Pool Balls for a snooker table

norrisk66

Registered
Hi, I have a 10X5 Snooker table.

I am trying to locate a set of 2-1/16 solids/stripes set of pool balls so we can play 8 and 9 ball on our snooker table.

I am able to find 2-1/8" balls at a few local shops.

I have also found some 2-1/16" "pool balls" for purchase from Europe and Austrailia.

I am hesitant to order anything from overseas, for fear that the balls might indeed show up as 2-1/8"

Does anyone know if there are actually 2-1/16 inch balls compared to 2-1/8"

Thanks in advance,
Keith
 
2 1/8 are the correct size for a 5 x 10.

Apparently OP has a proper snooker table on which he plays with proper snooker balls.
He wants a set of pool balls the same size.
Snooker tables come in all sizes.

Now, thanks to your intrusion, the OP has to decide if he has a real snooker table or an American bastard. :D
 
Apparently OP has a proper snooker table on which he plays with proper snooker balls.
He wants a set of pool balls the same size.
Snooker tables come in all sizes.

Now, thanks to your intrusion, the OP has to decide if he has a real snooker table or an American bastard. :D

Scaramouche, you do tend to be a little harsh on the Americans whether your intent is tongue-in-cheek or not. The OP has not indicated anything about his table other than the fact that its nominal dimensions are 5' x 10'.

In England, I always preferred a proper full sized table, but I certainly played on a few of the 5' x 10', inappropriately titled "three quarter sized", which (in England) used the same standard 2-1/16" balls as the full sized.

"American Snooker" tables do have a long tradition of 5' x 10' nominal dimensions using 2-1/8" diameter balls and that is most likely what the OP has simply as a matter of supply and demand. That fact has nothing to do with his decision to purchase 2-1/16" "solids and stripes".....I simply suspect that he is looking for a way to invite friends and acquaintances to a game that they will more easily understand albeit on rather strange equipment compared to usual.

My advice to the OP Keith is to go ahead and get the 2-1/16" set and enjoy. It will obviously make the table play a little easier than with 2-1/8" even if that is the originally intended dimension for your table. If you are just looking to knock the balls around with buddies, the 2-1/16" will save a little bit of frustration (the larger balls will have slightly more tendency to rattle the jaws rather than dropping in). Also, if you have a different source that claims 2-1/16", there is no reason not to believe it as it is a common industry size.

And lastly, for the curious......that actual difference in measurement between 2-1/16" and 2-1/8" is (as you would expect) 1/16". To put that in perspective, 1/16" is EXACTLY the thickness of an American quarter. If I sat one random ball down in front of you about three feet away from your eyes and asked you "Is it 2-1/16" or 2-1/8"?", chances are probably pretty close to fifty-fifty that you would answer correctly. If you don't believe that, look at it this way: if I sat a stack of quarters in front of you about three feet away from your eyes and asked you "Is there 33 quarters or 34 quarters?", chances are probably pretty close to fifty-fifty that you would answer correctly.
 
Last edited:
The difference isn't so much in the the dimensions, but in the weight.
Each additional 16th or an inch adds more weight than the previous 16th.
A standard pool ball, only 3/16th of an inch greater in diameter is significantly heavier than a snooker ball.

Snooker does not specify the weight of snooker balls, only that balls in a set vary by no more than 3 grams.

Aramith makes makes 1G sets - no more than 1 gram variation in the balls.
 
Along with my main concern of the overall size of the ball (as well as weight) is the height of where the ball meets the cushion.

We have played with a set of 2-1/4" balls, and you can definitely tell the difference in how the ball strikes the cushion.

This is a very old Brunswick Saratoga table, and I am wondering if the height of the cushions themselves were originally made for a 2-1/16" snooker ball.

Thanks for all your replies.

Keith
 
Along with my main concern of the overall size of the ball (as well as weight) is the height of where the ball meets the cushion.

We have played with a set of 2-1/4" balls, and you can definitely tell the difference in how the ball strikes the cushion.

This is a very old Brunswick Saratoga table, and I am wondering if the height of the cushions themselves were originally made for a 2-1/16" snooker ball.

Thanks for all your replies.

Keith

If the rubber is knife edge, like pool rubber, I suggest 2-1/8 balls.
If the rubber is flat edge, I suggest 2-1/16.
 
Good advice from pt about the rail height and from Scaramouche about the weight.

If you are good with math, there is a way to calculate the proper ratio of cushion height to ball diameter. Here is a link to it:

http://plus.maths.org/content/outer-space-cushioning-blow

What it boils down to is the ball-to-cushion contact point should be very near to .635 times the height (diameter) of the ball; a little above the equator. That is the reason the 2-1/4" balls were funny.....contact point was probably right around the equator (50 per cent of height) so the rebound would tend to jump up off the bed.

Chances are the table was originally designed for the 2-1/8" (American Snooker; as pt put it, "If the rubber is knife edge, like pool rubber, I suggest 2-1/8 balls"). You may not be aware, but there are different styles of cushion used when a table is an American style vs. a British style and pt's litmus test of point vs. flat answers that question perfectly.

Another part of your decision of 2-1/16" or 2-1/8" goes to Scaramouche's point about weight. If you have cues specific to snooker (tip diameter 9 mm to 11 mm), they are made for the 2-1/16" balls. If you have standard pool cues (tip 12 mm to 14 mm), you are probably better off with the 2-1/8".
 
Great info-the cushions are definitely flat-edged. Ill try to attach a pic.
 

Attachments

  • photo3.jpg
    photo3.jpg
    90.8 KB · Views: 264
Back
Top