balance point for shorter cues

[wayync]

Anyone know how to adjust for the balance point when ordering a custom cue that is 55" in length?

normally it would be between 16-18 but what about a short cue?

if anyone could help that would be great, thanks!

[Vitalich]

Usually, when shortening the cue point of balance is also moved back, but not directly proportional. More depends on your individual preferences and feelings of comfort.

[snookerpoolman]

Anyone know how to adjust for the balance point when ordering a custom cue that is 55" in length?

normally it would be between 16-18 but what about a short cue?

if anyone could help that would be great, thanks!

It depends largely on how much weight you are having in the butt (if at all), and also which woods you choose for the butt and shaft.

As Ebony is more dense, and therefore heavier, than Rosewood, so go for Rosewood butt if you dont wish the cue to be too 'back-heavy'.

I play English pool with an 1982 Powerglide Mannock Rosewood splice into Maple Shaft approx 54" long, 8mm tip and really is quite back heavy as must have been weighted when manufactured. It suits my game and I can screw back forever, but some players would not like it.

If you're having a small tip obviously this will effect the overall balance as well (less meat on the shaft at the tip end).

A rule of thumb is dont have weight added to the butt if you dont want the cue back heavy on a shorter cue and consider all Ash one piece e.g. no separate wood spliced, just all ash or all ash maybe with coloured veneer or frontsplice if you like decoration.

Hope this helps, Dave, Snookerpoolman

[Bulkie]

Usually, when shortening the cue point of balance is also moved back, but not directly proportional. More depends on your individual preferences and feelings of comfort.

Correct me if I'm mistaken but if the balance of a 57" cue is set at 17" from butt, then a 56" cue would have to be balanced at 16" from the butt?

[gtjohnnymac1965]

No mate it doesn't work like that. Its all to do with proportionate weight to length. If it was that easy we would all be expert cue makers and "doctors".

[Watford]

Correct me if I'm mistaken but if the balance of a 57" cue is set at 17" from butt, then a 56" cue would have to be balanced at 16" from the butt?

Not sure about that at all. Changes from cue to cue a lot of 2 piece mass produced 57" are balanced at 18+
Some 3/4 are 58" and back heavy. There is not real rule. I think it's nice to have the balance at the tip of the splice so 17-18 for a 57-58" traditional type cue but it's all personal pref.

[sanman]

Suppose one changes the lenght by 3 inches from the tip end,

the balance of the cue would shift by approximately a quater inch, backwards. So if your balance was at 17 inches it would then be at 16 3/4 inches. So the balance would hadly be affected that much by removing a bit of the tip. The weight at the front end of the cue is approximately 25-30 time less per inch than the weight at the rear end of the cue, depending on the density of woods used. Hence mass removed per inch at the front doe not affect the balnce point as much as the rear end. I hope that helps.

[blinky88]

I agree with Sanman. I remove 3" from the tip of every cue I have bought and it does not effect the balance in any way.

[sanman]

My thoughts on balance of a cue is that if u are comfy with a longer cue that u want to shorten the balance wont change by more than half a cm or quart of an inch. That being the case it should not change perfomance of cue. Lenghtening of cue however wil change balance point in most cases.