Density of cue shafts and BP

[cueman]

Don't know whether its coincidence but I often look at cues for sale on here and Ebay and many sellers are now listing the balance point as part of the spec of the cue. What I've noticed as well with the last few cues I've had made is how light the shafts are these days, thus often resulting in a balance of around 15-16" which is quite butt heavy and very light and flimsy on the bridge hand.

My preference is for a BP of 17-18" as I feel that shafts that are naturally of good density and rigidity should be coming out at this minimum, unless the cue is weighted particularly heavily for a specific customers needs. I get the feeling that the standard of shafts these days just aren't as good as they were some years back when many cues I tried and bought were all of good density and coming in or around the 17" BP.

[Particle Physics]

Don't know whether its coincidence but I often look at cues for sale on here and Ebay and many sellers are now listing the balance point as part of the spec of the cue. What I've noticed as well with the last few cues I've had made is how light the shafts are these days, thus often resulting in a balance of around 15-16" which is quite butt heavy and very light and flimsy on the bridge hand.

My preference is for a BP of 17-18" as I feel that shafts that are naturally of good density and rigidity should be coming out at this minimum, unless the cue is weighted particularly heavily for a specific customers needs. I get the feeling that the standard of shafts these days just aren't as good as they were some years back when many cues I tried and bought were all of good density and coming in or around the 17" BP.

I've noticed that the gap between the grain is getting bigger. This tends to suggest faster growing ash, which combined with kiln drying will lead to less dense wood, as the wood probably won't hold as much water as a naturally matured shaft ever again (wood is about 35% water in the naturally dry state).

What you've also got to take into consideration is where the weight is put. A cue maker in a rush may plump for drilling into the butt and dropping a bar in. A good cue maker will drill further up with better equipment, to make sure the balance point is further up the cue. I took a cheap cue apart for fun last year and found a bar, a mere 8 inches into the butt, no wonder it was handle heavy.

I'm with you, a balance point of 18'' feels just right.

[cueman]

Its true about the weight thing but the cues I've had have been made by very experienced and good quality cue makers. Also tried cues of other players I know and I just feel that the shafts just aren't rigid or dense enough for the game today. I know the balls are getting lighter and cloths quicker but you still need to have a good solid hit to generate enough power for when you play on slow heavy club tables from time to time.

[sunny3909]

Don't know whether its coincidence but I often look at cues for sale on here and Ebay and many sellers are now listing the balance point as part of the spec of the cue. What I've noticed as well with the last few cues I've had made is how light the shafts are these days, thus often resulting in a balance of around 15-16" which is quite butt heavy and very light and flimsy on the bridge hand.

My preference is for a BP of 17-18" as I feel that shafts that are naturally of good density and rigidity should be coming out at this minimum, unless the cue is weighted particularly heavily for a specific customers needs. I get the feeling that the standard of shafts these days just aren't as good as they were some years back when many cues I tried and bought were all of good density and coming in or around the 17" BP.

Spot on cue man
There is more stress on multiple splice works on butt and how even the splices are rather then the density and quality of shafts nowadays.

[cueman]

Spot on cue man
There is more stress on multiple splice works on butt and how even the splices are rather then the density and quality of shafts nowadays.

Yep in complete agreement with this. I think the majority of people who are buying cues today are doing so more to show off to their friends and also are buying purely from an aesthetic viewpoint, most cue makers have caught onto this fact and are probably sourcing more decorative hardwoods for splices and veneer work and completely overlooking the shaft material as that has become a secondary requirement. I see quite a few images on various cue makers websites highlighting their multi spliced cues and nicely grained shafts yet you can guarantee that most will play like crap.

Also and this is certain to ruffle a few feathers, is that many cue makers can't even hold a cue or play to any kind of decent standard. Its all well and good being good with your hands and capable of making nice looking cues but if you don't know how to select a good quality piece of ash or maple for a player who has a specific kind of hit that they are looking for then they should make ornaments or furniture with their skills as they will be more suited to that than cue making.

[sydneygeorge]

Don't know whether its coincidence but I often look at cues for sale on here and Ebay and many sellers are now listing the balance point as part of the spec of the cue. What I've noticed as well with the last few cues I've had made is how light the shafts are these days, thus often resulting in a balance of around 15-16" which is quite butt heavy and very light and flimsy on the bridge hand.

My preference is for a BP of 17-18" as I feel that shafts that are naturally of good density and rigidity should be coming out at this minimum, unless the cue is weighted particularly heavily for a specific customers needs. I get the feeling that the standard of shafts these days just aren't as good as they were some years back when many cues I tried and bought were all of good density and coming in or around the 17" BP.

Your observations are accurate.

[Terry Davidson]

Concerning balance point, I had a weird experience which taught me something I never realized before. I had occasion to trade a hornbeam shafted cue made by Tony Glover which had a balance point of about 19". When I picked up the cue it felt like it weighed somewhere around 20oz but when I weighed it on my scales it came in at 17.9oz!

I think it's the force required in the grip to hold the cue and raise it onto the bridge which with the weight being further forward makes the cue SEEM to be heavier than it is. It's a very nice cue but I found the hornbeam to be a little too stiff for me

Terry

[trevs1]

Apologies if this sounds somewhat argumentative, but the points above really are not to be taken as accurate or correct in any sense at all. These are opinions based on limited knowledge and / or understanding.

Perhaps besides the one point that most cues feel best with balance points of between 16" to 18" (depending on cue length clearly)

[trevs1]

Concerning balance point, I had a weird experience which taught me something I never realized before. I had occasion to trade a hornbeam shafted cue made by Tony Glover which had a balance point of about 19". When I picked up the cue it felt like it weighed somewhere around 20oz but when I weighed it on my scales it came in at 17.9oz!

I think it's the force required in the grip to hold the cue and raise it onto the bridge which with the weight being further forward makes the cue SEEM to be heavier than it is. It's a very nice cue but I found the hornbeam to be a little too stiff for me

Terry

That's actually a good point Terry, a cue will feel as though it has different weight depending on how it's held.

Obviously, the only way to really get a good indication of the weight of it is to do so by addressing the ball over the table, as that's how it will be used.

[narl]

Concerning balance point, I had a weird experience which taught me something I never realized before. I had occasion to trade a hornbeam shafted cue made by Tony Glover which had a balance point of about 19". When I picked up the cue it felt like it weighed somewhere around 20oz but when I weighed it on my scales it came in at 17.9oz!

I think it's the force required in the grip to hold the cue and raise it onto the bridge which with the weight being further forward makes the cue SEEM to be heavier than it is. It's a very nice cue but I found the hornbeam to be a little too stiff for me

Terry

Opposite thing happened a guy who picked up my 3/4 cue, its 19oz and he thought it felt light, got a shock when i told him its actual weight. Funny thing is hes a stickler for lighter cues, he thinks anything over 17.5 is too heavy.

[cueman]

Apologies if this sounds somewhat argumentative, but the points above really are not to be taken as accurate or correct in any sense at all. These are opinions based on limited knowledge and / or understanding.

Well you are entitled to your opinion and many will agree with you but I'm only going on what I have experienced. With respect you are only dealing with making cues so therefore you probably don't get to see many other cues other than your own and also you are unlikely to actually be playing with these cues to gauge an opinion. Many others are in complete agreement with me so surely there must be something in it for so many others to agree, and to be fair my knowledge is a lot more than just limited and as a regular century break builder I know about cues and what makes for a good quality and what doesn't!


Perhaps besides the one point that most cues feel best with balance points of between 16" to 18" (depending on cue length clearly)

Yes I agree that most cues usually feel best within these dimensions, however you can still get a balance point coming out at this without shafts which are good enough in terms of density and rigidity. Doesn't mean to say the cue will play right, though this is where cues are more subjective as one cue may suit one player and not another.
There is no doubt in my mind though that many cue makers are simply churning out as many cues as they can and are not really bothered about the quality of the shaft. Sure they may look nice but I think too many are choosing shafts based on looks rather than feel. I never hear cue makers ever say what makes for a good playing cue, they treat too many of their customers as basic club players who should just be thankful that they are making a cue made to the spec they require, but I get the feeling most cue makers think that these players couldn't make a 30 break so therefore they can select whatever shaft they like. Sure many of their clients may well be basic club players but they should treat every customer as though they are professional standard as I expect they would choose a much better shaft for them than mr Joe bloggs off the street.

[The Doctor]

Tightness of grain, in my little experience, has very little to do with shaft weight or density. I recently made a cue that had only 1 arrow and a blank underbelly and only 3 lines on side grain and it was just the same weight as a cue that had 10 arrows. Balance point is a preference. A cue drilled "a mere 8 inches" may well be all that is needed to achieve the desired weight/balance.
Picking out the best quality ash, is not as easy a many would think. There is loads of cheap rubbish out there. You can find good quality wide grain ash that is satisfactory weight and density though.

[trevs1]

Yes I agree that most cues usually feel best within these dimensions, however you can still get a balance point coming out at this without shafts which are good enough in terms of density and rigidity. Doesn't mean to say the cue will play right, though this is where cues are more subjective as one cue may suit one player and not another.
There is no doubt in my mind though that many cue makers are simply churning out as many cues as they can and are not really bothered about the quality of the shaft. Sure they may look nice but I think too many are choosing shafts based on looks rather than feel. I never hear cue makers ever say what makes for a good playing cue, they treat too many of their customers as basic club players who should just be thankful that they are making a cue made to the spec they require, but I get the feeling most cue makers think that these players couldn't make a 30 break so therefore they can select whatever shaft they like. Sure many of their clients may well be basic club players but they should treat every customer as though they are professional standard as I expect they would choose a much better shaft for them than mr Joe bloggs off the street.

Cueman, I am a little bit confused as to why a part of your post (post 11) quoting my earlier post, has a part in bold which is not what I wrote. It's confusing and appears as though I wrote that also. Anyway, no biggie.

As for the part written below that section in post 11, (also in bold), yes, most cues do feel best with a balance point at between 16" to 18". This is simply due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of cues are of a "fairly" standard...ish length. This length being anything between perhaps 56" and 58" (give or take a fraction). Cues balanced within this region will make the cue feel as though whatever weight it has, is distributed between butt and tip, and will create the impression the cue "sits" on your bridge fairly well.
Balance point in itself though is no indicator of how well any cue will perform,, as I'm sure you'll know.

The thing with cue shafts is simple. They need to be of adequate weight, AND, adequate stiffness, in order to offer the opportuntiy to produce a reasonable playing cue. The issue with grain pattern and arrow marking means nothing at all, not one tiny bit.
This obsession with grain patterns has become increasingly fashionable, with many potential customers becoming ridiculously fastidious about how they'd like it to appear in a finished cue. Now, what this has led to (especially for the maker who produces mainly custom work) is a constant search for timber which not only has the weight and stiffness, but, also the kind of grain pattern potential in the board (if that particular maker actually chooses his own timber to produce the cues which bare his name).

Now, when a board of timber is selected, it's very very difficult to be certain that it's going to be completely adequate in weight, and, in stiffness too. There might well be a board which displays the most perfect looking grain and colour, but it might feel just a fraction light. This then means that it can be left or taken, and could mean it's useable, or totally wasted once it is converted into round form as a shaft. Clearly, experience plays a massive part here, and the ability to choose good, from what is definitely going to be bad, does come over time (if you have half a brain anyway). The problem remains however, that numerous boards will be borderline good enough, and may offer much of the quality you are looking for, but perhaps be fractionally light, or have a tiny knott, or have a tiny bit of discolour or whatever else it may be. Scouring through hundreds od boards of timber is a long, laborious process, and is not entirely practical to do over and above a certain "amount" of timber, due to the availability of material, tiredness and even the patience and accommodation of the timber merchant you are dealing with. There are numerous obstacles here.

As I mentioned, this thing with the shaft having to look like this or that, does put pressure on a maker to provide materials of a certain grade. This has without a doubt increased over the last ten years, no question. What you will see in cues made by a number of top level makers is the option to specify a shaft which has virtually all of these attributes, but, at a cost. If makers only used shafts that has practically perfect grain, colour, stiffness, weight and so on, it would mean they'd have to waste enormous amounts of material that would be perfectly adequate to produce cues which played every bit as good as those with these so called 'select' shafts.

Anyway enough of that.

I think your assumptions that makers treat customers like club players is stretching it a little bit also. We (some of us anyway) deal with a great many people of all sorts, from novice club players to top level professionals. There is often this misconception that professional players are going to be more discerning than club players, when in fact, it's very often the other way around, trust me.
Many professionals would not know the length of their cue, the size of their ferrule, their butt diameter, or exact weight. What they will know, is whether the cue is doing what they tell it to do, in the way they like it to behave and feel, coupled with the overall shape and size (but rarely exact dimensions), which gives them the feeling of comfort. A good number of them are not massively particular about the grain either, certainly not like many non pro's are. I'm not suggesting they are all like this of course, and there are exceptions on both fronts.

The fact is, that cues are not necessarily of any given weight, or balance point, simply due to the weight of the ash in the shaft. Although the natural shaft weight plays a major part, it's just not always that black and white, and is dependant on how the cue is made, and how any additional weight is placed into the cue. A number of factors will be at play in determining whether a cue feels light towards the tip end, and besides, not all cues with the heaviest of shafts are the better cues, not at all. I'm not trying to be awkward when I respond to what you stated at the beginning of this post, but am just trying to bring some balance to what was otherwise, a bit of a misleading statement by "the standard of shafts these days just aren't as good as they were some years back" That just is not accurate at all.

Nothing I write is ever done with the intention of promoting myself, or what I do, but simply done to give people something to think about and consider in a critical manner.

Anyhow, all the best to you.

I'm off for a few beers now.

[gagg8ball]

My mates been churning out cues for years,and you can hardly tell the difference between early ones and new ones. You can still get as good a shaft its just harder to find!I'm just getting to 10 posts to put some pics up as i had loads of his recent ones at mine earlier

[Particle Physics]

Two friends use a Sherwood, Cuecraft cue and the ash, weight and balance point feel different to most cues. The ash is slightly granier in the hand but it hits the ball very solidly and there is lots of feel. One friend attributes this to the shaft being naturally matured over many years, a decade according to him. Those cues aren't expensive either, so all the cue makers saying we can't get good, matured ash has to be guff if Cue Craft can, splice it with ebony and a front splice from Sherwood Forest, and knock the cue out for £160.