Unknown (vintage?) cue

cuesblues said:
Maybe it's a partially restored Richard Black or Paul Mottey
Click to expand...

I would say not a Black; not sure about Mottey. The joint rings are not right, too thick for Black, and the buttplate treatment is not at all like Richard's, weight screw and all. Someone also mentioned Rauenzahn. I don't think so. His butt plates never came off like that, and not the right points; his are closer at the wrap.

This reminds me of the early 80s when I bought some tips through the mail from a guy from the New England area. He asked me if I was interested in any nice bushka-looking cues, that he had an unknown cuemaker make for him. Who knows who that was, and there was probably more than one cuemaker doing this sort of thing in that day. Though this cue looks newer than that, the time period of the account is about right.

I would have someone qualified put a finish on it, but I don't think I'd get rid of the wrap. It looks good as it is, especially if cleaned, and pressed.

All the best,
WW
 
Last edited:
Classic

It certainly is a great lookin cue.

Looks similar to an older (1970s) Adam AH7. Except the but cap had a black ring.

I think the joint, silver rings and bumper are almost identical to what Adam used back then.

I have an older AH10 and the points and veneers look very similar.

Whatever it is, great find!

Regards
Dave
 
WildWing said:
I would say not a Black; not sure about Mottey. The joint rings are not right, too thick for Black, and the buttplate treatment is not at all like Richard's, weight screw and all. Someone also mentioned Rauenzahn. I don't think so. His butt plates never came off like that, and not the right points; his are closer at the wrap.

This reminds me of the early 80s when I bought some tips through the mail from a guy from the New England area. He asked me if I was interested in any nice bushka-looking cues, that he had an unknown cuemaker make for him. Who knows who that was, and there was probably more than one cuemaker doing this sort of thing in that day. Though this cue looks newer than that, the time period of the account is about right.

I would have someone qualified put a finish on it, but I don't think I'd get rid of the wrap. It looks good as it is, especially if cleaned, and pressed.

All the best,
WW
Click to expand...


The .810 dimension at the joint collar is a good reason for the confusion.
It's possible that any patina or signature was completely taken down, and if that much
turning was necessary, I wonder what the original butt cap looked like.

.810 is less than God intended joint collars to be, unless it's a jump cue
 
cuesblues said:
The .810 dimension at the joint collar is a good reason for the confusion.
It's possible that any patina or signature was completely taken down, and if that much
turning was necessary, I wonder what the original butt cap looked like.

.810 is less than God intended joint collars to be, unless it's a jump cue
Click to expand...

I knew someone that had a cue made by George with and .810 joint and 1.34 cap and they said the cue hit better than any cue they'd ever player with...
 
cuesblues said:
The .810 dimension at the joint collar is a good reason for the confusion.
It's possible that any patina or signature was completely taken down, and if that much
turning was necessary, I wonder what the original butt cap looked like.

.810 is less than God intended joint collars to be, unless it's a jump cue
Click to expand...

Agree, .810 is less that the typical .840 to .845 for steel joints.

Who said it was .810? The OP only called it "skinny..."

All the best,
WW
 
skins said:
I knew someone that had a cue made by George with and .810 joint and 1.34 cap and they said the cue hit better than any cue they'd ever player with...
Click to expand...

My Herman Rambow cues are about .820 and close to 1.40 at the back end.
The Hoppe is a 28.5 inch butt so it looks kind of funny when you roll it.

What is interesting is I have a Willie Hoppe Professional and the back end is 1.40 or so, fatter than my Rambow Hoppe, but around the middle of the handle the Rambow is fatter.
 
cuesblues said:
My Herman Rambow cues are about .820 and close to 1.40 at the back end.
The Hoppe is a 28.5 inch butt so it looks kind of funny when you roll it.

What is interesting is I have a Willie Hoppe Professional and the back end is 1.40 or so, fatter than my Rambow Hoppe, but around the middle of the handle the Rambow is fatter.
Click to expand...

Not surprising. Those early Rambows and Hoppes were pretty thin at the joint, but very large at the butt end. It's just the way they were built. Very few cuemakers of the present choose to do it that way. Does make this cue a bit interesting.

All the best,
WW
 
Chopdoc said:
Dear Lord! I knew it! You have vernier calipers in your eyes! :D
Click to expand...

I admit it, Doc. It's what I see. When others wonder how many stars there are, I wonder, how far apart are they, down to the the thousandth of an inch. By the way, my Browne & Sharpe goes down to the ten thousandth of an inch, even better than my eyes.

Back to this cue though, this does give some clues. It's been sanded down, probably many times. Pre-tapped joints, stainless steel, were never originally turned that far down, .811. Which leads me to believe this was one of those 80s garage project cues, that were very nicely done, and got done over and over as the years went by. The lack of finish shows this also. It may have had a finish at some point, but got taken off as the years went by.

It's still a very nice cue, by the way. Nice design, and nice colors. Hope the OP isn't looking to make a mint off it, because it is not built by any of the coveted cuemakers. Too many give-aways. Just an opinion.

All the best,
WW
 
WildWing said:
I admit it, Doc. It's what I see. When others wonder how many stars there are, I wonder, how far apart are they, down to the the thousandth of an inch. By the way, my Browne & Sharpe goes down to the ten thousandth of an inch, even better than my eyes.

Back to this cue though, this does give some clues. It's been sanded down, probably many times. Pre-tapped joints, stainless steel, were never originally turned that far down, .811. Which leads me to believe this was one of those 80s garage project cues, that were very nicely done, and got done over and over as the years went by. The lack of finish shows this also. It may have had a finish at some point, but got taken off as the years went by.

It's still a very nice cue, by the way. Nice design, and nice colors. Hope the OP isn't looking to make a mint off it, because it is not built by any of the coveted cuemakers. Too many give-aways. Just an opinion.

All the best,
WW
Click to expand...

I considered the "hobbyist" "garage project" source.

I also considered maybe somebody that died or sold out their shop and this was an unfinished cue that got a quickie wrap and "done" by somebody else.

I also thought maybe somebody's early work.

I considered many avenues for a source...and many names.

Everything went to a dead end. Nothing made sense.

I will say I had the privilege to preview some pics and consider and discuss the cue before it was posted.

I think it's a great find, but I don't think Patrick is under any illusions about the cue. He knows his cues and he knows what this is and he knows what this isn't...to a point. Basically to the same point as the rest of us.

Right now it is an enigma. Sadly I think it will remain so.

I would probe a bit and continue to ask around but in the end likely just put a good finish on it and let it be a cool cue that plays well.

It will take a stroke of luck to nail this one down. If it can be attributed to a "good" maker I will be surprised. If somebody claims to have made it I will be surprised. But I don't rule either out completely at this point.

Right now, I think the cue was simply never properly finished. I have no idea who made it. I do think it is a very cool cue and worth something in that regard. It has a great formula of features and seems constructed well even if the dimensions are a little odd.

Many are frustrated by unknowns, I find them intriguing and enjoy it when they can stand on their own without a name. I would love to hit a few balls with this cue. I think it likely stands on its own just fine.

.
 
Cue

The pool table cloth lining the case looks brand new cut from end grain of the bolt, most likely off the end of a table recover drop pieces..


Rob.M
 
Last edited:
Sealegs50 said:
Is it common to use a metal insert to secure the butt cap and weight bolt?
Click to expand...

No, that's not typical with these older cues. Usually the butt end is bare wood, threaded for a 3/8 X 16 standard weight bolt, aluminum or steel. Newer cues though, have more variation, and more custom weight bolt treatments.

All the best,
WW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top