LD shafts

cuenut

cuenut

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If LD shafts are "the way to go", it would seem that the old aluminum cues from the early 70's would have taken off if the shafts were polished and were as smooth as a wood shaft, and for that matter, they would have come back into style recently. Seems like you could almost be guaranteed "0" deflection except that which is imparted by differing tips?
 
Carbon fiber.

Problem is these types of pool players want the most technological assistance they can get but they want it in the most traditional looking package. ;)
 
cuenut said:
If LD shafts are "the way to go", it would seem that the old aluminum cues from the early 70's would have taken off if the shafts were polished and were as smooth as a wood shaft, and for that matter, they would have come back into style recently. Seems like you could almost be guaranteed "0" deflection except that which is imparted by differing tips?
Click to expand...

Wrong kind of deflection. This is why science-minded people call it squirt and stay away from the term "deflection" when talking about "cue ball deflection."

The aluminum cues would have low beam deflection, but high cue ball deflection (squirt).
 
"R-U an engineer?

cuenut said:
If LD shafts are "the way to go", it would seem that the old aluminum cues from the early 70's would have taken off if the shafts were polished and were as smooth as a wood shaft, and for that matter, they would have come back into style recently. Seems like you could almost be guaranteed "0" deflection except that which is imparted by differing tips?
Click to expand...


You have made an extremely accurate observation, sir. Currently, mislabeled terminology states, shafts, as "Low deflection shafts," like the OB-1, Predator, and shafts of this type of construction. When in point of fact, a low deflection shaft is one of the stiffest hitting shafts ever made [(for example) a solid wood, tight grained, 14mm shaft with an Ivory ferrule, and little to no taper] now that's the description of a TRUE, low deflection shaft! It's an Extremely stiff (BIG cue-ball squirt) shaft.
However, a High deflection shaft, is an extremely malleable shaft that delivers the playing characteristics most top players want today, in point of fact, a shaft with very LOW cue-ball squirt.
The high deflection shaft gets out of the way of the cue-ball at impact and causes the cue-ball to travel straighter along it's intended original aiming line towards the object ball.
I've been making a high deflection shaft (low cue-ball squirt) like this for the last 9 years. I always chuckle at the pseudo physics, players and even the cue companies, apply so willingly to this misnomer-ed shaft definition.
The as-of-today, "LDF-Shaft current definition" is typical "state-of-the-ART" in POOL world thinking!!!:rolleyes:
 
deflection?

Cornerman said:
Wrong kind of deflection. This is why science-minded people call it squirt and stay away from the term "deflection" when talking about "cue ball deflection."

The aluminum cues would have low beam deflection, but high cue ball deflection (squirt).
Click to expand...

............just for the record, Fred, a good friend is "master machinist/scientist" at the National Lab at Oak Ridge, Tn., when having this very discussion last week, He agreed, "it would take an electron microscope to measure cue-ball deflection!"

Cue-ball squirt however, is a lot easier to quantify, basically it's a by product of the impact velocity of the cue tip on the ball, and the reaction of the ball with the cloth, pretty easy to observe even with the Human eye, as you well know. Deflection of the cue-ball is a totally different subject, and would be measured on the surface of the cue-ball.

The Low Deflection Shaft concept, as discussed in the current "Pool World lingo" is just wrong! Typical, it's just pool after all!:cool:
 
Zbotiman said:
............just for the record, Fred, a good friend is "master machinist/scientist" at the National Lab at Oak Ridge, Tn., when having this very discussion last week, He agreed, "it would take an electron microscope to measure cue-ball deflection!"

Cue-ball squirt however, is a lot easier to quantify, basically it's a by product of the impact velocity of the cue tip on the ball, and the reaction of the ball with the cloth, pretty easy to observe even with the Human eye, as you well know. Deflection of the cue-ball is a totally different subject, and would be measured on the surface of the cue-ball.

The Low Deflection Shaft concept, as discussed in the current "Pool World lingo" is just wrong! Typical, it's just pool after all!:cool:
Click to expand...

You've just demonstrated how easy these terms are to be misused. Cue-ball deflection is the same as cue-ball squirt. It's shaft delection and cue ball squirt that are different. :thumbup: Yukon Ed
 
Last edited:
Zbotiman said:
............just for the record, Fred, a good friend is "master machinist/scientist" at the National Lab at Oak Ridge, Tn., when having this very discussion last week, He agreed, "it would take an electron microscope to measure cue-ball deflection!"

Cue-ball squirt however, is a lot easier to quantify, basically it's a by product of the impact velocity of the cue tip on the ball, and the reaction of the ball with the cloth, pretty easy to observe even with the Human eye, as you well know. Deflection of the cue-ball is a totally different subject, and would be measured on the surface of the cue-ball.

The Low Deflection Shaft concept, as discussed in the current "Pool World lingo" is just wrong! Typical, it's just pool after all!:cool:
Click to expand...
Very good. Very good.
 
Yukon Ed said:
You've just demonstrated how easy these terms are to be misused. Cue-ball deflection is the same as cue-ball squirt. It's shaft delection and cue ball squirt that are different. :thumbup: Yukon Ed
Click to expand...

I think you missed the distinction Ed. Cue ball deflection itself is technically incorrect.
 
cuenut said:
If LD shafts are "the way to go"
Click to expand...
Low-squirt shafts have both advantages and disadvantage.

cuenut said:
it would seem that the old aluminum cues from the early 70's would have taken off if the shafts were polished and were as smooth as a wood shaft, and for that matter, they would have come back into style recently. Seems like you could almost be guaranteed "0" deflection except that which is imparted by differing tips?
Click to expand...
Aluminum and carbon-fiber shafts can be much lighter, which reduces endmass; but they are also much stiffer, which increases effective endmass. Squirt is directly related to effective shaft endmass. For more info, see:

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
Low-squirt shafts have both advantages and disadvantage.

Aluminum and carbon-fiber shafts can be much lighter, which reduces endmass; but they are also much stiffer, which increases effective endmass. Squirt is directly related to effective shaft endmass. For more info, see:

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

The beauty of carbon fiber in this application is that by tuning the type of resin used and the type and layup of the cloth you very precisely control the final weight and amount of flex at any and in all parts of the shaft. You can concievably have parts of the shaft as stiff as a high performance arrow blank (for example) and other parts as flexible as a light test fly fishing rod (as another). Could make for some quite interesting possibilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top