how to design a true parabolic/conical tapered cue- ?

E

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
what dimensions are used to make the cone?

cue tip and end of butt diameter? joint? cue length? all of the above?

I'm trying to design a cue, and am wondering how variable these dimensions can be/
what dimensions "fix" the cone shape

thanks for any info.-
 
A parabola is a curve, not a cone. A parabola can be drawn/shaped through any two points you want. So the tip diameter and the butt diameter can be any common measurement you want. I looked into it and built a couple, but couldn't discern any playing difference from my regular cues. Joey B swears by his, so maybe he'll say something.
 
GBCues said:
A parabola is a curve, not a cone. A parabola can be drawn/shaped through any two points you want. So the tip diameter and the butt diameter can be any common measurement you want. I looked into it and built a couple, but couldn't discern any playing difference from my regular cues. Joey B swears by his, so maybe he'll say something.
Click to expand...
It is a curve except the first few inches of the shaft.
You'd have to bend the taper bar. Thick in the middle .
Some .825 joint, 1.070 A-joint and 1.270 bottom for sw-like butt .
PS
I don't do parabolic.
 
Last edited:
I believe the turbo encabulator was built on the parabolic curve principal. You need special sperving bearings to make it play right though,
 
Kershenbrock was the first to come up with a parabolic/curved taper afaik .
I believe his shafts were 29.25" long too and the butt was 29.75".
Richard Harris , Searing and Bender have curved tapers too .

The philosophy behind it for the hit actually makes sense to me .
But, I like linear angles .
 
Here you go, parabolic after pro taper. Had a guy specify this back in 2003.
(PROGRAM NAME - RONSHFT )
(DATE=DD-MM-YY - 31-01-03 TIME=HH:MM - 23:15 )
N1 G00 G17 G49 G80 G90 G98
( .512 to .850 )
N2 G00 X0. Y-.5
N3 G00 Z0.
N4 G01 Y0. F20.
N5 X14. Y-.0197
N6 G02 X30. Y-.1691 I-2.8437 J-1161.3056
N7 G00 Y-.5
g00 x0.
N8 M30
 
JoeyInCali said:
Kershenbrock was the first to come up with a parabolic/curved taper afaik .
I believe his shafts were 29.25" long too and the butt was 29.75".
Richard Harris , Searing and Bender have curved tapers too .

The philosophy behind it for the hit actually makes sense to me .
But, I like linear angles .
Click to expand...
Do you think cues with linear angles hit better?
 
JoeyInCali said:
Different.
And different linear angles have different hits imo.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

I am quite sure that all the differences between cues make them hit differently.

I had an old cue with a noticeable “hump” from the top of the wrap and then it slimmed down into a rather small joint. When I had the cue refinished and the “hump” smoothed down to a straight taper to the joint it changed the hit.
 
This thread is all over the place. Some are talking about butts while others invoke shafts.

There is no such thing as a curve it's all straight lines between points even if the points are very close to each other.

It appears to my mind's eye that in order for a shaft to have a curve in it's taper it will be necessary for it to be fatter somewhere upstream of the joint than the joint is. Silly idea.

Sheldon: Can you take a minute and explain this line of code? Thanks

N6 G02 X30. Y-.1691 I-2.8437 J-1161.3056
 
Last edited:
JC said:
This thread is all over the place. Some are talking about butts while others invoke shafts.

There is no such thing as a curve it's all straight lines between points even if the points are very close to each other.

It appears to my mind's eye that in order for a shaft to have a curve in it's taper it will be necessary for it to be fatter somewhere upstream of the joint than the joint is. Silly idea.

Sheldon: Can you take a minute and explain this line of code? Thanks

N6 G02 X30. Y-.1691 I-2.8437 J-1161.3056
Click to expand...
It has a curve . You can even tell from holding the cue in front of you and examining it.

And that code proves it . If it were linear , you would have no I and J numbers , would you ?
 
HawaiianEye said:
Thank you.

I am quite sure that all the differences between cues make them hit differently.

I had an old cue with a noticeable “hump” from the top of the wrap and then it slimmed down into a rather small joint. When I had the cue refinished and the “hump” smoothed down to a straight taper to the joint it changed the hit.
Click to expand...
That would have ruined the hit imo .
You now have a cue with a very skinny forearm with a thin joint .
That sort of thing happened to a sneaky pete of my late mentor.
The owner took it to another maker and had it refinish.
He thought it had a funny taper and proceeded to re-taper to one straight angle .
The owner then called my mentor saying the cue no longer hits the same way after he had it refinished .
Then he fessed up it was retapered .
My mentor would have retired the cue if he had a choice after that.
 
JoeyInCali said:
That would have ruined the hit imo .
You now have a cue with a very skinny forearm with a thin joint .
That sort of thing happened to a sneaky pete of my late mentor.
The owner took it to another maker and had it refinish.
He thought it had a funny taper and proceeded to re-taper to one straight angle .
The owner then called my mentor saying the cue no longer hits the same way after he had it refinished .
Then he fessed up it was retapered .
My mentor would have retired the cue if he had a choice after that.
Click to expand...
It still hits good and the joint may not be as small as I maybe made you think.

I am not sure it is an exact straight taper to the joint, but the “hump” isn’t there.

The whole butt of the cue from the hump to the butt was oversized. The cue would not slide down into cases that all my other cues fit into.

I find it funny when all the different cue makers have different ideas of how a cue should hit. The ”quality” of the hit is as “perceived“ by the player, not the cue maker.

Even two identical cues usually have a noticeably different hit.

Southwest has a waiting list of over a dozen years for some reason. The Chinese seem to think they have mystical powers or something. I’m surprised there aren’t more cue makers using Southwest’s exact dimensions in their cues and marketing to the Chinese. There are a lot more pool players there than there are in the USA.
 
Last edited:
HawaiianEye said:
It still hits good and the joint may not be as small as I maybe made you think.

I am not sure it is an exact straight taper to the joint, but the “hump” isn’t there.

The whole butt of the cue from the hump to the butt was oversized. The cue would not slide down into cases that all my other cues fit into.

I find it funny when all the different cue makers have different ideas of how a cue should hit. The ”quality” of the hit is as “perceived“ by the player, not the cue maker.

Even two identical cues usually have a noticeably different hit.

Southwest has a waiting list of over a dozen years for some reason. The Chinese seem to think they have mystical powers or something. I’m surprised there aren’t more cue makers using Southwest’s exact dimensions in their cues and marketing to the Chinese. There are a lot more pool players there than there are in the USA.
Click to expand...
The Chinese themselves are making SW duplicates but they don't have that made in America mystique. Some pretty solid fakes I've seen though.

I'm not sure all SW cues have the same dimensions over the years either.
 
JC said:
The Chinese themselves are making SW duplicates but they don't have that made in America mystique. Some pretty solid fakes I've seen though.

I'm not sure all SW cues have the same dimensions over the years either.
Click to expand...
Somehow , Kao Kao , who has a really fancy factory has not copied the taper .
SW's assembly is actually fairly simple .
I don't know if they've copied that .
But, if you are making cues in China, they better be cored .
SW's are not .
So, when you see a SW with ebony nose, it is ebony nose .
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali said:
It is a curve except the first few inches of the shaft.
Click to expand...

hey joey, thanks for the reply. are you referring to the definition of "parabola" itself? or as it might pertain to cuemaking?
I could very well have been wrong by using that term and please let me know if so
the carom and snooker cues I have no straight parts from tip to butt, not bigger than an inch, anyway

MVPCues said:
Doing a parabolic taper also wearing a special hat.
Click to expand...

how come? stick with "conical" if that makes more sense.
do you think there's anything inherently wrong with building/playing with a cone-shaped cue?
do any of y'all?

thanks for the replies-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top