Never said anything about cost.
No, but i did. Both sides of the equation, cheaper or more costly.
Metal framed tables are cheaper to build no doubt but play no better. At all.
My premise is that they could easily play as well, and have fewer stability issues
with proper design
I've played the early KSteels and hit balls on a Rasson in a showroom. Both tables were fine but don't try to blow smoke up people's asses trying to say metal is better for making tables. Its cheaper
See this is where you keep going off the rails, talking about how tables have been designed in the past.
is the main reason. I like the Timberstrand beams that Diamond use on the Professional. That stuff is incredibly strong and uses leftover/throwaway pieces of wood in a epoxy matrix. Weather/humidity has no effect on it. Hell, they build housed using this stuff for beams and trusses.
Well i've certainly built a lot of houses!
I've mentioned my intro to pool table builds: in the late 70's/early 80's a builder sought me out because he heard i could make anything in wood.
That's literally what he said, but of course it is not true, wood is a big field. Anyway, until he died, i made wooden parts, and machined tools, tooling, and machines for him to use as he juggled aspects of BBC builds on tables he restored, maintenance tools for him to use in the field - he maintained tables across about 5 states, and for his own custom table builds in various styles. I have also posted that i regret that i never paid attention to any of it, except to come up with whatever John told me he needed or problem to solve. He installed bars, too, so i came up with some fancy over-bar mouldings; and some for the armrest on a bar, more or less according to what he described imagining. I thought John would always be there to ask, and i certainly miss him.
It's an aside, but after John took me to the slate mines one time to get several sets of slate for his builds, & i watched them saw it, plane it, & hone it, and cut & float the pockets to John's choice from patterns on the wall, by hand; i kept buying architectural slate from them over the years. Just tried calling them yesterday, and it seems they are finally gone.
Steel - I use it for structural parts in buildings, sometimes balancing vs wood, sometimes a matrix of both, sometimes wood is better.
I use steel, cast iron, and aluminum to build machines, machining accessories, and tooling. It is familiar to me. Like fastone, even a little bit of chrome moly for airplane fuselage.
Per cost - my vision of a steel table would not likely be cheaper than compost type wood, and i have too many other projects that i work on every day, to make a table just to prove a point. But i can imagine a number of improvements that would make it superior for set up and for stability; and it could probably be cost effective in volume. One way it has been done for machine tools was to include polymer concrete in the hollow members for damping.
That's it for me, though - if you want to keep spinning the intention of what you wished i said, go for it. Saying anymore only gives you more words, as opposed to useful consideration of the options in either direction. BTW, what physical things do you build professionally, it will help me understand where you are coming from. I certainly don't have a problem with wood. I think steel, good design, and modern systems can be as good and potentially better. Even a steel primary support/framed table (a "good" one) will probably include some wood for damping, & primarily wooden rails, in my imagining of it.
smt
PS - you no doubt know that cast iron tables; and cast iron supported tables, were made during the 19th c and were generally superior. They were more expensive and took more effort to move. Some in England were entirely CI. Some in America were CI pedestal and support of varying detail such as the BBC Monarch. I think the Monarch did have wood above the base for bedding the slate?