Raschig new old stock review

iusedtoberich

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I bought this set of new old stock balls about 3-5 years ago. They have never hit a ball. Here are some specs. @Boxcar

Mass (6 ball): 161g
Diameter (6 ball): 2.2338"
Markings (all balls) the black numbers are all sunken in slightly. It can be felt with a fingernail. I'd estimate sunken in about .002" by eye. My theory is the filling material shrunk over the years that these were in the box. I think they were flush when new. I don't think the filling material is phenolic like the rest of the ball.

IMG_7003.jpeg


IMG_7004.jpeg


IMG_7005.jpeg


IMG_7006.jpeg
IMG_7008.jpeg


IMG_7009.jpeg
 
iusedtoberich said:
I bought this set of new old stock balls about 3-5 years ago. They have never hit a ball. Here are some specs. @Boxcar

Mass (6 ball): 161g
Diameter (6 ball): 2.2338"
Markings (all balls) the black numbers are all sunken in slightly. It can be felt with a fingernail. I'd estimate sunken in about .002" by eye. My theory is the filling material shrunk over the years that these were in the box. I think they were flush when new. I don't think the filling material is phenolic like the rest of the ball.

View attachment 679320

View attachment 679321

View attachment 679322

View attachment 679323View attachment 679324

View attachment 679325
Click to expand...
OUTSTANDING!!!!!! Thank you very much. OK, I need one more big favor. Please turn the balls so all the numbers are facing your camera and take the shot. Then, see if you can get another shot where the reflective light shows an indentation in the surface of the number. And last, please measure the exact diameter of the white circle on several of the balls to check for conformity.

I appreciate your help,

Boxcar
 
The 5/13 color looks right but the 2/10 looks darker than I remember.
Raschig stole the show in 1989 on the spherical micrometer.
Their technology was used in the old Vitelite balls which was by far the snooker choice in North and South America.
…they didn’t do wel in the UK because they were 1/2 ounce lighter.
 
Boxcar said:
OUTSTANDING!!!!!! Thank you very much. OK, I need one more big favor. Please turn the balls so all the numbers are facing your camera and take the shot. Then, see if you can get another shot where the reflective light shows an indentation in the surface of the number. And last, please measure the exact diameter of the white circle on several of the balls to check for conformity.

I appreciate your help,

Boxcar
Click to expand...
Are you looking for a roundness TIR measurement? I can measure that directly.
 
I have lots of sets of them. One set I bought new and they have 5-6 hours play on them.

The others I’m guessing are either new or hardly used. I’ll get them out and measure them. I traded a cue for thrm in Germany.

They are great balls.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Are you looking for a roundness TIR measurement? I can measure that directly.
Click to expand...
Thank you! I don't quite understand the question. I was referring to the diameter of the white phenolic circle which surrounds each number. I'm trying to establish the degree of uniformity in that circle across several decades of manufacturing. A tight measurement would be very helpful.
 
One thing I learnt from AZB during the years is that Raschig balls have been THE BEST ever. German quality and meticulous QC, most probably.

edit: that's not necessarily very true, so take that with a grain of salt ;)
 
Last edited:
These are the balls that used to be in play when the US One Pocket Open was held at the Billiard Playground in Kalamazoo.

The one thing I remember about them is that you could twist the bejeezus out of your banks with these balls.

Lou Figueroa
 
Does anyone know the years they were produced and/or sold in the US. I recall them being around for less than 10 years here.
 
The difference in height between the sunken in numbers and the adjacent area of the ball is .about .0013". The plunge style indicator has a bigger diameter stylus on it, so it does not get in the sunken number as deep as the test indicator does. The test indicator has a smaller diameter stylus. The actual depth is even deeper, but I don't have a way to measure it. I'd probably need a very sharp stylus.

IMG_7078.jpeg


IMG_7079.jpeg


IMG_7080.jpeg


IMG_7081.jpeg
 
BallMass (g)Dia at Number (or dot for CB)Dia 90 deg horiz from numberDia 90 deg vertical from numberDiameter AverageStd Deviation 3 diameters
Cue Ball
163​
2.2342​
2.2354​
2.2346​
2.2347​
0.0006​
Object Ball 1
161​
2.2364​
2.2366​
2.2367​
2.2366​
0.0002​
Object Ball 2
164​
2.2361​
2.2370​
2.2371​
2.2367​
0.0006​
Object Ball 3
163​
2.2339​
2.2353​
2.2355​
2.2349​
0.0009​
Object Ball 4
160​
2.2358​
2.2348​
2.2345​
2.2350​
0.0007​
Object Ball 5
160​
2.2338​
2.2324​
2.2332​
2.2331​
0.0007​
Object Ball 6
161​
2.2340​
2.2335​
2.2334​
2.2336​
0.0003​
Object Ball 7
162​
2.2370​
2.2397​
2.2395​
2.2387​
0.0015​
Object Ball 8
161​
2.2338​
2.2359​
2.2357​
2.2351​
0.0012​
Object Ball 9
162​
2.2341​
2.2354​
2.2333​
2.2343​
0.0011​
Object Ball 10
162​
2.2345​
2.2341​
2.2338​
2.2341​
0.0004​
Object Ball 11
162​
2.2344​
2.2351​
2.2330​
2.2342​
0.0011​
Object Ball 12
162​
2.2358​
2.2350​
2.2343​
2.2350​
0.0008​
Object Ball 13
163​
2.2342​
2.2356​
2.2334​
2.2344​
0.0011​
Object Ball 14
161​
2.2336​
2.2360​
2.2352​
2.2349​
0.0012​
Object Ball 15
161​
2.2381​
2.2395​
2.2361​
2.2379​
0.0017​
Average
161.750​
2.2350​
2.2357​
2.2350​
2.2352​
Standard Deviation
1.13​
0.0014​
0.0019​
0.0018​
0.0015​
Measured Date
1/7/2023​
ScaleEtekcity $20 scale, 1 gram resolution
MicrometerStarrett 2-3" #9097 in stand
CalibrationStarrett 2" mic standard, 2 clicks
Surface Temp of balls F
72​
 

Here is a 2min video showing the roundness of a Rashig #1 ball, a $100 2.250" ball bearing from McMaster-Carr I bought 15 years ago, and an Aramith ball with 15 years of play on it. If you look at the TIR measured on the roundness test stand of the #1 ball it's about .0012". But when you look at the 3 diameters of the 1 ball measured with the micrometer, it is a way tighter group than that. So the mic measurements, even though I took 3 at different parts of the ball, don't tell the whole story.
 
So after years in storage, those balls are small by about 0.015 inch on average. Manufacturing spec is +-0.005 but Raschig has been reported before to be within 0.001 when new.

I would like to see the throw characteristics compared to your Aramith set. Maybe with this setup:

1673120983584.png

The 2 is sent by the 3 about half-ball into the 1. The 1 is thrown and twists off the head rail and maybe goes in the pocket. Played at pocket speed.
 
Bob Jewett said:
So after years in storage, those balls are small by about 0.015 inch on average. Manufacturing spec is +-0.005 but Raschig has been reported before to be within 0.001 when new.

I would like to see the throw characteristics compared to your Aramith set. Maybe with this setup:

View attachment 679877
The 2 is sent by the 3 about half-ball into the 1. The 1 is thrown and twists off the head rail and maybe goes in the pocket. Played at pocket speed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I'm so surprised at. Did these balls shrink? Or were they .015" too small when new? If they shrunk, well then that throws the whole wear thing of pool balls out the window.

I'll get back to the throw test another time.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Yeah, that's what I'm so surprised at. Did these balls shrink? Or were they .015" too small when new? If they shrunk, well then that throws the whole wear thing of pool balls out the window.

I'll get back to the throw test another time.
Click to expand...
I've had a report of another brand shrinking in storage. However, cue balls definitely wear down. One room I played at had not a red circle but a pink circle cue ball because the red had nearly worn through.
 
Bob Jewett said:
I've had a report of another brand shrinking in storage. However, cue balls definitely wear down. One room I played at had not a red circle but a pink circle cue ball because the red had nearly worn through.
Click to expand...
I have another long term test going. I bought a new set of Dynasphere balls 2 years ago, measured each one. Then played 200 racks of 9 ball only. Then I was going to measure all 15 again. This would show wear. The funny thing is they got bigger! That's what led me down the path of seeing how much temperature has an effect on the measurements and I had made a post about that at that time. It's funny when trying for very precise measurements. I haven't touched that set since, they are still in the box half played half untouched.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top