Yes, it has a McWorter touch. I like the McWorter cues very much. The design is a little bit like my Joss #JM01 or #MC01 with a McWorter design :wink:.
I'm always curious when I see a cuemaker closing sales based on computer renderings of cues that don't yet exist - "virtual cues", if you will. Bill Stroud had a website a number of years ago that featured this idea, but it failed to take off (or he lost interest).
From my experience the rendering software available enables one to make a virtual cue look a lot more sexy than the real thing. I'm not saying it has to be that way, just that the computer-artist side of the equation would have to be careful to not create too much sizzle with the art that the cuemaker side couldn't satisfy with the steak.
So here's an opportunity to test my theory first hand...
Are you at all disappointed that the [almost] razor-thin points in the imaginary rendering aren't manifested in the reality of the cue? I mean, the points shown in the pitch image would have to cut with a 0.010" bit (0.25mm) or smaller, but in the actual cue they're obviously done with something on the order of 1mm or bigger. To my eye the disparity is huge, and I'm curious if you see that as a bad thing or if doesn't matter in the end result...?
the cuemaker told me that the ends of the point are too sharp, it is OK for me. We talked a lot about the design and we find a way but I'm too lazy to edit the renderings :wink:
the pin is now include too.
A ring at the forearm and the butt is include too, we got a lot of mammoth. The last step is the finishing for 4 or 5 times.
I hope I can play the stick in the next 2 -3 weeks.
Thanks for sharing...I always enjoy the inclusion on the steps of the building process, it is fantastic too see it from the raw and to slowly take shape, and then when the sealer and finish is applied is just amazing!