ball went almost dead-straight(using 1.5 tips spin) with OB. With Schon shaft the squirt was big(massive actually), pretty much same as in BM's test.
 
Last edited:
iusedtoberich

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
slach said:
Is there any independent 'lab' anywhere that actually measures/compares shaft deflection (or is it squirt?) from different makers?

In golf there's a number of independent (in theory) places that use high tech equipment (flight monitors, mechanical stroking machines, etc.) that test out and report on equipment.

Bigger cue shaft makers might have a scientific way of measuring, but I haven't seen any details about what/how they do this. It's like you have to take their word on it - 'mine deflects less'.
Click to expand...

To answer your question directly:

No, there is not anything independent, reliable, and available to the public.
 
hang-the-9

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
slach said:
Is there any independent 'lab' anywhere that actually measures/compares shaft deflection (or is it squirt?) from different makers?

In golf there's a number of independent (in theory) places that use high tech equipment (flight monitors, mechanical stroking machines, etc.) that test out and report on equipment.

Bigger cue shaft makers might have a scientific way of measuring, but I haven't seen any details about what/how they do this. It's like you have to take their word on it - 'mine deflects less'.
Click to expand...

The issue with just having deflection numbers is that there is no way to take that and translate it into you playing better with a shaft. Your stroke may want a certain performance from the shaft to match how you hit the cueball without spending time to re-train how you play.

I think the only way you can find a shaft/cue is by trying a lot of them.

I have seen some players that have no idea why they are missing shots, and when I talk to them it turns out they are using an LD shaft because someone told them they should but don't know how to aim with one or using a non-LD shaft but don't know how to adjust for spin. It's not even their shooting flaws that cause the miss, they just don't know how to play with the equipment they have.
 
Last edited:
G

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
hang-the-9 said:
The issue with just having deflection numbers is that there is no way to take that and translate it into you playing better with a shaft. Your stroke may want a certain performance from the shaft to match how you hit the cueball without spending time to re-train how you play.

I think the only way you can find a shaft/cue is by trying a lot of them.

I have seen some players that have no idea why they are missing shots, and when I talk to them it turns out they are using an LD shaft because someone told them they should but don't know how to aim with one or using a non-LD shaft but don't know how to adjust for spin. It's not even their shooting flaws that cause the miss, they just don't know how to play with the equipment they have.
Click to expand...
Well said. Its like getting fit for golf clubs. Buying off-the-rack usually hurts your game.
 
S

Superiorduper

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I honestly don’t think it’s something any pool player should bother taking up their mental capacity with.

All I know is that pretty much all the low deflection shafts do as they’re advertised, some feel better than others. But “adjusting” a certain amount to calculate the amount of deflection is silly. Speed of the shot, the cloth/it’s condition, and the cue ball’s weight/size are too great of factors to make an accurate calculation.

So I just line up the shot to where I’d like it to go. But I know if I’m using a thick old maple shaft with a hard 1” ferrule on it I’m going to stay relatively close to middle ball and not try to over power anything.
 
S

slach

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Found the Meucci machine in action here http://meuccicues.com/deflection_videos.html.

These vids are rather old, it'd be interesting to see what kind of numbers the latest shafts have.

Plus, testing tips and chalks... measure how far the cue ball would spin off the end rail.

Yeah, I know it's all rather subjective when it comes to the 'feel' you like.
 
Q

qbilder

slower than snails
Silver Member
Whether you hit a sphere with a feather or you hit it with a freight train, the direction it travels will be exactly opposite of contact point. The only way to alter the trajectory is with friction, not the mass of the projectile. Both objects deflect. The direction in which they do so is static, regardless of mass. Take any low deflection shaft you want and clean the chalk off, then wet the tip. Try shooting. Anything aside from center ball will result in what we know as a miscue, the tip deflecting one way and the ball deflecting the other. In fact, the result will exactly mirror what happens when you shoot a cut shot, driving the CB into the edge of the OB. The same exact physics apply. The rub(pun intended) comes in with chalk. The abrasive nature of chalk exponentially increases friction. It's the friction that alters the dynamics, not tip end mass.

Another way to look at it is with a marble. You have a cut shot. Draw a line from the pocket through the OB. Where that line exits the ball is where the cue ball needs to contact it in order to pocket. That's a given, right? Now sub the CB with a small marble. Will the contact point change? Nope. Will the marble deflect in a different direction than the CB would have after contact? Nope. The deflection direction(s) is/are static. The deflection intensity is the only thing that changes. The marble will not transfer as much energy to the OB as a CB would, but the directions each move after impact is the same. So why would we use a LD shaft to hit the CB & expect the CB to travel a different direction than it would if we had hit it with a standard shaft?
 
S

slach

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Are you saying a chalked tip and an LD shafts allow more friction to occur, thus more altering the trajectory, thus less deflection? If so, why does a LD shaft cause more friction?


qbilder said:
Whether you hit a sphere with a feather or you hit it with a freight train, the direction it travels will be exactly opposite of contact point. The only way to alter the trajectory is with friction, not the mass of the projectile. Both objects deflect. The direction in which they do so is static, regardless of mass. Take any low deflection shaft you want and clean the chalk off, then wet the tip. Try shooting. Anything aside from center ball will result in what we know as a miscue, the tip deflecting one way and the ball deflecting the other. In fact, the result will exactly mirror what happens when you shoot a cut shot, driving the CB into the edge of the OB. The same exact physics apply. The rub(pun intended) comes in with chalk. The abrasive nature of chalk exponentially increases friction. It's the friction that alters the dynamics, not tip end mass.

Another way to look at it is with a marble. You have a cut shot. Draw a line from the pocket through the OB. Where that line exits the ball is where the cue ball needs to contact it in order to pocket. That's a given, right? Now sub the CB with a small marble. Will the contact point change? Nope. Will the marble deflect in a different direction than the CB would have after contact? Nope. The deflection direction(s) is/are static. The deflection intensity is the only thing that changes. The marble will not transfer as much energy to the OB as a CB would, but the directions each move after impact is the same. So why would we use a LD shaft to hit the CB & expect the CB to travel a different direction than it would if we had hit it with a standard shaft?
Click to expand...
 
hang-the-9

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This does not make sense, if you take a standard shaft and put on a different tip, or scuff the tip more, you will not change the deflection properties on it. Every LD shaft does something to the end mass of the shaft, hollow end, filled or not filled with foam or something, smaller ferrule, thinner wall ferrule, thinner shaft, etc...


qbilder said:
Whether you hit a sphere with a feather or you hit it with a freight train, the direction it travels will be exactly opposite of contact point. The only way to alter the trajectory is with friction, not the mass of the projectile. Both objects deflect. The direction in which they do so is static, regardless of mass. Take any low deflection shaft you want and clean the chalk off, then wet the tip. Try shooting. Anything aside from center ball will result in what we know as a miscue, the tip deflecting one way and the ball deflecting the other. In fact, the result will exactly mirror what happens when you shoot a cut shot, driving the CB into the edge of the OB. The same exact physics apply. The rub(pun intended) comes in with chalk. The abrasive nature of chalk exponentially increases friction. It's the friction that alters the dynamics, not tip end mass.

Another way to look at it is with a marble. You have a cut shot. Draw a line from the pocket through the OB. Where that line exits the ball is where the cue ball needs to contact it in order to pocket. That's a given, right? Now sub the CB with a small marble. Will the contact point change? Nope. Will the marble deflect in a different direction than the CB would have after contact? Nope. The deflection direction(s) is/are static. The deflection intensity is the only thing that changes. The marble will not transfer as much energy to the OB as a CB would, but the directions each move after impact is the same. So why would we use a LD shaft to hit the CB & expect the CB to travel a different direction than it would if we had hit it with a standard shaft?
Click to expand...
 
buckshotshoey

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
hang-the-9 said:
This does not make sense, if you take a standard shaft and put on a different tip, or scuff the tip more, you will not change the deflection properties on it. Every LD shaft does something to the end mass of the shaft, hollow end, filled or not filled with foam or something, smaller ferrule, thinner wall ferrule, thinner shaft, etc...
Click to expand...

Or use thinner shaft. A 12mm will not deflect the cue ball as much as a 13 of the same construction.
 
K

KMRUNOUT

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
qbilder said:
It's the friction that alters the dynamics, not tip end mass.
Click to expand...

qbilder said:
So why would we use a LD shaft to hit the CB & expect the CB to travel a different direction than it would if we had hit it with a standard shaft?
Click to expand...

Because the "not you" part of we recognize the first statement as false. LOTS of research and physics shows that it is end mass that determines amount of cueball squirt. You can easily prove this to yourself.

Not trying to be snarky, but have you ever studied the application of vectors to forces? When you strike the cueball off center there are "component" forces in both a longitudinal and transverse direction. The mass of the end of the shaft alters the longitudinal force vector in direct proportion to its mass. Less mass, less force. Less force, smaller angle of departure. Basic collision physics. So that's why.

KMRUNOUT
 
G

garczar

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
buckshotshoey said:
Or use thinner shaft. A 12mm will not deflect the cue ball as much as a 13 of the same construction.
Click to expand...
Less tip-end mass is why. How much a shaft does/doesn't deflect has nothing to do with friction. The mass in the last 5-6" of the shaft determines the amount of deflection.
 
Q

qbilder

slower than snails
Silver Member
KMRUNOUT said:
Because the "not you" part of we recognize the first statement as false. LOTS of research and physics shows that it is end mass that determines amount of cueball squirt. You can easily prove this to yourself.

Not trying to be snarky, but have you ever studied the application of vectors to forces? When you strike the cueball off center there are "component" forces in both a longitudinal and transverse direction. The mass of the end of the shaft alters the longitudinal force vector in direct proportion to its mass. Less mass, less force. Less force, smaller angle of departure. Basic collision physics. So that's why.

KMRUNOUT
Click to expand...

Yes, I have looked at all of the science being applied to the LD explanation. I have seen the research, videos, discussions, etc. I'm well aware of the perception. I'm not saying a new tip with fresh chalk will deflect less, and I'm not saying tip end mass has nothing to do with the way the shaft deflects in relation to the CB deflection. What I am saying is that we are missing something, trying to do a math problem without all of the factors.

My point is very clear. Remove the chalk from ANY shaft, and wet the tip to reduce friction. Now play pool. What happens? The exact same deflection(s) that occur when the CB strikes an OB. I'm not being snarky, either. Nor am I flat earthing it. I 100% believe science, but only when the science is thorough. You cannot leave out factors & reach an accurate conclusion. Friction is obviously a major factor, and by the very nature of chalking it is variable. That's my position, for now. It's always been an interesting conversation that has never satisfied. The concrete has yet to cure, so there's still some soft spots. Compare & contrast the deflection properties of ANY shaft with chalk vs. no chalk, wet tip. Basically friction vs. no friction. It's a simple comparison. Do that, then explain again to me how all of the science your using to describe LD applies.
 
Cornerman

Cornerman

Cue Author...Sometimes
Gold Member
Silver Member
hang-the-9 said:
The issue with just having deflection numbers is that there is no way to take that and translate it into you playing better with a shaft. Your stroke may want a certain performance from the shaft to match how you hit the cueball without spending time to re-train how you play.

.
Click to expand...
Considering that my whole game is based on what the pivot point is, and teaching how to adjust for squirt using your cue's "deflection number" is lesson three of my instruction curriculum, I'd say I wholeheartedly disagree. Been talking about the methods for 20 years now.

I think part of the issue is a lot of new buyers have no idea what to do with a pivot point number. LD shafts helped to confuse people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top