Low deflection shafts

In reading Barioni's website, I notice that he has ceased the "tuning" service he was offering and only does it on his own shafts - said it took up too much time, which is easy to believe.
I was hoping to find deflection numbers for other LD shafts either on his website or on Youtube, but was unsuccessful - has anyone else found that info and I simply missed it? I'm an OB fan, so I'm interested in those numbers.
Gary
 
Figured I'd turn to the experts.......I've never seen one of these low deflection shafts so can someone explain the theory behind it...snip snip

Something to keep in mind about the shafts. If you have played extensively with non low deflection shafts, your brain has adjusted to the squirt or deflection of the ball.

So say a long cut shot from one end of the table to the other, with left engish the ball will 'squirt' a little right. Your brain has learned this and adjusts for the aiming point.

Now add a low deflection shaft into the mix and the same aiming point has changed. Your brain needs to relearn how to shoot w it.

For me, I had a long layoff (was never a very good player, but played a lot when I was a young whipper snapper) so adjusting to the LD shaft seemed natural.

So a player may actually find it easier to play with a non low deflection shaft if they are accustomed to them.

fair warning - not an expert - just my observation
 
agreed, not a secret.

I just think there are some makers taking it to another level, I could be wrong .... wood ferrule seems to be the choice for Barioni, says its lighter then all the other materials? Again, I don't know for sure. Not trying to challenge anyone, just giving my 2 cents :smile: ... just repeating conversation that I had with John.

wonder where he got that idea? lol

Royce
 
Whoa whoa whoa.....wait. So let's say you have a 12-3/4 mm shaft (.502) with a male 5/16 (.3125) threaded tenon for a female ferrule. Behind that male tenon you have a .250 - 4-5 inch hollow? Seriously? The wall thickness of that 4 or 5 inches would be only a shade over 1/8".........and that tiny amount of weight removal makes a noticeable difference in cue ball deflection? Does anyone know what that amount of material weighs? (roughly) I'm guessing it's no more than a gram or two. Man, I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept.......lol
 
Vince, the tenon is closer to 3/8 . Couple that with lightweight ferrule
The mass reduction makes a huge difference in that shaft.
 
Whoa whoa whoa.....wait. So let's say you have a 12-3/4 mm shaft (.502) with a male 5/16 (.3125) threaded tenon for a female ferrule. Behind that male tenon you have a .250 - 4-5 inch hollow? Seriously? The wall thickness of that 4 or 5 inches would be only a shade over 1/8".........and that tiny amount of weight removal makes a noticeable difference in cue ball deflection? Does anyone know what that amount of material weighs? (roughly) I'm guessing it's no more than a gram or two. Man, I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept.......lol



In the calculations we use in R&D we take the average specific gravity (density) of the materials involved, couple that with the actual dimensions (in full 3d graphic modeling programs) and determine the actual tip end mass in varying increments of distance from the tip going back about 5 to 6 inches or so.

To make a significant difference, you need a fairly sizable change. But once you get to where the top performing cue shafts are, it doesn't take much to make a noticeable difference.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
wonder where he got that idea? lol

Royce

I came up with it on my own back in 1997 way before OB came into the picture. I have many witnesses to this. We started manufacturing Barioni Cues in 2002 and the first one was completed and sold for $700 August 7, 2003. At that time all most every one in the pool halls said that the wood ferrules would fail and that the wood ferrules would crack and not hold up. Then much later comes OB with the laminated wood ferrules with a carbon fiber tip pad. The OB ferrule is quite a bit heavier than mine. My tuned shafts have a wood ferrule that is less than half the weight of the standard OB shaft ferrule. We were making custom designer wood ferrules 10 years ago. Something that OB still has not put out. That aside,
It is possible to make a zero deflection shaft. Ya , that's right, I said here for all to see. No type o. Zero deflection shaft. Don't believe it, put up a grand and come out here and I will prove it to you. A post on this thread says that OB test better than Predator. Well it depends which one. Most of the Predator shafts all test different from one shaft to another of the same model. The same goes for OB and mine as well. Every piece of wood is different. Denser, heavier, more or less growth rings, stiffer, and so on and so on. These LD production shafts with many wood pieces glued together can not have a thin enough shaft wall because they will fall apart. Now I did not invent the LD shaft. I just studied shafts in general and stumbled on it by accident. In my opinion, Predator was the first one that came up with the technology and break through that will change shafts forever. And they deserve credit for that. My Predator shaft came apart. I feel because the glue eventually breaks down. All I know is that I never had a solid shaft from any cue maker that broke down or came apart. So I glued it back together with a solid, heavier tenon. Guess what happened. It pushed the cue ball off a half a diamond. Ya try to get used to that. I know 140 speed players that struggle to make three ball in a roll in any order with ball in hand to start. And the sad thing is the balls are a diamond in front of the pocket. So I figured out that lighter has to do the opposite.
I expanded from there. 8 years of testing and experimenting. A good friend and pool player of mine said you need a more solid way of testing shafts and cues. So the robot was made to do just that. It does test at all different speeds. I will be happy to test any thing for you, even in person for those who want to come by. I will prove and explain any thing related to this. I will not however go into detail what I do to my shafts to make them test the way they do. Someone posted on this thread that it is not just the end mass that makes LD. That person is correct. The end mass play a big part. About 60 percent. The taper also plays a big part along with a few more principles. Even the tip and the shape of the tip play a big part. The butt of the cue, especially the joint have a part in cue ball squirt or deflection as well. The butt of the cue can add as much as 15%.
 
They do as described, which is REDUCE deflection, not eliminate it. The amount varies from shaft to shaft. Technically, the weight of the tip itself can even have an affect. The player will have to adjust according to the amount of deflection that is reduced. I have played with almost all of them, and even have my own version(s) that I thinker with. In the end, I have found there is no substitute for a really nice shaft, whether it's labeled as low deflection or just a normal standard shaft. That's just my opinion. I can adjust to what I am playing with within several racks, and become comfortable with it. Some cues/shafts simply hit/perform/feel better than others & I play my best with a very nice hitting cue. Doesn't matter to me if it's LD or not. It's just an adjustment. Just my personal opinion.

Predator actually will disagree with this statement unless you add 'relative to the line of stroke'. Read their patent. I agree with this. Also agree with Barioni's statements about the entire cue having a part in reducing the effects..... relative to the line of stroke. Shafts play different on different butts, so how can it only be the last few inches at the tip end of the shaft that make a difference? I started making laminated LD shafts 21 years ago, much of what I assumed was born out by the robot experiments that Barioni shared here on AZB and for which he was blasted with criticism because it did not coincide with the last 4" crowd. This year we are coming out with a couple of new shafts, including different tapers and a super low deflection shaft with the same feel/feedback as the original shafts have... which is more feel/feedback than any of the big names have.
 
If the shaft is parallel to the center line and way off center, zero
cueball squirt is impossible to me.
PS
The amount of reduced squirt eventually has a diminishing value.
You will have to adjust to the throw too.
Th throw caused by inside English by these low end mass
shafts can be pretty substantial.
 
Last edited:
If the shaft is parallel to the center line and way off center, zero
cueball squirt is impossible to me.
PS
The amount of reduced squirt eventually has a diminishing value.
You will have to adjust to the throw too.
Th throw caused by inside English by these low end mass
shafts can be pretty substantial
.

Maybe you just have bad aim? ;)
 
If the shaft is parallel to the center line and way off center, zero
cueball squirt is impossible to me.
PS
The amount of reduced squirt eventually has a diminishing value.
You will have to adjust to the throw too.
Th throw caused by inside English by these low end mass
shafts can be pretty substantial.

Joey,
The reason zero cue ball squirt seems impossible is because it is unless you over pump the Shi* out of the shaft. You can not get zero squirt by lightening up the end of the shaft alone. Not sure where in California you are but I bet your with in 5 hrs from me. Come out here and I will show you zero squirt shafts. You are also right about the throw caused by zero and regular LD shafts. I mean all shafts will cause throw but the squirting shafts help compensate for some of the throw. It is nice to find or make a
shaft that has just the right amount of deflection or squirt to cancel out the amount of through produced. How ever if you polish the balls the through is diminished. If you live in a perfect world and are playing with polished ball and a zero squirting shaft, pool is easier. If you don't live in a perfect world then you just have to learn how to adapt and compensate for the throw and squirt.
 
Please define squirt and give an example. Then define throw and deflection, and give examples of each. Then if can be done in a simple to the point matter, explain how they are relative. Anybody. It's simple physics so simple definitions will be sufficient. No need to get complicated.
 
Joey,
The reason zero cue ball squirt seems impossible is because it is unless you over pump the Shi* out of the shaft. You can not get zero squirt by lightening up the end of the shaft alone. Not sure where in California you are but I bet your with in 5 hrs from me. Come out here and I will show you zero squirt shafts. You are also right about the throw caused by zero and regular LD shafts. I mean all shafts will cause throw but the squirting shafts help compensate for some of the throw. It is nice to find or make a
shaft that has just the right amount of deflection or squirt to cancel out the amount of through produced. How ever if you polish the balls the through is diminished. If you live in a perfect world and are playing with polished ball and a zero squirting shaft, pool is easier. If you don't live in a perfect world then you just have to learn how to adapt and compensate for the throw and squirt.

We need to know how you define zero squirt .
 
Please define squirt and give an example. Then define throw and deflection, and give examples of each. Then if can be done in a simple to the point matter, explain how they are relative. Anybody. It's simple physics so simple definitions will be sufficient. No need to get complicated.

Wow , your making this complicated and a lot of work. Doesn't every body know these principles by now. Ok, here it goes. Squirt: the amount the cue ball comes off center using side spin. Also known as cue ball deflection. Example: Using right side spin the cue ball squirts to the left. Zero squirt means if you cue to the right edge of the ball (Maximum side Spin) the cue ball comes off in a straight line. No squirt, No Cue ball deflection.

Throw: the object ball being pushed off line due to the side spin on the cue ball. The spin on the cue ball grabs the object ball
upon contact and throws the object ball off line or target.
 
With respect, I was going to ask the same thing. It is good for the sake of the discussion to define the terms that are being used.

Is it possible to measure the amount of spin a shaft imparts onto a CB?
 
Last edited:
Wow , your making this complicated and a lot of work. Doesn't every body know these principles by now. Ok, here it goes. Squirt: the amount the cue ball comes off center using side spin. Also known as cue ball deflection. Example: Using right side spin the cue ball squirts to the left. Zero squirt means if you cue to the right edge of the ball (Maximum side Spin) the cue ball comes off in a straight line. No squirt, No Cue ball deflection.



Throw: the object ball being pushed off line due to the side spin on the cue ball. The spin on the cue ball grabs the object ball

upon contact and throws the object ball off line or target.



Also with respect please define swerve in simple terms like you did squirt and throw.

Thank you.
 
Ok, while I disagree with you on the definitions of squirt and deflection, at least we are on the same page because I now know what you mean when you say zero squirt. Squirt is actually an arc in the ball's travel, which is induced by spin. The friction causes the ball to squirt/swerve along its path.

Deflection is a different animal altogether. That's where two objects give way to one another upon impact. It's determined by mass and inertia. Mass with inertia is energy, whether static or kinetic, and the most energy wins. Lessening the tip end mass of the shaft via weight will theoretically reduce cue ball deflection, but I don't think enough emphasis has been put on inertia. Inertia (speed of stroke) can play equally as much role as mass. Case in point, blow on the cue ball. Can you make it roll? Air has virtually no mass, but tell that to the wind. Now focus that air through a nozzle & blast it at a focus point on the right side of the ball. I'll bet the ball deflects to the left, giving way to the virtually massless gust of air. So now consider the cue shaft. Obviously it will always weigh more than air, and given that even air can cause the ball to deflect, is it even possible to create a zero deflection shaft? Food for thought
 
Back
Top