Suggestions for a home pool table

logical said:
Admittedly mine was set up by me, not Mark Gregory, has standard issue and not pro-feshnal pockets but even after shipping from 6 states away and buying new 860...I don't have $3500 in this. I do agree actually that a great no excuses (mine has a few excuses) Gold Crown can push $6000 all in and I also would take one over a Diamond even if the cost was the same. I have nothing against Diamond but am nostalgic for a Gold Crown.
5eed8c5e88157fe6beabfd6621b4225b.jpg


Sent from the future.
Click to expand...

Looks great! You did really good getting that for under 3500. It looks absolutely perfect in your space. I'm like you, the looks, tradition and nostalgia of your table makes it much more desirable to me than any new Diamond.
 
sy1840 said:
Found this one: https://m.facebook.com/marketplace/item/514839865804781/

How can you tell if it’s a 1-4 and what are the differences.
Click to expand...

That's a Gold Crown III. It may be splitting hairs but in the research I've done the III is the least desirable in the line. No offense to those of you that have III's, they are great tables. From what I've seen the I, II, IV, etc are more desirable.

This will help you decipher the GC models.

49622721612_eb43fb46cc_o.jpg


49621934498_f3ac167e42_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
rexus31 said:
That's a Gold Crown III. It may be splitting hairs but in the research I've done the III is the least desirable in the line. No offense to those of you that have III's, they are great tables. From what I've seen the I, II, IV, etc are more desirable.

This will help you decipher the GC models.

49622721612_eb43fb46cc_o.jpg


49621934498_f3ac167e42_o.jpg
Click to expand...

I am interested in why you would say that? Being that the 3 was the longest production of the GC ever? I have worked on so many and never had any reason to think this version was any less desirable than others. Just my experience and interested to hear your input.

TFT
 
trentfromtoledo said:
I am interested in why you would say that? Being that the 3 was the longest production of the GC ever? I have worked on so many and never had any reason to think this version was any less desirable than others. Just my experience and interested to hear your input.

TFT
Click to expand...

Just what I have heard and read over the years. Don't the III's have the sagging frame issue?

The I's and II's are over 100 lbs heavier as well.

The III's are still great tables but if given a choice, It seems most would choose a I or II over a III.
 
The comparison document mentions carpet feet available for the Gold Crown I, anyone know what those look like or how they are different?
 
rexus31 said:
Just what I have heard and read over the years. Don't the III's have the sagging frame issue?

The I's and II's are over 100 lbs heavier as well.

The III's are still great tables but if given a choice, It seems most would choose a I or II over a III.
Click to expand...

Making sure the frame ends are bolted together very tight is key. Can also use the angle iron under the frame, easy fix. Gluing the slates together as well.
IMO Slate is better and apron system is much easier to work with.

All GCs are great tables, just requires knowledge and experience making them go together right. Each version has its own quirks

TFT
 
Does anyone know a place that can transport this from Ocean Shores WA to Seattle? It’s about 2.5hrs away.
 
trentfromtoledo said:
Making sure the frame ends are bolted together very tight is key. Can also use the angle iron under the frame, easy fix. Gluing the slates together as well.

IMO Slate is better and apron system is much easier to work with.



All GCs are great tables, just requires knowledge and experience making them go together right. Each version has its own quirks



TFT
Click to expand...



I totally agree. IMO slate is better than the earlier Brunstone playing surface. It’s just more accurately machined vs. the casting/machining process of the old Brunstone. It’s not a huge issue for me, but for max playability it is easy to understand why the top-end restoration projects include the slate upgrade. BTW, I checked on that upgrade through the local dealer here in West Texas and was quoted a 1,000.00 bucks for the change over. I think I’ll decline that upgrade for now since I’ve already busted the budget on this old Anni.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lawnboy77 said:
I totally agree. IMO slate is better than the earlier Brunstone playing surface. It’s just more accurately machined vs. the casting/machining process of the old Brunstone. It’s not a huge issue for me, but for max playability it is easy to understand why the top-end restoration projects include the slate upgrade. BTW, I checked on that upgrade through the local dealer here in West Texas and was quoted a 1,000.00 bucks for the change over. I think I’ll decline that upgrade for now since I’ve already busted the budget on this old Anni.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

FWIW, my GCI has slate, not Brunstone.

49626952542_3c2e3a00f2_c.jpg


49626956677_ca9c0fd8f1_c.jpg
 
Your 14' width is a little tight, but not tight enough to rule out a 9-foot table if that's what you desire. You will occasionally have a few shots you'll need to use a cue 4 inches shorter.
 
rexus31 said:
Just what I have heard and read over the years. Don't the III's have the sagging frame issue?



The I's and II's are over 100 lbs heavier as well.



The III's are still great tables but if given a choice, It seems most would choose a I or II over a III.
Click to expand...
I think the frame end sag is a GCIV issue but one easily remedied

Sent from the future.
 
trentfromtoledo said:
I am interested in why you would say that? Being that the 3 was the longest production of the GC ever? I have worked on so many and never had any reason to think this version was any less desirable than others. Just my experience and interested to hear your input.

TFT
Click to expand...

- The frame is scabbed together with scrap wood
- The frame design causes the ends to sag
- The rail inserts are junk, and easily strip out. Leading cause of loose castings
- The casting design is inferior (changed during GC I production). Over-tightening bolts will easily bend/break the castings
- The casting finish quickly degrades, exposing a terrible looking casting (pocket castings and feet)
- Tables produced through the 80's had junk cushions, which hardened prematurely
- Floating capture nut in sub-rail cavity, for rail attachment
- Slate is no longer pinned
- The slate liners are garbage wood. Bolt cutouts extend through the side, leaving nothing to staple to. Not a problem if you glue the cloth, but not everyone does.


Of course, all of these issues are manageable, but they are still key differences from an early Gold Crown I. That said, there are some beneficial design changes that were implemented on the Gold Crown III, such as:

- Apron attachment method improved
- Cut-out in the ball tray, which allows access to the center rail bolt
- Improved, single-piece pocket design
- Sub-rail angle adjusted for modern-day K55 cushions
 
logical said:
I think the frame end sag is a GCIV issue but one easily remedied

Sent from the future.
Click to expand...

It is actually both, the early 3's had almost identical frames to the 1 & 2, then they changed to to the end sills cap off the long sills. They did the same in the early GC4 and then changed back to the side sills capping off the 4 center sills.

TFT
 
The 14' is tight but doable for a 9' table. A 9' table has a 50" width playing surface (cushion to cushion) and most modern cues are 58" in length. So if you multiply the cue length by 2 and add the table width you get 166" A 14' room is 168" wide so if you center the table you only have room for 1" of back stoke to make shots straight across the table. The problem only exists when your cue ball is on the rail and you are shooting straight across the table. The width never comes into play on any of the other shots. My GC 9' is in my room which is exactly 14' wide and the wall only comes into play maybe once or twice (many nights never) in an evening playing pool. Now with 50 years of playing pool I have learned that it is beneficial to not leave the cue ball on the rail and on a 9' table not leave shots that require the player to reach the length of the table. The problem comes when your opponent doesn't have your cue ball placement interest at heart. The 20' length should not be a problem but give additional room on the break end of the table.

Now the next item that is a bigger problem is your budget. If you are planning on using Simonis cloth, it will cost you a minimum of $325 just for the cloth. If the cushions require replacement, that is a minimum of $150 for SuperSpeed replacements. None of this includes installation and the installation of new cushions is fairly tricky. Typically Brunswick cushions seem to hold up well if they were stored properly.

Next finding a table is very hit or miss and can take quite some time. I had a 9' Kasson table that I purchased at a very good price. After several years of usage two of the cushions became very hard and made the table very unplayable. Through this forum I found Mark Gregory's info and contacted him about replacing the cushions. He basically told me that after shipping (Minnesota to Georgia) the rails to him and installation of the cushions and new cloth it would be a sizeable expenditure and I would still have a Kasson table. He told me he had a line on some used Gold Crown IVs and that he could get one for a good price. I bought the table through Mark along with new Simonis cloth which he installed on the rails before I traveled to pick up the table. I would contact some table mechanics and they usually have lines on a lot of used tables and can determine any issues with the tables. If the mechanic is in your area they can even do all of the installs. I can't thank Mark enough for all his help when it came time to assemble the table which I did on my own. He gave me many pointers (along with some supplies not available to the average guy) on how to get a top notch install. He also gave me his phone number to contact him during the install if I ran into questions or issues.

Assembling your own table is doable but I would recommend that you have at least one machinist level ( 4' and 6' levels help) and a pneumatic stapler is a big plus. A Brunswick service installation manual is also a big plus if you do the install. I installed this table over 5 years ago and it is still as flat as the day I finished the install. Do not rush the install!!!

Hope this helps.
 
Thanks StaightIn!, and everyone helping me plan this out.

I am not too concerned about the space limitations, as it will primarily be a practice table for myself anyway and I can either use a shorter cue in situations where I’m on the rail.

I just got a quote of about $1100 to transport and setup the table, going to look for a second quote today, but would love any referrals if anyone has any. I’m willing to pay the $1000 since I believe the table is in excellent condition and is only $1500.

Scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top