Cue construction
- Thread starter luke
- Start date
It is all personal preference....what you may find to play better could be the polar opposite of what I like. As far as quality I don't think that there is much difference.
What does IMO mean? Something about glues too
A trick question for john, what does IMO mean? He has been trying to get Joey to share those X-Rays for years, Joey chooses not to. That is Joey's business. Joey clearly put IMO at the end of the statement. Hard to contest that a person's opinion is what it is. Lord knows "john barton" has enough opinions of his own!
The better glues of today might bite a lot of people in the butt a few years up the road. The wood glues may indeed be better if you carefully select the glues for the application. Today's glues are somewhat "purpose built", newer ain't necessarily better for your application!
CA glues in particular, the Super Glue, Crazy Glue, types of glues are failing in far less demanding uses than cues around the twelve-fifteen year time period. CA glues have been used in some cues best I recall, not going to read ten years worth of posts to try to find who and when. However, it is worth asking your cue builder if and where he uses CA glues. Tips are swapped often enough it isn't likely to matter and ferrules are easily repaired. From there it starts getting a little tougher to fix all the time.
A hard "tink" is in style now. Old very dry wood gives that sound. The cues of today may have just as good a hit and sound to them as the 30-50 year old cues when they are 30-50 years old. I would bet some will but I probably won't be around to collect or the person I bet would die on me!
In terms of build quality, it depends on who built a cue from 50 years ago and who builds one today. Wood to wood fit hasn't changed in fifty years, or a hundred. It isn't going to change in another hundred. One thing I find funny is the love of veneers. Veneers are pretty. They also are generally made of very soft wood or paper. They make very nice filler to take care of tiny imperfections in fit that recut points can't. Black and white glues make many an inlay "fit perfectly" too. The old guys knew these tricks too though.
The best made cues are generally a fairly plain cue from a master builder. The fancier you get the more places for tiny imperfections to sneak in. Too, it is easy to build a pretty cue on the outside. The easiest way is to deliberately not have perfect fits on the inside parts of pieces that only show partially. Are some cue builders doing this today? Almost certainly. Also certain that some cue builders did it in the past too.
The quality of play of a cue is largely on the inside, invisible to the naked eye. There is no way to look at the outside of two cues and tell that one is crap and one is quality. The hit when new may or may not tell the story. Price is certainly only a small indication of a quality build. The only assurance of a good cue is knowing the dedication to quality of the cue builder you buy from.
Hu
A trick question for john, what does IMO mean? He has been trying to get Joey to share those X-Rays for years, Joey chooses not to. That is Joey's business. Joey clearly put IMO at the end of the statement. Hard to contest that a person's opinion is what it is. Lord knows "john barton" has enough opinions of his own!
The better glues of today might bite a lot of people in the butt a few years up the road. The wood glues may indeed be better if you carefully select the glues for the application. Today's glues are somewhat "purpose built", newer ain't necessarily better for your application!
CA glues in particular, the Super Glue, Crazy Glue, types of glues are failing in far less demanding uses than cues around the twelve-fifteen year time period. CA glues have been used in some cues best I recall, not going to read ten years worth of posts to try to find who and when. However, it is worth asking your cue builder if and where he uses CA glues. Tips are swapped often enough it isn't likely to matter and ferrules are easily repaired. From there it starts getting a little tougher to fix all the time.
A hard "tink" is in style now. Old very dry wood gives that sound. The cues of today may have just as good a hit and sound to them as the 30-50 year old cues when they are 30-50 years old. I would bet some will but I probably won't be around to collect or the person I bet would die on me!
In terms of build quality, it depends on who built a cue from 50 years ago and who builds one today. Wood to wood fit hasn't changed in fifty years, or a hundred. It isn't going to change in another hundred. One thing I find funny is the love of veneers. Veneers are pretty. They also are generally made of very soft wood or paper. They make very nice filler to take care of tiny imperfections in fit that recut points can't. Black and white glues make many an inlay "fit perfectly" too. The old guys knew these tricks too though.
The best made cues are generally a fairly plain cue from a master builder. The fancier you get the more places for tiny imperfections to sneak in. Too, it is easy to build a pretty cue on the outside. The easiest way is to deliberately not have perfect fits on the inside parts of pieces that only show partially. Are some cue builders doing this today? Almost certainly. Also certain that some cue builders did it in the past too.
The quality of play of a cue is largely on the inside, invisible to the naked eye. There is no way to look at the outside of two cues and tell that one is crap and one is quality. The hit when new may or may not tell the story. Price is certainly only a small indication of a quality build. The only assurance of a good cue is knowing the dedication to quality of the cue builder you buy from.
Hu
Last edited:
And I answered that. playability is SUBJECTIVE.
you think you can tell the difference in cues from the 80s and cues from the 2000s based on hit?
If so then tell me where we meet to test your ability because I am willing to bet high that you can't accurately pick what cues are from what decade in a blind test.
And before you go off berating me....
This test was already done.
http://jbcases.com/caseblog/2009/02/22/what-is-the-hit-of-a-pool-cue/
No. Hit is mostly subjective but on average cues across the board are better built than cues at any time in the past.
The flat fact is that if you had ten old production cues and ten new ones most people on this forum could not pick which was which with any authority or expertise.
http://jbcases.com/caseblog/2009/02/22/what-is-the-hit-of-a-pool-cue/
A hard "tink" is in style now. Old very dry wood gives that sound. The cues of today may have just as good a hit and sound to them as the 30-50 year old cues when they are 30-50 years old. I would bet some will but I probably won't be around to collect or the person I bet would die on me!
The best made cues are generally a fairly plain cue from a master builder. The fancier you get the more places for tiny imperfections to sneak in. Too, it is easy to build a pretty cue on the outside. The easiest way is to deliberately not have perfect fits on the inside parts of pieces that only show partially. Are some cue builders doing this today? Almost certainly. Also certain that some cue builders did it in the past too.
Hu
I have always said these things and believe that the more holes you put in anything the weaker it becomes.
Pool is full of superstitions and nostalgia. Folks apparently wish to believe in falsities rather than to adopt fact based beliefs. Worse yet, they argue their points of view without ever being able to provide viable evidence, and still yet the argument is entertained. It is a fact that cues of today are better than in any time before.
Glue is better, and there's plenty technical data to prove it. Machining is infinitely more accurate and precise and repeatable due to CNC, and no, CNC isn't just for inlay. Knowledge sharing and R&D are broader than ever before. Case in point, we have online forums, both public and private, where we can openly exchange advancements and breakthroughs. Machinery is being produced that is designed specifically for manufacturing cues. That never existed until somewhat recent times. We have tremendously more wood varieties available than ever before, with technical data to aide in our selection, and even software to project the final weight and balance of the cue according to the woods we choose. And if a wood isn't good enough for cues, we can resin stabilize it under vacuum and/or core it with another wood to achieve much higher structural integrity. There are plastics available now that have become staples in cue making, such as juma.
Point being, just 20 years ago a guy would have to equip himself with industrial machinery and apprentice under another cue maker in order to break into the business. It would be years or decades before he had a name folks knew, and a product folks wanted. Today, a guy can buy a machine ready to plug in and do everything, and within a few Youtube videos and/or instructional videos, can be producing cues that are at least on par or superior to cues of the past. And due to internet forums and social media, he can have a recognizable name within months, or at minimum enough to keep him busy making cues. Seriously, who builds a truly junk cue nowadays? I can find any wood or plastics supplier I want with just a few minutes of internet time, and if willing to spend the cash, can have the finest materials available period. In my mind, there's no doubt at all that cues are better today, in every sense and fashion, than cues of yesteryear. There's plenty evidence to prove it, and little to no evidence to prove otherwise.
Glue is better, and there's plenty technical data to prove it. Machining is infinitely more accurate and precise and repeatable due to CNC, and no, CNC isn't just for inlay. Knowledge sharing and R&D are broader than ever before. Case in point, we have online forums, both public and private, where we can openly exchange advancements and breakthroughs. Machinery is being produced that is designed specifically for manufacturing cues. That never existed until somewhat recent times. We have tremendously more wood varieties available than ever before, with technical data to aide in our selection, and even software to project the final weight and balance of the cue according to the woods we choose. And if a wood isn't good enough for cues, we can resin stabilize it under vacuum and/or core it with another wood to achieve much higher structural integrity. There are plastics available now that have become staples in cue making, such as juma.
Point being, just 20 years ago a guy would have to equip himself with industrial machinery and apprentice under another cue maker in order to break into the business. It would be years or decades before he had a name folks knew, and a product folks wanted. Today, a guy can buy a machine ready to plug in and do everything, and within a few Youtube videos and/or instructional videos, can be producing cues that are at least on par or superior to cues of the past. And due to internet forums and social media, he can have a recognizable name within months, or at minimum enough to keep him busy making cues. Seriously, who builds a truly junk cue nowadays? I can find any wood or plastics supplier I want with just a few minutes of internet time, and if willing to spend the cash, can have the finest materials available period. In my mind, there's no doubt at all that cues are better today, in every sense and fashion, than cues of yesteryear. There's plenty evidence to prove it, and little to no evidence to prove otherwise.
Anyone can say IMO. I don't care if joey shares xrays or not. I have seen dozens of brands bandsawed length wise to inspect them. I don't need to see the xrays joey inherited from Kerry Zeiler to know what a cue looks like internally.A trick question for john, what does IMO mean? He has been trying to get Joey to share those X-Rays for years, Joey chooses not to. That is Joey's business. Joey clearly put IMO at the end of the statement. Hard to contest that a person's opinion is what it is. Lord knows "john barton" has enough opinions of his own!
The better glues of today might bite a lot of people in the butt a few years up the road. The wood glues may indeed be better if you carefully select the glues for the application. Today's glues are somewhat "purpose built", newer ain't necessarily better for your application!
CA glues in particular, the Super Glue, Crazy Glue, types of glues are failing in far less demanding uses than cues around the twelve-fifteen year time period. CA glues have been used in some cues best I recall, not going to read ten years worth of posts to try to find who and when. However, it is worth asking your cue builder if and where he uses CA glues. Tips are swapped often enough it isn't likely to matter and ferrules are easily repaired. From there it starts getting a little tougher to fix all the time.
A hard "tink" is in style now. Old very dry wood gives that sound. The cues of today may have just as good a hit and sound to them as the 30-50 year old cues when they are 30-50 years old. I would bet some will but I probably won't be around to collect or the person I bet would die on me!
In terms of build quality, it depends on who built a cue from 50 years ago and who builds one today. Wood to wood fit hasn't changed in fifty years, or a hundred. It isn't going to change in another hundred. One thing I find funny is the love of veneers. Veneers are pretty. They also are generally made of very soft wood or paper. They make very nice filler to take care of tiny imperfections in fit that recut points can't. Black and white glues make many an inlay "fit perfectly" too. The old guys knew these tricks too though.
The best made cues are generally a fairly plain cue from a master builder. The fancier you get the more places for tiny imperfections to sneak in. Too, it is easy to build a pretty cue on the outside. The easiest way is to deliberately not have perfect fits on the inside parts of pieces that only show partially. Are some cue builders doing this today? Almost certainly. Also certain that some cue builders did it in the past too.
The quality of play of a cue is largely on the inside, invisible to the naked eye. There is no way to look at the outside of two cues and tell that one is crap and one is quality. The hit when new may or may not tell the story. Price is certainly only a small indication of a quality build. The only assurance of a good cue is knowing the dedication to quality of the cue builder you buy from.
Hu
I have been fortunate enough to have been in dozens of maker's shops from small individuals in a room not much bigger than a closet to state of the art operations as large as a football field and four stories high.
I have at times also been a part of sourcing wood, materials, supplies and machinery.
So it isn't as if I have no experience in the field. and that experience is what I base my opinions on.
While I won't presume to tell a maker how to build his cues I can assure you that being a seller of cues from low end to high end for 25 years does give one some measure of broad experience to form an opinion with.
as I said . . .
As I said, you have no shortage of opinions!
I am sure a person of your imagination can hold a cue in hand and know all about it's internal construction!
Hu
As I said, you have no shortage of opinions!
I am sure a person of your imagination can hold a cue in hand and know all about it's internal construction!
Hu
Sorry but facts can be debated, and opinions can be discussed. It's his opinion to make such a statement. It's you being an ass trying to inject someone else's opinion where it shouldn't be. You want to try an persuade and opinion with facts? That's cool. He already made his opinion based on other facts. Facts you choose to ignore. You need another chill pill John. You're going overboard trying to make yourself look like a god of knowledge, when in fact you're not. You continually force your opinion onto others without the decency to show respect to anyone.
CNC does not necessarily mean more accurate and precise, the only advantage CNC brings to the table is repeatability. I would venture to say a good quality manual machine can be of higher accuracy then some of the CNC's being cobbled together today for the purpose of building cues.
A trick question for john, what does IMO mean? He has been trying to get Joey to share those X-Rays for years, Joey chooses not to. That is Joey's business. Joey clearly put IMO at the end of the statement. Hard to contest that a person's opinion is what it is. Lord knows "john barton" has enough opinions of his own!
The better glues of today might bite a lot of people in the butt a few years up the road. The wood glues may indeed be better if you carefully select the glues for the application. Today's glues are somewhat "purpose built", newer ain't necessarily better for your application!
CA glues in particular, the Super Glue, Crazy Glue, types of glues are failing in far less demanding uses than cues around the twelve-fifteen year time period. CA glues have been used in some cues best I recall, not going to read ten years worth of posts to try to find who and when. However, it is worth asking your cue builder if and where he uses CA glues. Tips are swapped often enough it isn't likely to matter and ferrules are easily repaired. From there it starts getting a little tougher to fix all the time.
A hard "tink" is in style now. Old very dry wood gives that sound. The cues of today may have just as good a hit and sound to them as the 30-50 year old cues when they are 30-50 years old. I would bet some will but I probably won't be around to collect or the person I bet would die on me!
In terms of build quality, it depends on who built a cue from 50 years ago and who builds one today. Wood to wood fit hasn't changed in fifty years, or a hundred. It isn't going to change in another hundred. One thing I find funny is the love of veneers. Veneers are pretty. They also are generally made of very soft wood or paper. They make very nice filler to take care of tiny imperfections in fit that recut points can't. Black and white glues make many an inlay "fit perfectly" too. The old guys knew these tricks too though.
The best made cues are generally a fairly plain cue from a master builder. The fancier you get the more places for tiny imperfections to sneak in. Too, it is easy to build a pretty cue on the outside. The easiest way is to deliberately not have perfect fits on the inside parts of pieces that only show partially. Are some cue builders doing this today? Almost certainly. Also certain that some cue builders did it in the past too.
The quality of play of a cue is largely on the inside, invisible to the naked eye. There is no way to look at the outside of two cues and tell that one is crap and one is quality. The hit when new may or may not tell the story. Price is certainly only a small indication of a quality build. The only assurance of a good cue is knowing the dedication to quality of the cue builder you buy from.
Hu
I agree!
My circa 1970's Josswest proves it. Master builder, plain Jane, good wood, great grain, beautiful stain. Simple yet elegant.
Although nice ... Inlays don't make balls!!
That's only valid if you have a very sloppy CNC with idiot programmer compared to a very nice manual machine with expert machinist. It's the exception, not the rule. Overall, CNC trumps manual.
I'm not saying a guy has to use CNC in order to do accurate work or build a good cue. I'm saying that there is a tool available to make the job easier, more precise, and exactly repeatable. That's an advancement from yesteryear.
My point was that accuracy and precision do not relate to whether a machine is CNC or Manual. All that indicates is who is turning the handles, the precision and accuracy is dependent on how the machine is built and how accurate the slides and lead screws are. If the operator doesn't know how to measure accurately and or doesn't know the principals of building good parts it makes know difference if he is running cnc or manual.They will both be inaccurate, and the opposite is also true.
PRODUCTION cues ?
.
Ask RAT. He'll tell you.
He sees them all the time.
I saw a lot of them when my mentor made a killing repairing them.
I just saw one this weekend . Full-splice production where the wood should have never made it to production.
Stop spreading fallacy. :grin-square:
Don't forget those Tad planers.
Or SW satins.:thumbup:
I believe so. That said, I do feel that production outfits are straying too far from the basics, and losing touch with what a cue should be. I see a lot of outfits working hard to market & give the illusion of quality, rather than actually offering it. The ones actually making top grade products charge accordingly, such as OB and Mezz. IMO, those two outfits are better than any production manufacturer to date. For me it's a coin toss between them for top spot.
Good grief - you can't read a little bit can you?
You are now officially arguing with yourself... again.
Dale