Cuemakers that use the 3/8X10 piloted joint.

Hello,
Because something 'can' be done doesn't necessarily mean that it 'should' be done. You could also pilot a Radial pin if you so desired but WHY? Do you have a specific reason for wanting this joint style?

If you are looking for opinions, then mine is that it's a bad idea. I believe that the use of any 'big' pin should be complimented with a flat-faced, wood to wood connection. One of the primary reasons for using the 'big' pin is to enhance certain 'hit' characteristics that are lost in a piloted configuration. Let me give you an analogy. Imagine your cue as a length of conduit containing wires. Those wires represent the wood fibres running the length of the cue. The purpose of those wires is to transmit the energy that is created at the tip when striking the QB to your grip hand on the handle. That's called feedback and it informs you immediately as to whether you've hit the ball well or not. Now, through the act of creating a pilot, you have eliminated roughly 1/2 of those wires (wood fibres) that you are relying on to provide you with feedback. You would have the impression of a softer hit because 1/2 of the wires have been cut, diminishing the amount of feedback you're receiving.

It should be noted that the purpose of the piloted joint is/was to more accurately align the shaft to the handle. It has nothing to do with enhancing the 'hit' and it's my opinion that it actually detracts from it.

Different C/Ms build cues for different reasons. My reason is to build an instrument of performance, not a piece of art. All the pretty in the world won't help you pocket even one more ball; built-in performance will.
 
Thanks for the reply.

KJ Cues said:
Hello,
Because something 'can' be done doesn't necessarily mean that it 'should' be done. You could also pilot a Radial pin if you so desired but WHY? Do you have a specific reason for wanting this joint style?

If you are looking for opinions, then mine is that it's a bad idea. I believe that the use of any 'big' pin should be complimented with a flat-faced, wood to wood connection. One of the primary reasons for using the 'big' pin is to enhance certain 'hit' characteristics that are lost in a piloted configuration. Let me give you an analogy. Imagine your cue as a length of conduit containing wires. Those wires represent the wood fibres running the length of the cue. The purpose of those wires is to transmit the energy that is created at the tip when striking the QB to your grip hand on the handle. That's called feedback and it informs you immediately as to whether you've hit the ball well or not. Now, through the act of creating a pilot, you have eliminated roughly 1/2 of those wires (wood fibres) that you are relying on to provide you with feedback. You would have the impression of a softer hit because 1/2 of the wires have been cut, diminishing the amount of feedback you're receiving.

It should be noted that the purpose of the piloted joint is/was to more accurately align the shaft to the handle. It has nothing to do with enhancing the 'hit' and it's my opinion that it actually detracts from it.

Different C/Ms build cues for different reasons. My reason is to build an instrument of performance, not a piece of art. All the pretty in the world won't help you pocket even one more ball; built-in performance will.
Click to expand...

Makes a lot of sense. So your saying that the wood to wood transfers the feedback better because the is no space between pilot and joint right? If the pilot is tight inside the joint isnt there even more feedback because you have more surface area of pilot touching joint? I am just wondering. I am in no way questioning the validity of what your saying I am simply trying to educate myself more. I want to thank you immensely for your input.
 
hjs032570 said:
Makes a lot of sense. So your saying that the wood to wood transfers the feedback better because the is no space between pilot and joint right? If the pilot is tight inside the joint isnt there even more feedback because you have more surface area of pilot touching joint? I am just wondering. I am in no way questioning the validity of what your saying I am simply trying to educate myself more. I want to thank you immensely for your input.
Click to expand...

Actually, no. There is no way you can lay the wood fibres next to each other, even through interference fit, to simulate the density of the uncut wood. Given the nature of wood, in that it expands and contracts, you'd eventually or at times, lose the interference fit thereby altering the feedback. It's also possible that I'm too much of a purist, but that's how I build cues.
 
Thanks for the reply.

KJ Cues said:
Actually, no. There is no way you can lay the wood fibres next to each other, even through interference fit, to simulate the density of the uncut wood. Given the nature of wood, in that it expands and contracts, you'd eventually or at times, lose the interference fit thereby altering the feedback. It's also possible that I'm too much of a purist, but that's how I build cues.
Click to expand...

You are welcome to your POV. Thanx!!!!
 
I feel the same as KJ. I can see wanting to try It to experiement, maybe even find something in between, so couldn't fault anyone for that, but for me the piloted 5/16, and the flat face 3/8 have 2 distinctive feels & each have their own fan base. I have done both flat face and piloted in both 5/16 pins, but when I use a 3/8 pin, I'm looking for the feel that the flat face provides with it.:) I'm using 3/8 on the batch I'm trying to finish right now. Greg
 
3/8 x 10 piloted

KJ Cues said:
You still haven't stated why you want a piloted 3/8 x 10.
Click to expand...

I was inquiring about it. It was interesting because you can get the benefits of both joint styles. I figured I would run it by the community experts here before making any decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top