Tapers

[tmcthree]

Sorry more stupid questions....

What kind of tapers can you get on a cue?

I assumed that the cue would taper from the butt to ferule in a straight line. But I've noticed some people talking about thin tapers. I'm guessing that this would mean that the cue would taper sharply after the butt and then level off towards the tip, creating an overall thiner cue with a slightly concaved edge.

I guess this would mean that the cue would be more prone to whip.

I'm buying a new cue and I'd like to aviod whip as much as possible. Can you get a "thicker" taper that would reduce whip? How would they do it? Start the taper further along the cue?

Thanks in advance

[mooneyy]

The overall shape of the cue has little to do with stiffness.

Main factor here is the quality and density of the shaft. Any good cuemaker
will use a timber for the shaft which is not whippy, but not "lifeless" neither.

So as long as you do not order a whippy shaft, you won't get one. However
that's of course down to personal taste and preference, so it'd be best to
speak to your maker of choice about this to find out what you really want
in terms of stiffness.

cheers

EDIT: Of course the shafts shape can affect stiffness as well. Less material will
always be whippier than more and vice versa.

[Jonny]

send a pm to trevs1 or is it trev1..... trevor white cue maker on this forum

[eaoin11]

Sorry more stupid questions....

What kind of tapers can you get on a cue?

I assumed that the cue would taper from the butt to ferule in a straight line. But I've noticed some people talking about thin tapers. I'm guessing that this would mean that the cue would taper sharply after the butt and then level off towards the tip, creating an overall thiner cue with a slightly concaved edge.

I guess this would mean that the cue would be more prone to whip.

I'm buying a new cue and I'd like to aviod whip as much as possible. Can you get a "thicker" taper that would reduce whip? How would they do it? Start the taper further along the cue?

Thanks in advance

This is something I'm curious about too. I've seen quite a few american cues which are kind of 'concave' as you describe but for snooker my impression is that many modern cues are slightly convex if anything, perhaps to lend them some strength.

John Parris once described his cues to me as slightly cigar shaped and pictures I've seen of other makers cues suggest this might be the norm for higher end cues.

With that in mind I surmised that a slim taper was basically a conical one, I haven't seen a 'concave' taper but perhaps they are out there. Maybe the old Mannock cues are concave? I've heard they are quite whippy (perhaps ADR or Keith could confirm/deny this?).

[stegorjus]

I think the cues with the thin taper toward the tip tend to be the ones that are sold as low squirt such as the infamous Acuerate. Squirt is the tendency for the cue-ball to deviate from the intended line of aim when side-spin is applied.

[tmcthree]

So basically, the whippier the cue, the less deviance you get with side.

[stegorjus]

I'm not sure. Have a look on Acuerate.com. They've got a lot on there about it. I know a lot of people on this forum think it's boJJocks

[poolqjunkie]

I do not think a longer slimmer taper would cause warpage easier provided that it is within reason.
Some players like to play with an almost conical taper for its stiffness but this kind of taper tends to have no "life" for some shots.
In 9 ball, a lot of players like a longer or softer taper, which is basically a shaft with a slimmer front end and then widen up significantly as it approaches the joint. How slim at the front and how soon does it woden up depends on the maker. This kind of softer taper allows for more spin to be put on the ball, and it tends to make it feel easier to move the ball around. But some 9 ball players also like a stiffer shaft so it is really a matter of personal preference. personally do not like this kind of taper for snooker because it feels kind of hard to control the cue ball when I try to "punch" in a long shot.
I am not sure what John Parris uses but I like his taper. It is stiff yet responsive.
It is not a drastic taper like a 9 ball pool cue taper, but it doe snot deflect too much and is very easy to control.
9 ball and snooker call for different sets of shots. The equipment used is also designed differently.
Americans are obsessed with "deflection" and they like to have as little deflection as possible.
For snooker I do not like that kind of very soft taper; for 9 ball, I do not like too stiff a shaft.

[trevs1]

I do not think a longer slimmer taper would cause warpage easier provided that it is within reason.
Some players like to play with an almost conical taper for its stiffness but this kind of taper tends to have no "life" for some shots.
In 9 ball, a lot of players like a longer or softer taper, which is basically a shaft with a slimmer front end and then widen up significantly as it approaches the joint. How slim at the front and how soon does it woden up depends on the maker. This kind of softer taper allows for more spin to be put on the ball, and it tends to make it feel easier to move the ball around. But some 9 ball players also like a stiffer shaft so it is really a matter of personal preference. personally do not like this kind of taper for snooker because it feels kind of hard to control the cue ball when I try to "punch" in a long shot.
I am not sure what John Parris uses but I like his taper. It is stiff yet responsive.It is not a drastic taper like a 9 ball pool cue taper, but it doe snot deflect too much and is very easy to control.
9 ball and snooker call for different sets of shots. The equipment used is also designed differently.
Americans are obsessed with "deflection" and they like to have as little deflection as possible.
For snooker I do not like that kind of very soft taper; for 9 ball, I do not like too stiff a shaft.

The american "pro type tapers" might have something to do with the use of the looped bridge also, as it's far easier to use it with that shape of shaft.

Re: the bold text above....

The taper that is fairly normal on most Parris cues is not what necessarily gives the cue stiffness. This is far more due to the timber selected for the shafts. If the timber is soft, it will be springy, no matter how thick the taper is, while if the timber is hard, heavy and stiff, it will be much stiffer.

This stiff, solid timber allows more flexibility in use, allowing cues to be made with varying stiffness, while retaining more natural weight.

[poolqjunkie]

The american "pro type tapers" might have something to do with the use of the looped bridge also, as it's far easier to use it with that shape of shaft.

Re: the bold text above....

The taper that is fairly normal on most Parris cues is not what necessarily gives the cue stiffness. This is far more due to the timber selected for the shafts. If the timber is soft, it will be springy, no matter how thick the taper is, while if the timber is hard, heavy and stiff, it will be much stiffer.

This stiff, solid timber allows more flexibility in use, allowing cues to be made with varying stiffness, while retaining more natural weight.

Thanks Trevor.

Just curious if you dont mind me asking, how do you tell if a piece of timber is stiff or soft? Do you go by the density or weight or grain or what other parameters do you go by?

If a taper is straight, wouldn't it give lesser vibration than a longer softer taper? In that sense, wouldn't that affect the "stiffness", which is what I would interpret as the inertia to vibration?
Thank you.

[eaoin11]

Hi Trev, could you explain the difference between a slim and 'standard' taper? I imagined standard to be slightly more 'convex' (to use original posters' terminology) than perfectly conical, and slim to be closer to conical. Does the slightly convex shape lend a better weight distribution?

[hendrykitty]

Hi Trev, could you explain the difference between a slim and 'standard' taper? I imagined standard to be slightly more 'convex' (to use original posters' terminology) than perfectly conical, and slim to be closer to conical. Does the slightly convex shape lend a better weight distribution?

I agree, but don't know what trevor thinks

some of the cues have a very big diametre on the joint place of the ash/maple shaft and the butt, but tend to be thinner very sharp towards the tips, but some others not, it totally depends on the cue makes' preference or has something to do with the quality of the timbers they use

[trevs1]

Thanks Trevor.

Just curious if you dont mind me asking, how do you tell if a piece of timber is stiff or soft? Do you go by the density or weight or grain or what other parameters do you go by?

If a taper is straight, wouldn't it give lesser vibration than a longer softer taper? In that sense, wouldn't that affect the "stiffness", which is what I would interpret as the inertia to vibration?
Thank you.

Gauging whether timber is likely to be stiff or not is done mainly in the initial selection of it in the board (or plank) form. It's quite easy to feel the weight of the piece, and, to see the grain in it. There are certain signs to take notice of in the grain, but it doesn't always tell you everything you need to know, so weight is THE most important factor in assessing likely stiffness. The other aspects which are important are colour, shape of grain, knotts and distortion of the board, as well as the size of the board to determine the probably wastage.

As for the tapers and how they relate to stiffness....

There are things to be mindful of when a cue is being made, but in general, it's more to do with the stiffness of the timber being used as it is anything else. for example Naturally, if a cue is made with a fairly stiff piece of timber and a very slim taper, but, is made to a fairly heavy finished weight, and, most of that weight is concentrated towards the back of the cue, then it's more probable that the cue will have some spring to the shaft.

There are a number of variables to consider when a cue is being made, but the bottom line is that it's not an exactly precise science, and so, is not always an absolute certainty to predict just how well any individual cue will perform.

[trevs1]

Hi Trev, could you explain the difference between a slim and 'standard' taper? I imagined standard to be slightly more 'convex' (to use original posters' terminology) than perfectly conical, and slim to be closer to conical. Does the slightly convex shape lend a better weight distribution?

Well, my own view on it is that tapers can be measured by their thickness, no more and no less, with shape being something which most (or perhaps all) makers pay less attention to. Obviously, the shape MUST be something pretty much of a normal "conical" taper, but as many of you will know, this can, and definitely does vary. So, whether a cue has an appearance of being slighty concave, or slightly convex, I'd say that is as much by chance as anything else and is not pre-determined to be that way by the maker.

I say this as I've seen cues made by all makers, some with this shape and some with that, so why would that be???

As for the taper to weight distribution thing....

The taper is not THE most significant factor in determining the distribution of weight, but, it will naturally play a part.

Personally, I'd measure a taper in thickness, as it's this thickness which creates the impression of a thicker or thinner shaped cue shaft. As I have said to many people who have asked me these questions before having cues made, there are very simple guidelines anyone can follow relating to the 'shape' of taper they like.

For example...

A cue which measures approx 14.25 - 14.5mm at 300mm from the ferrule, could be considered a 'standard' thickness, while anything above perhaps 14.75 - 15mm begins to look pretty thick, and conversely, anything much below 13.75mm will look quite slim. This kind of gauging at specific points throughout the shaft of a cue will tell you what shape a cue will have, and, eliminates the need for the guesswork in stating either "conical, concave or or convex"

It's easier to work to measurements.

[trevs1]

I agree, but don't know what trevor thinks

some of the cues have a very big diametre on the joint place of the ash/maple shaft and the butt, but tend to be thinner very sharp towards the tips, but some others not, it totally depends on the cue makes' preference or has something to do with the quality of the timbers they use

The "shape" of one cue from one to another does definitely vary, although it won't really have anything to do with the quality of the timber used.