Crical case

[JB Cases]

Hi! Yes, most of the cases are a thicker fabric on the top half and the bottom is just a nylon sleeve.
I was wondering why my cue had all these marks and dings on them since I was being very careful with them during play. Turns out it was because of the design of them that doesn’t provide protection in the bottom half of the case where it rattles during any kind of movement.

I had a few hard cases and unfortunately this was the design of most of them, so I was looking for a case that would protect my more expensive cues. I came across JB and did some research. For me, it’s worth purchasing to protect my cues in case I ever sell them. For my cheaper bar cues that I don’t care about being damaged any case will suffice.

If you don’t need that level of protection or wanting to shell out that much cash, then any one you like is fine. JB also sell the fabric inserts for $50. So you can later upgrade/ convert the inside of your case with that if you wanted to later.

In fact we do sell an interior that would works for this particular knockoff and it would definitely improve the internal protection. The only thing we need is the measurements of the tubing used to be sure we are delivering an interior that will fit. Since you mentioned it I will probably do a video on this.

Since I care mostly about cue protection I don't mind if people upgrade their cases to our protection when possible. Of course they won't get the other benefits we build into our cases but they will get a major improvement in protection which is the most important part in my opinion.

Here is a link to the interiors. I need to amend this page with better instructions because our interiors don't always easily fit other cases.

UltraPad Interiors | JB Cases | Custom Pool Designer Cases

JB Custom Case Designer

jbcases.com

 

[tomker]

Actually, our cases range in price from $80 to $2000. A JB Case in a similar style to yours runs about $250.

I see. The reason I picked $250 as an upper bound is because when I was shopping for a new case, I was seeing models for under $250 that were clearly inferior and models for over $250 that were clearly superior. I will be the first to admit that I didn't examine every model of cue case from every manufacturer and it looks like I may have been optimistic about that upper bound.

... All I ever care about is that cues are well protected and consumers are not lied to explicitly through marketing deception or through construction deception such as showing padding at the visible part and then taking it away at the invisible part.

You (and another poster, earlier) see this as deception, which I can understand. Let me offer a more charitable interpretation. The manufacturer COULD have not included any padding at all with the case and just had the compartments separated by a grid of nylon fabric. Like I said in an earlier post, for ~10 years I used a 1x1 hard case where the compartments were separated only by a piece of such fabric. So that was an option for them. But they included the padding at the top as a value-add. And presumably they added the padding at the top instead of the bottom, not to deceive, but because that's the logical place to put it to prevent cues from making contact with each other as they're being inserted or removed [from the top].

The reason I was questioning how much cues could really be damaged by "banging" around against each other is multi-fold. First, we're talking about things that are relatively lightweight, so in terms of physics, in the real world, they aren't really going to build up that much momentum for a collision. Second, we're talking about cylinders, so their cross sections are circles, i.e., the strongest possible shape. The force of a collision is going to be distributed across the whole object. And third, even though the fabric between the cues is thin, it's still going to act as an interface to decrease friction between the cues and allow them to roll off of each other rather than transfer energy as they would in an inelastic collision.

I'm happy to have my intuition be proven wrong. hkstyle has said, above, that his cues have been damaged. So, that's a shame.

I will freely admit that having more padding is better. (Which is something that I have never disagreed with.)

 

[JB Cases]

I see. The reason I picked $250 as an upper bound is because when I was shopping for a new case, I was seeing models for under $250 that were clearly inferior and models for over $250 that were clearly superior. I will be the first to admit that I didn't examine every model of cue case from every manufacturer and it looks like I may have been optimistic about that upper bound.


You (and another poster, earlier) see this as deception, which I can understand. Let me offer a more charitable interpretation. The manufacturer COULD have not included any padding at all with the case and just had the compartments separated by a grid of nylon fabric.

Well, they could but they won't because the inclusion of padding at the top of the cavities creates an illusion of protection and implies that it extends the full length. I have ever seen some of these cheap cases where the interior simply stops completely about halfway down. Mostly i see them stopping about 2-3"above the bottom.

If they did not include any padding at all then the rattle would be so obvious that the users would probably reject them based on the annoyance factor more than the protection.

Like I said in an earlier post, for ~10 years I used a 1x1 hard case where the compartments were separated only by a piece of such fabric. So that was an option for them. But they included the padding at the top as a value-add. And presumably they added the padding at the top instead of the bottom, not to deceive, but because that's the logical place to put it to prevent cues from making contact with each other as they're being inserted or removed [from the top].

I can tell you from first-hand experience that the reason is deception and not a value-add. The 1x1 cases you speak of are $20 cases that are generally paired with $50-100 cues. Both items are generally considered throwaway if damage occurs and most users at that level aren't sophisticated enough to know about or care about damage that happens as a result of using the case. Also, the 1x1 cases are generally made better than the case you have. The reason for this is that they were created at a different time and had different origins.

For what it's worth I lived in China for 7 years and worked intimately with several manufacturers including the one that made your case.

In fact cases were made without padding before I invented the UltraPad interior and it gained popularity. The usage of padding at all is directly because of copying what we do.

The reason I was questioning how much cues could really be damaged by "banging" around against each other is multi-fold. First, we're talking about things that are relatively lightweight, so in terms of physics, in the real world, they aren't really going to build up that much momentum for a collision.

It's not just about the momentum, it's also about the number of oscillations and vibrations induced. Cues are relatively fragile as instruments go and are made up of many small parts glued together with thin walls and flimsy tenons. They are not made to take very much lateral force.

Second, we're talking about cylinders, so their cross sections are circles, i.e., the strongest possible shape. The force of a collision is going to be distributed across the whole object.

Cues are actually cones and not circles. So the force, whatever it is, is not distributed equally. It is amplified so that the thinner parts of the long cone receive more torque than the thickest parts. Beyond that though the parts are glued together and very often there are cavities internally depending on the tolerances that can contain excess glue. With frequent enough applied vibration this extra glue can detach and cause rattles. As well the joints themselves can detach and cause buzzes. Furthermore the quality of glue used makes a difference and if the glue is weak then constant vibration can loosen it.

As well the finish can develop cracks and bubbles from collisions and vibrations.

I think we both agree that some padding is better than no padding. But my point is that some padding vac also create a fulcrum point and as such can amplify the applied force just a lever can be used to multiply the leverage and allow heavier objects to be lifted with less direct energy.

And third, even though the fabric between the cues is thin, it's still going to act as an interface to decrease friction between the cues and allow them to roll off of each other rather than transfer energy as they would in an inelastic collision.

In that sense yes something is better than nothing between the parts but the question is whether you want to depend on the tiny amount of decreased friction provided by a piece of paper thin fabric to prevent damage to a thin tapered cone composed of many smaller parts held together by flimsy tenons and thin walls? Especially if you paid a lot of money for that cue?

I am pretty sure you wouldn't want to test it with any cue that you truly valued. If it's a $50 cue then maybe it doesn't matter much but if it's a 5000 dollar cue then I think it matters a lot.

I'm happy to have my intuition be proven wrong. hkstyle has said, above, that his cues have been damaged. So, that's a shame.

It is a shame. Moreover because the solution doesn't actually cost much to implement but when the manufacturers and importers don't actually care or bother to know or test then consumers are easily fooled by a little visible padding and next to nothing for the majority of the case.

Most consumers I think just assume that a top loading case has adequate protection and any damage to the cue that they experience isn't attributed to the case.

I will freely admit that having more padding is better. (Which is something that I have never disagreed with.)

Yes, I think I'm most situations more padding is better to protect fragile things. In my opinion though padding applied only at the top actually creates more danger than if there were no padding at all.

I don't really have the setup to test this conclusively and of course any tests I do would be tainted with the conflict of interest inherent in my competitive position.

I could of course probably find an independent lab capable of testing this and I have thought about it many times but haven't taken the time to find one or work to a budget. The slow motion video I posted was done by an independent party and I specifically instructed them not to do anything that would skew the results in our favor. I gave them full permission to publish their video with no editorial control on my part. The video that was ultimately made which bears my logo was done with no input from me.

I will conclude this with a story from Burton Spain. He was a cue maker who made blanks for other makers. He was obsessed with creating cues that wouldn't develop internal issues. He would go to shows and stand on his blanks suspended between two cement blocks. The way he put it was this; the family's pet alligator might never eat the family dog but the dog certainly feels better when the alligator isn't there.

 

[garczar]

Well, they could but they won't because the inclusion of padding at the top of the cavities creates an illusion of protection and implies that it extends the full length. I have ever seen some of these cheap cases where the interior simply stops completely about halfway down. Mostly i see them stopping about 2-3"above the bottom.

If they did not include any padding at all then the rattle would be so obvious that the users would probably reject them based on the annoyance factor more than the protection.



I can tell you from first-hand experience that the reason is deception and not a value-add. The 1x1 cases you speak of are $20 cases that are generally paired with $50-100 cues. Both items are generally considered throwaway if damage occurs and most users at that level aren't sophisticated enough to know about or care about damage that happens as a result of using the case. Also, the 1x1 cases are generally made better than the case you have. The reason for this is that they were created at a different time and had different origins.

For what it's worth I lived in China for 7 years and worked intimately with several manufacturers including the one that made your case.

In fact cases were made without padding before I invented the UltraPad interior and it gained popularity. The usage of padding at all is directly because of copying what we do.




It's not just about the momentum, it's also about the number of oscillations and vibrations induced. Cues are relatively fragile as instruments go and are made up of many small parts glued together with thin walls and flimsy tenons. They are not made to take very much lateral force.


Cues are actually cones and not circles. So the force, whatever it is, is not distributed equally. It is amplified so that the thinner parts of the long cone receive more torque than the thickest parts. Beyond that though the parts are glued together and very often there are cavities internally depending on the tolerances that can contain excess glue. With frequent enough applied vibration this extra glue can detach and cause rattles. As well the joints themselves can detach and cause buzzes. Furthermore the quality of glue used makes a difference and if the glue is weak then constant vibration can loosen it.

As well the finish can develop cracks and bubbles from collisions and vibrations.

I think we both agree that some padding is better than no padding. But my point is that some padding vac also create a fulcrum point and as such can amplify the applied force just a lever can be used to multiply the leverage and allow heavier objects to be lifted with less direct energy.



In that sense yes something is better than nothing between the parts but the question is whether you want to depend on the tiny amount of decreased friction provided by a piece of paper thin fabric to prevent damage to a thin tapered cone composed of many smaller parts held together by flimsy tenons and thin walls? Especially if you paid a lot of money for that cue?

I am pretty sure you wouldn't want to test it with any cue that you truly valued. If it's a $50 cue then maybe it doesn't matter much but if it's a 5000 dollar cue then I think it matters a lot.



It is a shame. Moreover because the solution doesn't actually cost much to implement but when the manufacturers and importers don't actually care or bother to know or test then consumers are easily fooled by a little visible padding and next to nothing for the majority of the case.

Most consumers I think just assume that a top loading case has adequate protection and any damage to the cue that they experience isn't attributed to the case.




Yes, I think I'm most situations more padding is better to protect fragile things. In my opinion though padding applied only at the top actually creates more danger than if there were no padding at all.

I don't really have the setup to test this conclusively and of course any tests I do would be tainted with the conflict of interest inherent in my competitive position.

I could of course probably find an independent lab capable of testing this and I have thought about it many times but haven't taken the time to find one or work to a budget. The slow motion video I posted was done by an independent party and I specifically instructed them not to do anything that would skew the results in our favor. I gave them full permission to publish their video with no editorial control on my part. The video that was ultimately made which bears my logo was done with no input from me.

I will conclude this with a story from Burton Spain. He was a cue maker who made blanks for other makers. He was obsessed with creating cues that wouldn't develop internal issues. He would go to shows and stand on his blanks suspended between two cement blocks. The way he put it was this; the family's pet alligator might never eat the family dog but the dog certainly feels better when the alligator isn't there.

Major props on the patience front. The guy is clearly someone who doesn't deal too well with either reason or facts. BTW, still lovin my 'ol 3x6rugged. Replaced the strap with a adjustable laptop bag strap 'cause the orig. was too long and not adj. great case.

 

[sixwillwin]

I see. The reason I picked $250 as an upper bound is because when I was shopping for a new case, I was seeing models for under $250 that were clearly inferior and models for over $250 that were clearly superior. I will be the first to admit that I didn't examine every model of cue case from every manufacturer and it looks like I may have been optimistic about that upper bound.


You (and another poster, earlier) see this as deception, which I can understand. Let me offer a more charitable interpretation. The manufacturer COULD have not included any padding at all with the case and just had the compartments separated by a grid of nylon fabric. Like I said in an earlier post, for ~10 years I used a 1x1 hard case where the compartments were separated only by a piece of such fabric. So that was an option for them. But they included the padding at the top as a value-add. And presumably they added the padding at the top instead of the bottom, not to deceive, but because that's the logical place to put it to prevent cues from making contact with each other as they're being inserted or removed [from the top].

The reason I was questioning how much cues could really be damaged by "banging" around against each other is multi-fold. First, we're talking about things that are relatively lightweight, so in terms of physics, in the real world, they aren't really going to build up that much momentum for a collision. Second, we're talking about cylinders, so their cross sections are circles, i.e., the strongest possible shape. The force of a collision is going to be distributed across the whole object. And third, even though the fabric between the cues is thin, it's still going to act as an interface to decrease friction between the cues and allow them to roll off of each other rather than transfer energy as they would in an inelastic collision.

I'm happy to have my intuition be proven wrong. hkstyle has said, above, that his cues have been damaged. So, that's a shame.

I will freely admit that having more padding is better. (Which is something that I have never disagreed with.)

Enjoy your cue case. Different people have different usage and expectations. I have had several JB and many others. Each have pros and cons.

 

[tomker]

...
It's not just about the momentum, it's also about the number of oscillations and vibrations induced. Cues are relatively fragile as instruments go and are made up of many small parts glued together with thin walls and flimsy tenons. They are not made to take very much lateral force.

Thanks, you've given me a lot to think about.

Is there any way to quantify how big of a problem it is for me to continue using my new case?

On one end of the spectrum, maybe all the inlays in my cue come unglued and pop out the next time I go to league night.
On the other end, maybe there will never be any noticeable damage to the cue as long as I handle the case with a reasonable amount of care.

I'm having a hard time gauging where the actual amount of risk sits along this spectrum.

I watched your video of cases falling on the floor in slow motion. That's obviously not something you WANT to happen to your cues, but the video does nothing to indicate how much damage was done to the cues.

It's also hard to know how relevant these sorts of tests are for me. In the ~15 years I've been playing pool, I can't remember the last time my case has fallen on the floor like that. It may have never happened. And I haven't ever dumped my cues on the floor because I turned my case upside down by accident. These tests are interesting the same way it would be interesting to shoot the cue cases with a gun, but what's really relevant to me is how much I might be damaging my cues by e.g. carrying this case around on my shoulder or setting it down gently under a pool table.

 

[garczar]

Enjoy your cue case. Different people have different usage and expectations. I have had several JB and many others. Each have pros and cons.

Problem is everyone that buys one of these cheap cases expects full protection but are not getting it. I don't think for one second people vary their 'cue protection expectations' rather they buy stuff based purely on looks/price not having a clue their cue is not being fully protected. If you don't travel and bounce the case around these cheapies are fine but if you DO travel, go to tournaments you want the best.

 

[tomker]

Problem is everyone that buys one of these cheap cases expects full protection but are not getting it. I don't think for one second people vary their 'cue protection expectations' rather they buy stuff based purely on looks/price not having a clue their cue is not being fully protected. If you don't travel and bounce the case around these cheapies are fine but if you DO travel, go to tournaments you want the best.

I assumed the padding inside my new case spanned the length of the case. I suppose you could say that was my expectation.

Now that I know it doesn't, I'm trying to quantify how much that actually matters.

Does anybody have any measurements on how durable cues are? How hard do you have to hit a cue butt for it to be damaged?

Does anybody know what kinds of forces cues are subjected to when they're in cases like these and the cases are subjected to external impacts?

I don't even know how you would start to measure something like that. Is there some kind of foam that you could wrap around a cue where its deformation would indicate the force of an impact?

 

[JB Cases]

Enjoy your cue case. Different people have different usage and expectations. I have had several JB and many others. Each have pros and cons.

Thanks, you've given me a lot to think about.

Is there any way to quantify how big of a problem it is for me to continue using my new case?

No. You could quite literally toss your cues in the back seat with no container at all and drive the Dakar rally and though the endless combination of physical interactions the cues could could survive 100 runnings without a scratch.

The amount of risk you want to subject the cues to is entirely up to you. We agree that all else being equal more protection is better but the amount of protection needed to mitigate potential damage is a combination of the construction quality of your cues, the forces they are regularly subjected to and your tolerance of what types of damage bother you. I know guys who play with cues that are cracked and buzzing and don't care. I know other players who are upset at the tiniest scratch.

In my particular situation I had a $1200 cue fall out of a case that got accidentally invented and as luck would have it the cue struck the metal foot of the table just right to crack the butt cap. I had saved up for several months to buy that cue and it meant a lot to me. So I sent it to America from Germany to get it repaired. While it was gone I rebuilt the interior of my case to make it hold the cue securely. Since then I have never had a problem with my cues coming out of a case without me deliberately removing them.

The annoyance and disappointment I had from that experience led to me solving the problem for myself and obviously with my invention of padded interiors in tube cases solving it for everyone else. Now it's an option that didn't previously exist. But just as clearly it's not something that must be used. Any container of suitable length is enough for transport. Even rubber bands serve the purpose of holding a bundle of parts together for easier transport. How much exposure to things that can affect the structural integrity of those parts is tolerable is completely up to the owner of the cues.

I often say it like this and I mean it sincerely, if you hate your cues keep them in a cheap case with inadequate protection. Your question is what denotes inadequate protection.

For me inadequate protection is anything that increases the opportunities for damage beyond the level of annoyance. That's going to be different from person to person.

On one end of the spectrum, maybe all the inlays in my cue come unglued and pop out the next time I go to league night.

Correct, depending on the construction of your cue and it's ability to withstand the changes in temperature and moisture levels combined with the case's ability to mitigate those factors it's certainly a possibility.

I traveled the USA with 50k in cues through all climates with the cues kept in the Ryder truck. Some cues survived the that two month trip fully intact and others developed inlay and finish issues due to the contraction/expansion the parts experienced.

On the other end, maybe there will never be any noticeable damage to the cue as long as I handle the case with a reasonable amount of care.

Yes, all things are possible. And all things being equal a fully padded case reduces the opportunity for damage considerably. If for example you happen to unavoidably hit a major pothole that sends the case violently flying into the ceiling and slams to floorboard the cue parts are not going to slam against the tube wall or each other. Such a situation could do no damage or it could crack a cue but the odds of the cue surviving without damage are far greater in a well padded case.

I'm having a hard time gauging where the actual amount of risk sits along this spectrum.

Just decide on what would bother you if it happened and use as much protection from that as you care to purchase. You at least have the choice and now you have the knowledge that what you are currently using has very little protection compared to what we deliver in the 200-250 dollar range whereas a week ago you didn't have that information.

I watched your video of cases falling on the floor in slow motion. That's obviously not something you WANT to happen to your cues, but the video does nothing to indicate how much damage was done to the cues.

Maybe no damage was done to them. The videographer didn't take any time to document the condition of the cues before and after.

Here is an example that you might find relatable. A cue maker friend, Jerry Oliver, was excited to show me a cue he had built for a sponsored player. He walked me over to the table where the player was about to play a match and asked the player to show me the cue. The player had a case where he had to tip out to get the cues to slide up into a position to grip them. As he does this all of his cues start sliding out at the same time and all three of us grabbed for them and all three of us missed them as all the cue parts clattered to the floor. The beautiful new cue that Jerry had given the player hours earlier now had two big dings in it and a few scratches.

I went back to my booth and got a case to give to the player so at least he wouldn't have to deal with that situation again.

It's also hard to know how relevant these sorts of tests are for me. In the ~15 years I've been playing pool, I can't remember the last time my case has fallen on the floor like that. It may have never happened. And I haven't ever dumped my cues on the floor because I turned my case upside down by accident. These tests are interesting the same way it would be interesting to shoot the cue cases with a gun, but what's really relevant to me is how much I might be damaging my cues by e.g. carrying this case around on my shoulder or setting it down gently under a pool table.

Fully understand. It's perfectly clear to me that most people have the attitude that nothing will harm their cue as long as they pay attention. Most of us have a won't happen to me outlook on accidents and tragedies. My cases are a form of insurance against situations that can damage a cue and over the past thirty years I have a collection of stories from people whose cues were saved from damage in situations that don't happen often.

As long as you handle your stuff gingerly and the case never subjects the cue to repeated blunt force in situations of sudden violence I am confident that the cue is likely to be fine and playable without any annoyance like buzzes and cracks. As long as the cue is decently constructed in the first place that is.

I will repeat that I build cases for people who want much more protection than the $80 knockoff you have offers. The only statement you made in your review that is not correct in my opinion is that the case is the equivalent of cases in the 200-250 range. Given that my cases are in that range this statement is objectively not true. I have proven than many times over.

If you wish to go further and state that the protection our interiors offer is essentially not needed then you are fully entitled to that opinion but objectively I am happy to subject your cues to the various situations experienced by my customers and see how well the cue survives in your knockoff. I will subject my cues to the same situations protected by my case and we can compare the condition.

And granted you may never experience any of these situations. I prefer better odds though and the net result is investing 250 over the expected lifespan of the case, with a lifetime warranty, to get our level of protection every day of use amounts to fractions of a penny per day in cost. In contrast repairing internal damage is often practically impossible and expensive even when possible. So an 80 dollar knockoff could end up costing more than our case. To me the peace of mind is worth it when the cost is less than a tenth of a penny for each day of use.

That's just the protection aspect. The other things are the quality of the case itself and whether it remains pleasingly useful or whether it becomes annoyingly broken. Those are also considerations that factor into the value.

With all that in mind the choice is always yours. Now you have plenty of solid information to make an informed choice.

 

[tomker]

...
With all that in mind the choice is always yours. Now you have plenty of solid information to make an informed choice.

Well, yes and no. The conclusion here seems to be "maybe it'll be a problem, maybe it won't be."

I have no way to quantify the risk to me personally. I like my new $100 case. I've used it for two months now and my cues show no signs of damage. Are my cues being damaged internally? Maybe. Are my cues not being damaged at all? Maybe. Who knows. Nobody, apparently. Should I turn around and buy a new $250 cue case to prevent this damage that may or may not be occurring? No idea.

Here's how I'm thinking about this now. I've been playing pool for about ~15 years. Over the years I've seen and heard about a lot of damage to cues. Mostly nicks and scratches from cues falling down and hitting the edges of tables or whatever. Sometimes people have warped cues or the finish is messed up, which can be directly explained by heat, humidity, thermal cycling, being stored at a weird angle, etc. I've seen some cues broken by blunt force trauma (while not in a cue case). But up until ~2 days ago, I had never heard of a cue being damaged because it rattled around against another cue while being stored in a hard case. So my intuition is that this is probably not a problem that I have to worry a lot about. Maybe I'm wrong, but without anybody being able to quantify how wrong I am, this is the only actionable data I have to go on.

It would go a long way if you could get one of these cases, put some cues in it, subject the case to "rattling" and/or various impacts, and measure how long it takes before the cues become noticeably damaged.

Meanwhile, I will update my original review with information about the internal padding, and to edit the claim that it's comparable to cue cases in the $200-$250 range.

 

[tomker]

My dissection and review of the Crical case.
...

BTW thanks for doing this dissection.

I assumed that the difference between my case and the one you tore down was just cosmetic (since they are sold as variants of each other on AliExpress) but it seems like my case is better built in a number of ways.

The zippers seem to be of a different and sturdier design on my case.

The bottom of my case is also riveted together, with two rivets holding the shoulder strap on at that end. So that seems sturdier too.

You said that you were able to easily tear out the stitching at the top of the shoulder strap, but it's hard to know if I should be concerned about this. Out of curiosity, I got my luggage scale and used it to yank my case into the air. The highest number the scale registered was 6 pounds. Then I tried pulling on the scale the way you pulled out the stitching. With very little effort I got a reading of 35 pounds. So I think you may have been applying almost 6 times as much force to that stitching than I would ever apply to it during normal use. This experiment has given me some peace of mind.

 

[tomker]

... We agree that all else being equal more protection is better ...

I've thought of a solution, or at least a stopgap solution, for me personally.

I only carry around two butts and two shafts but the case has compartments for four shafts.

I'm going to buy some foam cylinders and put them in the empty shaft compartments.

The foam obviously won't prevent collisions in certain directions but it will in some directions, and it should absorb a lot of the energy of the cues "rattling around."

 

[JB Cases]

Well, yes and no. The conclusion here seems to be "maybe it'll be a problem, maybe it won't be."

Well yes that's basically the entire thing. When you have cases that allow cues to rattle and move them the integrity of the cue is at more risk than when the cue is well padded.

I have no way to quantify the risk to me personally. I like my new $100 case. I've used it for two months now and my cues show no signs of damage. Are my cues being damaged internally? Maybe. Are my cues not being damaged at all? Maybe.

Maybe, maybe not. Your tolerance for risk is your choice. I had a room owner tell me that the the extra padding to keep the cues from falling out was bullshit and not needed but he would buy ten of our cases because they were new and looked great and would sell.

About an hour later he came in to show me his 10k cue with dings and scratches on it. Turns out he was leaving the room and forgot to latch his case and slung it over the opposite shoulder which made it upside down to the way he normally carried it. This caused the cues to move quickly and they forced the lid off and the cues clattered on the rough concrete.

I was sympathetic but inwardly pleased that this happened because I really didn't want him selling my cases just because they look good.

Who knows. Nobody, apparently. Should I turn around and buy a new $250 cue case to prevent this damage that may or may not be occurring? No idea.

It happens. Not all cues are built the same and not all of them can take the same amount of stress. We already agreed that padding is better than no padding and more padding is better than less padding. You can purchase an interior for $65 or modify it yourself now that you know how easy it is to take apart if you want to improve the protection. Or do nothing and maybe you will never have a problem at all.

Here's how I'm thinking about this now. I've been playing pool for about ~15 years. Over the years I've seen and heard about a lot of damage to cues. Mostly nicks and scratches from cues falling down and hitting the edges of tables or whatever. Sometimes people have warped cues or the finish is messed up, which can be directly explained by heat, humidity, thermal cycling, being stored at a weird angle, etc. I've seen some cues broken by blunt force trauma (while not in a cue case). But up until ~2 days ago, I had never heard of a cue being damaged because it rattled around against another cue while being stored in a hard case.

Neither did I until I started studying this. Most people don't ever think that the case could be contributing to the damage they experience with their cue. I assumed that all hard casess would be made adequately protective until I found out that they weren't.

Just like many things in life no one thinks of as a problem until it's identified.

For example a lot of cues get scratched up by the inside of hard cases that are made with expanding foam. The foam often pushes through the sewn liner and forms a little line of hard beads. Until I exposed this no one had ever bothered to open up this style of case and see exactly what the interior of the cavities looked like. So no one to my knowledge had connected the construction of the case with the scratches. And I didn't know either until I took some of them apart.

Doesn't happen all the time and not to all brands. But it happens often enough to be a problem. Even today people use foam core cases and don't bother to look for these defects in construction.

They just assume that the scratches happened while using the cues.

So my intuition is that this is probably not a problem that I have to worry a lot about. Maybe I'm wrong, but without anybody being able to quantify how wrong I am, this is the only actionable data I have to go on.

That's fine. If I had more data I would show it. Some people care more about protecting their gear than others do. Maybe there will come a time when I will find out how much it would cost to have an independent lab run testing to get the data. Until then the very simple answer is that more padding is better and cue parts not banging against each other is better. Intuitively just about any human knows that without any extra data needed.

It would go a long way if you could get one of these cases, put some cues in it, subject the case to "rattling" and/or various impacts, and measure how long it takes before the cues become noticeably damaged.

No it wouldn't. Here is why, marketing is about story telling. If for example I were to run these tests and produce the data very few would actually care.

The knockoff brands would simply lie or insinuate that whatever they sell is protective and fulfills the same criteria. It's extremely easy to do that in the billiards industry. I have caught other brands literally ripping off my content practically verbatim.

I once did a review of a famous brand's flimsy butterfly case and they threatened to sue me for showing the world how the case was constructed. And this brand made their mark by selling performance shafts that they did in fact test extensively. They said that the case I reviewed wasn't even in production anymore to which I said that's great, hope you improved with the newer models.

I used to think it would be that simple, just show the data, show the side by side comparison.... It's not. People are much more motivated by following fashion trends and buying cheap knockoffs. Then they will defend their buying choices to the death because they feel slighted if what they bought is criticized. I have seen it thousands of times in the past 30 years.

And dozens of times I have had people come back with damaged cues and tell me I was right. It always sucks to see it but in fact I was right.

I actually have nothing more to gain at this point by educating people about this. We sell every case we can make and are likely to do so far into the future. I can have cheap knockoffs and crappy cases made by the container load and sell them all day to people who don't care that much about knowing how the case is actually constructed.

Even if I would have not responded to your review at all we would continue to sell everything we can make because we have earned enough of a reputation to be desirable for those who care and can afford to invest the relatively small amount of extra money into the protection and quality we provide. There would likely have been and are likely to be some people who will buy this knockoff or something similar based on your review and some of them will really think that it's equivalent to what we make. That's ok because our waiting list is 14 weeks and stays full. If sales start to slip below everything we can make then I will start to look for why and adjust as needed.

I build cases for my needs. I care about my cues being safe during transport and I know what happens in cases that are not as protective as what we build. You might not think that our level of protection is needed and that's fine. I take responsibility for the protection I offer and if anyone says that their cue was damaged in our case and I can duplicate the damage I will pay to repair their cue.

No one who recommends cheap crappy inadequately protective cases will ever take on such a responsibility. No seller of such cases would ever take on such a responsibility.

I do. And I give a lifetime warranty on what we build. The only reason I give such a warranty is because I know exactly how every centimeter of our cases are built.

So sure, if you feel perfectly safe with the case you bought then great. If you want our level of protection then buy our case. There are 250 dollar cases and even 2500 cases made by other brands than don't have our level of protection so it's not a matter of how much you spend. For $65 you can have our interior in your case and have most of the protection we provide.

I could make exactly the case you have with our interior and sell it to you for $100 all day and make decent profit. But I decided that the case should be more than just well protecting. It should be well built to last, should be comfortable to use and should provide excellent value every day of use. To build all that into the case means more cost and a higher price. I am perfectly fine competing at the price level we are at. Everyone gets to eat and live comfortably and I don't have to see tons of cheaply constructed cases falling apart from normal use with our interior in them. I don't build disposable items.

Meanwhile, I will update my original review with information about the internal padding, and to edit the claim that it's comparable to cue cases in the $200-$250 range.

Thank you. And if you ever decide to go down the road of testing extensively in a controlled manner I am happy to contribute to the effort as long as it's done in an independent and unbiased manner.

 

[JB Cases]

BTW thanks for doing this dissection.

You're welcome

I assumed that the difference between my case and the one you tore down was just cosmetic (since they are sold as variants of each other on AliExpress) but it seems like my case is better built in a number of ways.

Possibly. There are many variants and many manufacturers. It's entirely possible that "Crical" is a brand name made up by a distributor who had cases made in several factories.

The zippers seem to be of a different and sturdier design on my case.

Possibly. Unlikely though as zippers are one of the main ways that the cheap case makers save money. I once was responsible for mass produced cases for a client's brand and the factory switched out the zippers from the high quality ones I had sourced to a low quality one that would save them about a dollar a case. They just couldn't understand why it made a difference. I said that zippers are the most touched part of the case and most likely to break. And with cue cases they are nearly impossible to repair easily. That's why I wanted super tough zippers, zipper sliders and zipper pulls.

The bottom of my case is also riveted together, with two rivets holding the shoulder strap on at that end. So that seems sturdier too.

That probably helps depending on how it was done. Rivets aren't always helpful if they are done in a way that allows the fabric to pull against them. I once showed this a factory owner who had installed them incorrectly on a famous brand's flagship case.

You said that you were able to easily tear out the stitching at the top of the shoulder strap, but it's hard to know if I should be concerned about this. Out of curiosity, I got my luggage scale and used it to yank my case into the air. The highest number the scale registered was 6 pounds. Then I tried pulling on the scale the way you pulled out the stitching. With very little effort I got a reading of 35 pounds. So I think you may have been applying almost 6 times as much force to that stitching than I would ever apply to it during normal use. This experiment has given me some peace of mind.

Fair enough. I design for extra durability. Not every case made by el cheapo makers gets quality sewing even if the design is decent. They operate on speed and not quality. So you could get one that lasts forever or one that lasts a month before the threads are pulling out even with "normal" use. But at least you now have some crude benchmark to use to alleviate any anxiety.

I have a lot of cases in various states of damage that were simply given to me after the previous owners bought a JB Case. Sometimes they had used the cases for years and sometimes months. I always take them because I can use them to learn more and also have more examples to show to others of what can happen to those models and similar ones constructed in similar ways.

Again though the main difference is that with the same amount of force you would not be able to do it with our cases and if that part should ever break them we would either repair or replace the case. Given our continuous improvement environment we have always taken any damaged JB Cases as an opportunity to try and strengthen the area of damage to the point that it would be unlikely to happen again.

And that's what the extra money buys. Pennies per day to get better construction and superior protection backed with a lifetime warranty.

Taking a risk with my cues isn't worth the "savings" of $150. The peace of mind that my case isn't likely to break in some annoying way as has happened to others at inopportune times is also worth the extra money.

If you feel that you're good with the construction quality coupled with the fact that you are careful with your equipment as you stated earlier then you're probably well served with a cheap knockoff. Especially if you diy an improvement to the interior protection which I highly recommend.

 

[JB Cases]

I think I found the one you have in on temu. I went ahead and ordered one just so that I could give a fair review of exactly the same model you have.

 

[garczar]

I think I found the one you have in on temu. I went ahead and ordered one just so that I could give a fair review of exactly the same model you have.

View attachment 806636

Again, MAJOR props for patience. Can't believe anyone would go to these length's to prove a point to one thick-headed idiot. Hopefully when he sees just how cheesy these cases are he'll either admit defeat or go away. My JB rugged is a first gen that looks like its been thru a battle but the zippers and integrity of the thing is spot-on. Strap was waaay to long and non-adj. so i cut it off and got a $10 laptop strap, works perfect.

 

[tomker]

Again, MAJOR props for patience. Can't believe anyone would go to these length's to prove a point to one thick-headed idiot. Hopefully when he sees just how cheesy these cases are he'll either admit defeat or go away. ...

What do you mean, "admit defeat"?

What is it that you want me to admit defeat about, exactly?

That having padding run the length of the entire case is more protective and better? I never said otherwise.

That JB Cases are better? I never said otherwise.

We're all on the same side here, and have been for the entirety of this thread. You're calling me an idiot but you can't even articulate what it is you think I'm wrong about.

I HAVE questioned the practical value of having more internal padding, with the end result being that nobody on this thread (including the maker of JB cases) can quantify that practical value. That's neither a victory nor a defeat for anybody involved.

 

[tomker]

I think I found the one you have in on temu. I went ahead and ordered one just so that I could give a fair review of exactly the same model you have.

I'm sure the review will be interesting and I look forward to it, although I wish you would have saved your money. I imagine it will be largely similar to the review of the other Crical case you did, except for maybe the small differences in rivets and zippers.

 

[JB Cases]

What do you mean, "admit defeat"?

What is it that you want me to admit defeat about, exactly?

That having padding run the length of the entire case is more protective and better? I never said otherwise.

That JB Cases are better? I never said otherwise.

We're all on the same side here, and have been for the entirety of this thread. You're calling me an idiot but you can't even articulate what it is you think I'm wrong about.

I HAVE questioned the practical value of having more internal padding, with the end result being that nobody on this thread (including the maker of JB cases) can quantify that practical value. That's neither

Let's be clear, I absolutely can quantify the value. It's very simple. Padding stops damage.

More padding stops more damage.

Padding at the top and thin fabric with no padding amplifies the force applied.
What you insist on is specific data that can't be provided because of the wide range of cue construction methods. It is impractical for me to set up tests that prove damage occurs because the logistics involved are far beyond what I can afford or have time for.

But I can assure you and everyone here that I have more practical experience with different cases and cues than everyone here. It's not even close.

I have turned cases over with a $25,000 cue inside. I have dropped cases with my $3000 in cues inside.

There is zero testing needed to understand that parts beating against each other audibly is uncomfortable for anyone who values the intact structural integrity of their cues. That's really the bottom line for me. It's literally the difference between dropping cues on a mattress versus dropping them on a hard floor in my opinion.

The clear winner is every person who cares enough about their cues to purchase a case that is actually protective throughout the entire length of the case. The losers are the ones who purchase cases in the expectation that they are protective and find that their cues develop rattles and cracks and buzzes because of repeated lateral beatings because the case is literally not more than an empty plastic tube.

a victory nor a defeat for anybody involved.

Any discussion where I get to show people how our cases protect cues compared to cases that don't is a victory for me. Any time I get to show off our quality compared to cheap knockoffs is a victory for me.

I would be willing to bet $20,000 that an independent test done by a qualified lab would favor us greatly over the level of case you purchased.

I am only speculating but I would guess that such a set of tests would likely cost more than $20,000 to do comprehensively.

I will repeat that I speak for the construction methods I created for our cases and my only issue is that the case you bought is not the equivalent of our cases at any price point. It might be the equivalent of other cases at the 200-250 dollar level and if so then to me those cases would be ripping off consumers even more than 80 dollar cases pretending to be protective with a little padding at the top.

With few exceptions cues are made of many thin parts and held together with thin walls and small tenons. They are absolutely not made to take lateral force. Not even a little bit. No cue maker will cover a cue that has been willfully subjected to sideways force if they know it has been.

So really, even though we agree that padding is better than no padding and more padding is better than less padding it seems that we don't actually agree that padding is needed at all.

To which I say that if you want to subject your cues to the abuse they get every single time your car hits a bump then that's your choice but my customers prefer the extra peace of mind that comes with knowing that their cues are not slamming against the interior walls and the other parts.

We don't need amplitude data correlated with glue types and tenon diameters to understand that force dampening is preferred regardless of cue construction.

 

[JB Cases]

I'm sure the review will be interesting and I look forward to it, although I wish you would have saved your money. I imagine it will be largely similar to the review of the other Crical case you did, except for maybe the small differences in rivets and zippers.

Maybe but it's a negligible amount to pay for actual knowledge.

The problem with comparisons is when they are made without actual knowledge of all compared items.

You made one statement that is actually indefensible unless you have first hand knowledge of the majority of cases made. Saying that the $80 case is the equivalent of cases in the $200-$250 range is the problem.

It's like me saying a particular $20,000 car is the equivalent of 80-100,000 dollar cars plural. There is is zero chance that I could ever make such a statement honestly, even framed as an opinion. I could tell you how 20k Ford compares to a 100k Mercedes because I have personal experience with them both. But I could not tell you anything about the internal construction of either car because I have never taken either of them apart.

That remains my only real issue with your review. Any customer of ours who recommends our cases knows that I stand behind the protection 100% and if a cue were to be proven to have been damaged through negligent construction then I would accept responsibility and try to make the customer whole.

No one who purchases a cheap case with paper thin nylon between the parts can expect you or the manufacturer or the importer to do anything for them if their cue is damaged by the case. That's the real problem with recommending cases that allow cues to excessively move and beat themselves against the parts and the sidewalls.

I would be absolutely sick if I told someone to buy a particular case and a really meaningful cue got damaged inside of it.