construction questions

[Kid Dynomite]

When a cue is cored or labeled cored, is it just the forearm that is cored or the butt peice as well?

Which makers core the butt peice as well?? I am all into construction these days after hitting with one cue that i really like and want to know if capone/carmelli or what cue makers if any core the butt and which ones do not???

Cue makers all have there signature styles of construction. I have one more question regarding construction, why would you sleeve over phenolic? I have seen this on some cues just do not know why???

Thanks!
Kid
Dynomite

 

[JoeyInCali]

Capone cores his forearms but not his handles .
He uses a radial laminated handle.
Sleeve over phenolic?
You mean sleeve ivory with phenolic to add durability to ivory.

 

[ragbug74]

Bob Owen at Shurtz cues cores some of his cues....I belive the handle section only.

I've seen guys core woods like cocobolo or bacote with phenolic to use as joint collars. This allows them the strength of the phenolic at the joint with the look of the natural wood.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I've seen guys core woods like cocobolo or bacote with phenolic to use as joint collars.

I think there should be a law against coring straight-grained bocotes.

 

[Jack Madden]

When a cue is cored or labeled cored, is it just the forearm that is cored or the butt peice as well?

Which makers core the butt peice as well?? I am all into construction these days after hitting with one cue that i really like and want to know if capone/carmelli or what cue makers if any core the butt and which ones do not???

Thanks!
Kid
Dynomite

Kid
I am not sure this can be answered accurately. I core some and don't core others. Some of the reasons ---- the wood itself (its weight, its stability, etc), weight desired for cue, balance, construction methods, etc etc. And all cuemakers have their own reasons for coring or not coring. Coring all, not coring at all, or both ---- and I think as cuemakers progress in their craft they may change some of the methods.

 

[jazznpool]

The rear section of a cue are usually sleeved on--in fact they are referred to as buttsleeves. Ariel uses a laminated handle that extends down and has the rear sleeved over it. In some sense I suppose you could think of it is as "cored" since it is similar to what is happeneing in the forearm (core of laminated maple expoxied in place). IMO excellence in cue construction must consider how to optimize "good vibrations."

Martin

When a cue is cored or labeled cored, is it just the forearm that is cored or the butt peice as well?

Which makers core the butt peice as well?? I am all into construction these days after hitting with one cue that i really like and want to know if capone/carmelli or what cue makers if any core the butt and which ones do not???

Cue makers all have there signature styles of construction. I have one more question regarding construction, why would you sleeve over phenolic? I have seen this on some cues just do not know why???

Thanks!
Kid
Dynomite

 

[manwon]

When a cue is cored or labeled cored, is it just the forearm that is cored or the butt peice as well?

Which makers core the butt peice as well?? I am all into construction these days after hitting with one cue that i really like and want to know if capone/carmelli or what cue makers if any core the butt and which ones do not???

Cue makers all have there signature styles of construction. I have one more question regarding construction, why would you sleeve over phenolic? I have seen this on some cues just do not know why???

Thanks!
Kid
Dynomite

Currently some cue makers use phenolic as a method of improving stability at major joints, such as, where the forearm attachés to the under wrap. One cue maker I know of actually threads the tenon on the under wrap and screws phenolic on to this tenon.

This cue maker then turns the Phenolic down for a new tenon, which he again threads. He then bores into the forearm where the under wraps tenon will be placed and threads the bored hole.

Next he drills his holes for his connection screw and epoxies and screws the under wrap to the forearm. This serves two purposes, it gives double the strength at the connection of the under wrap and the forearm, and it stops any buzz from ever occurring. While this technique is more time consuming it also prevents any failure from ever occurring at this joint.

I suspect that the only reason someone would sleeve over phenolic is for the two purposes I have outlined above, but this is conjecture and may not be correct.

 

[dzcues]

This cue maker then turns the Phenolic down for a new tenon, which he again threads. He then bores into the forearm where the under wraps tenon will be placed and threads the bored hole.

Next he drills his holes for his connection screw and epoxies and screws the under wrap to the forearm. This serves two purposes, it gives double the strength at the connection of the under wrap and the forearm, and it stops any buzz from ever occurring.

Hi Craig,

I've heard of this technique before, where the tenon is threaded into the handle & there is also a threaded screw going into that same tenon & the handle. I've never tried it but upon thinking about it, I fail to see any advantage.

First, you must use the same pitch for both sets of threads, otherwise you will create a bind after only a revolution or two into the assembly, stripping out one set of threads. Both threads must advance at the same rate per revolution. The logical thread sizes would be 3/8-16 and 3/4-16. No problem there.

But then, the threads would have to be exactly in phase with one another or one set of threads will alway be slightly tighter or looser than the other. Always. And even if you start out exactly in phase, differences in internal friction say that the threads will always get slightly out of phase so that one set of threads will always be lagging behind. As a result, when one set of threads reaches maximum torque, the other will still be somewhat shy of maximum torque. The looser the threads, the greater the difference in final torques. This leads me to believe that the lagging set of threads, being loose, serves only to provide marginally more glue surface rather than any additional mechanical reinforcement to the connection.

Am I making sense here? Maybe I'm missing something but this strikes me as a total waste of time. Since most of us are always looking for a better way, can you (or anyone) provide any comments or clarification?

 

[Cue Crazy]

Hi Craig,

I've heard of this technique before, where the tenon is threaded into the handle & there is also a threaded screw going into that same tenon & the handle. I've never tried it but upon thinking about it, I fail to see any advantage.

First, you must use the same pitch for both sets of threads, otherwise you will create a bind after only a revolution or two into the assembly, stripping out one set of threads. Both threads must advance at the same rate per revolution. The logical thread sizes would be 3/8-16 and 3/4-16. No problem there.

But then, the threads would have to be exactly in phase with one another or one set of threads will alway be slightly tighter or looser than the other. Always. And even if you start out exactly in phase, differences in internal friction say that the threads will always get slightly out of phase so that one set of threads will always be lagging behind. As a result, when one set of threads reaches maximum torque, the other will still be somewhat shy of maximum torque. The looser the threads, the greater the difference in final torques. This leads me to believe that the lagging set of threads, being loose, serves only to provide marginally more glue surface rather than any additional mechanical reinforcement to the connection.

Am I making sense here? Maybe I'm missing something but this strikes me as a total waste of time. Since most of us are always looking for a better way, can you (or anyone) provide any comments or clarification?

I follow you, I've thought about this a while back, but never tried It, and in theory I came to much the same conclusion as you with the binding. Even if the thread count was the same, It seems the threads would have to be perfectly aligned with each other for the best fit. I'm sure It can be done, because I have heard of It being done too, just that I never tried It, and came up with much the same thoughts in thinking about It.

Greg

 

[Kid Dynomite]

Capone cores his forearms but not his handles .
He uses a radial laminated handle.
I read in the Blue Book of cues #2 he uses purpleheart handles. But, cue makers change up so often you never really know!Sleeve over phenolic?
You mean sleeve ivory with phenolic to add durability to ivory.

I asked the coring question because I like cored cues and have 3 by Ted Harris! Was just wondering who else cores the cue all the way thru/maple laminated handle and makes a flat faced wood to wood joint standard?

I know what I like in terms of construction just curious what other makers have similar construction methods? I am not looking to have one custom made but I search the for sale board for ones that are similarly constructed to ted harris cues! Suggestions are welcomed! Ted has had some issues better left alone and I am curious who else I might like???

Kid
Dynomite

 

[rhncue]

Hi Craig,

I've heard of this technique before, where the tenon is threaded into the handle & there is also a threaded screw going into that same tenon & the handle. I've never tried it but upon thinking about it, I fail to see any advantage.

First, you must use the same pitch for both sets of threads, otherwise you will create a bind after only a revolution or two into the assembly, stripping out one set of threads. Both threads must advance at the same rate per revolution. The logical thread sizes would be 3/8-16 and 3/4-16. No problem there.

But then, the threads would have to be exactly in phase with one another or one set of threads will alway be slightly tighter or looser than the other. Always. And even if you start out exactly in phase, differences in internal friction say that the threads will always get slightly out of phase so that one set of threads will always be lagging behind. As a result, when one set of threads reaches maximum torque, the other will still be somewhat shy of maximum torque. The looser the threads, the greater the difference in final torques. This leads me to believe that the lagging set of threads, being loose, serves only to provide marginally more glue surface rather than any additional mechanical reinforcement to the connection.

Am I making sense here? Maybe I'm missing something but this strikes me as a total waste of time. Since most of us are always looking for a better way, can you (or anyone) provide any comments or clarification?

Dennis Diekman, although he does not construct his cues in this manner, he does utilize a procedure that would eliminate this "binding". When he installs the A-joint stud he drills and taps two different size holes. One will be 3/8X16 and the other 7/16X14. He then will fill all the voids with epoxy and screw the stud into the 3/8X16 hole and just slide the stud into the other threaded hole. In doing it this way you get the benefits of the stud for strength and forward balance without the problems encountered from the stresses of misalignment. The faces and tenon align the prong /handle without the pin always trying to pull the joint out of alignment from not being exactly in alignment with the tenon joinery. Although the stud does not pull the two parts of the A-joint together while the epoxy is still wet, once it has dried it is the same as having an insert installed for the A-joint stud that is perfectly aligned with the rest of the joinery.

This procedure would work great with the usage of the threaded tenons and phenolic means of construction as the studs thread count would not be in conflict with the tenons thread count.

Dick

 

[JoeyInCali]

Currently some cue makers use phenolic as a method of improving stability at major joints, such as, where the forearm attachés to the under wrap. One cue maker I know of actually threads the tenon on the under wrap and screws phenolic on to this tenon.

This cue maker then turns the Phenolic down for a new tenon, which he again threads. He then bores into the forearm where the under wraps tenon will be placed and threads the bored hole.

Next he drills his holes for his connection screw and epoxies and screws the under wrap to the forearm. This serves two purposes, it gives double the strength at the connection of the under wrap and the forearm, and it stops any buzz from ever occurring. While this technique is more time consuming it also prevents any failure from ever occurring at this joint.

.

I don't see an advantage in that system.
Why not just thread the top of the handle and epoxy the phenolic there?
Let's say 3/4 by 2 inches deep.
Then when that's dry, drill the phenolic and thread it for the bolt.
You can do the same for the bottom of the forearm too if you really want to encase the metal stud in phenolic.
Two pieces with threads getting glued at at the same time has problems as Dick mentioned.
Back to the original question. Black Boar uses a one piece dowel for their butts.
He sleeves everything on that piece.

 

[manwon]

Hi Craig,

I've heard of this technique before, where the tenon is threaded into the handle & there is also a threaded screw going into that same tenon & the handle. I've never tried it but upon thinking about it, I fail to see any advantage.

First, you must use the same pitch for both sets of threads, otherwise you will create a bind after only a revolution or two into the assembly, stripping out one set of threads. Both threads must advance at the same rate per revolution. The logical thread sizes would be 3/8-16 and 3/4-16. No problem there.

But then, the threads would have to be exactly in phase with one another or one set of threads will alway be slightly tighter or looser than the other. Always. And even if you start out exactly in phase, differences in internal friction say that the threads will always get slightly out of phase so that one set of threads will always be lagging behind. As a result, when one set of threads reaches maximum torque, the other will still be somewhat shy of maximum torque. The looser the threads, the greater the difference in final torques. This leads me to believe that the lagging set of threads, being loose, serves only to provide marginally more glue surface rather than any additional mechanical reinforcement to the connection.

Am I making sense here? Maybe I'm missing something but this strikes me as a total waste of time. Since most of us are always looking for a better way, can you (or anyone) provide any comments or clarification?

Thanks for the input, and like I said above this seems like a great deal of work to me also. However, I am not at liberty to say, but you may be surprised who out is doing this.

Have a very nice day!!

 

[dzcues]

Dennis Diekman, although he does not construct his cues in this manner, he does utilize a procedure that would eliminate this "binding". When he installs the A-joint stud he drills and taps two different size holes. One will be 3/8X16 and the other 7/16X14. He then will fill all the voids with epoxy and screw the stud into the 3/8X16 hole and just slide the stud into the other threaded hole. In doing it this way you get the benefits of the stud for strength and forward balance without the problems encountered from the stresses of misalignment. The faces and tenon align the prong /handle without the pin always trying to pull the joint out of alignment from not being exactly in alignment with the tenon joinery. Although the stud does not pull the two parts of the A-joint together while the epoxy is still wet, once it has dried it is the same as having an insert installed for the A-joint stud that is perfectly aligned with the rest of the joinery.

This procedure would work great with the usage of the threaded tenons and phenolic means of construction as the studs thread count would not be in conflict with the tenons thread count.

Dick

In other words, the bolt does nothing to draw the forearm & handle together. It is merely used for weight. The threads serve only as glue grooves. In fact, he could make the tapped hole 1/2-13 or 5/8-11 and just add more epoxy. I don't really see any problems except that I have a natural aversion to filling big voids with epoxy. I admit that isn't something I would have tried on my own. I'll have to ponder this some more. Thanks for the input.

 

[dzcues]

Thanks for the input, and like I said above this seems like a great deal of work to me also. However, I am not at liberty to say, but you may be surprised who out is doing this.

Have a very nice day!!

Thanks for the clarification. You have a very nice day, too.