2025 Southwest Cues

skor said:
Let's say that they work on a cue once a month for an hour, so after the first batch of cues is out and assuming that they work 8 hours a day, they should be putting out 8 cues a day.
Click to expand...
No, your math only works if there is only 1 step in the process.
In reality, there might be 100 steps in the process, so one might get 0.08 cues done per day.
 
MitchAlsup said:
No, your math only works if there is only 1 step in the process.
In reality, there might be 100 steps in the process, so one might get 0.08 cues done per day.
Click to expand...

No, his theory works out. If there are 100 steps in every cue, and you can do 1 step a day on eight different cues, on day 100 you will put out 8 cues. Day 101, eight cues. Day 175, eight cues. It's the same theory as pulse-line or parallel line assembly. The problems are: You need multiple stations, a lot of room, a lot of investment, and a TON of organization/tracking. You also need a place to store 800 cues.

In theory, great. In practice, not so much, especially if you are wanting a custom cue made by 1-2 people.
 
IMG_4488.jpeg
IMG_4491.jpeg


I haven’t screwed these together
 
xproskier said:
19 years just to get a cue? No doubt they are nice, as shown in the photos, and probably hit well too. But 19 years??? C'mon. I've built two custom homes in 19 years! Imagine if one worked on their stroke for 19 years? They should be able to pick up a $39 Mizerak off Amazon and shoot straight. Do you know how many tournaments I have won in 19 years beginning with a $250 Viking and now with a Predator P3 for the past 7 years? (And yeah, I've lost many too.) It never ceases to amaze me how many people spend $5000+ in equipment plus a table but not a penny on lessons. Duh. Unless you just want to put the cue behind some glass display, along with some Civil War swords and a few signed baseballs, I really don't see the point. Isn't a cue made for playing? And isn't it the person BEHIND the cue rather THAN the cue? Specifically cue technology which HAS changed, many other things can change too in 19 years, like one's stance, alignment, stroke, vision, etc. Maybe for the better, or maybe not. And if not, that SW is not going to become some magic wand. In fact, it might even be MORE harmful to your current game. Truth be told, I rarely focus on the other player's equipment when competing. I only watch their technique and what the table presents to me IF I am fortunate enough to even get back to the table. But if SW and waiting two generations is your thing, fine. I'm not knocking your choice nor your decision. Not my circus; not my monkey. Good luck and all the best to you.
Click to expand...
i have been on the list for 16 years, i did have a repair and a set of matching joint protectors made in a couple months after contact however
 
xproskier said:
In 19 years, there have also been other "nice" things put out. With even more technology too and exotic wood that's been dried just as long. And for less money and half of the wait time. But agree, SW is one great cue and cue-maker. But so is Dennis Searing. So is Ernie Martinez. And the list goes on a bit more... It's also not hard to comprehend.
Click to expand...
You were good at Searing, then you added Martinez - not in the same world
 
billiards_watch said:
One of the most copied cue.

I believe that is their original design so with that it comes with a lot of interest. Not only an original design but they are supposedly great hitting cues. We've seen a lot of copies of this design.

Kind of like Balabushkas are often copied with the 4 point 4 veneer cues. Which now Tascarella gets the authority to make. So if you want a Balabushka type cue then you go to Tascarella and not anyone else.

While there are a lot of great cue makers but you want to go with as "original" as you can get.
Click to expand...
If you want a Balabuska type cue you go to Showman, there is no other option for old school design from a master. Yes Tasc makes nice cues but Showman does it like nobody else and they play great
 
Worst playing cue I've ever owned and Haley was a close 2nd. Both outstanding looking cues that simply didn't play well, not to mention Ron Haley was one of the nicest people you would ever meet.

Manzino plays bad also, another great guy making gorgeous cues that don't play very well - Richard Black made cues that had the worst gaps around inlays and some cues played dead better than a 2nd hand villian in a western but some played great.

I've probably managed to piss everybody off at this point but....have a good night
 
DeeDeeCues said:
No, his theory works out. If there are 100 steps in every cue, and you can do 1 step a day on eight different cues, on day 100 you will put out 8 cues. Day 101, eight cues.
Click to expand...
Where did you find the time to do the other 99 steps on those first 8 cues ??
DeeDeeCues said:
Day 175, eight cues. It's the same theory as pulse-line or parallel line assembly. The problems are: You need multiple stations, a lot of room, a lot of investment, and a TON of organization/tracking. You also need a place to store 800 cues.
Click to expand...
And each step takes 1 hour and there are 100 steps so, at best, each cue takes 100 hours or 1 cue per 4 days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top