Are any carbon fiber shafts low deflection?

[hang-the-9]

Wondering if any carbon fiber shafts are actually low deflection?
I got a 12.3 Jacoby Black, my buddy has a Bcue prime, and another friend has a Rhino carbon fiber shaft. And all of those have much much more deflection than my players HXT wood shaft. Which is not a super low deflection shaft in itself.
I like the feel of carbon fiber , but the deflection being so high makes it tough to play with. So hoping there may be one out there?

You may not be trying them out properly, all of those have lower deflection than the HXT shaft, even the thinner version. What you posted is the opposite of what everyone else has experienced. I have not tried the Rhino shaft but from all reviews it is a good LD shaft, and I have played with both the Jacoby and the BCUE and both are LD, about the level of a Predator 314.

 

[hang-the-9]

My hxt shaft is at 12.5mm. When I use my Jacoby Black 12.3mm and I am using high right or left English, I literally have to compensate 2 times further for the deflection than I would with my Htx shaft.
Meaning to compensate for how much right hand English will through the cue ball to the left on a firm shot for example.
About the same as a bar cue off the wall would deflect.
I think people that are not aware of this observation have not play with enough different shafts to be able to recognize deflection.
Because the carbon fiber shafts that I have tried up to this point, simply do not have very low deflection.

You are very much the exception here, in fact the first person I have heard of thinking the HXT shaft is lower deflection than any good brand CF shaft. Most of the regular posters on AZB and reviewers have played with dozens of different shafts and are very well aware of deflection. I have an HXT shaft, 11.75 mm, and it is higher deflection than almost all of my other LD shafts, including personally having owned 4 different CF shafts, Revo 12.4 and 11.8, a Mezz Ignite and an OB CF shaft.

You must be doing something funky with your aiming/compensating since your results are the opposite of what everyone else sees.

 

[Jaden]

I haven’t been caught up in the race for lowest deflection. But when they come out with shafts that provide better speed control so I can stop hooking myself, I’ll be all over them.

Low deflection tech has its' benefits. The biggest being that if you don't line up on center ball perfectly, it is more forgiving because it doesn't deviate from the original aimline as much.

With lower deflection; stroke, bridge length and aiming methodologies have evolved. When I first started using low deflection tech with a mcdermott I-2 shaft on a 2009 cue of the year, I adjusted how I held the cue and where I bridged.

I had never liked the hollow feel that most LD shafts have, so I invented my own. I even designed and prototyped THE most advanced shaft made to date. I call it the AEM shaft. I'm not going to get into details right now because I may still bring it to market.

If you look at videos of pros before and after, you'll see what I'm talking about regarding the evolution of stroke.

Jaden

 

[Sealegs50]

Low deflection tech has its' benefits. The biggest being that if you don't line up on center ball perfectly, it is more forgiving because it doesn't deviate from the original aimline as much.

With lower deflection; stroke, bridge length and aiming methodologies have evolved. When I first started using low deflection tech with a mcdermott I-2 shaft on a 2009 cue of the year, I adjusted how I held the cue and where I bridged.

I had never liked the hollow feel that most LD shafts have, so I invented my own. I even designed and prototyped THE most advanced shaft made to date. I call it the AEM shaft. I'm not going to get into details right now because I may still bring it to market.

If you look at videos of pros before and after, you'll see what I'm talking about regarding the evolution of stroke.

Jaden

I understand what you’re saying and have compared current videos against older videos of pros. Their strokes have evolved as you said for the reasons you provided.

Maybe it’s because I’ve been playing with the same style shafts for 50+ years, but all the shots my LD friends tell me I can’t make with older shafts, I make just fine. I understand the benefit of using the right bridge length to match the pivot point of a shaft. But I don’t see how LD provides an advantage over older shafts if I am using a shorter bridge (like pros used to do).

All of the cues that I put on my Mount Rushmore of cues have stiff thick wooden shafts with natural ferrules. My playing shafts were made by Schick, Szamboti, and Showman. I wouldn’t buy another shaft with natural ferrules. But I haven’t found a reason to change what I have owned for years.

Years ago, I bought a Predator 314-2. It hits fine. I still get it out from time to time. I don’t have problems adjusting to it or adjusting back to my older shafts. If I was just getting started I would definitely change to newer technologies because of the ease in finding replacements.

Good luck with your AEM shafts. When you figure out shafts with better speed control, please let me know.

 

[Jaden]

I understand what you’re saying and have compared current videos against older videos of pros. Their strokes have evolved as you said for the reasons you provided.

Maybe it’s because I’ve been playing with the same style shafts for 50+ years, but all the shots my LD friends tell me I can’t make with older shafts, I make just fine. I understand the benefit of using the right bridge length to match the pivot point of a shaft. But I don’t see how LD provides an advantage over older shafts if I am using a shorter bridge (like pros used to do).

All of the cues that I put on my Mount Rushmore of cues have stiff thick wooden shafts with natural ferrules. My playing shafts were made by Schick, Szamboti, and Showman. I wouldn’t buy another shaft with natural ferrules. But I haven’t found a reason to change what I have owned for years.

Years ago, I bought a Predator 314-2. It hits fine. I still get it out from time to time. I don’t have problems adjusting to it or adjusting back to my older shafts. If I was just getting started I would definitely change to newer technologies because of the ease in finding replacements.

Good luck with your AEM shafts. When you figure out shafts with better speed control, please let me know.

They still make a difference with a short bridge in regards to forgiveness of not being aligned with center CB on the original aimline. Although I doubt the amount of forgiveness is enough to compensate for the lack of bad stroke forgiveness that bridging at the PP provides.

It's funny, when I learned how to play pool, no one talked about BHE or pivot points, but they did say to bridge at 8-10 inches, which IS the pivot point for a standard maple shaft. Whether people understood it or not, the industry standard was to bridge at the cue's natural pivot point which has a lot of forgiveness.

Some even taught swiping as a means of putting sidespin which would absolutely require being at the cue's pivot point.

Jaden

p.s. one thing I do to ensure I'm over center ball when aligning my shot is to place my shaft over the ball. Some pros do it by placing the tip of their cue at the base of the CB. This ensures that you're directly at the center line of the CB when aligning the shot.

It's kind of funny, every time me and Scott Frost have matched up he sees my stroke, or rather, he sees my line up and preshot routine and says the same thing when I'm lined up over the ball. "I know what you're doing there." lol

 

[jtompilot]

Not a chance in hell. And not a chance in hell in the low deflection wood era. To each his own

I feel like the 314-3 is about the same as my 12.4 Revo. Which are less than the Jacoby black and Becue prime I used to have. My McDermett CF is pretty low.

 

[Cocoa]

I feel like the 314-3 is about the same as my 12.4 Revo. Which are less than the Jacoby black and Becue prime I used to have. My McDermett CF is pretty low.

Impossible!

 

[scassidy77]

Jacoby black and prime are close to wood LD from what I have heard, but by no means are carbon shaft anywhere close to being on a grid of making a comment or asking the question " Are there any low deflection carbon shafts out there" Lowest deflections I have played with are Revo's, Cynergy 12.5, Becue engage 11.8 and 12.3 and Fortis they all very close in terms of deflection that other factors come into play more than anything. The ones I have seen have closer or just as much deflection as wood LD are peachaure ( has the most) and first gens Jacoby blaks and a Raven that I sent back after a hour of play because it squirted the cue ball further off line than any solid piece of wood I have ever hit with...

Are you using back hand English? I feel Carbon shafts don't react well with it, some more than others. They IMO do very well with parallel and front hand English, some more than others. Also their difernces of deflection depend on how much speed and far out your aiming. That being said I don't have to aim as far out to get as much spin, maybe thats the issue you so use to having to aim father with the HTX. Plus your used to your HTX cuz its yours, you'd have to put more time into the other shafts to truly see what Im talking about.

Ya, I think my jacoby black is a 1st gen.
I am not sure what backhand English is? I am experiencing the high deflection when using high inside English on firm shots. I use these often in my game for position play. And can't adjust to the very high amount of deflection. So hoping to find a carbon shaft that is a lot lower than that to make it easier for me to make the switch, because I love the feel of the carbon shaft otherwise.

 

[iusedtoberich]

I feel like the 314-3 is about the same as my 12.4 Revo. Which are less than the Jacoby black and Becue prime I used to have. My McDermett CF is pretty low.

Same. I played the 314 series since the late 90's (and the Z series for a couple of those early years). Switching to the 12.4 Revo was zero adjustment.

Over the years I've tried most of the wooden LD shafts. None were as low as Predator. In recent years I tried several of the CF offerings. Again, none were as low as Predator.

I wanted to like the Rhino, because it is so cheap. I would have had to retrain 25 years of aiming, and that was not worth saving $300 to me.

 

[Mensabum]

Yup! I agree 100% with your post. Appreciating the craftmanship and differences is part of the fun.
This whole thread just highlights for me how confusing the term low deflection is.
The first thing we should ask ourselves is: What's a standard deflection shaft and what's the level of squirt we set as a minimum threshold for calling a shaft Low Deflection. @iusedtoberich claims Revo (without saying which model..) is the shaft with the lowest deflection. My first question is: Have you tried every shaft on the market? Secondly why is no one talking about the fact that very low deflection comes with other issues and these things should be considered as a whole. If the goal is to make the lowest deflection possible, that's not that difficult, but how does the shaft feel and is it durable are considerations we should include in the discussion.

Perhaps the kitty will lead the way by citing squirt, deflection #'s and any other pertinent info on their shafts.
Other companies to follow suit... 025 squirt/ft. .3"/ft deflection at 10lbs, etc...
Buyers could then choose which shaft to buy according to the numbers. Kinda reminds me of paint by number tho.

 

[Double-Dave]

Not a chance in hell. And not a chance in hell in the low deflection wood era. To each his own

Yeah. No.

I'm not saying the overall package delivered by these other shafts is as good as or better then the Predator package, but if you focus simply on the lowest deflection then by no means do the Predator shafts have the lowest, either in wood or in carbon.

 

[Mensabum]

Same. I played the 314 series since the late 90's (and the Z series for a couple of those early years). Switching to the 12.4 Revo was zero adjustment.

Over the years I've tried most of the wooden LD shafts. None were as low as Predator. In recent years I tried several of the CF offerings. Again, none were as low as Predator.

I wanted to like the Rhino, because it is so cheap. I would have had to retrain 25 years of aiming, and that was not worth saving $300 to me.

I liked the fact that I didn't have to offset my aim any longer for deflection w/a cf shaft. Just point amd shoot. Lol. If something makes my job easier and simpler, I'm all for it. Even tho I'm stubborn and have since gone back to maple. Lol. I cant knock cf for those who choose to play w one. There's a reason they do so.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I didn't have to offset my aim any longer for deflection w/a cf shaft.

So you’re saying a CF shaft produced no squirt?

Color me skeptical.

pj
chgo

 

[mikemosconi]

I like deflection - makes the game more interesting and challenging. I play with only maple shafts. I love it when I hit a 4 foot shot with extreme inside - make the ball and spin the cue ball to my next zone - it is a skill to know how much to move the OB contact point using spin that one can take satisfaction in mastering - however playing as much center ball as possible, using pocket width and CB speed - getting correct angles - that beats any LD shaft all day long!

 

[garczar]

So you’re saying a CF shaft produced no squirt?

Color me skeptical.

pj
chgo

Low? Yes No? No. ALL shafts make cb deflect to some degree. Zero deflection would require re-writing the laws of physics.

 

[iusedtoberich]

Yeah. No.

I'm not saying the overall package delivered by these other shafts is as good as or better then the Predator package, but if you focus simply on the lowest deflection then by no means do the Predator shafts have the lowest, either in wood or in carbon.

I didn't try every shaft on the market, but I tried all the major players in wood low deflection from about 2000 to 2015 or so. OB, Tiger, Meucci, McDermott I-1,2,3, Cuetec 360, Mezz, Black Boar ferrule less, a couple other custom maker's low deflection offerings, and more I'm forgetting. The Z and 314 series had them all beat. The closest in my recollection was the McDermott I-3, which I actually played about one year around 2005.

In the CF era, I tried Rhino, Cuetec, Konlin, Jacoby, and a few others I forgot. Again, the Revo was lower. Revo I have had all 3 sizes, 12.9, 12.4, 11.8. I like the 12.4 best overall.

 

[iusedtoberich]

I like deflection - makes the game more interesting and challenging. I play with only maple shafts. I love it when I hit a 4 foot shot with extreme inside - make the ball and spin the cue ball to my next zone - it is a skill to know how much to move the OB contact point using spin that one can take satisfaction in mastering - however playing as much center ball as possible, using pocket width and CB speed - getting correct angles - that beats any LD shaft all day long!

You've got to do the same with the lowest deflection shaft. I routinely move the aim point a whole ball width or more. With the 1980's 1" long ivory ferrule cues, it might have been 1.5-2 ball widths for certain shots. Its still the exact same concept, just a bit less of it.

 

[Jaden]

Ya, I think my jacoby black is a 1st gen.
I am not sure what backhand English is? I am experiencing the high deflection when using high inside English on firm shots. I use these often in my game for position play. And can't adjust to the very high amount of deflection. So hoping to find a carbon shaft that is a lot lower than that to make it easier for me to make the switch, because I love the feel of the carbon shaft otherwise.

BHE is lining up as though you're not putting any sidespin on the ball and while maintaining that bridge position, rotating the back of the cue, or moving your BACK hand to get the sidespin you want.

Efren taught it to me.

For it to work, you have to bridge at the cue's natural pivot point. Which, ironically, you find by using BHE. Also, to avoid swerve as much as possible, you want to lower and elevate your bridge for draw and follow. It works for the vast majority of shots. Really soft shots will have too much CIT (collision induced throw).

Jaden

 

[HueblerHustler7]

BHE is lining up as though you're not putting any sidespin on the ball and while maintaining that bridge position, rotating the back of the cue, or moving your BACK hand to get the sidespin you want.

Efren taught it to me.

For it to work, you have to bridge at the cue's natural pivot point. Which, ironically, you find by using BHE. Also, to avoid swerve as much as possible, you want to lower and elevate your bridge for draw and follow. It works for the vast majority of shots. Really soft shots will have too much CIT (collision induced throw).

Jaden

Perfectly explained Jaden, thank you, you made it easy for me to no have to type it out or find a link hah.

 

[Mensabum]

So you’re saying a CF shaft produced no squirt?

Color me skeptical.

pj
chgo

Just a general comment dude. Not looking to ruffle feathers. Look someplace else.