Question for PJ

Saturated Fats

Saturated Fats

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This is a quote from one of PJ's posts on squirt:

"The amount of squirt a shaft will produce depends on the amount of 'end
mass' it has (the amount of weight contained in the first foot or so of
the shaft from the tip end). Less end mass (for instance, because of a
thin tip, a hollowed out shaft or a smaller ferrule) produces less squirt."

My question is why does a thin tip equate to less end mass? Are tips heavier than maple?
 
I think PJ is currently "on leave." I'm guessing what he meant by "thin tip" is a shaft with a thin diameter at the tip end. I.e., other things equal (if they ever could be), a shaft that is 12mm at the ferrule/tip would produce less squirt than a shaft that is 13mm at the ferrule/tip.
 
Saturated Fats said:
This is a quote from one of PJ's posts on squirt:

"The amount of squirt a shaft will produce depends on the amount of 'end
mass' it has (the amount of weight contained in the first foot or so of
the shaft from the tip end). Less end mass (for instance, because of a
thin tip, a hollowed out shaft or a smaller ferrule) produces less squirt."

My question is why does a thin tip equate to less end mass? Are tips heavier than maple?
Click to expand...
The thinness, weight, and hardness of the tip can have small effects on squirt, but PJ might have been referring to tip "size" (shaft diameter) here. The diameter and weight of the end of the shaft has a big effect on squirt. For more info, see:

Regards,
Dave
 
Last edited:
Fats

Maybe I can help, since Patrick is "on vacation".

Dr. Dave is right that you're splitting hairs here, but it does make a small difference.

In your post, you asked "are tips heavier than maple?". It really doesn't matter. The length of the maple never changes whether you have a tall tip, or if you have a short one. As tip wears away, it just isn't there any longer. It doesn't get replaced by maple as it wears down.

Way back when we sent our cue shafts to Platinum Billiards to have the squirt tested, we had full thick tips. When we had them tested again, we cut the tips down, and our numbers were lower. Not by much, but the machine could see the difference.

I hope that helps!

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
Saturated Fats said:
This is a quote from one of PJ's posts on squirt:

"The amount of squirt a shaft will produce depends on the amount of 'end
mass' it has (the amount of weight contained in the first foot or so of
the shaft from the tip end). Less end mass (for instance, because of a
thin tip, a hollowed out shaft or a smaller ferrule) produces less squirt."

My question is why does a thin tip equate to less end mass? Are tips heavier than maple?
Click to expand...

The weight of a tip in the new uncompressed size and the thinner compressed size should not make much of a difference.

What I am interested in knowing is just what effects tips and chalk have on deflection and squirt. That seems to be the two variables that are never mentioned in Predator's claims, or Meucci's or anyone who sells LD shafts.

Specifically how do we know what tips and chalk were used in the testing and whether or not that variance made a difference. As Royce points out just changing the tip height made a small difference.

Kamui Chalk is now claiming that their chalk reduces deflection.

It seems reasonable to me that any change in tips would result in a change in deflection to some degree but how much is the question?

As long as we are going down this road then lets go all the way and get the data for all variables.
 
JB Cases said:
The weight of a tip in the new uncompressed size and the thinner compressed size should not make much of a difference.
Click to expand...
... however, tip weight can make a big difference. For example, if you were to replace a thin, low-density, light tip with a large, high-density, heavy tip, the squirt of the shaft would increase dramatically.

JB Cases said:
What I am interested in knowing is just what effects tips and chalk have on deflection and squirt.
Click to expand...
I have studied some tip effects. Explanations and resources can be found here:

JB Cases said:
Kamui Chalk is now claiming that their chalk reduces deflection.
Click to expand...
I haven't studied the effects of chalk, but I would be shocked if the type of chalk makes a big (or even any) difference. Such a claim would certainly need to be justified with convincing experiments. Now, if the tip is not grabbing the CB (e.g., if the tip has a hardened or polished surface or if it is not properly chalked), then miscues or partial miscues will result, possibly giving the appearance of increased squirt, but this shouldn't happen with a decent tip that is properly chalked, IMO.

Regards,
Dave
 
RBC said:
In your post, you asked "are tips heavier than maple?". It really doesn't matter. The length of the maple never changes whether you have a tall tip, or if you have a short one. As tip wears away, it just isn't there any longer. It doesn't get replaced by maple as it wears down.
Click to expand...

If you reread the original quote at the top of this thread, it mentions the "first foot" of the shaft. I take that to mean that it is measured from the top of the tip down. If that's the case, then as the tip gets shorter (thinner), the "first foot" includes less tip and more maple.
 
Saturated Fats said:
If you reread the original quote at the top of this thread, it mentions the "first foot" of the shaft. I take that to mean that it is measured from the top of the tip down. If that's the case, then as the tip gets shorter (thinner), the "first foot" includes less tip and more maple.
Click to expand...

12" is a generous estimate. Some who write on the subject are of the opinion that endmass effects are limited to the last 4" of the cue.
 
Not Dead Ted said:
12" is a generous estimate. Some who write on the subject are of the opinion that endmass effects are limited to the last 4" of the cue.
Click to expand...
My tests have shown the endmass length is typically closer to about 6".

However, squirt is more sensitive to mass closest to the tip.

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
My tests have shown the endmass length is typically closer to about 6".

However, squirt is more sensitive to mass closest to the tip.

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

What if you shoot with a 4" bridge?

RBC said:
In your post, you asked "are tips heavier than maple?". It really doesn't matter. The length of the maple never changes whether you have a tall tip, or if you have a short one. As tip wears away, it just isn't there any longer. It doesn't get replaced by maple as it wears down.
Click to expand...

I disagree. As the tip gets shorter--from wearing down and/or plastic compression--your bridge moves down the shaft, replacing the few millimeters of leather with a few millimeters of maple. I would think the difference in density between the leather and the maple would have some kind of effect...unless the density ratio of tip and maple is the same as tip diameter and extra shaft diameter.

There's another interesting question: What is the ideal shaft taper to maintain constant squirt/deflection as the tip gets shorter?
 
Drew said:
What if you shoot with a 4" bridge?
Click to expand...
If the bridge is beyond about 6", it can have no effect on squirt. The closer the bridge is to the tip, the more of an effect it could have, but I don't think the effect would be significant (although, I haven't tested this). Now, if you had a really heavy and stiff mechanical bridge at a bridge length of 1-2", then I would expect to see a noticeable effect (although, I haven't tested this either).

Regards,
Dave
 
dr_dave said:
If the bridge is beyond about 6", it can have no effect on squirt. The closer the bridge is to the tip, the more of an effect it could have, but I don't think the effect would be significant (although, I haven't tested this). Now, if you had a really heavy and stiff mechanical bridge at a bridge length of 1-2", then I would expect to see a noticeable effect (although, I haven't tested this either).

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

Suppose I use a tight closed bridge (with my hand, not mechanical) at 4", I imagine this would significantly increase squirt as the cue cannot pivot with such a stable support as a closed bridge.
 
Drew said:
Suppose I use a tight closed bridge (with my hand, not mechanical) at 4", I imagine this would significantly increase squirt as the cue cannot pivot with such a stable support as a closed bridge.
Click to expand...
... but a closed hand bridge typically has some soft flesh surrounding the shaft (e.g., on the index finger). And for the small amount of cue deflection involved at 4" during cue-tip-CB contact, I don't think this soft flesh can react with much force. Therefore, there should be no significant change in squirt. Most of the cue deflection and vibration (which is felt quite a bit in the bridge hand) occurs well after the CB is off the tip, at which point the bridge can no longer affect the shot.

Regardless, most people use bridges much longer than 4", so it probably isn't a very practical effect anyway, even if it is an effect.

Regards,
Dave
 
My tests have shown similar results...

dr_dave said:
My tests have shown the endmass length is typically closer to about 6".

However, squirt is more sensitive to mass closest to the tip.

Regards,
Dave
Click to expand...

The mass closest to the tip has the most significant effect. The predator Z shaft has pretty much the lowest deflection possible and they do it with a combination of cored shaft and reduced diameter shaft.

My LD shafts have significantly reduced deflection over standard shafts but have a tad bit more than the predators because of what I have to do to maintain the feel and feedback that predator and other LD shafts seem to lack.

Jaden
 
Jaden said:
The mass closest to the tip has the most significant effect. The predator Z shaft has pretty much the lowest deflection possible and they do it with a combination of cored shaft and reduced diameter shaft.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Predator uses a small tip/shaft diameter, drills out the end of the shaft, and uses a smaller and lighter ferrule. All three factors contribute to significant squirt reduction. A thinner and harder tip will also result is slightly less squirt, but this effect is small.

Regards,
Dave
 
Saturated Fats said:
If you reread the original quote at the top of this thread, it mentions the "first foot" of the shaft. I take that to mean that it is measured from the top of the tip down. If that's the case, then as the tip gets shorter (thinner), the "first foot" includes less tip and more maple.
Click to expand...

Fats,

As has been said in later posts, it's really more like 4 to 6 inches. However, the closer to the tip, the more the difference the mass makes. Basically, the same length of the cue shaft is in play both ways. At least for all practical purposes. I can say that tip thickness does make a difference, but it's very small. I don't think it would be noticeable at all to the individual.

Once you get down to really low cue ball squirt, it's difficult to make any improvements. There just isn't as much mass there to work with.


Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
Jaden said:
The mass closest to the tip has the most significant effect. The predator Z shaft has pretty much the lowest deflection possible and they do it with a combination of cored shaft and reduced diameter shaft.

My LD shafts have significantly reduced deflection over standard shafts but have a tad bit more than the predators because of what I have to do to maintain the feel and feedback that predator and other LD shafts seem to lack.

Jaden
Click to expand...

Jaden,

Have you tried our OB-2, or Classic Pro? they're both the same tip size as the Z2, and our tip end mass reducing design.

Both are very low in tip end mass, and cue ball squirt.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top