There is no difference in someone offering a new piece of machinery and somebody building a new line of cues, whether or not the said machinery is used to make them.
Choosing a cuebuilding lathe.
- Thread starter BKB
- Start date
how much is Bassel paying? I got a handful of cues that will be done in a month or so that I'm going to have to sell.....I could be your pimp too
I guess you gotta ask yourself.... "Are two pimps really better than one?"
pimpin' since pimpin'
-Grey Ghost-
Oh and one more thing lets not BS anyone.....THE HIGHTOWER IS NOT PRICEY....ITS A DAM STEAL FOR THE QUALITY & CAPABILITIES!!! Its the szamboti of cue making specific, built to order turning machines. Its not my opinion, its basically the vast majority of cuemakers opinions when speaking of non-engine style lathes. He's been around since b/f there was any such thing as a cue making lathe that you could just pay for.....you had to build them from nothing yourself....now you have engine lathes that you still have to tool out, you have the unique products cue making lathe, you have chris hightowers signature deluxe model and then you have a few hightower design knockoffs and that even goes for some accessories too....and thats the bare bones facts, its not mean or nice, just the plain truth....if the hightower was not the shizz nit as per form/function then you would not see the knock offs....
For your information Mr. Greyghost. when u have a great friendship like Bassel and I have, There is no need for the rude comment of you replying "can I be your pimp too". Its called a favor for a favor. Try it out. I also would not buy or sell any of your cues if I was given one. Thank you : Dave
I think this is what he was talking about, Chris. It's what i'm seeing, anyway. In the last 3 years there has been an influx of machine dealers who assemble & sell machines that are virtually the same as what you do. That's a different kind of competition. Bludworth, Porper, & Unique all at least had the dignity, foresight, and imagination to create their own product. You, being the pioneer of the Taig base machinery, share that dignity, foresight, & imagination. What we are seeing now is not that same level of respectable competition where boundaries & ethics are observed.
To me, this one line says it all. There seems to be no respect, nor ethics involved anymore when it comes to many things in our society as a whole. In this industry, it seems even larger than normal life. There are now of NON-cuebuilders that are building machines and it seems to be from a purely selfserving, business standpoint, not even understanding the essence involved with the creation of a cue, and therefore are willing to screw anyone in their way, say what ever is necessary to make a sale. Very unlike the various Cuebuilders that have gone into machine building to share the same passion that they build cues with, and to further the art, not the wallet
Just my .2 cents
Dave.
jesus christ........... really people?....this is just stupid......I don't care who makes it if it does what i need it to........anyone who owns a lathe made by chris, or eastpoint cues, or custom cue lathe, or brianna, or unique or porper is going to think the best of it....cause everyone wants to claim to have the best and want there machines to have the most value....everyone agrees that chris was the pioneer and has held the title for a long time.....but compitition is a good thing.....now I belive the cost of cue lathes could stand to be lower.....I found a brand new 13x40 jet with 2000 worth of tooling for 2,000 dollars not 1 hour from my house......I think no cue shop is complete without a machine lathe anyway....truth be told I have a taig micro lathe that I bought to convert to a tip lathe.....picked it up fully loaded for 150 bucks.....I have less than 300 in it and it will do any kind of repair you would want it to including house cues.....I just bought that as a tournament lathe.....but seriously this pi**ing contest is cluttering up this forum....if you don't have anything nice to say just keep it shut.....lets all be adults and get back to making products we can be proud of and let the product speak for itself instead of running other compitition down be it cues or machines to make cues.....shouldn't this be fun and enjoyable.....let the product do the talking..........
Last edited:
I've stayed out of this as I use full size equipment and anything else I need I build myself as most on this forum know. I have no intension of buying anyones equipment so it doesn't matter to me who's is the best or who should be building or not. IBM had a brilliant idea but there are an awfully lot of computers available today. Competition does both bring down cost and improve quality.
I could be wrong on some of these details but I'm sure Chris will let me know where. I know Blud was doing repair work in the mid 80's on equipment that he made from a converted wood lathe. I don't know what date he started selling these. Chris's first offerings, I believe, were also made from a wood lathe base closely similar to Blud's. Porper's offerings were in there somewhere using a completely different format. As their machines progressed Bluds and Chris's design changed greatly moving away from a wood lathe base. Here is where the trouble starts. Blud's machines are built by him or parts that he has made. The same with Porper. Most parts are specialty made. Chris took the rout to build his equipment based on a already designed and available to anyone, equipment. Most parts can be bought by anyone and built into a system, other than a couple of parts that he has made just for him. Anyone who wants to build one almost identical to Chris's only has to adapt a couple of parts rather than the whole machine. This makes it very easy to copy by most any do it yourselfer. Porper's and Bluds and Uniques take much more effort and expense to copy. I am very surprised that there weren't more people copying them sooner.
There are a couple of things that Chris has done over the years that has greatly enhanced his sales and that was freely communicating his cue building know how. Between his book, movies and always available personal help he has helped many, many people get into building cues as he showed many secrets that cue makers had developed over the years through trial and error that could now be learned over night. This last paragraph is the main thing that has greatly enhanced the amour that many on this forum show towards Chris. He is usually available to answer questions on problems with either your equipment or cue making difficulties after the sale. This is definitely worth some extra money to most. He still has the problem, however, is that his answers that he provides on this forum for his machines also pertains to the other machines that are almost identical to his.
As far as enterpriser's copying Chris's design and selling at a lower price, well, that is what comes by using a system that's parts are readily available to all. He was the first to think of this system But that doesn't protect it. Only a patent does that and it doesn't help much. No one copies Porper's although most of their owners make adaptions to them to make them better. The same with Bluds. They are copied some but not nearly as much as Chris's or unique's as more of the parts must be made instead of readily available off the shelf. For many goodwill stops at the wallet.
Dick
I could be wrong on some of these details but I'm sure Chris will let me know where. I know Blud was doing repair work in the mid 80's on equipment that he made from a converted wood lathe. I don't know what date he started selling these. Chris's first offerings, I believe, were also made from a wood lathe base closely similar to Blud's. Porper's offerings were in there somewhere using a completely different format. As their machines progressed Bluds and Chris's design changed greatly moving away from a wood lathe base. Here is where the trouble starts. Blud's machines are built by him or parts that he has made. The same with Porper. Most parts are specialty made. Chris took the rout to build his equipment based on a already designed and available to anyone, equipment. Most parts can be bought by anyone and built into a system, other than a couple of parts that he has made just for him. Anyone who wants to build one almost identical to Chris's only has to adapt a couple of parts rather than the whole machine. This makes it very easy to copy by most any do it yourselfer. Porper's and Bluds and Uniques take much more effort and expense to copy. I am very surprised that there weren't more people copying them sooner.
There are a couple of things that Chris has done over the years that has greatly enhanced his sales and that was freely communicating his cue building know how. Between his book, movies and always available personal help he has helped many, many people get into building cues as he showed many secrets that cue makers had developed over the years through trial and error that could now be learned over night. This last paragraph is the main thing that has greatly enhanced the amour that many on this forum show towards Chris. He is usually available to answer questions on problems with either your equipment or cue making difficulties after the sale. This is definitely worth some extra money to most. He still has the problem, however, is that his answers that he provides on this forum for his machines also pertains to the other machines that are almost identical to his.
As far as enterpriser's copying Chris's design and selling at a lower price, well, that is what comes by using a system that's parts are readily available to all. He was the first to think of this system But that doesn't protect it. Only a patent does that and it doesn't help much. No one copies Porper's although most of their owners make adaptions to them to make them better. The same with Bluds. They are copied some but not nearly as much as Chris's or unique's as more of the parts must be made instead of readily available off the shelf. For many goodwill stops at the wallet.
Dick
Last edited:
I agree 100%, Dick. I'm also surprised it didn't happen sooner. Doesn't make it ethically right, but it's business.
JCACTION, not to be a nit but your post could have said everything you wanted to say without beginning with Jesus' name. It's unnecessary, serves no purpose & makes no point.
And frankly, if you think conversation is contaminating the forum, then maybe you should consider the very purpose of an online forum. It's for discussion. We're using it exactly for what it's intended for. Guys coming on here advertising but not contributing are not. They are trolls. However, this forum is odd & allows it. Regardless, it's a place for conversation & that's what's going on.
And frankly, if you think conversation is contaminating the forum, then maybe you should consider the very purpose of an online forum. It's for discussion. We're using it exactly for what it's intended for. Guys coming on here advertising but not contributing are not. They are trolls. However, this forum is odd & allows it. Regardless, it's a place for conversation & that's what's going on.
Ok. Here's a question that I've had concerning these arguments that continue.
You can have someone building equipment and selling it. And you can have another assembling equipment (and adapting it for your customer's specific needs) and selling it. If you design it and build it from the ground up, you should be able to get a patent for your unique idea. However, if you just buy other people's equipment and modify it for your customer's needs, your unique idea is in how you alter and market another person's equipment. That would be perfectly ethical because you are buying another person's equipment and thereby paying him for his idea. And he is finding additional customers for his equipment.
So if someone decided to also assemble equipment and market it the same as the previously mentioned assembler, I don't see how that could be unethical either.
Very well said
Parts readily available means anybody can create their own version. Now the end customer can take the best features from each producer and make his own final version.Mario
Oh it did happen sooner than most know about, it was in the mid 90's and now the guy who was making them then uses my machines and even helps me sell them. Then it happened again in the late 90's with a knock off of my Deluxe and inlay machine. That guy also quit and now refers people to me. I sell him some of my parts and he resales them today. His reason for quiting????
It was because he found the customer service side of it to take more of his time than it was worth. I have had complete days that I have not been able to work on building lathes because I am on the phone. And that is not a rare day. They are pretty common. Most of the time around 1/3 of my day consist of answering the phone, emails and forum questions.
I wrote the book to cut down on my phone time and it helped a lot. I used to spend closer to half my day on the phone before I wrote the book. What puzzles me is why people who have a good job making good money would want to get into this business. In time they will either provide poor customer service and ruin their reputation or they will find out how involved it really is.
Last edited:
Good point.
Instead of all the complaining about who is better and so on why not have a competitive price on your product like any other thriving business and sell more units, after all if price was in the same ball park wouldn't most people buy from the maker they feel was the best, sell more units you make more money in the long run. I know that some will say it will drive down the resale value but with all the competition lately this is already happening, besides most people that buy these items that stay in the business usually do not get rid of these machines. Even when you upgrade these machines are very cost effective to keep in your shop, the more stations the better.
With the Taig based lathe there are a few sources that are selling the anodized or steel bed and the channel lately, why would you not buy these items from the source with the best price? These items are all basically the same thing.
This is just my opinion and I am not trying to ruffle any feathers here.
Last edited:
Cue Lathe History
But when all is said and done we all owe Leonard (Blud) the credit for starting the cuemaking and cue repairmen boom of the 80's. We also owe him the credit for the Cue Machinery and Ask the Cuemaker forums on AZ Billiards.
Leonard was the pioneer of cue lathes and definitely deserves his hall of fame status. Actually Blud's non CNC machines and non saw machines were all based on other lathes. Not only was he the first to sell the modified wood lathes, he was the first to make the totally modified large metal lathes with taper bars and such available. He was the first to use the Sherline as a base. And yes I started out modifying wood lathes similar to Blud. I just took the wood lathe to levels he chose not to take them to. You could even do joint work and all on my early wood lathes. I was the first to take the 7 x 10 mini lathe and deck it out to do cue work and sell them. I called them the Work Hustler. Then in 91 I figured out how to make the Cue Smith lathe using the jewlers lathe headstock, carriage and tailstock. That is when my business took off. Porper jumped in with his A-Model house cue lathe shortly after. Then the next year he introduced the A Model lathe. Then David Kersenbrock told me I should put taper bars on my Cue Smith lathe and I did and it took off even more. The next year I introduced the large bore single chuck headstock. The next year the double chuck headstock and so on. A couple of years later Porper introduced the B Model and a few years later Unique introduced the Cue Companion. Some time later Shaft Master introduced his super portable set up.
But when all is said and done we all owe Leonard (Blud) the credit for starting the cuemaking and cue repairmen boom of the 80's. We also owe him the credit for the Cue Machinery and Ask the Cuemaker forums on AZ Billiards.
You and the other poster do err in your thinking that people who use some of Taig's parts are just assemblers. You cannot go to Taig and buy enough parts to build a good cue lathe. You have to manufacture other parts. Here is where the issue at hand starts. Is it acceptable to copy the originators parts in order to provide the extra parts needed to make the cue lathe? The long bed, the steady rests, the custom live centers, the larger bore headstocks, the power feeds, the taper bars, the general cue lathe layout, etc.. That is the real question????
Is it fair that the originator spends thousands of dollars in trial and error to design and manufacture a part and then someone takes the part to a machine shop and says make me some copies of this part?
Once they are called on the carpet for their exact copies they change the looks just a little and call it their own original design. They are even given credit for out doing themselves. I find it sad, but also find it amusing in order to keep my sanity..
Last edited:
Hightowers point has always been that the headstock and the steady rests are his design. Mike Gulyassy used to use the taig to make his "Baby lathe" many years ago, but it was a factory headstock from my understanding.
Which is exactly where I make my point about ethics. I don't think most folks realize the differences between supplied parts & in house manufactured parts. It takes both to build a complete machine. Taig doesn't sell cue building lathes for a guy to put his own label on. Somebody has to build the components which make the machine a cue lathe. Copying those and copying the machine layout is where the ethical issue comes into play. I don't believe it's unethical for somebody to buy parts & assemble a lathe for their own use or to sell. But to copy proprietary parts from another builder in order to compete for his business is absolutely unethical. Patents do indeed protect the originator but the expense to get & maintain outweighs profits in such a tiny industry. Patents have become very easy for copy-cats to manipulate, too. Change the bolt pattern & claim it improves on the existing design and you bypass the original patent. There's no real fix to the problem except time.
You and the other poster do err in your thinking that people who use some of Taig's parts are just assemblers. You cannot go to Taig and buy enough parts to build a good cue lathe. You have to manufacture other parts. Here is where the issue at hand starts. Is it acceptable to copy the originators parts in order to provide the extra parts needed to make the cue lathe? The long bed, the steady rests, the custom live centers, the larger bore headstocks, the power feeds, the taper bars, the general cue lathe layout, etc.. That is the real question????
Is it fair that the originator spends thousands of dollars in trial and error to design and manufacture a part and then someone takes the part to a machine shop and says make me some copies of this part?
Once they are called on the carpet for their exact copies they change the looks just a little and call it their own original design. They are even given credit for out doing themselves. I find it sad, but also find it amusing in order to keep my sanity..
Chris,
You are correct about all the tooling and the large headstock that you provide. I have two of your Deluxe lathe's plus your inlay machine and they are great machines. I would not trade them for any of the knock-offs out there. I bought these items at a tournament and on ebay in the early 90's, they do not come up for sale as easily anymore. I have also bought taper bars, extra 6' bed with gear track and channel, power feed, cutters, video's, DVDs, books, wood, cleaners, sealers, micro lathe and coring drills from you and have had nothing but great product from you.
It was in error stating assembler in my post, I was only referring to the bed and channel that others have started selling in my response. I apologize for giving you the impression of being an assembler, this is definitely not the case.
Very commendable of you to post the information about Bludworth.
I remember seeing him reparing away at a few tournaments many years
ago. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.
Just to set the record a little bit straighter, Blud did do lots to advance the
state of the art of specialized equipment.
However, he also did not exactly "invent" the cue lathe.
A fellow I know from nearby is now the owner of a modifided Delta
wood lathe. The original headstock was replaced by a "shop made"
assembly that has a metal lathe chuck on a 'spindle' with a large
enough bore to accommodate a 1 1/2 inch dowel. This one came from
the shop/room of Bob Mullens(sp?) of Que-master(sp?) fame, or is that
infammy?
in Detroit. IIUC he had been using it since the 60s.Again, IIUC - he once worked for Brunswick. They had been using
similar set-ups since the 30s or 40s.
Dale<who is hoping to win the cue machinery trivia award>
Last edited:
oK...eric I have personaly heard your are a good guy so I will make this short....your right about the useing of the word jesus.....I apologize.....on this lathe subject yes this "conversations" is clearly to run custom cue lathes name in the ground.....clear and simple no matter how you say it.....that is unethical.....let the guy sell his stuff and give him a chance....no one has yet......bassel has anwsered alot of questions by phone and saved me a few dollars......I have also had chris give me free adivse so I can vouch for both......he is just another guy trying to offer a product....he does care about his customers and wants to make a good product.....he is being inventive.......but so many people blindly attack him because of owning a hightower.....I hope people don't meet me with the same attitude about my cues as I am a newer cue maker......I am using desgins and ideas that were thought of a 100 years ago in cue making but it doesn't mean I have any less pride in my work or that I am not trying to get the best possible cue for the money in the hands of my customers...I am......this argument is pointless......
I was not saying Leonard invented the cue lathe. The Billiard encyclopedia shows a very old large bore headstock for building cues. But Leonard was the first to market simple repair lathes to the general public. Before that you had rapid top sanders, taylor machines for ferrules and a few other cumbersome tools to use.Very commendable of you to post the information about Bludworth.
I remember seeing him reparing away at a few tournaments many years
ago. Perhaps cooler heads will prevail.
Just to set the record a little bit straighter, Blud did do lots to advance the
state of the art of specialized equipment.
However, he also did not exactly "invent" the cue lathe.
A fellow I know from nearby is now the owner of a modifided Delta
wood lathe. The original headstock was replaced by a "shop made"
assembly that has a metal lathe chuck on a 'spindle' with a large
enough bore to accommodate a 1 1/2 inch dowel. This one came from
the shop/room of Bob Mullens(sp?) of Que-master(sp?) fame, or is that
infammy?
Again, IIUC - he once worked for Brunswick. They had been using
similar set-ups since the 30s or 40s.
Dale<who is hoping to win the cue machinery trivia award>
He was also the first to market the CNC machinery to the general public for cue making.
Last edited: