Cues - it seems like more simple design is were it is at ?

I went very simple with nice figured woods for my next cue. Should be in my hands by end of the month. Made by Mike Stacey.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tusmadpark said:

I went very simple with nice figured woods for my next cue. Should be in my hands by end of the month. Made by Mike Stacey.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I like that.

Simple and clean looking.

JoeyInCali said:

Ebony cues are ugly.
Ugh! Filthy ugly.
And they hit like wet expired noodle .
Go with ramin and bamboo.

Click to expand...

Does the hit differ depending on where the ebony is? Nose and butt sleeve or handle?

My fugly olivewood and ebony Cem.

jimmyco said:

Does the hit differ depending on where the ebony is? Nose and butt sleeve or handle?

My fugly olivewood and ebony Cem.

Click to expand...

Very good question.

I was wondering the same thing.

I have cues with ebony fronts, but have never tried one with other fronts and an ebony handle.

HawaiianEye said:

Very good question.

I was wondering the same thing.

I have cues with ebony fronts, but have never tried one with other fronts and an ebony handle.

Click to expand...

I always use the heavier wood in the forearm. It gives a forward balance that makes open bridge follow through on off center shots a stress free existence. Especially in this age of small pro taper shafts which are simply lighter by dimensional physics.

It's a subtle difference but it's there.

There are not too many woods available that are denser then Ebony, and are suitable for cues.

Click to expand...

That chart is wrong.

Bloodwood and Ceylon Satinwood are a few points denser than Gabon Ebony, but call them the same. Cocobola, Ipe, Honduran rosewood, snakewood, are all denser. There's some a slight few points lower, like Pau fero, Brazilean rosewood, Santos "mahogany" etc.

African blackwood is correctly listed as much denser. Its a good bit more stable, and tougher, too.

Got all the above here in the shop right now, mostly in big pieces. I'm not guessing.
Though reference checking wood database to keep myself honest.

There are timbers from Australia that are more dense that i don't know about.

Ipe is a hard hitting cue, but you have to find pieces with waterfall figure or they kind of just look like mud. :smile: Great hit, though.

smt

Ssonerai said:

That chart is wrong.


smt

Click to expand...

Please post a correct one or a link to one.

I just did a simple search and came up with these. I don't know how accurate they are.





Specific Gravity (also referred to as "density")
Specific gravity is a simple ratio between the weight of wood and the weight of water. For instance, the typical dried weight of a cubic-foot of Hard Maple is 45 lbs. and the weight of a cubic foot of water is 62.38 lbs. To calculate specific gravity, divide 45 by 62.38 = .72
Substances with a SG of less than one will float.
We have tried to provide you with the most accurate information for the domestic and exotic wood species listed below, but there may be errors. Please use the following information as a guide. (If you find any errors in your own research, please contact us)

https://www.bellforestproducts.com/info/specific-gravity/

Spc. Gravity Specie Name
0.34 Buckeye Burl
0.37 Mappa Burl
0.38 Spanish Cedar
0.39 Guanacaste (Parota)
0.40 Anigre
0.42 Basswood
0.45 Aspen
0.45 Butternut
0.48 American Chestnut
0.51 Poplar
0.51 Tornillo
0.51 Masur Birch
0.53 African Mahogany
0.53 Koa
0.55 Quilted Western Maple
0.55 Western Maple Burl
0.55 Curly Western Maple
0.55 Western Maple
0.55 Curly Pyinma
0.55 Peruvian Walnut
0.56 Walnut
0.56 Figured Walnut
0.58 Cherry
0.58 Cherry Burl
0.58 Curly Cherry
0.58 Afzelia Burl
0.58 Ebiara
0.59 Genuine Mahogany
0.60 Figured Mango
0.61 Holly
0.62 Lacewood
0.62 Thuya Burl
0.62 Figured Makore
0.62 Quilted Sapele
0.62 Sapele
0.62 Makore
0.63 Red Oak
0.63 Curly Maple (Red Leaf)
0.63 Maple (Red Leaf)
0.63 Curly Oak
0.63 Quarter Sawn Red Oak
0.63 Spalted Oak
0.63 Nicaraguan Rosewood
0.66 White Ash
0.66 Curly White Ash
0.66 Black Ash
0.66 Swamp Ash
0.66 Amboyna Burl
0.66 Curly Narra
0.66 Narra
0.67 Honey Locust
0.67 Black & White Ebony
0.68 Redheart
0.68 Merbau
0.69 Afrormosia
0.71 Birch
0.71 Flame Birch
0.71 Birch Burl
0.72 Birdseye Maple
0.72 Hard Maple
0.72 Curly Maple (Hard Maple)
0.72 Quarter Sawn Maple
0.72 Bark Pocket Maple
0.72 Hard Maple Burl
0.72 Spalted Maple
0.72 Rift Sawn Hard Maple
0.72 Padauk
0.72 English Brown Oak
0.73 Bocote
0.73 Ziricote
0.74 Canarywood
0.74 Zebrawood
0.74 Figured Zebrawood
0.75 Red Palm
0.75 Shedua
0.76 E. Indian Rosewood
0.77 Quarter Sawn White Oak
0.77 White Oak
0.77 Madrone Burl
0.77 Mayan Walnut
0.79 Angelim Pedra
0.80 Wenge
0.80 Yellowheart
0.80 Indian Ebony
0.81 Santos Mahogany
0.81 Osage Orange (USA)
0.82 Hickory
0.82 Eucalyptus
0.83 Osage Orange (Argentine)
0.84 Bolivian Rosewood
0.84 Jarrah Burl
0.85 Olivewood
0.85 Chakte Viga
0.85 Marblewood
0.85 Red Mallee Burl
0.85 Brown Mallee Burl
0.85 Yellow Box Burl
0.86 Purpleheart
0.86 Figured Purpleheart
0.86 Goncalo Alves
0.86 Cumaru
0.86 Red Coolibah Burl
0.88 Figured Bubinga
0.88 Quilted Bubinga
0.88 Chechen
0.88 Granadillo
0.88 Black Palm
0.88 Bubinga
0.88 Tamboti
0.88 Camphor Bush Burl
0.88 Figured Camphor Bush
0.89 Amazon Rosewood
0.90 Gaboon Ebony
0.90 Mun Ebony
0.90 Spalted Tamarind
0.90 Royal Ebony
0.91 Jatoba
0.91 Leopardwood
0.91 Tulipwood
0.94 Cochen Rosewood
0.95 Pink Ivory
0.96 Bloodwood
0.96 Honduras Rosewood
0.96 Honduras Rosewood Burl
0.98 Mopani
1.00 Sucupira
1.01 Macassar Ebony
1.04 Katalox
1.04 Figured Katalox
1.04 Brown Ebony
1.08 Snakewood
1.10 Cocobolo
1.10 Kingwood
1.10 Lignum Vitae (Argentine)
1.12 Grey Box Burl
1.12 Lignum Vitae (Genuine)
1.17 Brazilian Ebony
1.19 Camatillo
1.20 African Blackwood

Janka Hardness
The Janka scale is used to determine the relative hardness of particular domestic or exotic wood species. The Janka test measures the amount of force required to embed a 0.444" steel ball into the wood to half of its diameter. Woods with a higher rating are harder than woods with a lower rating.
The scale used in the table is pounds-force.

Janka Specie Name
350 Buckeye Burl
380 Aspen
410 Basswood
470 Guanacaste (Parota)
490 Butternut
540 American Chestnut
540 Poplar
540 Mappa Burl
600 Spanish Cedar
800 Genuine Mahogany
850 Quilted Western Maple
850 Western Maple Burl
850 Curly Western Maple
850 Black Ash
850 Western Maple
891 Lacewood
930 Anigre
950 Cherry
950 Curly Maple (Red Leaf)
950 Cherry Burl
950 Maple (Red Leaf)
950 Curly Cherry
950 Tornillo
960 Peruvian Walnut
1010 Walnut
1010 Figured Walnut
1020 Holly
1055 Curly Pyinma
1100 African Mahogany
1100 Figured Mango
1160 Thuya Burl
1170 Koa
1200 Redheart
1200 Masur Birch
1210 Nicaraguan Rosewood
1220 Red Oak
1220 Curly Oak
1220 Quarter Sawn Red Oak
1220 Spalted Oak
1260 Birch
1260 Flame Birch
1260 Birch Burl
1260 Amboyna Burl
1260 Curly Narra
1260 Narra
1294 Figured Makore
1294 Makore
1320 White Ash
1320 Curly White Ash
1320 Swamp Ash
1330 Shedua
1335 Quarter Sawn White Oak
1335 White Oak
1350 Ebiara
1360 English Brown Oak
1400 Mayan Walnut
1400 Eucalyptus
1439 Quilted Sapele
1450 Birdseye Maple
1450 Hard Maple
1450 Curly Maple (Hard Maple)
1450 Quarter Sawn Maple
1450 Bark Pocket Maple
1450 Hard Maple Burl
1450 Spalted Maple
1450 Rift Sawn Hard Maple
1460 Madrone Burl
1500 Sapele
1520 Canarywood
1548 Honey Locust
1560 Afrormosia
1712 Merbau
1780 Black & White Ebony
1800 Camphor Bush Burl
1800 Figured Camphor Bush
1810 Afzelia Burl
1820 Hickory
1830 Zebrawood
1830 Figured Zebrawood
1860 Jarrah Burl
1878 Yellowheart
1900 Red Palm
1930 Wenge
1960 Bolivian Rosewood
1970 Padauk
1970 Ziricote
2010 Bocote
2020 Black Palm
2140 Sucupira
2150 Leopardwood
2160 Goncalo Alves
2200 Chechen
2200 Honduras Rosewood
2200 Honduras Rosewood Burl
2250 Chakte Viga
2318 Spalted Tamarind
2400 Osage Orange (Argentine)
2400 Santos Mahogany
2410 Figured Bubinga
2410 Quilted Bubinga
2410 Bubinga
2430 Cochen Rosewood
2430 Indian Ebony
2440 E. Indian Rosewood
2480 Tamboti
2490 Red Mallee Burl
2490 Brown Mallee Burl
2500 Tulipwood
2520 Purpleheart
2520 Figured Purpleheart
2532 Marblewood
2620 Amazon Rosewood
2690 Jatoba
2690 Olivewood
2700 Granadillo
2760 Osage Orange (USA)
2900 Bloodwood
2920 Yellow Box Burl
2960 Cocobolo
3000 Mun Ebony
3080 Gaboon Ebony
3080 Royal Ebony
3160 Angelim Pedra
3220 Macassar Ebony
3230 Pink Ivory
3330 Cumaru
3340 Kingwood
3340 Camatillo
3370 Grey Box Burl
3390 Mopani
3590 Brown Ebony
3660 Katalox
3660 Figured Katalox
3670 African Blackwood
3690 Brazilian Ebony
3710 Lignum Vitae (Argentine)
3730 Red Coolibah Burl
3800 Snakewood
4380 Lignum Vitae (Genuine)

https://www.bellforestproducts.com/info/janka-hardness/

Please post a correct one or a link to one.

Click to expand...

The Wood Database does a good job sorting and posting the technical info for most wood species. I cross reference there. They do have a few lists, including "10 heaviest" But mostly you have to search and compare. OTOH, being in commercial woodwhacking for almost 50 years, it's good to stay educated.

Here's a link to a typical wood item,

https://www.wood-database.com/cumaru/

When people post specific gravity, you need to state at what MC.

https://www.wood-database.com/wood-articles/specific-gravity/

One problem with wood database is they post SG for green, and at 12% MC. Oven dry weight is posted separately. Few species that interest cue makers are worked at 12%, or they certainly shouldn't be. Then again, most will be only a mass of cracks & splinters at 0 %. So you have to do a little extrapolation. But wood at equal MC's at around 12% can be compared as to how they will continue to rank at 5% - 8%

There's a lot of more interesting info in the wood database than weight - janka hardness, youngs modulus, compressive and tensile strength, ratio of tangential to radial shrinkage (which tells a lot about the potential stability). etc.

Your chart, on the face of it, looks better than the previous one posted. And on yours, Gabon ebony is a lot further down from the top, as i noted earlier.

smt

Ssonerai said:

The Wood Database does a good job sorting and posting the technical info for most wood species. I cross reference there. They do have a few lists, including "10 heaviest" But mostly you have to search and compare. OTOH, being in commercial woodwhacking for almost 50 years, it's good to stay educated.

Here's a link to a typical wood item,

https://www.wood-database.com/cumaru/

When people post specific gravity, you need to state at what MC.

https://www.wood-database.com/wood-articles/specific-gravity/

One problem with wood database is they post SG for green, and at 12% MC. Oven dry weight is posted separately. Few species that interest cue makers are worked at 12%, or they certainly shouldn't be. Then again, most will be only a mass of cracks & splinters at 0 %. So you have to do a little extrapolation. But wood at equal MC's at around 12% can be compared as to how they will continue to rank at 5% - 8%

There's a lot of more interesting info in the wood database than weight - janka hardness, youngs modulus, compressive and tensile strength, ratio of tangential to radial shrinkage (which tells a lot about the potential stability). etc.

Your chart, on the face of it, looks better than the previous one posted. And on yours, Gabon ebony is a lot further down from the top, as i noted earlier.

smt

Click to expand...

I looked at three or four different sources, and they all basically said the same thing. This is just the chart I chose to post. But, I will have a look at the links you posted as I get time today.

Ssonerai said:

That chart is wrong.

Bloodwood and Ceylon Satinwood are a few points denser than Gabon Ebony, but call them the same. Cocobola, Ipe, Honduran rosewood, snakewood, are all denser. There's some a slight few points lower, like Pau fero, Brazilean rosewood, Santos "mahogany" etc.

African blackwood is correctly listed as much denser. Its a good bit more stable, and tougher, too.

Got all the above here in the shop right now, mostly in big pieces. I'm not guessing.
Though reference checking wood database to keep myself honest.

There are timbers from Australia that are more dense that i don't know about.

Ipe is a hard hitting cue, but you have to find pieces with waterfall figure or they kind of just look like mud. :smile: Great hit, though.

smt

Click to expand...

You're correct.

Lignum Vatia is the same as the African Blackwood on weight and specific gravity.

Ssonerai said:

The Wood Database does a good job sorting and posting the technical info for most wood species. I cross reference there. They do have a few lists, including "10 heaviest" But mostly you have to search and compare. OTOH, being in commercial woodwhacking for almost 50 years, it's good to stay educated.

Here's a link to a typical wood item,

https://www.wood-database.com/cumaru/

When people post specific gravity, you need to state at what MC.

https://www.wood-database.com/wood-articles/specific-gravity/

One problem with wood database is they post SG for green, and at 12% MC. Oven dry weight is posted separately. Few species that interest cue makers are worked at 12%, or they certainly shouldn't be. Then again, most will be only a mass of cracks & splinters at 0 %. So you have to do a little extrapolation. But wood at equal MC's at around 12% can be compared as to how they will continue to rank at 5% - 8%

There's a lot of more interesting info in the wood database than weight - janka hardness, youngs modulus, compressive and tensile strength, ratio of tangential to radial shrinkage (which tells a lot about the potential stability). etc.

Your chart, on the face of it, looks better than the previous one posted. And on yours, Gabon ebony is a lot further down from the top, as i noted earlier.

smt

Click to expand...

I did some searching on the links you provided. The info was NOT very helpful. There was no chart or list I could find. Only reference material or posters that need to be purchased.

I did learn a few things, but not what I was looking for.

Those charts are just a rough guideline. I weigh, measure and calculate the density on every piece of wood I acquire.

Some are very close and some are off by miles.

I have a round of very dry red narra that weighs about the weight of water at 62 lbs per cubic foot. A fine piece of wood.

This species is listed a third less than that in density on the "chart".

I have a couple hundred squares and rounds of cocobolo that ranges from 60lbs per cubic foot to almost 80.

Every tree has it's own story to tell. Don't trust those charts with you cues.

Bling IMHO don't make a Cue play better. LOL.:smile:

I did some searching on the links you provided. The info was NOT very helpful. There was no chart or list I could find. Only reference material or posters that need to be purchased.

I did learn a few things, but not what I was looking for.

Click to expand...

Everyone is looking for simple answers they can "rely on"
Most "charts" in any field just copy each other, esp now with the internet.
I would not buy Wood Databse charts, either, though at least they developed their own from source material and experiment. Simplifications are not all that useful.

Wood is not that simple as JC explains.

And it's worth repeating: there are characteristics such as young's modulus, Janka hardness, & ratio of tangential to radial shrikage as well as over all shrinkage that are far more interesting & potentially predictive than simple density. The parts that probably don't help you. Are you a woodworker? Professionally?

smt

Ssonerai said:

Everyone is looking for simple answers they can "rely on"
Most "charts" in any field just copy each other, esp now with the internet.
I would not buy Wood Databse charts, either, though at least they developed their own from source material and experiment. Simplifications are not all that useful.

Wood is not that simple as JC explains.

And it's worth repeating: there are characteristics such as young's modulus, Janka hardness, & ratio of tangential to radial shrikage as well as over all shrinkage that are far more interesting & potentially predictive than simple density. The parts that probably don't help you. Are you a woodworker? Professionally?

smt

Click to expand...

Having actually had some experiencing working with wood. Wood is not a man made like stainless steel, copper, or alumium.

Each piece of wood is an adventure. We build a small sail boat years ago in school shop class. Also many many lathed turn bowls & Chess boards, in that class.

One of the problems is everytime you made a cut, your project could be scrap because some knot, or grain change made the piece of wood you were work on junk, or scrap.

Every tree growning in a forest get different sunlight, amount of water, the soil differs, so each tree grows differently

These challanges are the reason some Cue-makers get delays, customer sometimes do not understand. Something that was coming along fine, became unusable scrap.

Project has to be restarted.

Ssonerai said:

Everyone is looking for simple answers they can "rely on"
Most "charts" in any field just copy each other, esp now with the internet.
I would not buy Wood Databse charts, either, though at least they developed their own from source material and experiment. Simplifications are not all that useful.

Wood is not that simple as JC explains.

And it's worth repeating: there are characteristics such as young's modulus, Janka hardness, & ratio of tangential to radial shrikage as well as over all shrinkage that are far more interesting & potentially predictive than simple density. The parts that probably don't help you. Are you a woodworker? Professionally?

smt

Click to expand...

No I'm not. I do hobby woodworking projects. But not with too many exotic woods.

But if I get the jist of what you are saying, as well as the course you provided, it Is possible for Ebony to be denser then some of the other woods higher on the list. As well as some listed lower as being denser then Ebony?

But if I get the jist of what you are saying, as well as the course you provided, it Is possible for Ebony to be denser then some of the other woods higher on the list. As well as some listed lower as being denser then Ebony

Click to expand...

Correct.
however, 1.) wood database (& National Forest Products Lab, if you really want to pull your hair out searching) do a better job IMO than many of the "charts" assembled for web consumption from other materials, either by people with an agenda, or without any technical woodworking acumen.

& 2.) density, like hardness of steel, is not the biggest factor in performance of those materials in any particular application. Those characteristics can be suggestive & correlate with more important factors. They are the ones that people glom onto because they are simple, can be "rated" in charts & seem to provide simple answers. But other characteristics are often more important for specific performance sets.

3.) to your last Q, wood is far from being a homogenous material. It is the original nature's carbon fiber. However, the trees that lay the fiber down (cellulose) and decide how much glue to add at various points (lignin), all have different needs when doing so. Stress on one side of a tree, injury/damage, fighting disease, cancer (burls), spreading out every direction to catch the sun because there is no competition, or growing straight up in a hurry with few branches on the trunk, because the seedling sprouted in a mature forest, minerals in the soil, climate conditions, some is literally genetically modified by other trees, etc, etc, etc.

smt

Aside from a nice SP cue, IMO, your personal cue should have some distinction from others.
There’s a Tibbits cue listed in the FS section by bobco729 that uses a Hoppe ring. Well, take
away the ring and you have a cue with ebony points, veneers and ivory joint with no inlays.

Just a players design without any fancy adornment and that is my definition of a terrific cue
design. Simplicity and beauty in a cue design rendered with distinction and curbside appeal,
well, that’s the Holy Grail in cue designs. If you’re going to get a cue, i vote get what you like.

When it comes to my liking about the cues...my major concern is how they play. Of course I also try my best to educate my eye and learn about designing them.
I love simple players.
I enjoy the beauty of nature when I look at some woods and just trying to choose the combination of woods that pleases the eye.
This quarantine allowed to give much more time to my new hobby and I'm having some fun.
I'm looking forward our pool school to be finally open at the end of May to test some new players at the table.

This thread from the OP is about 'simple' cue designs. All this hoopla about wood density hardness complicates a choice of a cue.
I would hate to have to use one of these charts to decide which wood I want in a cue.
I could just imagine a few players arguing about their cues density, hardness, and what it weighs compared to water, diesel fuel, moonshine, or red clay mud.