Taper on a thin handled cue

conetip said:
Originally the thicker butt or tapered handle was to get the balance correct for the cue.

Thanks for the input, conetip! Your post is a real eye opener. If, indeed, the thicker butt/tapered handle was incorporated for the purpose of cue balance, then to me it is inconceiveable that modern cuemakers don't dispense with this cumbersome shape, and use modern techniques/materials for balance instead. Functionality in a cue is supreme, I believe, and looks are secondary. Obviously, others see this differently, including the majority of cuemakers.

Conetip, based on your numbers, and measurements of my butt, you must have a steeper-than-normal taper between the joint and balance point of your cue. That way, when you start the cylinder there (at balance point), it's diameter is roughly 29 mm. My (production) butt diameter at approx 18 inches from the end is 25-26mm, so if I use your 29mm number I won't have as long a cylinder. Another question, please: Do you consider your hands to be large, medium or small (just trying to second guess how 29mm relates to hand size). I'd say mine are medium and I'm tempted to cut a 27mm cylindrical butt end. Any warnings - too small???
Click to expand...
 
Hi Shankster8, I make my cues from fishing rod blanks.
From the tip to the end of the cue is a constant taper.
Tip is about 10 mm or so and at 29 inches from the tp the joint is about 14.4 mm or so diameter. The whole cue with no cork or wood handle over the carbon handle is about 150 gms.
So from the rod to the handle is not uniform, it is stepped up.
I have medium sized hands an for me dia 29 feels good. For my cues the diameter of the handle does not effect it's strength or integrity.
At this point in time , I do not do inlays or points on my cues. I like the look of the wood at the base and the natural patterns that the laminated cork reveals and a wood front cap. There are about 80 rings of cork laminated in the handle.
Anyway , I would suggets just going down to 29 mm first and see how it all is and how it plays. You can allways take more off, but it is hard to put back on.
I measure my balance point from the tip. It is 1050 to 1060 mm.
From the but end of the cue it is about 17.5 inches.
Looking at a production cue 26 mm is probably the diameter at the balance point. I like my cue balanced a little further back than the production one. It is relatively easy for me to put the balance and weight where I want it.

Neil
 
fullsplicefiend said:
For those of you who dont mind building a cue with a thinner butt, say 1.2" at the buttcap, what sort of a taper do you use so the butt does not have too much flex and become whippy. What other methods do you use to preserve the stiffness at such a small diameter?

Thanks
Ian
Click to expand...

Good quality wood and time is the most important factor, Tapers vary on many cues, Term (Custom). I have some out there down to 1.05 at the butt cap, finishing one now at 1.1 also. You have to be a little more precise with your balancing methods and the wood used. It's not about just changing the screws used at the _A_ joint or joint itself because you don't want it to feel heavy in one certain area. Hope this helps some.
 
Michael Webb said:
Good quality wood and time is the most important factor, Tapers vary on many cues, Term (Custom). I have some out there down to 1.05 at the butt cap, finishing one now at 1.1 also. You have to be a little more precise with your balancing methods and the wood used. It's not about just changing the screws used at the _A_ joint or joint itself because you don't want it to feel heavy in one certain area. Hope this helps some.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input, Michael. I am curious if you know the hand size of the customers you made the 1.05 and 1.1 inch butts for (small medium, or large)? In a post above I said I was contemplating a 27mm diameter cylindrical butt end. Actually the cue I want to modify measures 1.07 at about 12 inches from the end, and I'm contemplating simply extending that diameter to the end of the cue. But, as conetip says, it's tough to add it back on, so I guess it would be wise to take it off in increments , and test thoroughly after each reduction (for days, probably). I just notice that the 1.07 inch diameter seems to cradle very comfortably in my grip hand, when I choke up on the cue, and the end of the cue definitely feels too fat! Am very curious, though, about the handsize of the people ordering those slim-butted cues from you. TIA
 
shankster8 said:
Thanks for the input, Michael. I am curious if you know the hand size of the customers you made the 1.05 and 1.1 inch butts for (small medium, or large)? In a post above I said I was contemplating a 27mm diameter cylindrical butt end. Actually the cue I want to modify measures 1.07 at about 12 inches from the end, and I'm contemplating simply extending that diameter to the end of the cue. But, as conetip says, it's tough to add it back on, so I guess it would be wise to take it off in increments , and test thoroughly after each reduction (for days, probably). I just notice that the 1.07 inch diameter seems to cradle very comfortably in my grip hand, when I choke up on the cue, and the end of the cue definitely feels too fat! Am very curious, though, about the handsize of the people ordering those slim-butted cues from you. TIA
Click to expand...

Normal hand size for a guy 5'-10", he just prefers the thin. He has owned everything from a Boar to a McDermott The 1.1 is a snooker player and just ordered what he was use too.
 
shankster8 said:
Thanks for the input, Michael. I am curious if you know the hand size of the customers you made the 1.05 and 1.1 inch butts for (small medium, or large)? In a post above I said I was contemplating a 27mm diameter cylindrical butt end. Actually the cue I want to modify measures 1.07 at about 12 inches from the end, and I'm contemplating simply extending that diameter to the end of the cue. But, as conetip says, it's tough to add it back on, so I guess it would be wise to take it off in increments , and test thoroughly after each reduction (for days, probably). I just notice that the 1.07 inch diameter seems to cradle very comfortably in my grip hand, when I choke up on the cue, and the end of the cue definitely feels too fat! Am very curious, though, about the handsize of the people ordering those slim-butted cues from you. TIA
Click to expand...


I like a thin butt. My Sugartree suits me. At 12" from the end it's 1.07" and at 4" it's 1.186". It would be fun to experiment with a no taper no wrap handle and butt. I'd want it about 1.15 all the way.... I think.
 
Straight line taper

I have a straght line taper in the wrap area centered on my hand at address. (back arm straght up and down when the tip touches the cueball). Also have the same taper on my jumpbreak cue it allows me to screw in the jumpbreak handle into the shooting cue for long shots.

Made out of Jarrah my next one will be out of bacote to compare the hits but so far I love it very functional.

Cue always feels the same in my hand (no matter where hand is on the cue for different shots) with the straight line taper a feature I like.
 
I build my cues with a straight taper from joint to butt. Finished sizes are .832 at joint and 1.2 at the butt. I like to use the harder heavey woods, and they will hit as solid as any big butt cue out there.
Chris
 
Chris' Cues said:
I build my cues with a straight taper from joint to butt. Finished sizes are .832 at joint and 1.2 at the butt. I like to use the harder heavey woods, and they will hit as solid as any big butt cue out there.
Chris
Click to expand...
That's really skinny. I think Buss and Espiritu are about the same same as that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top