Joint collar mismatch- aftermarket shafts- and OCD

OK...I absolutely can't stand joint collars on shafts that don't match the butt.

First, the ring design. I can't deal with it if they don't match. :angry:

Second, the diameter. If the diameter does not match I can't deal with it. :angry:

So...aftermarket shafts are all the rage. But I know most of you guys are not sending blanks off to be matched to your butt, you are playing "off the shelf" aftermarket shafts.

Really?

You'll spend serious money on equipment that DOES NOT MATCH and DOES NOT FIT? Sure...it screws on there and plays but....

Do you wear socks that don't match?

Do you wear shoes that don't match?

Do you have four different tires on your car? Hey, they're all round and the same size but a black wall, white wall, a white letter, and a red stripe? Really?

Check your wife...does the carpet match the drapes? OK, bad example....

Yes, I am a bit OCD. Yes, when my daughter wears socks that don't match and she tells me it is a fad I question her cognitive function. Yes, I have problems with asymmetry....



Is this why we see "spare" Searing, Mottey, JW, dash ring Schon, Tasc, etc shafts in perfect condition for sale? "I forgot I had this shaft when I sold the cue." You forgot you had a $200-$700 shaft?


OK...I think most guys with really valuable cues do get their aftermarket shafts matched. But the masses don't. That's the majority of the market.

Do people not care at all?

Am I just too OCD?

I have a pair of truly awesome Scruggs shafts with ivory ferrules (spare me the argument, those ferrules are awesome). But they have very fancy, very unique rings. I am having trouble deciding what cue to have them matched to. It is tough because they are longer than traditional rings so they are hard to match and I don't want to shorten the shafts just to get the rings the right size. I have played them, and they are seriously great shafts...but most of the time they are stored. I scored them cheap, like most of my stuff, I am a bargain hunter and cue sleuth. It's a hobby. I am seriously thinking to have them done with a stainless ring on the end like some old Vikings in order to get the decorative ring thickness to match the cue I want them on.


OK...rant over.


Rebuttals...





.

Ched said:

meh - whether the collars match or not really doesn't bother me. Yes - I think it's much more attractive if they /do/ match - but it doesn't affect the play ability IMO. The "size" though ... that /does/ matter to me. I'm not sure why I feel the way I do - but you asked.

Click to expand...

So....size matters...?



.

skins said:

You must drive your bike builders nutz!

Click to expand...

LOL!


Well, I generally build my own. But a Harley is one of the few asymmetrical things I can tolerate. LOL!


That big old agricultural pump motor sitting sideways in the frame with a carb on the right and the big ass primary drive on the left...something is just right about that.

To me a Moto Guzzi looks retarded...but it is symmetrical.





.

louieatienza said:

What then if the stitching or checks on the rings don't line up?

Click to expand...

Well, for some reason that does not mess with me so badly.

To me that is more of a wear issue. Even if they start out perfect, by screwing on and off eventually there will be a tiny bit of wear on the joint face and they won't line up. So if they don't line up brand new it won't matter to me because the cue is going to get used.

On a museum piece, a real show piece, it would matter to me. They should be made to line up perfectly. But then the cue will not be used and there will be no wear. But I will never own such a cue, I don't want to.

That's my rationality and I am sticking to it.



.

WildWing said:

I share your frustration, as well as the OCD. I probably can't even count all my shafts, mostly original, but some aftermarket as well. Some of the aftermarket are matched to the original joint collars, some aren't. Some match just by accident, especially the plain black ones.

The real issue, I think is stnrdards among the aftermarket shaft makers. Predator, OB, and Mezz, for example, make shafts with nickel rings overall slimmer than the very standard approximately 1/2 inch wide, for some reason. Some make a 1/2 inch black collar, which looks fairly decent on most cues.

I guess the real question is, Predator, OB, Mezz, etc, when are you going to extract your heads from your rectums and make your nickel ring shafts 1/2 inch wide to match a lot of the Bushka-type joint collars already out there? The diameter usually isn't bad, about .845, which is usually about right. I don't understand the insanity either. There's no copyright on collar design. Mezz even takes the insanity further, by not only making their nickel ring collars slimmer, but also making their ring collars a double, rather than single ring. What cues would that match? None I know of.

Has to be a conspiracy between the aftermarket makers and the cuemakers and cue repairmen. Like speed bump makers and shock absorber makers.

Frustrated also.
WW

Click to expand...

I really prefer a half inch ring. If it is not a half inch it better be a damn nice ring.


And I hate metal rings. The only exception I have to that is a real Balabushka. Other than that, I hate them. For the life of me I cannot imagine why Schon went to metal rings so long ago and stayed with them. A Joss with metal rings is a rarity.


I prefer some sort of a dashed ring...but there are others I do like. Plain black is nice as well. Depends on the cue design. I really like maple or ivory dashes in black phenolic...sometimes brown on the right cue. I really also like colored veneers in between the dashes to match the point veneers. That's a nice touch. I have seen a number of Tasc cues like that that I really like.

To me, metal rings are poor design. They always pop eventually. And I hate that. I really hate that.





.

Kickin' Chicken said:

I do have an idea on what you could do with those TS shafts. Send me pics. :yeah::canoodle:

best,
brian kc

Click to expand...

I'll have to dig them out. I don't have pics of them. They are currently put away and I have no idea which case they are in.

I am interested in your idea though, so I will make an effort to get pics of them soon.

I was thinking to have them matched to my Joss. But since the rings are wide...I am not sure.

I have 2 Joss, 2 JW, and one Scruggs shafts for my Joss. I wouldn't mind these two as well. Or maybe another cue.

One of the issues is that they are 18 pin flat face, not 14 piloted. I know. Odd. Yes, they are Scruggs. So it would be easier to get them matched to my Huebler, or a really nice old Mali I have.

I have played them on several cues and they are really seriously sweet playing shafts.



I will be curious to see what your idea is.

.

Black-Balled said:

I have grown to appreciate the bit of accent a decorative collared shaft adds to my butt.

It is like a tattoo, why would you get the same one on both sides of your body?

Click to expand...

That's a nice perspective. Thank you.




.

PoppaSaun said:

Want to know what is worse?

Most cue makers use identical height (thickness) rings at all five locations. This means that the ring on the shaft (smallest diameter) is the same height (or thickness) as the ring at the buttcap (largest diameter). This leads to an unbalanced look.

It's kind of like bad kerning. Once you notice it, you will always notice it.

Click to expand...

Some cue makers can manipulate the relative sizes of rings and inlays in order to alter the apparent proportion of the cue. A cue can be made to look quite different. The cue can look bottom heavy, top heavy, or otherwise. Properly managed the proportion flow with the design in such a way that you don't even immediately notice how he did that. At the other extreme the design can be thrown off and the cue looks "unbalanced" in proportions.

Every cue maker has his talents. They are all different. What might look wrong or not suit your tastes might be why that cue maker is not the right one for you.

I try to admire the work in any case.




.