Fooling around w/coring

[scdiveteam]

I core every thing on the cue at .750. I bought mt gun drill about 15 years ago and was one of the first to core their cues. When I ordered the drill it never dawned on me that the coring dowels would have to be a little smaller than .750 or I would have ordered the bit a little larger so that standard size phenolic and rings could easily be used. I can think of no reason why any builder would want to design a joint as small as .800 so unless your prong warps right at the joint why worry that the cue has been bored at .780. You just need to be sure that your dowel has good centers before use as a core.

Dick

Hi,

Ditto .750. I turn my dowels to .737 for gorilla glue expansion. I drill my ring billets out to .740 so my ring geometry does not get eccentric to the points in the A-Joint area, nice close ID fit.

Decor Rings must have a close ID to dowel fit or ring geometry can get out of alignment on the A-Axis when you view your completed cue.. This fit concentricity is something you must pay close attention to when full coring. It is not like cutting a tenon and test fitting your rings for the close fit. The dowel can not be too close of a fit or you will piston out your glue during install. This is why GG Glues is perfect for coreing as opposed to using epoxy that does not expand by 5 times the volume. No buzzing with GG guaranteed! JMO

 

[dave sutton]

I core every thing on the cue at .750. I bought mt gun drill about 15 years ago and was one of the first to core their cues. When I ordered the drill it never dawned on me that the coring dowels would have to be a little smaller than .750 or I would have ordered the bit a little larger so that standard size phenolic and rings could easily be used. I can think of no reason why any builder would want to design a joint as small as .800 so unless your prong warps right at the joint why worry that the cue has been bored at .780. You just need to be sure that your dowel has good centers before use as a core.

Dick

When I say joint I mean the actual joint where the shaft and butt screw together. Not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or if your misunderstanding me.

My concern is... I core ebony forearm 775. My fi idh joint size with an ivory joint is 835. Right at that joint there is only about .075 thickness. About 2 veneers not very much. So say cue is finished customer has it. You know how hard people are on their cues. Say he/she whacks it in that perfect spot on the edge of the table on the followthrough on a fast shot. I want to be confident it will hold up over time.

I have cut one of my cores in half to see if it can be tighter and it's pretty good. If there was a void I can see there being a huge problem.

Anyway that's my worry. I see some coring bigger up front with no issues so I guess I'm wrong but still a little scared I guess.

 

[qbilder]

I honesty respect everything you say. ESP about woods. However here I must disagree. I cored a very expensive spalted maple with a .650 core of old purple heart from a brunswick sneaky Pete (50 years old or so) I cut up alot of sneaky petes for shafts handles and cores. Anyway it was straight ats an arrow spinning but once I started taking passes ESP near the ajoint I could not stop it from wobbling and chattering. I even put a steady rest in the middle of the forearm. No luck. Ruined a 150$+ piece of wood. I did another piece from the same place and cored it .775 and it was alot more stable. No chatter.

I am not a fan of coring forearms 775 Too small at the joint IMO. But handles should be cored 775

So you cut an old purple house cue butt down to a .650" core, put it inside of a technically half rotten piece of maple, the forearm moved, and you blame the size of the core? How sure are you that the purple was stable? Did that .650" core sit around long before you plugged it into the maple? Was the maple thoroughly dry, was it impregnated, was it cue worthy before you used it? There are lots of things that could more likely be an issue besides the size of the core, IMO. Just because you had luck with a .775" core doesn't really mean anything in this situation because that core came from a different piece of wood, and how do you know which was most stable? How do you know that .775" core couldn't have been cut to a .650" core & stayed straight as an arrow? Or if that .650" core was only cut to .775" would it have still moved? How do you know? Point being, I get what you are saying & don't doubt your experience a bit. I just don't think the size of the core made the difference, and don't think it should even be considered unless all else was equal, which it clearly isn't.

For a while I believed a .750" core was more stable than a .625" core, and that's what I used in my forearms. But it didn't change a thing in the long run in terms of stability. All it did was biased the hit & weight of the forearm to the core wood type. Some still moved, just like with the .625" cores. I figured out pretty quick that I had to cut cores just like shafts. Cut them incrementally & observe for stability. If anything even budges off center, toss it. I couldn't just cut something & expect it would hold because it's a generally stable species or old. This is why I don't do many Titleist conversions or old house cue conversions. Not many are stable enough to trust. Just because they're old doesn't mean they're good. Some are, some aren't. No different with cores. Gotta be PROVEN good wood, regardless of species or source. Now I use a .650" core for forearms, .775 for handles. It's the size ratio that i'm after. For my cues, a .750 or .775 core is a no-no. But above all else for me is the stability & strength of the core.

 

[dave sutton]

It was a handle I had trouble with. I came into a lot of old sneakys so u cut them up 5 years ago and turn them slowly in my rotation. I only had issues when tapering and only in the dead middle of the cue. It was flimsy. Kinda glad I found out that way. There is no way you can honestly say the rotten spalted maple is as stable as pph. Not even close.

If that was the case why core the rotten Spalted maple at all.

To each his own I guess. I respect your opinion a great great deal so don't take my post negatively. If there is something I can learn here I am all for it

 

[JoeyInCali]

I like .650 and .758 for forearms, .883 for handles .
I like the forearms countersunked at the bottom while I like the handles to be countersunked on top ( Bob Flynn gave me the idea ).

 

[qbilder]

It was a handle I had trouble with. I came into a lot of old sneakys so u cut them up 5 years ago and turn them slowly in my rotation. I only had issues when tapering and only in the dead middle of the cue. It was flimsy. Kinda glad I found out that way. There is no way you can honestly say the rotten spalted maple is as stable as pph. Not even close.

If that was the case why core the rotten Spalted maple at all.

To each his own I guess. I respect your opinion a great great deal so don't take my post negatively. If there is something I can learn here I am all for it

Oh i'm definitely not taking anything negatively. I speak openly & prefer when others do the same. It's discussion and too many details get left out if everybody is being too diplomatic.

No, the maple is not as stable as the purple. It's also not as strong. Since it's not as strong, it shouldn't be able to pressure the purple core to move, but the much stronger purple core can certainly cause the maple to move. But that was assuming it was a forearm you had trouble with. I agree completely that a .650 core is insufficient for a handle. IMO, do to my own experiences, the core should be at minimum half of the mass of the host piece. If my math is correct, two .650 cores equal roughly a 1.06" area, not the 1.30" many would assume. That makes up less than half of the mass area of the handle, unless your butts are like 1.18 or something really thin. So yes, in that case I agree a core should be larger. Would it trump the quality of the core? I still don't think so. I will say that with incredibly unstable woods like spalted maple should have larger cores just to eliminate as much of the unstable wood as possible. But that all comes with the learning curve. My first post was speaking of the general process of coring.

 

[JoeyInCali]

It was a handle I had trouble with. I came into a lot of old sneakys so u cut them up 5 years ago and turn them slowly in my rotation. I only had issues when tapering and only in the dead middle of the cue. It was flimsy. Kinda glad I found out that way. There is no way you can honestly say the rotten spalted maple is as stable as pph. Not even close.

If that was the case why core the rotten Spalted maple at all.

To each his own I guess. I respect your opinion a great great deal so don't take my post negatively. If there is something I can learn here I am all for it

IMO splated maple should be treated before gluing to the dowel.
It absorbs moisture way too much.
Same thing for some burls I think.

 

[olsonsview]

I agree with Joey

Spalted Maple is basically rotting wood. It is so weak and porous that it really begs to be resin impregnated before even considering it for use on a cue. After impregnating, it is awesome cue making wood!

 

[MVPCues]

...IMO, do to my own experiences, the core should be at minimum half of the mass of the host piece....

Because the density of the core typically varies from the handle, the actual size of the core to achieve half of the mass will vary. But, if you assumed both densities were equal, the break even point for both volumes being the same is .779. To get this number, I am using a tapered round, small diameter 1.0, large diameter 1.2, 12 inches long.

Kelly

Edit: The .779 number would abviously vary for different finish diameters and taper.

 

[qbilder]

Because the density of the core typically varies from the handle, the actual size of the core to achieve half of the mass will vary. But, if you assumed both densities were equal, the break even point for both volumes being the same is .779. To get this number, I am using a tapered round, small diameter 1.0, large diameter 1.2, 12 inches long.

Kelly

Edit: The .779 number would abviously vary for different finish diameters and taper.

Which would loosely echo the .775 core size for handles, within .004". That's interesting. Would be cool if somebody could take it a lil further and quantify (within reason) optimum core size for components. The ultimate variable would be quality of core material, which could easily trump the rule/equation. That was point in my first post.

 

[MVPCues]

Which would loosely echo the .775 core size for handles, within .004". That's interesting. Would be cool if somebody could take it a lil further and quantify (within reason) optimum core size for components. The ultimate variable would be quality of core material, which could easily trump the rule/equation. That was point in my first post.

Certainly, the quality of the core, and the comparable weights would tend to dictate the specifics (not to mention one's drill sizes if they don't bore holes for coring). But, I thought it might be good to know what the tipping point was given your feelings based on your findings.

For fun, I just did a forearm, .840 to 1.000, again 12 inches in length. That one comes out to .651 core diameter.

Kelly

Edit: Actually, the length doesn't matter, only the diameter of the endpoints.

 

[qbilder]

Certainly, the quality of the core, and the comparable weights would tend to dictate the specifics (not to mention one's drill sizes if they don't bore holes for coring). But, I thought it might be good to know what the tipping point was given your feelings based on your findings.

For fun, I just did a forearm, .840 to 1.000, again 12 inches in length. That one comes out to .651 core diameter.

Kelly

Edit: Actually, the length doesn't matter, only the diameter of the endpoints.

Which also echoes the .650 core for forearms. Pretty interesting stuff. Thanks for posting. I think it's fascinating to apply a scientific method to various aspects of cue making. If nothing else, it gives a general point of origin to build from. Fun stuff.

 

[scdiveteam]

Hi,

Everyone here makes good points and they are all valid.

I have another take on the coring geometry objective. I like to build my cues on a 30" maple dowel. I core at .750 and reduce my dowel to .737. That leaves me at finish size at about .056 of wall size per side at the nose of my cue. By doing this my cue's hit is maple and the forearm wood influence on the hit is only a slight buffer to each specific cues feedback to the player.

An ebony forearm will have a slightly different hit than a Paduak one but not significantly different, just a little different flavor. The .056 wall is plenty thick and is not a factor in the construction stability.

Since using Gorilla glue fore my coring for the last 5 years I have found that when used within the .013 annulus between the dowel and the core that the cues have an incredible ring tone with any wood I used. It is amazing!!

My goal is to have my cues play as close to one another as possible and I have found this has been the answer I was looking for. I would say as a subjective observation, that there is not more that a 10% variance in the hit of my cues from the origin of the butts influence.

I built 10 beta cues with a stepped core with a .625 dowel dimension in the forearm and the hit was very different with the selection of different woods for the front. After going .750 throughout the entire cue, I found what I was happy with.

Rick

 

[dave sutton]

That's whats it's all about. Trial and error. Hopefully sooner then later you reach your goal. Personally I do what I like with my cues and hope customers like it the same. I think customers should do their homework on builder specs before ordering a cue. Find the maker that fits you best.

You don't order a southwest from barry and ask for southwest specs.

That's what makes us unique.

Capped vs uncapped. Threaded vs un threaded.

1 inch tennon no tennon (yikes)

Personally I am scared to go that thin in the forearm but I see some are doing it successfully. Maybe one day I'll change. It has happend.

 

[Cgra2]

I am by no means an experienced cue maker, not even a cue maker yet, as just one cue doesn't qualify me to be called a cue maker. Just for the sake of joining in on the conversation (since I spent some time pondering the coring subject) before I even found this forum. I did watch some cuemaking DVD's and the man said one could core two sized in the forarm if they wanted to. I got a couple of 20mm gun drills off ebay ten dollars each (I thought that was a very good deal) and a long 21/32 drill bit which works out to .656.
Since .750+ seemed to leave a little too thin wall on the forearm, I drilled halfway with the 20mm (.787) and the joint end with the 21/32 (.656) drill then cut the purple heart cores to fit. The handle and butt was was drilled .787, glued it with Gorilla Glue, It worked out pretty well. Purple heart does seem to be pretty stable.

 

[treed]

coring

i used to use the gorilla glue the foaming action can leave voids,there was a test on hear several years ago with several glues out of all the glues available simple wood glues held best.i now core and use wood glue,i have found that it slighty swells the wood and creates a superior bond.this is all that cuemakers had 50 years ago and we are still using ther work to make cues.

 

[bdcues]

Hi,

Helium impregnation of wood would seem to be an oxymoron. Helium as a gas has a propensity to escape over time from even the most well designed valve seats. I can't imagine it wanting to stay put in wood fiber and to what end attribute.

I may be missing some other feature of your procedure but I don't think helium is the answer.

Helium is expensive don't waste it as a resource on wood.

Rick G

I think you have been sniffing too much glue....


Bob Danielson
www.bdcuesandcomix.com

 

[whammo57]

i used to use the gorilla glue the foaming action can leave voids,there was a test on hear several years ago with several glues out of all the glues available simple wood glues held best.i now core and use wood glue,i have found that it slighty swells the wood and creates a superior bond.this is all that cuemakers had 50 years ago and we are still using ther work to make cues.

The point of the foaming action from gorilla glue is that the foam will fill the voids not leave them empty. Glue up a full length core and the next day bounce it on a concrete floor and listen to it ring. That sounds pretty solid to me.

Yes.... you are right that gorilla glue is not the strongest glue out there but the foaming action can't be beat.

Kim

 

[Paul Dayton]

I do .750 fronts and .875 handles with thickened West epoxy. The cores are turned between centers and the centerpoints are taped over before glueing. I cost the inside and then pour a couple inches of the glue into the hole, tip it up and push the coated dowel into the hole. I catch the excess glue in a cup and use it for the next core. Cover your work surface with waxed paper, wear cheap rubber gloves and throw everything away when finished.

I try to remove as much wood as I can and replace it with the core I select. Poorly colored purple heart is great as is ugly bocote.

 

[rheester]

handle wood

the only thing that i think may really affect the "hit" sensation, not necessarily the playability, would be in the situation of a wrapless handle in which it is a very soft, unstable wood that is cored.

the core may be solid, regardless of diameter, and the transmission of contact will be thru the core, however, when you're holding the cue, the sensation has to be transmitted radially, therefore, the quality of the wood would influence how it felt in your hand.

extreme example, just your everyday maple handle, or better yet, cocobolo wrapless handle. considering the density and tonality of cocobolo, i think everyone would agree that the transmission of "hit" would be relatively uncompromised.

then think of a very porous wood, or to the extreme wrapless styrofoam handle. the integrity of the hit would be completely lost.

you may still get the "ping" or "tonk" because much of that would be from the core wood and that's from the impact going linearly. however, the transmission radially is affected by the handle wood.

at least this is how i reason it. i'd love to hear some of your thoughts.

jason