Has anyone made a hollow front, no-ferrule shaft?

iusedtoberich

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member

CueTable Help

Has anyone made a shaft with the following configuration:

1. Hollow front (like Predator)
2. No ferrule

I believe Patrick Johnson mentioned he had one made like that. Has any cue maker done this on a regular basis? If so, how have the shafts held up over the years?

I don't think this is a patent issue, because predator's original patent is either expired or about to expire very soon, and, I don't recall their patent covering a non-ferrule shaft. (Although I'm not a patent attorny)

Anyway, I'm more interested in how the shafts have held if anyone has done this. Predator shafts have had more then their fair share of ferrule and shaft breakage problems. Would removing the ferrule from the shaft, and switching to a non-laminated shaft, make that problem better or worse?
 
There was one builder. He reads but doesn't post much any more.
Hollowed out, no ferrule with a tip pad.

The shafts played very well.
 
I made one for myself with a carbon fiber pad.
Shot straight but less feel of course.
 
Maybe after the hole is made, fill it with thin CA, and whip it around like a lasso so the CA coats the walls of the hole, and slightly impregnates it. This may help with the strength. I know this is done sometimes with wooden shaft joint threads.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Maybe after the hole is made, fill it with thin CA, and whip it around like a lasso so the CA coats the walls of the hole, and slightly impregnates it. This may help with the strength. I know this is done sometimes with wooden shaft joint threads.
Click to expand...

CA is okay for tips, that's about it. Just sayin.
 
iusedtoberich said:

CueTable Help

Has anyone made a shaft with the following configuration:

1. Hollow front (like Predator)
2. No ferrule

I believe Patrick Johnson mentioned he had one made like that. Has any cue maker done this on a regular basis? If so, how have the shafts held up over the years?

I don't think this is a patent issue, because predator's original patent is either expired or about to expire very soon, and, I don't recall their patent covering a non-ferrule shaft. (Although I'm not a patent attorny)

Anyway, I'm more interested in how the shafts have held if anyone has done this. Predator shafts have had more then their fair share of ferrule and shaft breakage problems. Would removing the ferrule from the shaft, and switching to a non-laminated shaft, make that problem better or worse?
Click to expand...


Isuedtoberich

The trouble is that it is a patent violation, and Predator is known for enforcing their patents with vigor. They have the financial means to make life very difficult.

To be clear of patent infringement, you must be clear of each and all of the independent claims. Ferrule or no ferrule won't make a difference.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
RBC said:
Isuedtoberich

The trouble is that it is a patent violation, and Predator is known for enforcing their patents with vigor. They have the financial means to make life very difficult.

To be clear of patent infringement, you must be clear of each and all of the independent claims. Ferrule or no ferrule won't make a difference.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Click to expand...

For the sake of discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Predator just patent 3 things. 1. Light weight ferrule so no ferrule would be completely different. 2. Dime radius on the tip, something that would be impossible to hold up in court as tip tools with dime radius were in use long before Predator took out their patent. 3. The all important hole in the end of .250 x 5 which if the size were changed more than 10% would not be an infringement.
 
RBC said:
Isuedtoberich

The trouble is that it is a patent violation, and Predator is known for enforcing their patents with vigor. They have the financial means to make life very difficult.

To be clear of patent infringement, you must be clear of each and all of the independent claims. Ferrule or no ferrule won't make a difference.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Click to expand...

I don't have the patents in front of me, but I do believe they have either expired or are very close to expiring. The shafts came out on the market sometime around the mid 90's. Its almost 20 years later now. Patents are good for either 20 yrs from filing date, or 17 yrs from granting date.
 
Interesting, Patent # 5725437 has expired due to not paying the maintenance fees. I believe this is the first predator patent. (There are other later Predator patents still valid, however)

This is public information on the uspto.gov site.
 
RBC said:
Isuedtoberich

The trouble is that it is a patent violation, and Predator is known for enforcing their patents with vigor. They have the financial means to make life very difficult.

To be clear of patent infringement, you must be clear of each and all of the independent claims. Ferrule or no ferrule won't make a difference.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Click to expand...

I read through the claims of patents 5725437 and 6162128. They have very few independent claims. See picture of screeshot of 6162128's claims:

Screen Shot 2012-06-23 at 3.26.39 PM.jpg

You can see that Claim 1 explicitly lists the ferrule. All the other claims are "based" on claim 1, or on another claim that is based on claim 1. With my "limited" knowledge of patents (I know enough to know they are hard to understand, unless you are a patent lawyer!, lol), this means that if there is no ferrule on a similar design, there is no infringement of this patent. There are more claims after the screenshot was cut off (they go up to 12), but they are also all based on claim 1.
 
bdcues said:
For the sake of discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Predator just patent 3 things. 1. Light weight ferrule so no ferrule would be completely different. 2. Dime radius on the tip, something that would be impossible to hold up in court as tip tools with dime radius were in use long before Predator took out their patent. 3. The all important hole in the end of .250 x 5 which if the size were changed more than 10% would not be an infringement.
Click to expand...

That part where they claim a hole .250 x 5.0 is a new invention is a joke.all they did was create a tube and claim they invented tubes.what a joke!!!

bill
 
vasilios said:
That part where they claim a hole .250 x 5.0 is a new invention is a joke.all they did was create a tube and claim they invented tubes.what a joke!!!

bill
Click to expand...

Sorry to sound mean, but what do you think is more reasonable:
1. The US patent office granted a patent (which involves a several years process to research the validity of the claims) to two billiard individuals that they invented a tube?

or

2. You are not quite understanding the patent?
 
iusedtoberich said:
Sorry to sound mean, but what do you think is more reasonable:
1. The US patent office granted a patent (which involves a several years process to research the validity of the claims) to two billiard individuals that they invented a tube?

or

2. You are not quite understanding the patent?
Click to expand...

I read it and i understand what they did with the language.they went out of there way to avoid the word tube.they claimed a structural event without using the word tube to get it through the patent office.you can not patent something that nature provides.tubes are seen in many forms in nature.

bill
 
Many years ago, there used to be pool cues made from Aluminum that were hollow in the front section.
Predator also have other patents of products that they are not currently making or marketing, but from discoveries in their R&D.
 
not saying i did

But, if I used a Old growth shaft with a conical taper, and drilled and filled with the foam you use to seal leaks around the house, or a piece of balsa wood, or a hollow plastic tube, then a carbon fiber pad and a tip, I bet it would play great and stand up great. Just saying it might
 
desi2960 said:
But, if I used a Old growth shaft with a conical taper, and drilled and filled with the foam you use to seal leaks around the house, or a piece of balsa wood, or a hollow plastic tube, then a carbon fiber pad and a tip, I bet it would play great and stand up great. Just saying it might
Click to expand...

I did a tube job to a regular maple shaft in the early 70's..
drilled it .230 x 8.0,filled it with expanding foam that was used as insulation for refrigeration.capped it with a g-10 pad and a lepro tip.it stiffened right up and played well.did it to a few ash shafts too.still prefer mine without the tube.

bill
 
vasilios said:
I read it and i understand what they did with the language.they went out of there way to avoid the word tube.they claimed a structural event without using the word tube to get it through the patent office.you can not patent something that nature provides.tubes are seen in many forms in nature.

bill
Click to expand...

Bill, they patented the air space in that hole.
.250" by 5" deep of air .
The patent is essentially air space. :D

If you had 8 pieces of pie laminates and trimmed the parts that go inside, it'll reduce weight too. I wonder if they'd complain about that.
 
JoeyInCali said:
Bill, they patented the air space in that hole.
.250" by 5" deep of air .
The patent is essentially air space. :D

If you had 8 pieces of pie laminates and trimmed the parts that go inside, it'll reduce weight too. I wonder if they'd complain about that.
Click to expand...

I understand what they did for the patent.it is still phony word play.they claimed a air space then filled it.if they send you a legal challenge,tell them you will meet them at the review board and bring a piece of hay straw for your defense.

Now to something important.you can do a complete through hole shaft.it will be very stiff.but if you flex it to much it will pop a sidewall.kind of like bending a drinking straw to much.try a through hole with 4 quarters first.radius a corner of each quarter so when you put them together you get a .1975 through hole.finish her out and try it.good luck!!

bill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top