Has anyone ever seen an A-Joint like this? I think it is a early Huebler!!

manwon

manwon

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I received this cue today from one of our members. The gentleman requested that I refinish this cue for him. I suspect that the cue ia a very early Huebler cue, however, I have not had time to contact Paul yet.

I understand how to complete the refinish on this cue, and how to build a tenon and properly re-asemble it at the A-joint.

Note: the A-joint came apart when I removed the cues wrap!!

My questions concern, first who made it, and has anybody ever seen an A-joint assembled in this manner, and if so why?

Here are the photo's!!

Ajoint connection.jpg

JointA2.jpg

Cue shaft butt.jpg

Oh and by the way, the shaft has a plastic insert like Hueber uses.
 
Last edited:
i have never seen one done like that.he might as well have just glued it together.i ma sure it was done for ease and convienience.i don't know what it is,but i wouldn't think Huebler would build a cue that way.
 
I did a substantial rebuild on a Ray Schuler cue about 3 yrs. ago that was 'A' jointed like that. I was somewhat taken aback by my discovery but was not about to question Ray about his building techniques. Maybe someday I'll have the opportunity to ask him about it. I'll have an eternity to hear his reasoning.
 
masonh said:
i have never seen one done like that.he might as well have just glued it together.i ma sure it was done for ease and convienience.i don't know what it is,but i wouldn't think Huebler would build a cue that way.
Click to expand...
It's more common than you think.
No tenon, just metal screw.
 
Schuler?wow,it would take an eternity to rationalize that.how could anyone expect that to hold up over time.hopefully they only use steel.
 
The cue I think is a very early Huebler cue, first it very dry rotted / frayed Courtland #9 Irish linen on it. The cues butt did not have the common Huebler inserts in the butt that you would see even on cues made in the Mid-1970's. Since I know the cue is certainly old, and during that time I know of knowone else who was using plastic inserts in thier shafts.

oh and by the way, another thing about this cue is, while it has a standard Fiber ferrule that Huebler used from the begining, all I have ever seen were an inch long and this one is 1 1/4th inches.
 
masonh said:
Schuler?wow,it would take an eternity to rationalize that.how could anyone expect that to hold up over time.hopefully they only use steel.
Click to expand...
If we really think about it, there was basically no info back then, such as advice, etc. They didn't have AZ back then, so It's possible this was part of his learning curve. and so he made them as best he could until such time he learnt a better way. Before I built my first forearm, I read Chris's book and read alot of the posts here. If I hadn't, I would have probably done the same as this builder did. If it was done in the early 70's, it lasted 30 yrs before anyone found out the real method used. And considering the glues they had back then were not even close to what we have today, I personally think the cue builder didn't do to bad of a job, all things considered, along with, we don't know how the cue was treated in those 30 yrs. If I build something well enough to survive that amount of time, I didn't do to bad of a job IMO.
Dave
 
It's called ease of construction. I know a maker in Florida that does the same thing except with a diffrent pin. Some of you will know who I am refering to, some won't. I like a tennon myself.
 
Dave,you have a point but there were guys doing it the right way back then.my comments were mostly directed to the fact that people are still doing it that way.
 
masonh said:
Dave,you have a point but there were guys doing it the right way back then.my comments were mostly directed to the fact that people are still doing it that way.
Click to expand...
64535-01-500.jpg

Err someone supposedly uses those too.
 
manwon said:
I received this cue today from one of our members. The gentleman requested that I refinish this cue for him. I suspect that the cue ia a very early Huebler cue, however, I have not had time to contact Paul yet.

I understand how to complete the refinish on this cue, and how to build a tenon and properly re-asemble it at the A-joint.

Note: the A-joint came apart when I removed the cues wrap!!

My questions concern, first who made it, and has anybody ever seen an A-joint assembled in this manner, and if so why?

Here are the photo's!!

View attachment 55512

View attachment 55513

View attachment 55514

Oh and by the way, the shaft has a plastic insert like Hueber uses.
Click to expand...
I had a Balabushka like that. I broke the balls and it broke at the front of the wrap. There was no tenon.
 
macguy said:
I had a Balabushka like that. I broke the balls and it broke at the front of the wrap. There was no tenon.
Click to expand...

I have never had the pleasure of seeing an x-ray of the A-joint on a Balabushka. However, I have been told by someone that I greatly respect of has seen x-rays of Balabushka's that the ones he had seen did have a tenon.

Your cue, may have been made early in Georges career, or even as an experiment. But to my knowledge George was very concerned about stability, longevity, and strength in his cues. I doubt that he would have built many that way, but who knows, maybe some of the more knowledgable posters will give their opinion!!!!

Thanks for your post!!!
 
Dave38 said:
If we really think about it, there was basically no info back then, such as advice, etc. They didn't have AZ back then, so It's possible this was part of his learning curve. and so he made them as best he could until such time he learnt a better way. Before I built my first forearm, I read Chris's book and read alot of the posts here. If I hadn't, I would have probably done the same as this builder did. If it was done in the early 70's, it lasted 30 yrs before anyone found out the real method used. And considering the glues they had back then were not even close to what we have today, I personally think the cue builder didn't do to bad of a job, all things considered, along with, we don't know how the cue was treated in those 30 yrs. If I build something well enough to survive that amount of time, I didn't do to bad of a job IMO.
Dave
Click to expand...

Huebler had never built cues before when Bob Meucci told him it would be a good business to get into. Bob taught him to build cues and worked in his shop until he opened a shop of his own.

Dick
 
What's wrong with it? It's the same style joint that we all use on our flat faced jointed cues, only it is in the "A" joint instead of shaft joint. If it's effective enough to hold a shaft on a butt, then it should be strong enough to hold a handle to a forearm with ease. The only issue I see is the stud's threads are not deep enough for wood and end grain does not glue well. Otherwise, I think it's fine. How many jump/break cues have flat faced jump joints? Are they strong enough to hold up? They seem to be plenty sufficient for breaking & take lots of abuse. If there was glue added would it make it any less strong?

There are many ways to build a cue. We all have our ways. I use a tenon with a threaded stem, no metal. The tenon fits tightly enough that it is the actual glue surface. The threaded stem simply locks it in place until the glue cures. I like the way it makes the cues feel, with a very natural resonance & balance. But I wouldn't say it's any stronger than a flat faced joint with a stud. I think this cue failed due to the wood threads giving out under stress. If a coarser thread stud was used, like 3/8-10, I think the cue would still be together & strong. It might buzz pretty good because end grain doesn't glue worth hell, but it would still be together & strong.
 
qbilder said:
What's wrong with it? It's the same style joint that we all use on our flat faced jointed cues, only it is in the "A" joint instead of shaft joint. If it's effective enough to hold a shaft on a butt, then it should be strong enough to hold a handle to a forearm with ease. The only issue I see is the stud's threads are not deep enough for wood and end grain does not glue well. Otherwise, I think it's fine. How many jump/break cues have flat faced jump joints? Are they strong enough to hold up? They seem to be plenty sufficient for breaking & take lots of abuse. If there was glue added would it make it any less strong?

There are many ways to build a cue. We all have our ways. I use a tenon with a threaded stem, no metal. The tenon fits tightly enough that it is the actual glue surface. The threaded stem simply locks it in place until the glue cures. I like the way it makes the cues feel, with a very natural resonance & balance. But I wouldn't say it's any stronger than a flat faced joint with a stud. I think this cue failed due to the wood threads giving out under stress. If a coarser thread stud was used, like 3/8-10, I think the cue would still be together & strong. It might buzz pretty good because end grain doesn't glue worth hell, but it would still be together & strong.
Click to expand...

First I should explain, this cue was not glued up end grain to end grain. While you can not see it in the photo's there was a thin piece of phenolic glued to the end grain, and held together with the pin glued into the under wrap and the forearm. The failure occurred in my opinion due to stress from play or abuse (the pin was not straight), which caused the adhesive to fail.

As I stated above before I removed the wrap the cue had a wobble at the A-joint. When the wrap was removed from the butt, the forearm and the under wrap just unscrewed in my hands. The threads had not failed, they are still as strong as the day this cue was assembled, it was certainly the adhesive that failed.

Now I have limited knowledge as a cue builder, however, I totally disagree and would never use this form of construction. By using the tenon method first of all you have more surface to glue to, which means two forms of stability, the pin and the tenon. Using this technique correctly will re-enforce the entire joint and with the adhesives in use today, failure is almost impossible under normal circumstances.

No disrespect intended, however on this we can agree to disagree.

Here is a close-up of the phenolic ring at the A- joint!!

Below, if you look closely you see the thin phenoilc ring that separated the end grains.

Phenolic.jpg

Have a good night!!!
 
manwon said:
First I should explain, this cue was not glued up end grain to end grain. While you can not see it in the photo's there was a thin piece of phenolic glued to the end grain, and held together with the pin glued into the under wrap and the forearm. The failure occurred in my opinion due to stress from play or abuse (the pin was not straight), which caused the adhesive to fail.

As I stated above before I removed the wrap the cue had a wobble at the A-joint. When the wrap was removed from the butt, the forearm and the under wrap just unscrewed in my hands. The threads had not failed, they are still as strong as the day this cue was assembled, it was certainly the adhesive that failed.

Now I have limited knowledge as a cue builder, however, I totally disagree and would never use this form of construction. By using the tenon method first of all you have more surface to glue to, which means two forms of stability, the pin and the tenon. Using this technique correctly will re-enforce the entire joint and with the adhesives in use today, failure is almost impossible under normal circumstances.

No disrespect intended, however on this we can agree to disagree.

Here is a close-up of the phenolic ring at the A- joint!!

Below, if you look closely you see the thin phenoilc ring that separated the end grains.

View attachment 55537

Have a good night!!!
Click to expand...

If the glue fails it does not matter what kind of construction is used.

Good Cuemaking,
 
rhncue said:
Huebler had never built cues before when Bob Meucci told him it would be a good business to get into. Bob taught him to build cues and worked in his shop until he opened a shop of his own.

Dick
Click to expand...

Dick beats me to the punch again.

The tenon-free A joint is the way all Mooochies were built,
far as I know, it still is.

Rambow's pin-thru-the-connecting-screw design was his
way of keeping the cue together after the evential glue failure.
Or so the story goes.

Dale
 
I had to reglue the "A" joint back together on a four point moochie one time, and not sure how rare it is, but it did have a tenon. Same thing as this cue as far as the cause, the glue just failed, and it would unscrew from the handle. It was an easy fix, and didn't even have to touch the finish up.

Greg
 
manwon said:
Now I have limited knowledge as a cue builder, however, I totally disagree and would never use this form of construction. By using the tenon method first of all you have more surface to glue to, which means two forms of stability, the pin and the tenon. Using this technique correctly will re-enforce the entire joint and with the adhesives in use today, failure is almost impossible under normal circumstances
Click to expand...

I understand your logic, the same logic & mindset we all likely have in early days of building. But I think as time goes on you'll find the critical flaw in the method you describe. On paper it sounds great, perfect. But in reality you will find that having more than one load bearing joint will counteract & cause internal stress. This is especially accentuated by using a metal stud, which is stronger than the wood. If you use a tenon you will nearly certainly need to make slop room for your stud, granted that your tenon is a nice fit. The tenon should be your load bearing joint, and the stud should be nothing but an internal clamp to secure the two pieces until glue cures. If your stud fits tight and your tenon fits tight, no matter how fine your tollerances are, unless they are absolute dead nuts both center including the threads, you are going to be causing stress with two counter-acting joints. Radial connecting pins are possibly the exception due to perfect tollerances. Rolled pins & threaded rod is not nearly accurate enough for a tight joint that is dead center. The stress is what most generally causes the often seen "warp" at the "A" joint. But don't take my word for it, find it out for yourself. This is stuff we mostly learn through experience. We can be instructed otherwise but still gotta find out for yourself.

As for the flat faced joint, I also disagree with the method to an extent but not for any strength reasons. It's a strong friggin joint type no matter what way it's hacked up & discussed. But the tenon methods most generally "buzz" less. Even though the cue in question had the buzz washer, it was still glued end grain. Glue back then never stuck to end grain or metal. The washer was nothing but a buzz deterent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top