Diamond Tables vs. Brunswick Tables

[BackPocket9Ball]

In recent months I've had the opportunity to play much more frequently on Diamond Tables, and since I play mostly one pocket, most of the time it's been double and triple-shimmed diamond tables.

I just cannot imagine why anyone would want to play on a Brunswick if they could play on a diamond.

Now, granted, I am not a table expert, but the diamonds seem more solid, have much tighter un-shimmed pockets than Brunswicks, have leather pocket coverings flush with the pockets (instead of raised metal like Brunswick does), and have wider rails which are more comfortable for rail shots.

Why would anyone want to play on a 5-inch + pocket Brunswick with all of the shortcomings listed above if they had access to a pro-cut Diamond table?

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

In recent months I've had the opportunity to play much more frequently on Diamond Tables, and since I play mostly one pocket, most of the time it's been double and triple-shimmed diamond tables.

I just cannot imagine why anyone would want to play on a Brunswick if they could play on a diamond.

Now, granted, I am not a table expert, but the diamonds seem more solid, have much tighter un-shimmed pockets than Brunswicks, have leather pocket coverings flush with the pockets (instead of raised metal like Brunswick does), and have wider rails which are more comfortable for rail shots.

Why would anyone want to play on a 5-inch + pocket Brunswick with all of the shortcomings listed above if they had access to a pro-cut Diamond table?

Actually, the problems with purchasing Brunswick go beyond what you've just stated. I cannot think of a single poolroom that owns Crown IV's that have not had a problem with the slate and/or rails. Either there have been defects in the table bed or the rails are ridiculously bouncy.

Ten years ago, I would have said that Brunswick would have to go out of their way for me not to endorse them. They are the industry standard and any time you deviate from that, you take a risk. However, not only has the competition gotten better in recent years, Brunswick really has gone out of their way to suck.

I hope things return to the way they were with Crown III's. It's disappointing and it's the last thing I would ever want to say about Brunswick but every time I walk into a room that has IV's, I'm concerned with how consistent they're going to be. That's gotta be a poolplayer's biggest nightmare.

 

[PatH]

I think one of the reasons might be durability. I've played on some Diamonds that have been in the pool halls for 3 or more years years and they have definitely lost a lot of their luster. Dead rails is the one thing I've noticed most. I can't speak for the GC IV's but there are sure a lot of GC I's, GC II's and GC III's that play as well as the day they came off the shelf.

PatH

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

I think one of the reasons might be durability. I've played on some Diamonds that have been in the pool halls for 3 or more years years and they have definitely lost a lot of their luster. Dead rails is the one thing I've noticed most. I can't speak for the GC IV's but there are sure a lot of GC I's, GC II's and GC III's that play as well as the day they came off the shelf.

PatH

I couldn't agree with you more. All Brunswicks I've played on prior to the Crown IV have always been great. Now, it's a real gamble.

 

[hustlefinger]

....the rails are ridiculously bouncy.

What makes the GCIV’s so bouncy? Is it the rubber cushion composition or possibly the cushion nose height from the bed?

I haven’t played on GCIV’s yet, and only a handful of times on the Diamonds. The Diamonds do play great, IMO. Although, I can’t attest to any longevity issues with the Diamonds, the GC’s have withstood many hard years of use.

Rick

 

[billlaur]

In recent months I've had the opportunity to play much more frequently on Diamond Tables, and since I play mostly one pocket, most of the time it's been double and triple-shimmed diamond tables.

I just cannot imagine why anyone would want to play on a Brunswick if they could play on a diamond.

Now, granted, I am not a table expert, but the diamonds seem more solid, have much tighter un-shimmed pockets than Brunswicks, have leather pocket coverings flush with the pockets (instead of raised metal like Brunswick does), and have wider rails which are more comfortable for rail shots.

Why would anyone want to play on a 5-inch + pocket Brunswick with all of the shortcomings listed above if they had access to a pro-cut Diamond table?

I have A GC iv, Best table i ever bought.solid ,rails are good.No problems,Maybe I am one of the lucky ones...

 

[JoeyInCali]

I own a GC II. Great table.
But, the Gabriel tables are hands down the best table imo.

 

[pete lafond]

Why would anyone want to play on a 5-inch + pocket Brunswick with all of the shortcomings listed above if they had access to a pro-cut Diamond table?

I posted a topic earlier about shimming pockets. It seems that in the advent of Diamond tables, GC owners have decided to try shimming pockets. This is a very difficult thing to do as the manufacturers work within tight geometric effects to ensure consistant and fair play. Diamond's havepockets that are somewhat tighter than GC's but their play is beautiful. Likewise I think that Brunswick should take note and consider a pocket choice for a more precise play. Brunswicks from the factory, unchanged by field mechanics, are great tables. Shimmed Brunswicks in the field can turn out to be hell.

 

[Fullsplice]

I bought my Diamond over 10 years ago so I'm not sure what has changed about them since then but I know at the time they offered two kinds of pockets, a regular and a pro cut (tighter). The pro cut compared to a shimmed table of any manufacturer played much better! Shims can turn into a nightmare as stated earlier. I've talked to a lot of room owners and one of the draw backs or concerns of the Diamonds was the wood was easily scarred in comparison to the fake laminant of the GC. So cosmetics seems to be an issue not play. I don't know if Diamond makes a version of the smart table in 9' or not now. I've had my table in my shop since it was originally purchased and plenty of customers have logged hours on it as well as myself and I have not noticed a problem with the rails. The table doesn't get the hard use of a pool hall but probably more than the average home. Just my 2 cents.

Mark Bear

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

I have A GC iv, Best table i ever bought.solid ,rails are good.No problems,Maybe I am one of the lucky ones...

I have played on good Crown IV's and yes, if you are without problems, you are one of the lucky ones. The problems are exposed when you look at large batches. Everything from the ball-return, the rails and the slate have been of less quality in comparison to their older models. I wish I could explain for the bouncy rails but unfortunately, I don't know why some are like that. It's just disappointing.

Honestly, if I were in position to buy a table today, I'd want a Brunswick. You have no idea how much I'd want to go with the industry standard but at the same time, I'd be doing it, knowing there's a chance I could be calling them in for repairs.

 

[vapoolplayer]

the ONLY problem i have with a diamond is that the slate is cut too deep in the pockets.

take a ball on a brunswick and put it as far in the pocket as you can without it falling. you still have room to hit the rail before the ball.

now, do the same thing with a diamond, you HAVE to hit the ball, you CANNOT hit the rail, you will miss the ball.

most of the time, this won't matter, but on alot of shots, this sucks.

again this is the ONLY problem i've seen, other than that, the diamonds are the best table out there.

VAP

 

[Williebetmore]

I've had a GCIV for 1 year - perfect in every way. The local pool hall (just closed unfortunately) had Diamonds, and my instructor (former top pro) has a Diamond. My instructor prefers the GCIV (by a very small margin) because of the "total consistency" of the cushions. Go figure. I don't really think you can go wrong with either one, but I've never run across the "bad" GCIV's. I wonder if its a setup problem. My old Ohlhausen (as detailed in the "popped seam" thread) had several serious problems that plagued it the first few months, and once a really good mechanic tackled the problem it played like a dream for close to three years. I can't believe a great mechanic couldn't whip any GCIV into shape, and shim the pockets so it plays great. Of course if you don't know a great mechanic, you can be in trouble with any table.

Another note, on the Diamonds the leather pocket backing and rails look really worn after a year or two. The black GCIV's also scratch like crazy. The mahogany GCIV's look like new after a couple of years if you take care of them.

 

[Jude Rosenstock]

I've had a GCIV for 1 year - perfect in every way. The local pool hall (just closed unfortunately) had Diamonds, and my instructor (former top pro) has a Diamond. My instructor prefers the GCIV (by a very small margin) because of the "total consistency" of the cushions. Go figure. I don't really think you can go wrong with either one, but I've never run across the "bad" GCIV's. I wonder if its a setup problem. My old Ohlhausen (as detailed in the "popped seam" thread) had several serious problems that plagued it the first few months, and once a really good mechanic tackled the problem it played like a dream for close to three years. I can't believe a great mechanic couldn't whip any GCIV into shape, and shim the pockets so it plays great. Of course if you don't know a great mechanic, you can be in trouble with any table.

Another note, on the Diamonds the leather pocket backing and rails look really worn after a year or two. The black GCIV's also scratch like crazy. The mahogany GCIV's look like new after a couple of years if you take care of them.

I wish it were set-up but I've seen problems with seperate batches set up by different people. I dunno.

 

[Rickw]

I play on Pro Diamonds most of the time and I really like them. There are two other phs that have GCIVs and they both play nice too. I think the rails are a little more problematic on the GCIVs than on the Diamonds. The rails don't seem to run as consistent on the GCIVs. For instance, if I take the cb and shoot out of the corner pocket for the three railer to the other pocket I shoot to the second diamond and the cb goes right into the heart. I shoot the same shot from the other corner and I have to shoot half a diamond to a whole diamond shorter to make the cb go into the pocket. That shouldn't happen and I don't think that is just how the table was put together but that's just my opinion. The Diamonds play more consistent than that.

 

[sjm]

The Gold Crown IV is a superb table, although the chalk seems to fall off the rails, which sometimes agitates me. Diamond is a very fine table, too. So, for that matter, is Olhausen. Anyone who attended the Women's challenge of Champions at Mohegan Sun last November will probably recall just how beatifully that Olhausen they used played.

Still, I have to rate the Gold Crown IV above the other two.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I don't like the GC IV at all . The cushions are boingy ( too low of a profile imo). Superspeed cushions get hard fast too.
Diamond Tables have the cushion right profile imo ( looks like the old GC I and II ) and are equipped with Artemis now which should last a long time.

 

[frankncali]

I own a GC II. Great table.
But, the Gabriel tables are hands down the best table imo.

I second the Gabriels notion.
Great tables.

I like the Diamonds but have wondered why some play a little easier than
others. Are there different cuts that you can order or maybe different
pocket shelf sizes?

I have not played on a GC IV so I can not compare but IMO both the
Diamond and Gabriels are better than the other Gold Crowns.

 

[shinyballs]

I've had my GC IV with shimmed pockets for 6 months now and haven't had any problems at all. It was used in the 2004 WPBA U.S. Open, so I don't know if anything is different from the standard GCIV, other than the shims and the logos plastered on it.

 

[EL'nino]

The Gold Crown IV is a superb table, although the chalk seems to fall off the rails, which sometimes agitates me. Diamond is a very fine table, too. So, for that matter, is Olhausen. Anyone who attended the Women's challenge of Champions at Mohegan Sun last November will probably recall just how beatifully that Olhausen they used played.

Still, I have to rate the Gold Crown IV above the other two.

Funny you mention that about the chalk falling off the table on the 4's, that drives me nuts.

 

[wizard]

I know you were comparing Diamonds and Brunswicks, but I have to tell everyone that the Olhausen Grand Champion I bought last year plays great too. It has accu-fast cushions on it that are guaranteed for life and the pockets are not too tight and not too loose. The best thing is I only gave $3500 installed. I don't think you'll find a brand new Diamond or Brunswick for that. I recently had Grady Matthews over for some private lessons and he was also very pleased how it played. I had a used Gold Crown a few years back and was very dissatisfied with the way the rails played. The were very inconsistent. From now on, when I go to tournaments I will feel better if there are Diamond or Olhausen tables there.