Turning down a Predator Z2 Shaft

[Burn]

Hello all

I played with a Predator 9-ball cue for the first time recently and was genuinely amazed at how little the white is thrown offline when appying side.

Curious to now try one to play snooker with, as I tried a few long pots and the results were amazing. I'd guess at 25% higher success rate.

Anyone got any experience of turning a Predator shaft down to more generally accepted snooker cue dimensions?

The Z2 shaft has an 11.75mm tip, and I'd like to buy one and get it turned down to 10mm.

More than happy to take the risk of possibly destroying a shaft, and am fully aware that I will be invalidating the warranty, but prior to embarking on this little experiment, I wanted to know if anyone else had already tried?

Attached picture is a simplistic diagram of how the Predator shaft is made of separate pieces laminated together.

[poolqjunkie]

I you like this kind of set up, i.e. lower deflection and such, have you tried the accurate cue?

[Burn]

I've tried all manner of cues, I am a bit of a collector of old cues, and have also had a number of cues from the usual suspects including Parris et al.

The Predator shaft played unlike anything I have ever used, including other multi-piece OB1 shafted 9-ball cues which claim low deflection.

None played like the Predator. Tell me I'm being overly dramatic, but it was a revelation.

So for now, until I know it can or cannot be done, I am not considering anything else.

Maybe after

[matoski]

The smaller the tip, the smaller the deflection. Try to play american pool with a snooker cue and you won't have any deflection on the cueball. Z shaft has smaller deflection than the 314 2 shaft because is 1mm smaller in diametar.
Also, maybe z shaft is ok for long shots in snooker, but for breakbuilding i don't think is as good as the standard snooker shafts.

[Burn]

I can't see how it could possibly be 'not as good for break building'.

A cue with better dynamic performance is a cue with better dynamic performance. For sure it will take some getting used too, because it plays so very differently in terms of compensation for throw.

Anyway, as interesting a topic as American Cue-making Technology vs English Cue-Making Tradition might be (believe me, I've heard all the arguments about what Stephen Hendry achieved with a bent branch taken off a broken tree), I'm only really interested in finding out if anyone has any experience of turning down a Predator shaft.

Thereafter, I'll reach my own conclusions, without wishing to sound rude or arrogant, I've found that is usually the only foolproof way to prove anything, because everyone you ask will have an opinion on the Pros and Cons, and many of these opinions will be conflicting ones.

[poolqjunkie]

I think you should contact the maker to know the diameter of the tenon--the inner diameter of the ferrule will tell you if you can turn it down to the size you want.
It is hollow at the front, right?
I have tried the OB-1 shaft a few times. I think it is rubbish, no feel, the hit is very dead and whippy, and also very ugly. Just my own opinion. If I have to choose between the two, I will certainly go with Predator.
For snooker, I like the ash shaft with a brass ferrule. The 29" shaft feels a bit too long for me anyway. But I understand it is a matter of personal perference and there is no right or wrong.

[Burn]

Sent email to Predator earlier today. But I'm expecting a very non-commital reply along the lines of "we cannot advise on alteration of our cues as this will have a negative affect on the integrity of the performance blah blah blah".

That is why I posted here to see if anyone had tried the same experiemnt, and whether it was an abject failure or not.

Agree on OB1 shafts, very dead and lifeless.

[trevs1]

Hi Burn,

An interesting question.

I believe the Predator shafts can be kind of replicated in the way they play, simply by choosing the right taper and shaft rigidity to offer the best chance of achieving the type of performance you mention. Unfortunately, for most snooker players, the shape of Acuerate shafts is unacceptable, so compromises come into play for most snooker cues.

It's likely that the key factor as to why the Predator shafts work the way they do is mainly due to the shape and rigidity of the shaft, and not purely down to the laminated construction. If a shaft was made with the same laminated method, but done to a different taper etc, I doubt they'd be anything like the Predator. When this is taken into consideration, there shouldn't be any reason the shaft will perform differently if the whole thing is reduced, but still retains its taper, if you know what I mean.

I would agree with you though, a cue which plays with minimal, if any, deflection/throw, AND, still manages to display good response with the white ball, can feel like an absolute revelation to play with.

I'd say it can be done......why couldn't it be?

[Wity]

I'm sure I read on one forum or another a post of a guy raving about his Predator shaft that had been modified to 10mm and him sayiny and less and he'd been told it'd be firewood.

Even the lowest of the low only reduce throw by 25% so I cant see any advantage other than when it comes to having to replace a shaft which is a rare event anyways you can easily pick up another and expect the same standard. You can get that with a carbon cue costing a fraction of the price.

Seems to me the yanks on their pool forums are 50-50 for/opposed to them.

[Nott]

Below the ferrule on a Predatorshaft the first 5 or so inches are hollowed out (filled with foam i beleive). No idea how thin the 'walls' will be if you try to get it turned down to 10mm. Sounds risky.

Illustration from Predator. Albeit a 314 but I think the Z has the same construction. http://www.billiardwarehouse.com/cue...lustration.jpg

You might get a more qualified answer from the American cuemakers/repairmen posting over at azbilliards.com on this subject.

[Burn]

Hi Trevor, hope you are well

Since posting this thread I have found another on here posted by someone called Slasher (sounds like a description of my cue action) who took his Z shaft down to 10.5.

Interesting his findings on longer pots concur with mine.

So... the experiment is going ahead. It will probably be a waste of time and effort, but ho hum, my curiosity has to be satisfied.

Incidentally, I also want another cue from you as well, same Mannock style, but with Ash shaft ( which I beleive you recommended first time round) this time. Maple looks more like a real Mannock, but feels a bit lifeless in use. How are you fixed for time? Reading some of the threads on here today, you appear to be just about the busiest man in the world currently.

[Burn]

Brakes!!!

Notts picture of the hollow front end has frightened the life out of me. Perhaps experiemnt isn't going ahead just yet

Will see what some of the bods on azbilliards have to say first. Thx for tip Notts.

[bongo]

Slasher (sounds like a description of my cue action)

LOL!

Would tapering down a shaft affect the cue's dimensions so it would affect the cue's abilty to reduce the 'throw' or 'push off' (deflection) of the Predator cues? I'm only talking about the 'low throw' Predator Cues here

[bongo]

BTW Trevor,

What are your wise opinions of the Predator technology?, do you think they exaggerate things in their website?! www.predatorcues.com

[Burn]

Bongo, I have PM'ed Slasher with the question.

He says in his post it is still 'low throw' and ideal for snooker.

His original post: http://www.thesnookerforum.com/board...ead.php?t=8356

That post was a long time ago though, my fear is that he now has a tip, a ferrule and some wood splinters in one hand, and the remnants of his cue in the other.

You know when you feel an overpowering urge to do something, even though all common sense and logic tells you it is a complete waste of time? That's the feeling I've got currently