I had an original 314 for years. They're hollow.
pj
chgo
Stiffest Low Deflection Shafts
- Thread starter CueAndMe
- Start date
I had an original 314 for years. They're hollow.
pj
chgo
1. Stiffest low deflection shaft? MEZZ HYBRID PROII with 12.5mm tip
2. Advantage of stiff shafts? Better feel and feedback. More solid feel when pocketing balls. On hard shots cue ball goes where it is intended or aimed because the shaft does not whip too much and throws the cue ball everywhere. On softer shots its still more accurate.
3. Advantage of MEZZHPII over 314-2? Feels and hits like a solid shaft but plays like a predator shaft(in terms of deflection) and lastly its Japanese.:wink:
2. Advantage of stiff shafts? Better feel and feedback. More solid feel when pocketing balls. On hard shots cue ball goes where it is intended or aimed because the shaft does not whip too much and throws the cue ball everywhere. On softer shots its still more accurate.
3. Advantage of MEZZHPII over 314-2? Feels and hits like a solid shaft but plays like a predator shaft(in terms of deflection) and lastly its Japanese.:wink:
hard english said:
your assumption is wrong, the 314 and 314-2 are both hollow. my d2 and predators are nothing alike in terms of deflection. the construction is nothing alike. the predator uses a different ferrule material (isoplast or titan vs. d2's lbm) and a bored out shaft. for both the 314 and 314-2.
radial construction has nothing to do with deflection, only the end mass affects deflection. the only thing the d2 has done to reduce weight is a slightly shorter ferrule (sleeved 3/4") and a slightly larger tenon (5/16").
The lowest deflecting, non-hollow shaft I've tested is the USS LS. That has a 3/4" sleeved XTC ferrule and a larger tenon (3/8"). The maple tenon is only about 1/4" and it has an outer shell made of some kind of cork or balsa wood. The ferrule has very thin walls. It basically is about the same deflection if you had a shaft with no ferrule, that is as low as you can go with out boring out something.
That's not a problem with flexible shafts either.
pj
chgo
hard english
Registered
McChen said:
Can you explain how the OB-1 gets such low deflection from there shaft? According to the information from there site the first four inches is all wood. This is contrary to what everyone else is saying that the weight has to be reduced at the tip. Yes, the OB-1 ferrule is made of maple, but no hollow sections (in the first four inches) or high tech materials.
As you said "only the end mass affects deflection".
This is from there site:
"By far the most common comment we get when someone hits with the OB-1 is how good it feels. Good performance and good feel are no longer mutually exclusive. With the OB-1, you get the performance of low deflection combined with a shaft that feels like a real shaft should feel. Part of that comes from the fact that our shaft is not hollow on the end. The final 4 inches of our shaft is all wood, including the ferrule. The other part of it comes from the use of a high density, vibration dampening foam in the core of the shaft."
hard english said:
Apparently the "foam in the core of the shaft" (i.e., the hollow part) only goes up to about 4 inches from the tip and then the last 4 inches is solid wood - but the mass in the first 6-8 inches of the shaft is important to squirt, so the foam core plays a part.
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
if the shaft bends a different amount with every shot i'd say it's a problem
RBC
Deceased
Maybe I can shed some light on this.
The OB-1 is all wood for the last 4 inches or so of the tip end of the shaft. During construction, the shaft is bored through, from one end out the other. The tip end of the shaft is then filled with a balsa wood pin. We use balsa because it is extremely light, and it also adds to the stiffness of the tip end of the shaft. The foam core consists of a foam rubber that extends from just below the balsa to just above the joint.
Basically, the low cue ball deflection characteristics of the OB-1 come from the tip end construction. The Maple ferrule combined with the balsa core reduces the tip end mass, which reduces the cue ball deflection.
The unique construction of the OB-1 along with the vibration dampening core add to the playability, but do not reduce the squirt or deflection.
The foam core is designed to reduce noise. The high pitched "Ping" or noise is just that, it is noise, and you can't feel noise. The true feedback you get from hitting the cue ball comes from the harmonic vibrations, or physical vibrations, that occur when you hit the cue ball off center. The OB-1 dampens out the noise, but allows the harmonic vibrations, or feel to come though. Basically it is like hitting balls with ear plugs. (try this sometime!)
Well, I hope that answers some of the questions!
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
The OB-1 is all wood for the last 4 inches or so of the tip end of the shaft. During construction, the shaft is bored through, from one end out the other. The tip end of the shaft is then filled with a balsa wood pin. We use balsa because it is extremely light, and it also adds to the stiffness of the tip end of the shaft. The foam core consists of a foam rubber that extends from just below the balsa to just above the joint.
Basically, the low cue ball deflection characteristics of the OB-1 come from the tip end construction. The Maple ferrule combined with the balsa core reduces the tip end mass, which reduces the cue ball deflection.
The unique construction of the OB-1 along with the vibration dampening core add to the playability, but do not reduce the squirt or deflection.
The foam core is designed to reduce noise. The high pitched "Ping" or noise is just that, it is noise, and you can't feel noise. The true feedback you get from hitting the cue ball comes from the harmonic vibrations, or physical vibrations, that occur when you hit the cue ball off center. The OB-1 dampens out the noise, but allows the harmonic vibrations, or feel to come though. Basically it is like hitting balls with ear plugs. (try this sometime!)
Well, I hope that answers some of the questions!
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Royce, isn't the foam core lighter than the wood that was removed? If so, it should reduce squirt by helping to lighten the first 6-8 inches of the shaft (along with the balsa wood core in the first 4 inches).
Sounds like a nice design.
pj
chgo
it probably does a little, but the farther back you go, the less effect it has on deflection. so i'd guess between 4 and 6" the effect is fairly small.
royce, i was curious about something...have you tried making an ob-1 without the foam core? so if you bored out only the first 4 inches and put in the balsa wood pin, but left the rest solid? would that feel more like a standard maple shaft? i was thinking a shaft like that could appeal to some people
royce, i was curious about something...have you tried making an ob-1 without the foam core? so if you bored out only the first 4 inches and put in the balsa wood pin, but left the rest solid? would that feel more like a standard maple shaft? i was thinking a shaft like that could appeal to some people
hard english
Registered
RBC said:
In your opinion Royce, is low deflection purely a result of low mass at the tip end of the shaft? In other words the construction of a shaft (a radial laminated construction) has nothing to do with low deflection.
If you were to develop a solid maple shaft with hollow sections or other light materials would it produce the same low deflection results as the OB-1?
BTW, I own OB-1. It's an outstanding product.
RBC said:
Hay Royce. i had a chance to play with one of the cues you made(i guess before the ob1 took off for you) and the shafts on the cue seemed low deflection. why don't you offer that type of shaft.
i'd buy one
hard english
Registered
McChen said:
Wouldn't that just be another version of a 314-2? My guess is that section is removed all the way to the joint because the construction is so dense (six flat lam pieces assembled in a radial form). If you did not remove the center the shaft would be very heavy and make the cue very front heavy.
hard english said:
well the main difference is that the whole shaft would be solid, no hollow spaces or foam. many people complain about the hit of the LD shafts, this might be something more like what they seek. and the combo of the wood ferrule and balsa wood insert would keep deflection still low.
as for the weight, i don't know how it would come out, but I think it would be ok. some of the great standard shafts have incredibly dense growth rings and are very heavy. most people would consider that a good thing, I know I like heavy shafts and forward balanced cue.
hard english said:
All laminating does is rearrange the grain. How would that make the wood more heavy?
And I believe flat lamination and radial lamination are different arrangements of the grain.
pj
chgo
Patrick Johnson said:
I don't know the details of this cue shaft construction, but if there is adhesive used in creating the laminate, it may be a factor in the performance characteristics, particularly if there is deep penetration of the surfaces and if there is a lot of surface area being bonded.
Anyone who has tried to "undo" a glued joint or laminate, knows that the underlying wood (outside the glue penetration zone) is where the wood will give way. So, I would assume there is greater stiffness imparted at the laminate interface by the adhesive.
Adhesives can also contribute weight in some circumstances. It is the high glue content that makes MDF so heavy.
RBC
Deceased
Sorry guys, I was not able to keep up with AZ yesterday.
OK, now to answer some of the questions.
PJ, the foam that we use is a little lighter than the wood, but not much. We remove a fair amount of maple and we don't want the shaft to weigh 2.5 ounces, so that mass of the foam replaces some of the mass lost with the drilling. Plus, McChen is right, the further from the tip, the less the impact of tip end mass.
Hard English. Deflection comes from effective Tip End Mass. Some argue that the flex of the shaft can change this, but it is very very small, so basically the shaft construction and taper don't have any significant affect on squirt. You could take a solid shaft and hollow it out and make it low deflection, but there are problems. The first is that it might violate Predator's patent. I know many who have received Cease and Desist letters. The second is that it would be very costly as many of your long seasoned shafts would warp as soon as you drilled them out. You would be taking away too much material from the center of the shaft.
PoolPlayer2093. Cool! I had almost forgotten that there are a few of my old cues still out there! Yes, I did take steps in those cues to reduce the squirt, but it was no where near as effective as the OB-1. The OB-1 is just so much lighter in the tip end that the squirt is much less than any solid maple shaft can be. Even a solid shaft with no ferrule is much more squirt than the OB-1 or Predator.
PJ and Dead Crab, You are both very close. Lamining a shaft does increase the weight, but in most cases it is not significant. The glue is what does it, but there is just not that much glue left to change it very much. We are really splitting hairs here. The OB-1 has about 48 pieces left after all is said and done, and we still run a little lighter than most, about 3.7 ounces depending on the joint. We use a long taper that takes away wood on the outside, and we take away wood on the inside too, but we replace some of that lost mass with the foam core.
Well, I hope that answers your questions. I will try to keep up with this thread a little closer. I will be staying in doors for the weekend because we are about to be hit by IKE. Imagine, a hurricane in Dallas!
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
OK, now to answer some of the questions.
PJ, the foam that we use is a little lighter than the wood, but not much. We remove a fair amount of maple and we don't want the shaft to weigh 2.5 ounces, so that mass of the foam replaces some of the mass lost with the drilling. Plus, McChen is right, the further from the tip, the less the impact of tip end mass.
Hard English. Deflection comes from effective Tip End Mass. Some argue that the flex of the shaft can change this, but it is very very small, so basically the shaft construction and taper don't have any significant affect on squirt. You could take a solid shaft and hollow it out and make it low deflection, but there are problems. The first is that it might violate Predator's patent. I know many who have received Cease and Desist letters. The second is that it would be very costly as many of your long seasoned shafts would warp as soon as you drilled them out. You would be taking away too much material from the center of the shaft.
PoolPlayer2093. Cool! I had almost forgotten that there are a few of my old cues still out there! Yes, I did take steps in those cues to reduce the squirt, but it was no where near as effective as the OB-1. The OB-1 is just so much lighter in the tip end that the squirt is much less than any solid maple shaft can be. Even a solid shaft with no ferrule is much more squirt than the OB-1 or Predator.
PJ and Dead Crab, You are both very close. Lamining a shaft does increase the weight, but in most cases it is not significant. The glue is what does it, but there is just not that much glue left to change it very much. We are really splitting hairs here. The OB-1 has about 48 pieces left after all is said and done, and we still run a little lighter than most, about 3.7 ounces depending on the joint. We use a long taper that takes away wood on the outside, and we take away wood on the inside too, but we replace some of that lost mass with the foam core.
Well, I hope that answers your questions. I will try to keep up with this thread a little closer. I will be staying in doors for the weekend because we are about to be hit by IKE. Imagine, a hurricane in Dallas!
Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Patrick Johnson said:
they're not laminating it with magic. what ever they're using it has to weigh something
poolplayer2093 said:
Since the shaft is the same size, the glue replaces some of the wood that would otherwise be there. So it only adds weight if it's heavier than wood. It might be lighter and make the shaft lighter. Either way there isn't enough of it to make a noticable difference - or it would have been noticed.
pj
chgo