New low deflection shaft: Meucci Ultimate Weapon

I guess I should have expected the outcome of: 1. Meucci sucks 2. low squirt is a scam, and 3. marketing bs...

With all that said, for those of us who use low deflection/squirt shafts, its always interesting to hear when a new shaft shaft comes on the market. I'm sure one of us will end up trying this shaft.

I checked Meucci's site, and the description of this Ultimate Weapon shaft is very poorly written. It looks like they stuck a small paragraph about the new shaft on the existing black dot shaft page.
 
iusedtoberich said:
I guess I should have expected the outcome of: 1. Meucci sucks 2. low squirt is a scam, and 3. marketing bs...

With all that said, for those of us who use low deflection/squirt shafts, its always interesting to hear when a new shaft shaft comes on the market. I'm sure one of us will end up trying this shaft.

I checked Meucci's site, and the description of this Ultimate Weapon shaft is very poorly written. It looks like they stuck a small paragraph about the new shaft on the existing black dot shaft page.
Click to expand...

Good post, and, even though I (along with a couple of other posters) had a little fun poking fun at the poor marketing, believe that's the only thing wrong in this instance. LD shafts are not "wrong" and Meucci does not suck.

In fact, I have a couple Meuccis myself -- one Meucci Original (from the late 80s), and one Meucci model 97-11 (script lettered-logo). I even had Ryan Theewen (of RAT Cues / Muellers) rebuild the 97-11 -- he had to re-core it, because the butt had developed a warp in the grip/handle area -- and it's one of my favorite cues today.

Because I personally have deflection-accounting built into my aiming style, LD shafts are not on my shopping list. However, I'd own a Meucci any day. The ones I'd owned (and still own) have always done right by me.

As to the marketing for the Ultimate Weapon shaft being a hacked-up version of the Black-Dot's marketing, this, to me, leads me to believe that whoever is doing the marketing materials on Meucci's website, is doing it as a "side job." Meaning, it's not his or her bread and butter. Perhaps it's one of their shop people who made the mistake one day of expressing to his/her boss that he/she is familiar with computers, and -- poof! -- immediately got handed the side job of marketing materials webmaster? It happens all the time in the blue-collar arena, unfortunately, and the end-product suffers as a result.

-Sean
 
Patrick Johnson said:
"This shaft has a whopping 150+ per cent less delection"

I believe this means 50% in the opposite direction.

They shoulda stopped when they got to 100% less, IMO.

LOL

pj
chgo
Click to expand...
I see your quoting the ad but, what is delection ??????????
Dale
 
MeucciMan79 said:
I hope this helps some to understand a percentage rating
Click to expand...
150% more for one shaft equals 60% less for the other - not 150% less as your website says.

Your website is falsely advertising a decrease in deflection that's 2.5 times the actual case.

If you advertised the true decrease in deflection of 60% it would have greater impact because it's plausible.

pj
chgo
 
Last edited:
sfleinen said:
the marketing message has already FAILED, if you have to think this deep, or to analyze what "150% less than..." means.
Click to expand...

The marketing "message" may have failed, but the intent of the message is a success. Just look at the attention it has drawn here.

Let's face it, gimmicky marketing works. And when I earlier said that I am opposed to gimmicky marketing claims, I should have clarified that I am really more opposed to using them myself, rather than being opposed to other people using them. If something works for you, and nobody is actually being hurt by it, then do whatever you like.

Now totally FRAUDULENT claims are a different story, altogether. :mad:

Roger
 
I guess it wouldnt be AZ if certain people didn't talk out of their a$$ only to say nothing.

Lets see..

At one time the many of the worlds best players played meucci cues, many of them. Wonder how many world champions are here in this thread?

The red dots were solid wood shafts and not "designed" purposely for LD. At that point in technology Bob address deflection with shaft diameter and taper, which by the way both have generally become the standard in use today. Were they wippy? Yea, little bit. The idea was that the shaft would deflect off the cue ball rather than deflect the cue ball off line. (Or obviously to a lesser degree) Guess what? Same generally theory in play today. However, the dot was simply an alignment aid to help locate the shaft spine for consistancy. Guess what? Many champion pool players used to mark thier shafts exactly the same way. Wonder how many champion players we have here in this thread.

The black dots were in fact considerably less deflection than thier stock wood shafts as tested and proven by impartial sources. Bob Meucci was 'one' of the first manufacturers to ever address the issue of deflection. Its debatable who was actually thee first but thats not the point. And probably going back 15+ years ago , even designing and building his own testing 'robot' which is almost common place today. He did not do any of it to mearly make a buck or as a gimmick. He generally cared about trying to build a better performing stick and at that time, he did. Was he the best? Probably not but he was better than many, maybe better than most.

What else....

Oh yeah, predator has been making a 11mm shaft since its earliest days (z shaft) and its been quite popular ever since. Lets not mention snookers cues typically in the size range as well, but I guess those guys can't play with small shafts either. ;) I guess their all crooked too.

Today.....

Has meucci quality dropped way off since 'back in the day ' ? Absolutely. Do I give Bob a pass for that? Absolutely not. I'd actually like to kick him in the nuts for letting his name be dragged thru the mud for the last 20 years. But do I think the guy understands the concepts and intends to offer products that perform ? With out a doubt. He also obviously needs some marketing help but I don't know to many cue biulders who do very well at marketing either. Seems like the nature of the beast for some reason.

I do understand the forum is full of Meucci haters, to each their own. I wouldn't buy a meucci today either but I appreciate the history and service Bob has done for the industry and I respect him for that. I understand he's trying to make an honest effort to correct the mistakes he's made in his business in the past and I applaud him for that. Most companies today act like they've never done wrong and your crazy for thinking so. I'm not going to hate till I have a reason too and I'm not going to kick someone when their down and trying to get up. But feel free to do so if it makes you feel like a better person.

Sorry for the rant. Carry on. ;)
 
RRfireblade said:
I guess it wouldnt be AZ if certain people didn't talk out of their a$$ only to say nothing.

Lets see..

At one time the many of the worlds best players played meucci cues, many of them. Wonder how many world champions are here in this thread?

The red dots were solid wood shafts and not "designed" purposely for LD. At that point in technology Bob address deflection with shaft diameter and taper, which by the way both have generally become the standard in use today. Were they wippy? Yea, little bit. The idea was that the shaft would deflect off the cue ball rather than deflect the cue ball off line. (Or obviously to a lesser degree) Guess what? Same generally theory in play today. However, the dot was simply an alignment aid to help locate the shaft spine for consistancy. Guess what? Many champion pool players used to mark thier shafts exactly the same way. Wonder how many champion players we have here in this thread.

The black dots were in fact considerably less deflection than thier stock wood shafts as tested and proven by impartial sources. Bob Meucci was 'one' of the first manufacturers to ever address the issue of deflection. Its debatable who was actually thee first but thats not the point. And probably going back 15+ years ago , even designing and building his own testing 'robot' which is almost common place today. He did not do any of it to mearly make a buck or as a gimmick. He generally cared about trying to build a better performing stick and at that time, he did. Was he the best? Probably not but he was better than many, maybe better than most.

What else....

Oh yeah, predator has been making a 11mm shaft since its earliest days (z shaft) and its been quite popular ever since. Lets not mention snookers cues typically in the size range as well, but I guess those guys can't play with small shafts either. ;) I guess their all crooked too.

Today.....

Has meucci quality dropped way off since 'back in the day ' ? Absolutely. Do I give Bob a pass for that? Absolutely not. I'd actually like to kick him in the nuts for letting his name be dragged thru the mud for the last 20 years. But do I think the guy understands the concepts and intends to offer products that perform ? With out a doubt. He also obviously needs some marketing help but I don't know to many cue biulders who do very well at marketing either. Seems like the nature of the beast for some reason.

I do understand the forum is full of Meucci haters, to each their own. I wouldn't buy a meucci today either but I appreciate the history and service Bob has done for the industry and I respect him for that. I understand he's trying to make an honest effort to correct the mistakes he's made in his business in the past and I applaud him for that. Most companies today act like they've never done wrong and your crazy for thinking so. I'm not going to hate till I have a reason too and I'm not going to kick someone when their down and trying to get up. But feel free to do so if it makes you feel like a better person.

Sorry for the rant. Carry on. ;)
Click to expand...
Very well said
 
4 pages deep and I know nothing of the shaft other than their marketing is questionable.

Has ANYONE played with one and if so, what are YOUR thoughts?
 
Koop said:
4 pages deep and I know nothing of the shaft other than their marketing is questionable.

Has ANYONE played with one and if so, what are YOUR thoughts?
Click to expand...
I have played with the very first one when I was back home for a visit, thought it was great myself but look at my screen name! lol
 
Koop said:
You ever tried a Universal Shaft? If so, how do they compare?
Click to expand...

I have tries other shafts, I just can't justify putting others on a a Meucci butt when the black dot has done well for "ME" and the ultimate weapon felt really nice as well! Just my thoughts
 
pwd72s said:
I hope it's okay if I keep playing with the shafts that came with my Josey. :confused:
Click to expand...

No.
Send it back to Josey.
Have a 5" deep hole drilled in there and have the ferrule replaced with Isoplast.
Change the taper to 17" straight too.
Then you will have to adjust to a ton of throws with inside english.
 
I've seen a brand new one that was horrible and had to be sent back.It looked like a bad snooker shaft.The taper was so bad and actually looked like it had a wave in the taper if you held it up to the light and scoped it.I don't mind Meucci's but this shaft was the biggest pile of poop I seen yet.Any shaft will deflect less if you taper it like a snooker shaft and make the front end 10.5mm.I was dissappointed in the shaft but not half as disappointed as the guy who bought it.His look was priceless:eek::eek:
 
iusedtoberich said:
I guess I should have expected the outcome of: 1. Meucci sucks 2. low squirt is a scam, and 3. marketing bs...

With all that said, for those of us who use low deflection/squirt shafts, its always interesting to hear when a new shaft shaft comes on the market. I'm sure one of us will end up trying this shaft.

I checked Meucci's site, and the description of this Ultimate Weapon shaft is very poorly written. It looks like they stuck a small paragraph about the new shaft on the existing black dot shaft page.
Click to expand...
As far as low squirt being a scam,I don't think so.It would only be a scam if there claims were false.
Independent tests have been done enough times about this and has been proven that Predator shafts do deflect less and the Z-2 deflects the least of all of them.Most LD shaft are not a scam but if someone doesn't like the shaft for whatever other reason, is a totally different story.
 
MeucciMan79 said:
For those who didn't watch the video I am posting the black dot chart. Please enjoy!
ztfz28.jpg


I hope this helps some to understand a percentage rating
Click to expand...


I watched your video. I know almost nothing about pool. But I do understand a little about marketing.

The claim about the Meucci cue deflecting the least and always in the range of the pocket is powerful. But I think that this chart is misleading when compared to the video.

In the video the laser line is pointing at the center of the cue ball or near the center. One would assume in light of your marketing statement that this represents the center of the pocket. A 4.5 inch pocket would then have 2.25 inches to either side of center. With the ball being 2.25 inches in diameter that would mean that it has only 1.125 inches of clearance before it hits the rail. Thus using your test anything beyond 1.125 inches of object ball variance from center would be a miss.

The infograpghic is misleading because you have the laser line starting at the far left of the pocket. So yes, if you were aiming to hit the far left of the pocket the object ball path using the Meucci shaft would be in the pocket but aiming for the center of the pocket would result in a miss more than half the time based on the graphic.

I think that you need to rethink this particular tack and perhaps rewrite it. Also you cannot have 150% less of anything. Because saying that one quantity is 150% less means concretely that there is a negative balance. In terms of performance it is impossible to have a negative balance. In other words you cannot say that Carl Lewis ran 150% slower than Usain Bolt unless Carl Lewis started running backwards from the finish line.

Starting with a known quantity, say 100, you can only reduce it by up to 100% to get to zero. You can add more than 100% though and for example add 150 units to end up with 250 or 150% more than the initial quantity.

If Shaft A causes deflection of 8" and shaft B causes 4" then shaft B casues 50% less than shaft A not 100% less. The only two correct ways to describe the effect are Shaft A causes 100% MORE deflection than B or shaft B causes 50% less.

The videos seem to be fairly well done but not entirely conclusive. Were I a potential customer I would like to see such a test done with an actual pocket and with the laser pointed at the center of the pocket. Then I could see a much better representation of the real world performance of the shafts compared.

Also, Mr. Johnson is correct. The amount of cue ball deflection should not be measured in terms of where the object ball goes. Obviously the cueball deflection is less than 1.25" for every shaft tested because the object ball is struck every time. Unless we know that the exact contact point distance from zero on the object ball we can't know if the numbers presented correlate accurately to the results for the object ball path. Using the object ball as in this video certain results in bigger numbers which look more impressive but how accurate are they really? Assuming little to no friction between the balls there is little to no object ball deflection on an off center hit. The object ball is a stationary target. Thus the only think that is of importance is where the cue ball is going and how far off a dead center ball hit the cue produces.

It seems like there is a lot of potential to use Meucci's device to collect a lot of data. In the hands of a non-commercial entity I think that there is a lot that can be learned from such a set up.

(disclaimer I am not a pool player and have no idea about the actual performance of cues. I have a McDermott cue given to me years ago and it has not been in my hands for ten years)
 
Last edited:
pwd72s said:
I hope it's okay if I keep playing with the shafts that came with my Josey. :confused:
Click to expand...

I love my josey shafts and I have hit ob, predator, and josey timeless timber. Did play with an older Meucci with a black dot shaft for years. Liked all my meuccis. Love my Josey

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
 
scsuxci said:
As far as low squirt being a scam,I don't think so.It would only be a scam if there claims were false.
Independent tests have been done enough times about this and has been proven that Predator shafts do deflect less and the Z-2 deflects the least of all of them.Most LD shaft are not a scam but if someone doesn't like the shaft for whatever other reason, is a totally different story.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree completely. My post was sarcastic, in that usually when asking about a LD shaft, the threads will often turn into a discussion on if they are the real deal, and if Mosconi used them, etc., as opposed to actual feedback on the shaft in question. Add the Meucci brand name to the mix, and you have the ingredients for my post.
 
scsuxci said:
I've seen a brand new one that was horrible and had to be sent back.It looked like a bad snooker shaft.The taper was so bad and actually looked like it had a wave in the taper if you held it up to the light and scoped it.I don't mind Meucci's but this shaft was the biggest pile of poop I seen yet.Any shaft will deflect less if you taper it like a snooker shaft and make the front end 10.5mm.I was dissappointed in the shaft but not half as disappointed as the guy who bought it.His look was priceless:eek::eek:
Click to expand...

Thank you for the feedback.
 
JoeyInCali said:
No.
Send it back to Josey.
Have a 5" deep hole drilled in there and have the ferrule replaced with Isoplast.
Change the taper to 17" straight too.
Then you will have to adjust to a ton of throws with inside english.
Click to expand...

Lmao :-)

I would like to see Keith s face about this! lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top