a lot of the older tables were constructed with rail bolts places horizantally, No it didn't "kill the slates" I'm not sure why you would even think that.. mine is over 110 years od and still "alive" ;-)
the main point there is a lot of energy can be lost or that better bounce characteristics can be obtained by either weighting the rails with added steel plates, or by making the connection between the rails and slate more solid and yes various manufacturers have attempted various methods of attachment.
If I was shopping for new tables I'd want to examine this further before making my purchase especially when dropping literally thousands for one table.
many tables have felt between the rails and cushions, this felt basically can contribute to the issue as it acts as a vibration isolator.
its poor engineering to isolate the rail from the slate and allow it to move independently if the objective is to solidify it. what you want is for the two to be positively locked together in order to combine their weights, this makes the rail more solid. a rail mounted more solidaly will return the ball more efficieently.
the mechanics of a bolt can either work such that the bolt is simply engineered hold things that pass through the bolt holes clamped together. the bolt is a lot more effective if the bolt's "holding force" is perpendicular to the bolt than by way of depending upon the bolt's clamping force to clamp the pieces together. especially true when the torque is limited by the nut being imbedded int he rail and unable to be torqued down very firmly. if you go and over torque the bolts, higher than the manufacturer's spec, the way the captive nuts are held in the rails will be a cause of issue. they can slip or simply crush into the th wood as that's all there is retaining the nut.
That's the difference in a nutshell.
to put that differently, it is very hard to stretch a bolt, it is much easier to shift the sections of the bolt which are merely being held sandwiched together..
What commonly happens is the bolt isn't fitted to either hole accurately, the hole is larger than the bolt to allow adjustment.
If the rail can move about and the only thing holding the rail to the slate is the clamping force of the bolts. this isn't as positive of a connection as a bolt which is tightened into and against the slate.
the rails themselves have different materials and weights which are unique to each table.
have a look though this thread and you can argue with whomever you wish to . I'm not trying to promote branding, like some in this thread are.
I agree it would help to show various new makers and compare the way things are held together..
you can have a look at the older method here:
try comparing that methodology that to the way diamond does it by relying on the sandwich clamping of rather lightweight rails in this video..
I think this comparison shows the key reason why the diamond table has inherently poor bounce characteristics, by comparison to older tables. the method used is inferior in design to that above.
You are quite right that many makers incorporate this same methodology, I've even seen wood screws used, or very weak ungraded metric bolts in some of the made in china tables.
Even just peering beneath the rails to compare the type of fasteners used gives some indication of the table's quality.
this method does work, Many tables are like that, its just not really a superior connection method.. It's done this way to save money.
I believe that if you were to remove the rails from a more superior quality table you'd find variations.. If you are just comparing new with new, well then the intracacies of that mounting design would be somethign I'd personally be focused upon in making my choice.
most pool tables, especailly new ones are finished on the outside but if you remove the rails and flip them over then you can feel their weight , look at their materials and the way the fasters are attached. many rails nowadays are simply particleboard junk coated in plastic. there are some small manufacturers that use better matierials than particleboard.. note that in the video showig the rails being isntalled he mentions not too tighten the pocket bolts toomuch and to take care when flipping , you can see the ossibility of overtighteningor stressing the rail acausing that cheap paeticleboard stuff to fail. They can be made from hardwood. Personally I wouldnt pay much for a table with cheaply constructed particleboard rails, but many do. a lot of the new tables are only that.
this video shows some far superior rails being built for a snooker table,, and it gives you a better picture of how the weight can be added to the rails. you can bet this one played nicely, the quality level is completely incomparable to most of the common tables.. look at the end view of the rails, hes not using garbage particleboard, hes used good quality plywood and hardwoods.
while yes, this is a snooker table, there is no reason a pool table cant; be manufactured using decent materials,
fact is, most new tables are particleboard junk, even though the buyer is paying thousands, well big surprise, the new stuff is almost all made offshore at the lowest possible price and then retailed as if it is good quality.. parts built ffshore, some in taiwan imported and "assembled int he US maybe"
That's quite typical of the standards of today. particleboard junk coated in plastic , being sold for thousands.. Its become normalized.
I think if you go to a manufacturer like this you might be able to get the quality level of an older table. There are small manufacturers that still exist. This video shows how the heavy steel plates are incorporated into the far superior rail design. what this guy is doing screams quality by comparison.
heres the old thread.. similar subject.
I've always felt that T Rail tables have a better rebound, faster with a more solid feel. I maintain that I can shoot a bank on a table and tell if it is T Rail without looking all other things being equal, K 55 cushions same cloth etc. Is this...
forums.azbilliards.com
