What the Big Deal about converting a Titlist Cue

CocoboloCowboy

CocoboloCowboy

Cowboys are my hero's
Silver Member
So now that I have you attention. Let me Apologies for the title.

But I am curious how many steps, and how time consuming is the conversion of a OLD Titlist Cue to conversion, and would it be EASIER to start with say a NEW Full spliced Blank say from Parther, John Davis or your Own, and do a Titlist from a NEW BLANK.?

Are there pitfalls in working with there old blanks.?
 
As long as there is enough "meat" on the Titlist blank, there really is no difference as far as time and difficulty go, but the final product is much nicer and will have more market value if you use a Titlist rather than a plain full spliced "sneaky" blank. Probably most Titlist conversions done have an 'A' joint installed, which does differentiate them from a sneaky conversion which will be a one piece butt, but not all.

As far as doing a Titlist from a new blank, a "Titlist" cue is a very specific cue. Titlist was the name given to Brunswick's four veneer cue from the early 1940s thru the 70s. Prior to that it was known as the model 26.5, and then briefly as the Carom King, and I have original examples of each. It always has four points, and four veneers of maple, mahogany, teal, and purple. If you make your own "new blank" it's then called a Titlist tribute. I'm making a couple now using Martin's repro veneers and curly maple rather than straight grain. They'll be very nice, but still tributes, not true Titlists.

If you think about it, the Brunswick Titlist is probably the single most influencial cue in history. With it's full spliced construction, sharp points, and colorful veneers, I believe that it set a standard for cue making that many still cannot replicate even now, 100 years later. Titlist blanks were used at some time by most, if not all, of those that we consider the masters of cue making. I have examples nearly 100 years old that have points as sharp and even (on both ends) that can possibly be made by human hands.

Mr H
 
Last edited:
i guess making a titlist conversion and a prather blank conversion would be the same. my only thing is some titlists arent in good enought condition to convert. veneers are seperating points are terrible ect. there arent many titlists that can be converted into wrapless 2 pc cues. mant times the blank needs to be cut and maple added to the handle under the wrap. instead of 12-13'' handle just like 6'' so to keep the full splice in tact. i wouldnt call it easy. to do it right it is hard
 
Thanks for your replies guys.
thumbsup.gif
 
Mr Hoppe said:
As long as there is enough "meat" on the Titlist blank, there really is no difference as far as time and difficulty go, but the final product is much nicer and will have more market value if you use a Titlist rather than a plain full spliced "sneaky" blank. Probably most Titlist conversions done have an 'A' joint installed, which does differentiate them from a sneaky conversion which will be a one piece butt, but not all.

As far as doing a Titlist from a new blank, a "Titlist" cue is a very specific cue. Titlist was the name given to Brunswick's four veneer cue from the early 1940s thru the 70s. Prior to that it was known as the model 26.5, and then briefly as the Carom King, and I have original examples of each. It always has four points, and four veneers of maple, mahogany, teal, and purple. If you make your own "new blank" it's then called a Titlist tribute. I'm making a couple now using Martin's repro veneers and curly maple rather than straight grain. They'll be very nice, but still tributes, not true Titlists.

If you think about it, the Brunswick Titlist is probably the single most influencial cue in history. With it's full spliced construction, sharp points, and colorful veneers, I believe that it set a standard for cue making that many still cannot replicate even now, 100 years later. Titlist blanks were used at some time by most, if not all, of those that we consider the masters of cue making. I have examples nearly 100 years old that have points as sharp and even (on both ends) that can possibly be made by human hands.

Mr H
Click to expand...


Well said, I agree.
 
CocoboloCowboy said:
So now that I have you attention. Let me Apologies for the title.

But I am curious how many steps, and how time consuming is the conversion of a OLD Titlist Cue to conversion, and would it be EASIER to start with say a NEW Full spliced Blank say from Parther, John Davis or your Own, and do a Titlist from a NEW BLANK.?

Are there pitfalls in working with there old blanks.?
Click to expand...

I do a lot of these conversion cues, and in my opinion the Titlist blanks are not my choice since production began around 1940. In many cases they are too small where they need to be cut for conversion. This is why I preffer the Brunswick 26 1/2 for this purpose. The cues I normally buy for conversion are cues from the 1920's and before because they are much larger in the butt section. The best way to identify them is if they still have a lable, but this is not always a certainty even if the lable exists. When older cues came back to brunswick for repair, they would completely refinish them, including new lables. The best way to date these cues is by the weight stamp, in the late model cues after approximately 1935 the weight stamp will be between the cues points. In the late teens until 1935 the weight stamp will be on the cues butt slightly above the cues bumper. On cues from around 1918 back to when production of these cues started the weight stamp will also be on the cues butt. However, it will be located in a small wedge cut into the wood just like the pearl wedge cues minus the pearl. I have even seen these wedges on cues with lables from the 1930's and I have come to the conclusion through research that this is the result of repairs done on cues sent back to Brunswick.

Hope this helps
 
I've finished several of each and think the Titlist hit is unique, perfect, and hard. Winning my vote for best hit.

The newer blanks like Prather or Davis need lots of time to season. They will shrink. Titlist's don't require months of seasoning and win ease of building.

You can pick the wood combination on a new blank so they win this hands down. Your going to pay if you can find darker Titlist cues.

After building and test hitting several of each (Davis, Schmelkee, Prather, and Titlist) the Titlist are my favorite. Old school and Kewl! I had to build one for myself.

This might be a good question for a pole. What cue do you prefer?
 
I have a brunswick wille hoppe that I bought in 1969. I also have a barrel full of cues that I play with and try every custom I get a chance to play with. I love experiencing and am amazed at the hit and feel of cues with different properties (I should have been a cuemaker). I agree with graciocues that the titlist is the best hitting, solid feeling, feedback cue I have ever played with. IMO it is an animal all its own.
 
I have a brunswick wille hoppe that I bought in 1969. I also have a barrel full of cues that I play with and try every custom I get a chance to play with. I love experiencing and am amazed at the hit and feel of cues with different properties (I should have been a cuemaker). I agree with graciocues that the titlist is the best hitting, solid feeling, feedback cue I have ever played with. IMO it is an animal all its own.
 
poke&hope said:
I have a brunswick wille hoppe that I bought in 1969. I also have a barrel full of cues that I play with and try every custom I get a chance to play with. I love experiencing and am amazed at the hit and feel of cues with different properties (I should have been a cuemaker). I agree with graciocues that the titlist is the best hitting, solid feeling, feedback cue I have ever played with. IMO it is an animal all its own.
Click to expand...



I heard this from another AZ'er and I have to agree.
Titlist cues are sexy!
 
I have built Qs from old Titleist & found SOME of them, to have a HOLLOW sounding hit. As for ease of turning, I prefer ANY of the new ones. The glue in the points & vaneers is better & more reliable. I love the old ones, but to deliver a good finished Q, I prefer the NEW blanks...JER
 
BLACKHEARTCUES said:
I have built Qs from old Titleist & found SOME of them, to have a HOLLOW sounding hit. As for ease of turning, I prefer ANY of the new ones. The glue in the points & vaneers is better & more reliable. I love the old ones, but to deliver a good finished Q, I prefer the NEW blanks...JER
Click to expand...

I don't agree. Your talking about a cue older then most of us. If it was going to fall apart it would of. If the points have come apart don't convert it. They have a ping. Solid ping. Sounds like your listening to a pro tournament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top