Cuetec CF Shaft Test (Finalised Version)

OnePercent

OnePercent

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I am very lucky to be able to test the finalised version of the upcoming Cuetec carbon fibre shaft.

1.jpg

Cue on the left:
Shaft with uni-loc joint, paired up with a Predator cue butt.

Cue on the right:
Shaft with radial joint, paired up with a Fury cue butt.

I have been shooting with a 12.9 Revo since last June.

A short comparison:
After shooting with it for a few hours, I found the learning curve from Revo to Cuetec is very small.

Cuetec's hit is more solid than the Revo. Players who prefer the closed bridge or permanently using an extension would probably like super slim taper. The Sniper tip is brand new and I encounter difficulties adjusting (my Revo has a G2 soft installed). Deflection properties are similar to Revo.

I will have to decide which will become my main playing shaft soon, which I shall find out in a few weeks
 
Last edited:
Coop1701 said:
If you cared about us at all.... You would send it to me to try out. I mean I did not win the lottery last night. So I could at least be a winner in another way.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, "Hope ... is not a tactic" (read in somebody's signature recently). Better luck with the next lottery. :grin-square:

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
Unfortunately, "Hope ... is not a tactic" (read in somebody's signature recently). Better luck with the next lottery. :grin-square:
Click to expand...


It was worth a shot. lol I'm actually torn. The new Cuetec or the Mezz Ignite. I'm perfectly happy with my Ex Pro on my Mezz. But I like to try out new things.
 
Coop1701 said:
It was worth a shot. lol I'm actually torn. The new Cuetec or the Mezz Ignite. I'm perfectly happy with my Ex Pro on my Mezz. But I like to try out new things.
Click to expand...
I'm hoping the Cuetec will become wildly popular. And then I hope they will reduce supply and create back-orders with a huge waiting list. And then I can sell it on E-Bay for $2500.

Regards,
Dave

PS: ... just kidding. I want to keep it.
 
I tried a Cuetec prototype earlier this year that Cuetec furnished to Tommy Hill to demo & critque.
The ferrule on the Cuetec is a distinct sighting advantage in my opinion. I rejected the Revo shaft
after trying it for several hours in favor of the Cuetec carbon fibre. At some point, if I were to get a
carbon shaft, it would definitely be Cuetec's version vs. Predator because the adjustment is easier..
 
@Dr Dave,

Can you make a reasonable comparison of hit efficiency of some of these shafts? Cuetec Vs Revo Vs Maple

That in itself is a big plus point for CF shafts in my opinion. So far after trying the Revo I've come to the conclusion that you easily get 5-10% more energy transfter on many shots. This is big because you can hit things slower and that should in theory increase your consistency, especially when it comes to recovery and spin shots... Stun power is also pretty big plust point for narrow angle stuns.

Just thought of raising that point... as I think its as big as LD characteristics...
 
51Breakshot said:
@Dr Dave,

Can you make a reasonable comparison of hit efficiency of some of these shafts? Cuetec Vs Revo Vs Maple

That in itself is a big plus point for CF shafts in my opinion. So far after trying the Revo I've come to the conclusion that you easily get 5-10% more energy transfter on many shots. This is big because you can hit things slower and that should in theory increase your consistency, especially when it comes to recovery and spin shots... Stun power is also pretty big plust point for narrow angle stuns.

Just thought of raising that point... as I think its as big as LD characteristics...
Click to expand...
Bob Jewett and I show a way to test shafts or cues for hit efficiency using drop tests, per the info and demonstration here:

cue hit efficiency

My sense, after hitting balls during the filming of my recent video, is the hit efficiency ranked as:

1.) Revo
2.) Cuetec
3.) Players
4.) Z-2

But this is just my qualitative and anecdotal judgement. I don't think the difference is as much as you suggest, but it would be interesting to measure. Regardless, I think the difference is easy to adjust to even just after a few shots, and I don't think it affects normal play much at all (for me anyway).

Regards,
Dave
 
51Breakshot said:
Can you make a reasonable comparison of hit efficiency of some of these shafts? Cuetec Vs Revo Vs Maple...

...So far after trying the Revo I've come to the conclusion that you easily get 5-10% more energy transfter on many shots.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is typically nearly that much efficiency difference between common playing shafts, all else (same tip, exact same weight cue, etc) being equal. The amount is likely inconsequential for practical purposes in game play..

51Breakshot said:
This is big because you can hit things slower and that should in theory increase your consistency, especially when it comes to recovery and spin shots...
Click to expand...
Even if the amounts of efficiency differences were as much as you are guessing they are, I think having a cue that is that much more efficient at energy transfer is just as and probably more likely to be bad for your consistency rather than good. If you are a little off in how much english you apply to the cue ball, it is is going to translate into a larger amount of spin (and speed) error on the pool table with a more efficient shaft than it would have with a less efficient shaft. But probably a much bigger deal is that if you are a little off in how hard you hit the cue ball, it is going to translate to bigger positional errors the more efficient that shaft is.

To help it make more sense, think about it in terms of when you set your computer mouse to a higher sensitivity setting. It lets you get more cursor movement out of less mouse movement, but at the sacrifice of some precision/consistency.

For the speeds of shots that are most typical in pool, I tend to think that it is the less efficient shafts (if there is much difference between them) that would likely lead to the best spin control, tightest position play, and increased consistency.
 
Last edited:
Poolplaya9 said:
I don't think there is typically nearly that much efficiency difference between common playing shafts, all else (same tip, exact same weight cue, etc) being equal. The amount is likely inconsequential for practical purposes in game play..


Even if the amounts of efficiency differences were as much as you are guessing they are, I think having a cue that is that much more efficient at energy transfer is just as and probably more likely to be bad for your consistency rather than good. If you are a little off in how much english you apply to the cue ball, it is is going to translate into a larger amount of spin (and speed) error on the pool table with a more efficient shaft than it would have with a less efficient shaft. But probably a much bigger deal is that if you are a little off in how hard you hit the cue ball, it is going to translate to bigger positional errors the more efficient that shaft is.

To help it make more sense, think about it in terms of when you set your computer mouse to a higher sensitivity setting. It lets you get more cursor movement out of less mouse movement, but at the sacrifice of some precision/consistency.

For the speeds of shots that are most typical in pool, I tend to think that it is the less efficient shafts (if there is much difference between them) that would likely lead to the best spin control, tightest position play, and increased consistency.
Click to expand...
Yes, precision is way more important than power in pool.

But (to pick a minor nit) I don't think spin control is affected much by more power transfer, since more power doesn't translate to more spin effect (greater spin-to-speed ratio), just more RPMs.

pj
chgo
 
Coop1701 said:
Look forward to hearing. I'm a little eager to try the Cuetec Myself.
Click to expand...

Just got my Revo in the mail today. My Dad has a Samsara with a Uniloc so I hit a few balls with it on that (I dont have any uniloc cues).

I feel it doesn't deflect much less then my current shaft (ferrule-less, non-laminated from my cue maker). I think it feels the best out of all the other Pred shafts though. It is pretty interesting. Going to get it converted next week after I get back from the International and get the tip changed. That Pred tip feels like shit.

It's neat. It's not going to be my main shaft, getting it to screw around with. Gonna have a sneaky or a plain jane made for it as well. Like a mess-around stick, unless I end up liking it too much LOL.
 
Patrick Johnson said:
Yes, precision is way more important than power in pool.

But (to pick a minor nit) I don't think spin control is affected much by more power transfer, since more power doesn't translate to more spin effect (greater spin-to-speed ratio), just more RPMs.

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I agree, and thanks for clarifying what I should have done a better job stating to begin with. I went ahead and addressed it since it was mentioned in the post I was responding to and since others also believe that. I made sure to try to indicate what would really be happening by including "(and speed)" to subtlety correct him and illustrate that it would really be increasing both spin and speed, as in keeping the same spin to speed ratio. It is also why I tried to indicate that that part of his concern was really a non-issue and that what would be the issue would be speed control. In hindsight I probably should have been more explicit than I was but I was hoping that the serious hinting would be enough to get the point across.
 
Last edited:
That Fury butt looks interesting. It seems to me like a CW model which is very cheap, is it using a uni-loc radial pin?
 
Sorry but I disagree about higher efficiency being inconsequential or even detrimental as some seem to hypothesize above...

Of course we are talking in the context of strong level play whereby it's assumed that certain quality of delivery and tip placement is guaranteed. Not just some random ball banger shooting.

The less force it takes from my stroke to execute a shot, the higher the consistency. Why? Because less effort makes it easier to keep perfect form (not getting up on the shot and etc.)

End of the day that's where we break down in our consistency as we are all human after all...

Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk
 
51Breakshot said:
Sorry but I disagree about higher efficiency being inconsequential or even detrimental as some seem to hypothesize above...

Of course we are talking in the context of strong level play whereby it's assumed that certain quality of delivery and tip placement is guaranteed. Not just some random ball banger shooting.

The less force it takes from my stroke to execute a shot, the higher the consistency. Why? Because less effort makes it easier to keep perfect form (not getting up on the shot and etc.)

End of the day that's where we break down in our consistency as we are all human after all...

Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I couldnt have written it better!;)
 
marek said:
I couldnt have written it better!;)
Click to expand...
Cheers!

Anyway, @ Dr. Dave, I hope you get to test the new Ignite shaft by Mezz (they need to send you one!!) as well in all those parameters (efficiency, deflection, pivot point) so for those of us contemplating to go CF can make the most informed decision based on the qualities they prefer.

Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk
 
51Breakshot said:
Sorry but I disagree about higher efficiency being inconsequential or even detrimental as some seem to hypothesize above...

Of course we are talking in the context of strong level play whereby it's assumed that certain quality of delivery and tip placement is guaranteed. Not just some random ball banger shooting.

The less force it takes from my stroke to execute a shot, the higher the consistency. Why? Because less effort makes it easier to keep perfect form (not getting up on the shot and etc.)

End of the day that's where we break down in our consistency as we are all human after all...

Sent on mobile Android via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Yes, that's true, but it's not the whole picture. It's also true that a cue that "hits harder" increases shot speed with less increase of stroke speed - which means you lose some precision in your speed control (and spin control for many fuller shots). It might also mean slower shots have to be hit at a stroke speed that's below your usual "comfort speed zone".

However, these effects are very small - probably not worth worrying about either way.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top