Predator shaft question

[X Breaker]

Theoretically if you increase the end mass you increase the deflection. What if the weight increase is so small that you can't even measure the increase in deflection? Do you say that deflection has increased just because the theory says it should even though for all practical purposes it has the same amount of deflections as before? Sometimes I think people on this board just like to argue for the hell of it when it doesn't even matter. Both of you could technically be right and it doesn't make any difference.

I have not seen or tried this particular modified shaft in question, so I do not think it would be appropritate to comment on it until at least test data are presented.

Having said that, I would like to point out that many cue makers and repairmen have attempted to change the ferrule on a 314 with a tenon added, and most of the ferrules they use are the linen based ferrules, such as Aegis, LBM, and so on. I know of one who even uses Ivory. These ferrules are quite a lot heavier than the 314 ferrule. I do not believe that the weight increase is impossible to measure with these modified shafts.

When a tenon is added, it would do two things, one is that it would reduce the amount of "flex" in the front end, and secondly, it would increase the front end mass. When I read the post the first time, I was careless and I thought Mr. Varney said that a material was used which had no weight. When I read it again, it appeared he indeed uses a tenon which weights about 1 gram. I have no experience with the Tiger ferrule and I have no idea of the weight of this material, so I do not know the combined weight of the two as compared to the weight of the original 314.

But I do not think Roger was unreasonable in his post. I have tried these modified 314 shafts in the past, and they did, in my opinion, displayed more deflection. I am sure Roger had tried them too, and have the same conclusion in terms of "deflection."

I personally do not mind that. I actually like some of those shafts I have tried. But the point is that I have never tried one which displayed lesser or even equal amount of deflection to a 314. Because of my past experience, I can understand why Roger made his comment. If Mr. Varney have indeed tested his shaft before he claimed that his shaft had the same amount of "deflection" as a 314, I am sure he could present such data and lots of us would be very eager to read them. It would be a hugh break through in cue making if he actually manages to do something many big name cue makers have tried and failed.

I am not saying he has to, because it is his choice. I am just saying in the absence of such data, it is understandable why Roger made his comment because it is very difficult to comprehend how adding a tenon and a ferrule would have insignificant effect on the effective tip end mass of a shaft.

Just my opinion.

Richard

 

[JoeyInCali]

I have not seen or tried this particular modified shaft in question, so I do not think it would be appropritate to comment on it until at least test data are presented.

Having said that, I would like to point out that many cue makers and repairmen have attempted to change the ferrule on a 314 with a tenon added, and most of the ferrules they use are the linen based ferrules, such as Aegis, LBM, and so on. I know of one who even uses Ivory. These ferrules are quite a lot heavier than the 314 ferrule. I do not believe that the weight increase is impossible to measure with these modified shafts.

When a tenon is added, it would do two things, one is that it would reduce the amount of "flex" in the front end, and secondly, it would increase the front end mass. When I read the post the first time, I was careless and I thought Mr. Varney said that a material was used which had no weight. When I read it again, it appeared he indeed uses a tenon which weights about 1 gram. I have no experience with the Tiger ferrule and I have no idea of the weight of this material, so I do not know the combined weight of the two as compared to the weight of the original 314.

But I do not think Roger was unreasonable in his post. I have tried these modified 314 shafts in the past, and they did, in my opinion, displayed more deflection. I am sure Roger had tried them too, and have the same conclusion in terms of "deflection."

I personally do not mind that. I actually like some of those shafts I have tried. But the point is that I have never tried one which displayed lesser or even equal amount of deflection to a 314. Because of my past experience, I can understand why Roger made his comment. If Mr. Varney have indeed tested his shaft before he claimed that his shaft had the same amount of "deflection" as a 314, I am sure he could present such data and lots of us would be very eager to read them. It would be a hugh break through in cue making if he actually manages to do something many big name cue makers have tried and failed.

I am not saying he has to, because it is his choice. I am just saying in the absence of such data, it is understandable why Roger made his comment because it is very difficult to comprehend how adding a tenon and a ferrule would have insignificant effect on the effective tip end mass of a shaft.

Just my opinion.

Richard

I thought the front of 314's do not flex. They deflect AWAY from the cueball before the cueball squirts off it.

 

[ShaneT58]

...I do not believe that the weight increase is impossible to measure with these modified shafts...
Richard

Just wanted to clarify that I never said the weight increase was impossible to measure. Just that the increase might not be significant enought to measurably increase squirt. So far I haven't seen any discussion of error with any of the measurements for squirt.

The platinum website says they used tip offsets of 6 mm and 12 mm then averaged them together. That doesn't make much sense to me. Wouldn't that be two different measurements being averaged together? No discussion of error on this website.
http://www.platinumbilliards.com/rating_deflect.php

How accurate can you measure squirt? +/- ?.?? mm <---this is a serious question to anyone on the board.

 

[Varney Cues]

How accurate can you measure squirt?

Its more along the lines of this...
you've been playing with the same 314 & your are very familar with how it "hits" & plays. Then a trick ot two....and you hit a ball and think...."OH CRAP THAT HIT GOOD". You continue to hit balls while smiling to yourself...table length inside english shots just keep hitting the back of the pocket...you play a few hours. After that you realize that you can honestly say the shaft plays not a little...but a lot better.
Thats about the best test needed...

On a side note...Shane, the brown truck just dropped yours off this very moment. I'll get it shipped back first thing in the am.
KV

 

[Varney Cues]

It's true my Josey w/ a 314 shaft modified by you does play exceptionally better then when the 314 was stock. .

Did anyone read this? PM tjlmbklr if you want his opinion. He's been using his for months now.

 

[Cornerman]

Did anyone read this? PM tjlmbklr if you want his opinion. He's been using his for months now.

The problem Kevin is that you've been arguing a point that was never argued against. So, I have to question whether or not you read the posts yourself.

Nobody argued against the playability of your tricked up 314 shafts. I think your defensiveness is making you delusional or something.

Fred

 

[metallicarokerx]

hey kevin i dont mean to go off topic but realy quick do you have a website i can check out? im in the arket for a new cue and am searching around a little and i hear great things about you cues.. thanks and now back on topic.. sorry

 

[Varney Cues]

The problem Kevin is that you've been arguing a point that was never argued against. So, I have to question whether or not you read the posts yourself.

Nobody argued against the playability of your tricked up 314 shafts. I think your defensiveness is making you delusional or something.

Fred

Excuse me sir, but how have I been arguing by simply saying that one could ask tjlmbklr for an honest opinion? This thread was debating whether adding front end mass, also added squirt. Thats how I read the thread. But now the great author wants to call me "delusional"...are you kidding. I guess I should expect no less...its not the first time you've taken a jab at me here on the forum. Its easy too see why so many cuemakers choose not to spend any time on this forum.
Ah...and yes...please forgive my defensiveness.

 

[Varney Cues]

hey kevin i dont mean to go off topic but realy quick do you have a website i can check out? im in the arket for a new cue and am searching around a little and i hear great things about you cues.. thanks and now back on topic.. sorry

PM just sent sir. Thank you.
KV

 

[TATE]

I thought the front of 314's do not flex. They deflect AWAY from the cueball before the cueball squirts off it.

I may be wrong in describing it this way, but the anecdote I use is a billiard ball and a bullet. If you were to shoot a cue ball just to left side of center with a BB, the BB would ricochet (deflect) a lot and the cue ball would move to the right just a little bit. If you were to shoot it with a .45 bullet, same place, same speed, the cue ball would move to the right a lot more and the bullet would ricochet a lot less than the bb did. This is simply because the mass and therefore the momentum of the .45 is so much greater and an off center hit directs the vortex at an angle to the bullet's path.

I think the rebound of the ball off the tip happens so quickly that the stiffness of the shaft and any bending of the ferrule will happen after the ball has left the tip anyway.

Chris

Ps. I have also found that some players do not benefit from a low squirt shaft and in fact, may hurt their game with it, and some players (myself included) benefit a lot from it.

 

[Cornerman]

Excuse me sir, but how have I been arguing by simply saying that one could ask tjlmbklr for an honest opinion? This thread was debating whether adding front end mass, also added squirt. Thats how I read the thread. But now the great author wants to call me "delusional"...are you kidding. I guess I should expect no less...its not the first time you've taken a jab at me here on the forum. Its easy too see why so many cuemakers choose not to spend any time on this forum.
Ah...and yes...please forgive my defensiveness.

I point out things to you when you constantly bicker due to your defensive nature. I would hope that clarity from an observer might help. Apparently not. Carry on with your incessant phantoms.

And it has nothing to do with your cuemaking. Nor does it have to do with writing.

Fred

 

[Varney Cues]

The problem Kevin is that you've been arguing a point that was never argued against. So, I have to question whether or not you read the posts yourself.

Nobody argued against the playability of your tricked up 314 shafts. I think your defensiveness is making you delusional or something.

Fred

And maybe YOU didn't read this thread. Try reading post #78 in this thread...I believe I was called "pathetic". And you want to call me out for being defensive? Have a nice evening Fred. Woof at someone else.

 

[Cornerman]

And maybe YOU didn't read this thread. Try reading post #78 in this thread...I believe I was called "pathetic". And you want to call me out for being defensive? Have a nice evening Fred. Woof at someone else.

Post #78??? LOL!!! You already had your phantom debate long before that. And you were frustrating another poster because you kept debating something other than what he was discussing. Clearly it was your defensive nature that got you off-track. Do you disagree that your argument was irrelevant to his post?

As I said, I would have thought adding some clarity from an observers point of view might be welcomed.

Fred

 

[Fuji-whopper]

Better watch out, he has a GUN!!

 

[BrooklynJay]

how much additional squirt/deflection would have to be added to be noticable?

sounds like if you change the type of tip you use you might increase squirt/deflection.

is the increase in playability and the removal of that annoy noise pred shafts make worth an unnoticable increase in squirt/deflection?

i'm just not sure what the arguments really about here.

Hey Kevin can you send me your web address too? I might eventually want an upgrade/nicer cue from ya.

 

[JoeyInCali]

I think the rebound of the ball off the tip happens so quickly that the stiffness of the shaft and any bending of the ferrule will happen after the ball has left the tip anyway.



If that were true, then why even have a light front?
We can certainly make 3.4 OZ cues anytime.
But, Pred's .250 by inches of hole is pattented.
So, we can take it out from the joint end.

 

[Cornerman]

is the increase in playability and the removal of that annoy noise pred shafts make worth an unnoticable increase in squirt/deflection?

i'm just not sure what the arguments really about here..

There really wasn't one. That was my point.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

I think the rebound of the ball off the tip happens so quickly that the stiffness of the shaft and any bending of the ferrule will happen after the ball has left the tip anyway.



If that were true, then why even have a light front?
We can certainly make 3.4 OZ cues anytime.
But, Pred's .250 by inches of hole is pattented.
So, we can take it out from the joint end.

This is a question that can only be answered with a discussion of contact times and transverse waves down the shaft.

During the contact time with the cueball (.0010 - .0025 sec,) the transverse wave (sideways boinggggg) only goes down 6 or so inches down the shaft. That's all the cueball "sees" in the sideways direction. So, it's important to take that weight/mass off of there.

The cueball sees all of the sticks mass in the direct (axial) line of fire.

Fred

 

[JoeyInCali]

This is a question that can only be answered with a discussion of contact times and transverse waves down the shaft.

During the contact time with the cueball (.0010 - .0025 sec,) the transverse wave (sideways boinggggg) only goes down 6 or so inches down the shaft. That's all the cueball "sees" in the sideways direction. So, it's important to take that weight/mass off of there.

The cueball sees all of the sticks mass in the direct (axial) line of fire.

Fred

That makes more sense.
So taking some weight at the front has to be of siginificant amount/weight in that area. Not just some lighweight ferrule.

 

[Cornerman]

That makes more sense.
So taking some weight at the front has to be of siginificant amount/weight in that area. Not just some lighweight ferrule.

That would be my thinking. But any decrease in mass (from a normal shaft/tip/ferrule) at the end should decrease the squirt.

Fred