Shaft matching

Canadian cue

Canadian cue

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Was curious as to how other makers match shafts to price of cue. Every one wants your very best shaft stock but if you are building a breaker or a replacement shaft are you going to use your best stock?
I probably yield about 10% perfect shaft stock as in 20+ growth rings perfectly straight even grain, no sugar. I have seen people post high end cues and the shafts don't look very high end. So how do other makers tackle this problem? I always use decent shaft stock on my cues but how do you decide who gets the superb stuff? Is it fair to charge a premium for the really good stuff?
Any info is appreciated thanks.
 
Canadian cue said:
Was curious as to how other makers match shafts to price of cue. Every one wants your very best shaft stock but if you are building a breaker or a replacement shaft are you going to use your best stock?
I probably yield about 10% perfect shaft stock as in 20+ growth rings perfectly straight even grain, no sugar. I have seen people post high end cues and the shafts don't look very high end. So how do other makers tackle this problem? I always use decent shaft stock on my cues but how do you decide who gets the superb stuff? Is it fair to charge a premium for the really good stuff?
Any info is appreciated thanks.
Click to expand...

That's been happening more often now I think.
6-8 rings per inch on a thousand dollar plus cues ? Looks like people don't look at the shafts anyway. Maybe they are still good hitting shafts but they just don't look like it.
Charge $200 plus for your premium. If people pay $200 for an import shaft b/c it has a hole from the tip down ( notorious for warping too ), AAA grade shafts you seasoned for years and are guaranteed to play great, deserve $200+ imo.
Breakers don't get premium shaft. They get straight and stable shafts. They get hard ferrules and tips.
Matching two shafts for weight is a common practice. Tone and stiffness are a great source of argument so I won't touch it.
 
As a point of comparison on price. I think people don't seem to understand that the manufacturers of laminated shafts use almost all the wood they buy because they cut it into pieces and after being laminated you have no clue what grade of maple it was. When building solid shafts you have allot of waste. Yet the laminated shafts command a higher price. But if you think about it as far as supply and demand the perfect shaft is quite rare in comparison. I am not knocking the makers of laminated shafts I do realize there is a great deal of labour involved and if that is your thing then great. Thanks Joey for your input.
 
Some makers do not even offer the option of a shaft from their 'private reserve' to anyone but repeat customers. It's called 'customer appreciation' for the return business/loyalty. It happens in all kinds of businesses...it's called 'perks'.

Too often, commissioned cues become available for sale...sometimes within days of receiving them. Why anyone would want to waste their reserve stock in this manner, when a loyal customer would likely appreciate it more, beats me. Just my $0.02 worth.
 
Last edited:
JoeyInCali said:
That's been happening more often now I think.
6-8 rings per inch on a thousand dollar plus cues ? Looks like people don't look at the shafts anyway. Maybe they are still good hitting shafts but they just don't look like it.
Charge $200 plus for your premium. If people pay $200 for an import shaft b/c it has a hole from the tip down ( notorious for warping too ), AAA grade shafts you seasoned for years and are guaranteed to play great, deserve $200+ imo.
Breakers don't get premium shaft. They get straight and stable shafts. They get hard ferrules and tips.
Matching two shafts for weight is a common practice. Tone and stiffness are a great source of argument so I won't touch it.
Click to expand...



I completely agree with your comments.
 
My only question would be, who better than the builder to determine the best shafts for the cue?

Case in point, I build a very nice cue that's going to sell for $2G's. I need a set of shafts that will have a particular weight & tonal characteristic to achieve what I feel will be the best performance. I have a set of very pretty 20gpi straight grain shafts that are the wrong weight & wrong tone, and I have a set that matches perfectly but are only 8-10gpi & grain maybe a little wavy. I know the cue will perform the best & balance correctly with the ugly shafts, but will look better with pretty shafts. Which should I choose? And who has the authority to say i'm putting crap shafts on an expensive cue if I opt for the best shafts over the pretty shafts?

Seriously, cue makers do not make nearly enough money to warrant such aggravations. Why should a builder be looked down on because the best shafts aren't the prettiest? It's simply the cards he was dealt with, and he's playing his hand the best he can. Why is it so hard for customers & people totally unaffiliated with the buy, to simply trust that the builder is doing what he feels is best? It is, after all, his name going on the cue. Wouldn't it make sense that he's going to do the best he can, if he wants to continue selling cues? But too often others are so quick to judge & point fingers as if they have a clue in the first place, or that they are somehow superior. The cue world is ridiculously petty & dramatic.
 
Canadian cue said:
Was curious as to how other makers match shafts to price of cue. Every one wants your very best shaft stock but if you are building a breaker or a replacement shaft are you going to use your best stock?
I probably yield about 10% perfect shaft stock as in 20+ growth rings perfectly straight even grain, no sugar. I have seen people post high end cues and the shafts don't look very high end. So how do other makers tackle this problem? I always use decent shaft stock on my cues but how do you decide who gets the superb stuff? Is it fair to charge a premium for the really good stuff?
Any info is appreciated thanks.
Click to expand...

I say, charge for it. As a player, I don't see why the finest grade shaft wood should be reserved for cues in a price range that don't get played, and vice versa. If someone pays e.g. five digits for a cue, I'd still give the buyer the choice of the shaft wood they want (= to pay for). Just as I wouldn't (I'm not a cue maker, though) blink and charge top dollar for an exceptional quality shaft to go with a Plain Jane if that is what the buyer wants. And as a buyer, I'd be happy to pay twice as much for one shaft than have to buy e.g. four until I finally get one I'm happy with - and believe me, I've had to do this many times, and I'm referring exclusively to so-called high-end cue makers. IMHO, a cue is meant to be played with - it's disillusioning to feel as if, as a buyer, one were alone in this opinion.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 
qbilder said:
My only question would be, who better than the builder to determine the best shafts for the cue?

Case in point, I build a very nice cue that's going to sell for $2G's. I need a set of shafts that will have a particular weight & tonal characteristic to achieve what I feel will be the best performance. I have a set of very pretty 20gpi straight grain shafts that are the wrong weight & wrong tone, and I have a set that matches perfectly but are only 8-10gpi & grain maybe a little wavy. I know the cue will perform the best & balance correctly with the ugly shafts, but will look better with pretty shafts. Which should I choose? And who has the authority to say i'm putting crap shafts on an expensive cue if I opt for the best shafts over the pretty shafts?

Seriously, cue makers do not make nearly enough money to warrant such aggravations. Why should a builder be looked down on because the best shafts aren't the prettiest? It's simply the cards he was dealt with, and he's playing his hand the best he can. Why is it so hard for customers & people totally unaffiliated with the buy, to simply trust that the builder is doing what he feels is best? It is, after all, his name going on the cue. Wouldn't it make sense that he's going to do the best he can, if he wants to continue selling cues? But too often others are so quick to judge & point fingers as if they have a clue in the first place, or that they are somehow superior. The cue world is ridiculously petty & dramatic.
Click to expand...

Needless to say, this I agree with wholeheartedly. I wasn't even thinking about "looks" in my reply above. Like I said, a cue is meant to be played with. If you, the maker, know it'll perform better with "ugly" (by the way, I've played for over two decades with a dark curly maple shaft and love it, is that what you you mean when you say "wavy" - who cares?!) shafts, then all you need is a customer with the ability and good judgement to tell you're right. Makes me wonder, do cue makers who concentrate on playability have other customers?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
 
Last edited:
ridewiththewind said:
Some makers do not even offer the option of a shaft from their 'private reserve' to anyone but repeat customers. It's called 'customer appreciation' for the return business/loyalty. It happens in all kinds of businesses...it's called 'perks'.Too often, commissioned cues become available for sale...sometimes within days of receiving them. Why anyone would want to waste their reserve stock in this manner, when a loyal customer would likely appreciate it more, beats me. Just my $0.02 worth.
Click to expand...

Great idea.
I'll start setting them aside.
Thanks Liz.

p.s.
I hope CC doesn't regret asking the question.
No drama please.

Thanks Craig. Jeesh, Kodak moment.
 
Last edited:
qbilder said:
My only question would be, who better than the builder to determine the best shafts for the cue?

Case in point, I build a very nice cue that's going to sell for $2G's. I need a set of shafts that will have a particular weight & tonal characteristic to achieve what I feel will be the best performance. I have a set of very pretty 20gpi straight grain shafts that are the wrong weight & wrong tone, and I have a set that matches perfectly but are only 8-10gpi & grain maybe a little wavy. I know the cue will perform the best & balance correctly with the ugly shafts, but will look better with pretty shafts. Which should I choose? And who has the authority to say i'm putting crap shafts on an expensive cue if I opt for the best shafts over the pretty shafts?

Seriously, cue makers do not make nearly enough money to warrant such aggravations. Why should a builder be looked down on because the best shafts aren't the prettiest? It's simply the cards he was dealt with, and he's playing his hand the best he can. Why is it so hard for customers & people totally unaffiliated with the buy, to simply trust that the builder is doing what he feels is best? It is, after all, his name going on the cue. Wouldn't it make sense that he's going to do the best he can, if he wants to continue selling cues? But too often others are so quick to judge & point fingers as if they have a clue in the first place, or that they are somehow superior. The cue world is ridiculously petty & dramatic.
Click to expand...

I agree with you to a point... I do realize that the tone of a shaft and weight are a consideration but to dismiss aesthetics completely would be foolish. To pick a nice shaft it is a combination of all the criteria. I have found while turning shafts that a majority of the time if it starts to wobble between turns, it quite often follows the grain. So for me personally I gamble on the straight grained ones. Number of growth rings is debatable but the theory that more equates to denser wood does have merit. Now what plays the best? That is totally personal preference.
 
acousticsguru said:
Needless to say, this I agree with wholeheartedly. I wasn't even thinking about "looks" in my reply above. Like I said, a cue is meant to be played with. If you, the maker, know it'll perform better with "ugly" (by the way, I've played for over two decades with a dark curly maple shaft and love it, is that what you you mean when you say "wavy" - who cares?!) shafts, then all you need is a customer with the ability and good judgement to tell you're right. Makes me wonder, do cue makers who concentrate on playability have other customers?

Greetings from Switzerland, David.
_________________

„J'ai gâché vingt ans de mes plus belles années au billard. Si c'était à refaire, je recommencerais.“ – Roger Conti
Click to expand...


Yeah, in a perfect world, shafts would be chosen for quality instead appearance. Unfortunately, we are building cues in a time where quality is judged by appearance & I fear many builders do not know the difference. Then again, many do.
 
Well, I think there are lots of example of builder that got it right when it comes to shafts. These guys seem to always have the best shafts for their cues whether high or low end. 95% of shafts from SW are monster players hence they are known for their playability. Schon, Mcworter, Jerry Olivier cues are others that always seem to have good shafts on all of their cues and they are some of the most consistent playing cues on the market IMHO.

Anyway, when it comes to buying cues...the first thing I look at first are the quality of the shafts. Most of the time, just looking at the shafts will tell you if the cue will play good or not. My pet pee with shafts are that you get a 2k cues and the shaft has a cheap tip on it. I would think, putting on a good layered tip like Moori/Kamui/Molavia etc will help better demonstrate the playability of the cue. I understand that tips are meant to be changed but it would be nice to have the builder mount on a tip they believe will give their cues the best performance. If I hit with it and I don't agree...then I'll change it but at least put on something that say hey...this tip with my cue plays the best.

I wonder how many cue builders even test their cues with all the different tips on the market?

Anyway, I think a good builder generally has a good range of shafts quality that meets their requirements that they put on any of their cues. I would think that the shafts wood quality the builders choose on their cues define them as a builder. Good builders always have good shafts on their cues and it's basically their lifeline. Look at any high end custom cues and you'll see that's the common theme. I guess, builders that command 2K plus for their cues can probably afford higher grade shafts and use only high grade shafts. Of course, they'll charge a lot for them as well and rightly so...check out the shafts quality of Gina and SW cues and you'll know why they are the top 2 cues in the market today.

Duc.
 
Last edited:
Canadian cue said:
...Number of growth rings is debatable but the theory that more equates to denser wood does have merit...
Click to expand...

I have seen this often. It isn't true. Winter growth is less dense than summer growth, ie, there is actually a negative correlation between growth rings and density, at least in sugar maple. The correlation is weak, because water and nutrient availability while the tree is growing is the most critical factor determining the physical properties of the lumber, but the correlation runs in the opposite direction than many think.

Kelly
 
Canadian cue said:
I agree with you to a point... I do realize that the tone of a shaft and weight are a consideration but to dismiss aesthetics completely would be foolish. To pick a nice shaft it is a combination of all the criteria. I have found while turning shafts that a majority of the time if it starts to wobble between turns, it quite often follows the grain. So for me personally I gamble on the straight grained ones. Number of growth rings is debatable but the theory that more equates to denser wood does have merit. Now what plays the best? That is totally personal preference.
Click to expand...

Same findings here. There are exceptions of course. I've come accross a few twisters and banana grained that will not warp even during very hot and dry days here.
And then there are straight grains that twist and turn but those are very rare in my findings. I've had some wobble then come back dead nuts straight after sitting for months or years.
I will gladly trade straight shafts I have now that have less than 8 rings per inch for tight grain dowels with up to 3/16 run-off on one end.
Not all shafts are equal of course but these come from a Michigan source popularly used by several makers.
These would play fine with heavy forearmed cues imo.
Hell, they might even be low deflection b/c they are light.
 
I don't care how pretty a shaft is....actually not a fan of bleached shafts. I just want a shaft that plays great with the cue it's on. I have had cues with 'ugly' shafts...played crazy good. Had a curly shaft, that felt light as air...but it played incredibly well on the butt it was built for...go figure.

Then again....I do convey this to the maker when ordering.....pretty shafts are not necessary...just a great playing shaft for the butt.
 
I have ordered a new cue with lots of ivory and one of the first questions the maker asked was if the cue was going to be a show piece or a playing cue. I told him in no uncertain terms the cue would be my new playing cue. He said I better pick out some special shaft wood to go with it. Don't know if it was because I am a repeat customer or if it is the value of the cue but I was sure happy to hear that!!
 
Wavy grain & grain run-off are two completely different things. Grain can be wavy & still run the length of the shaft. As for density having anything to do with grain count, not so. Often times a very tight grain shaft indicates an unhealthy tree, starved of either sun, water, or nutrition. In the end, there's really no rule that visually indicates a good shaft. It simply doesn't exist. I have cut thousands of shafts. I scout, log, mill, & dry maple for shafts & still have not been able to find a good visual indication of good wood. Fact is, there's pretty wood, and there's ugly wood. Regardless of how good or bad it is, builders focus on attaining & utilizing the pretty stuff and very often disregard the ugly. All things considered, one visual indication that I do consider and depend on, is whether or not the grain stays on the shaft. Aside from that, I have come to the conclusion that the shaft's quality must be determined by other than appearance.

I really do wish it were easier than that, and that all I had to do was have tight, straight grain, clean shafts. I guess in a sense, it is all I really need to do. It has become the status quo. But if you are going to honestly build cues for playability first, then there's a lot more to choosing shafts than how they look.
 
When I choose shafts for a cue. It is because they are going to be good playing shafts! NOT because of how they look!!!

Let me ask everyone here 1 question????
When you are bending over the table shooting a shot, can you really see what the shafts looks like???? NO!!! If you are looking are the grain in the shaft when you are shooting a shot, then you are going to miss the ball!!!!

So for me its all about how there going to play! NOT WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE!!!!
 
qbilder said:
Wavy grain & grain run-off are two completely different things. Grain can be wavy & still run the length of the shaft. As for density having anything to do with grain count, not so. Often times a very tight grain shaft indicates an unhealthy tree, starved of either sun, water, or nutrition. In the end, there's really no rule that visually indicates a good shaft. It simply doesn't exist. I have cut thousands of shafts. I scout, log, mill, & dry maple for shafts & still have not been able to find a good visual indication of good wood. Fact is, there's pretty wood, and there's ugly wood. Regardless of how good or bad it is, builders focus on attaining & utilizing the pretty stuff and very often disregard the ugly. All things considered, one visual indication that I do consider and depend on, is whether or not the grain stays on the shaft. Aside from that, I have come to the conclusion that the shaft's quality must be determined by other than appearance.

I really do wish it were easier than that, and that all I had to do was have tight, straight grain, clean shafts. I guess in a sense, it is all I really need to do. It has become the status quo. But if you are going to honestly build cues for playability first, then there's a lot more to choosing shafts than how they look.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to disagree with this statement. If a tree grows in a colder climate with longer winters it's going to have tighter grain than the same species grown in a warmer one. Consequently the wood will be denser.
 
Canadian cue said:
I am going to have to disagree with this statement. If a tree grows in a colder climate with longer winters it's going to have tighter grain than the same species grown in a warmer one. Consequently the wood will be denser.
Click to expand...
I've never come across a tight straight grain dark maple I didn't like.
I do think somehow they need longer time to season than wide grain low count ones. It might be mental, but I let it be. I'm in no hurry. I have enough to get going for a while. More are coming I hope. Most of the ones I'm using now I've had for 5 years or more.
Wide low ring count ones do have one advantage, easy to align grains end to end. Ones they are lined up, they are pretty stable. Not too many guys fighting for room or pushing the other guys.
Call me crazy but that's what I've been seeing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top