New Lambros Joint

M

masonh

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Anyone played with the new Lambros ultra joint yet?Is it better or worse or what?What is different about it.Thanks.
 
New Lambros joint is actually a deep pioleted 3/8" 10 thread pin. It offers a tighter fit with less deflection in the shaft. It is definitely an improvement over the original "Ultra" joint. I have one on "SALE" now
www.cuesnthings.com
 
What year did Lambros start using the new improved ultra joint?

How is it a definite improvement over the original? It sounds as if the original was flawed
 
Last edited:
The biggest difference I noticed is that with the new ultra joint the edge of the joint collar is flat as opposed to the old ultra joint where the edge of the joint collar was conical, almost coming to a sharp edge. Check out the pics below, the first two are the old joint, the third is the new joint. Personally, I prefer the hit of the old joint.

Lambrosjoints.jpg


Lambrosjoints2.jpg


Newlambrosjointclose.jpg
 
Why would a flat face be bettter than a conical? Layani cues use a conical joint that he claims is superior to any other joint and also harder and costlier to make.

Seems as if Mike is trying to use a cheaper process.
 
TheBook.That is kind of what I was thinking.It seems to me it is just a piloted 3/8-10 joint like his oldere sneaky petes.I can't see any reason why this joint would be better than the old one.UGOTDA7 you got any Lambros' for sale?
 
masonh said:
TheBook.That is kind of what I was thinking.It seems to me it is just a piloted 3/8-10 joint like his oldere sneaky petes.I can't see any reason why this joint would be better than the old one.UGOTDA7 you got any Lambros' for sale?
Click to expand...


I have one I would consider selling, not really looking to do so. I would need $2200 to part with it. See pics below.

It is a 2005 cue I just got a short time ago. It only has test hits on my home table. Ten points - five very high cocobolo with three veneers each, five low ebony; cocobolo butt sleeve; rings at all locations; two shafts with Moori III medium tips.

I'm not going to jump to conclusions about why Lambros went with a new type of ultra joint - maybe he wanted a change, maybe he thinks it plays better, maybe it holds up better, maybe it is a better design, maybe it is cheaper, etc.

I have had a few of his old sneaky petes, this joint is not the same. It is still conical in nature, just not all the way out to the edge of the joint collar.

In my experience with the old Lambros ultra joints, perhaps since they were so conical in nature and had some wood mating surfaces, there was a tendency for the shafts to not mate up the same every time. There is very little room for error in any joint for a shaft to mate up properly and with a conical type surface subject to humidity this can present some unique problems. Maybe this new flat outer portion remedies this scenario?

Regardless, in my opinion, his cues are still easily in the top five of playing cues available anywhere.

Not sure why the four pics below are spread out like they are.

Lambrostopallcropped.jpg

Lambrosbuttcropped.jpg

Lambrostopcropped.jpg

Lambrosforearmcropped.jpg
 
Mike sure likes to make long points. They also look razor sharp.

Have you also noticed that the wrapped area is different than other cues. If I remember they seem to be shorter.
 
Lambros joint change

I spoke to Mike yesterday ...According to Mike, the locking conical joint remains the predominant design feature in both designs. The difference in the upgraded joint is the flat locking surface at the very top of the joint collar. The reason for the upgrade was to address an issue that occurred in a small number of cases when too much torque was applied during assembly causing small stress fractures at the top of the joint collar in the previous design. The new design strengthens and adds stability to the joint while maintaining the predominant feature which is the locking conical joint.
 
Hmmm...
If there is a conical connection inside the joint, and flat faces up top, it is (IMO) impossible to have both of them connect flush.
It's like a capped ferrule, you can't have the bottom of the ferrule rest against the shaft AND the top of the tenon touching the roof of the ferrule.

Just throwing that out there...

Jon
 
masonh said:
i think that your logic may be flawed.
Click to expand...
How so?
From Layani Cues:
The conical joint has a gap that gives the impression the shaft is not properly fixed, but actually this gap is what guarantees a perfect fit between the female and the male cones
Click to expand...

If you had a conical bore on the butt, and a cone on the shaft that tapered out to nothing (a sharp edge on the shaft and butt), it would come together and would appear to be flush.
But having a flat face AND a conical connection, will mean that one of them isn't flush.

It's simple really.

Jon
 
why would it be impossible for both sufaces to be flush.in fact it really doesn't even seem any more complicated than the concave /convex joint.please explain why this would be physically impossible.
 
masonh said:
why would it be impossible for both sufaces to be flush.in fact it really doesn't even seem any more complicated than the concave /convex joint.please explain why this would be physically impossible.
Click to expand...
When you tighten the joint, one surface will most like hit flush before the other. Getting those two separate faces to hit dead stop simultaneously; pretty tough specially on a 3/8 10 pin with so much play.
 
JoeyInCali said:
When you tighten the joint, one surface will most like hit flush before the other. Getting those two separate faces to hit dead stop simultaneously; pretty tough specially on a 3/8 10 pin with so much play.
Click to expand...

The wooden part of the joint is prone to regular wear and temperature/moisture expansion effects. I can see why Layani uses a metal-to-metal joint with a single conical surface to combat these effects.

Also, ivory is still very brittle compared to other joint materials like brass or stainless steel. Putting a concave interface in that joint shape will subject it to expansion forces that push outward every time the cue is driven into any ball. I'm no engineer, but this gives me a picture of a small indent with a wedge being constantly hammered into it.
 
Last edited:
Flat face, how tight?

Greetings,

Speaking of a joint/pin, if you have a radial or 3/8X11 (South West, Blue Grass, etc) style pin cue, how tight do you normally connect/screw in the cue to the shaft?

What are the pros and cons of tight/loose joints?

Thank's
 
the_saint_siwa said:
Greetings,

Speaking of a joint/pin, if you have a radial or 3/8X11 (South West, Blue Grass, etc) style pin cue, how tight do you normally connect/screw in the cue to the shaft?

What are the pros and cons of tight/loose joints?

Thank's
Click to expand...

My understanding of flat-faced and piloted joints is that a tighter fit prevents play, thereby protecting the joint. I don't know if this applies to metal pin -> wooden thread joints.
 
Jon said:
How so?
From Layani Cues:


If you had a conical bore on the butt, and a cone on the shaft that tapered out to nothing (a sharp edge on the shaft and butt), it would come together and would appear to be flush.
But having a flat face AND a conical connection, will mean that one of them isn't flush.

It's simple really.

Jon
Click to expand...

Jon,
There's nothing about the design which makes contact in both areas impossible.
But doing so would require precision probably beyond the scope of cuemakers' machine tools. Additionally, if both surfaces didn't wear in equally as is likely, then there'd be only one or the other contact area as you suggest. So I think we agree: a classic case of over-engineering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top