Seems to be no reason to ask a question, if you already know all the answers.
C.F. Shaft Fabrication...
- Thread starter EL Picos
- Start date
Seems to be no reason to ask a question, if you already know all the answers.
Different shaft blanks can, and are designed with different bend points, and different torque specifications, depending on their intended application. Does that clarify it for you just a little?
IF you could add enough reinforcement to the tip to make it ANYWHERE near as strong as butt-end the shaft would deflect as much as solid metal bar. Golf shafts made for hi-speed swings(105mph+) have reinforced tip ends but the butt end is still stiffer. Take any cf pool shaft on the market and apply same force to both ends. The big end is stiffer/stronger.
Some golf shafts flex up higher by the handle or grip area by design. They are designed that way to produce a flatter ball trajectory.
I understand that. Been fitting/selling/fixing clubs for 20+ years. The big end of a tapered cf tube is still the stong/stiff end due to its circumference. To soften a shaft you trim the big end. To stiffen it, the opposite. Regardless of flex the butt end is always the stiff end.
What is your preferred TV emission? I suppose The Flintstones
You're going backwards, actually.
Cues use to be really fat at the bottom and thin in the middle .
That's why old house cues can still be chopped, extended and converted.
The average cue butt dimension now is around .840"-1.250".
it used be around 1.300" at the bottom.
Your 30mm taper would be ridiculous today.
You probably won't even find that many hard cases to fit the butt.
Picos, let's rein in the sarcasm here.
Mike
Mike
Only said that my BUTTS have 30mm diameter at big end for 12 inch long!!
the best cf shaft is made of wood.
hah!
hah!
Last edited:
I don't answer that, this subject is closed for me.
A house pro
How about reigning in people saying some builders are greedy.
Or putting out a product just to make a quick buck.
If you dont like my products, that's fine with me. Dont buy them.
But when you start calling me a crook, you might be looking for an ass kicking for an old man.
How about reigning in people saying some builders are greedy.
Or putting out a product just to make a quick buck.
If you dont like my products, that's fine with me. Dont buy them.
But when you start calling me a crook, you might be looking for an ass kicking for an old man.
Who called you a crook? I don’t see that anywhere. What I did find, rather quickly was this:
Well,
You said my product is no good
You said I dont know about carbon fiber
You said I was out to make a quick buck.
Sounds like YOU are calling me a crook.
All I'm saying is you know nothing about me, my products, or my life.
You keep it up and I'll explain it all to you in person.
You said my product is no good
You said I dont know about carbon fiber
You said I was out to make a quick buck.
Sounds like YOU are calling me a crook.
All I'm saying is you know nothing about me, my products, or my life.
You keep it up and I'll explain it all to you in person.
Mike, Personally the person that needs the warning is Hit's em Hard.....He has not followed the rules of posting in this section thru most of this thread, especially against Desi
Dave
Desi is the one who couldn’t properly keep his answer confined to the topic at hand. While I may been dealing with him in a not so pleasant manner, he brought this upon himself. He wants to speak as if his carbon fiber weave shaft is equal to these newer tow wound carbon fiber shafts. I’ll apologize to desi for treating him harshly, as long as he apologizes for trying to spread misinformation and implying his shafts are comparable to the tow wound versions. But I doubt that’ll happen as he’s threatening me with physical violence for showing him he’s wrong about his shafts.
But of course we know that in just a few weeks Picos went from not knowing anything to seemingly the expert. And as I seem to recall, there’s only three users on this board who deal with the full production and sale of these carbon shafts. And all three of them cannot answer to the extent needed because of their jobs. So should this entire thread be moved then?
Have you hit with one of Chuck's shafts, have you made carbon fiber shafts before, since the answer is a big fat no to both those questions, maybe you should slow your roll a bit.
I have hit with one of chucks shafts. Or at least I was told it was one of his. It did not feel pleasant when striking a ball. Feedback felt dull and the sound it produced was like nothing else I’ve ever played with. I don’t even know how to describe it other than when I handed it back to the owner “no thanks, never again” is what I told him. This was last August at the APA nationals. It looked and felt just like every other carbon fiber weave car part I’ve ever held. Nothing special. And since Picos was specifically talking about about all these new tow wound shafts, desi should follow face and not respond in turn either. But you won’t ask for that.
There are many aspects to making a carbon based cue shaft that we haven’t even discussed properly yet. If the wall thickness of a shaft is supposed to be uniform to a certain tolerance. What happens to all these companies making a tapered end? The vault plate/ferrule has to be allowed to have slop on the back end. That’s poor craftsmanship there. The joint end can be machined to fit within the taper, but the tip end cannot. Did that ever pass your mind as a problem? How about the ability to make a blank with preformed threads for a joint insert to thread into. These are all problems that need to be address at some point, and not just the current thought of “the epoxy will fill the gap” mentality that people have taken so far. There’s better ways to control weight placements than using a metal slug like Predator does.
Let’s not get to far off topic here, but the manufacturing costs of these blanks does not match up with their final cost. The amount of testing a golf shaft goes through before it’s given its ferrule to attach to a club is huge. Sound testing to ensure no problems during manufacturing. Flex testing to ensure it’s target is being met. Twist testing to find the optimal torque spot for the head. None of that is done on cues, but these cue shafts in market are being sold for more than your average golf shaft is. There is a distinct level of greed carbon cue shaft makers have right now. There’s what, 10 different makers of carbon cues, while there are 40+makers of golf shafts. Time will end up showing everyone that a carbon cue shaft we see now, will not exist in 10 years. And the shafts we get in 10 years are just copies of what the golf shaft world went through.
Did you remember my question that you did not answer yet, concerning your affirmations?:
EXPLAIN ME WHY A TAPERED TUBE OF 1MM OF WALL 3 FEET LONG WILL BE MORE FLEXIBLE IN THE LARGER PART THAN THE SMALLER PART OF THE TUBE!
Of course that I need to be an expert in C.F. to know that your are totally wrong in yours affirmations!
My first question in this thread was not about this absurd basic thing!
I always have respect for people who respect others people.
Because simply put, you’re not looking at the distortion of the shape. Visually you may not see the bend being as great, but the circular shape is being deformed to an oval. And that’s where the weakness is. If we take this from the size of cue shafts, to the size of a sewer pipe, it’d be easier to see the shape deformation occurring. And then at a large enough size, the 1mm wall thickness is not strong enough to support the weight of itself. A very easy way to test this would be to put it into a press and measure the force needed to cause failure.
The joint end of a carbon cue shaft has a higher chance for failure than the tip end. But again, since cue shafts have multiple points of taper changes. All those changes will augment the flex points of a shaft, and change their inherent weak points. If we take a carbon fiber cone and flex it, you’ll visually see it flex more towards the thin end, but structurally it’s deforming at the thick end and no longer round like the thin end. By plugging the entire shaft with foam, adding a large mass to accept a joint pin. You’ve change the properties for flexing. And by the methods used to make the shaft ‘sound’ playable, you’ve created a new flex point. That’s the flex point you are looking at when claiming the joint end is ‘stronger’.
Your first question is asking what the differences are. Simple answer is a lot, but also not much. These companies making the blanks to sell are using basic known techniques to put layers together. They are making them to an industry known stable thickness, not always cue friendly thickness. And not always understanding that the finish needs to be perfect because these blanks are not getting a finishing treatment like golf shafts or normal carbon fiber. But that doesn’t help you understand all the nuances that goes into why carbon fiber weave was ditched and everything is done with a single filament. It doesn’t help you when someone chimes in that carbon fiber shafts aren’t designed to flex. Yes, structural pieces of carbon fiber are designed not to flex. But could you imagine if golf shaft makers held that same idea! Hell, how about a golf shaft filled with foam! Cue shafts are not structural, and are designed to flex.
You are confusing some physical principle.
Don't try to explain what is no explainable, a long one piece fishing rod of the same thickness wall all their lengtht will be more flexible at the small end, and will have a higher % of deformation vs the diameter at the small end than the big end.