View Full Version : Layani cues conical joint
05-13-2002, 04:02 PM
Damn, another one of those "someones already done it" ideas. . . .
05-13-2002, 08:50 PM
What can I say? And moreover, it works!
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Thierry Layani:</font><hr> What can I say? And moreover, it works!
Thierry Layani <hr></blockquote>
i'm told that everything is alot more conical after a joint but i wouldn't actually know..um, y'know, i mean...for myself.
just what people tell me.
05-14-2002, 01:27 AM
I have a Lambros with conical joint. I have no idea how a conical joint would hit any better than a flat face.
Classic post Dan, thanks for helping me to get my day started with a chuckle!
05-14-2002, 07:24 AM
I with you there. I, myself, didn't inhale though.
Eric >Big Bambu
Cueless, Just go to the website; it's all there.
1. Perfect coaxiality
2. No decentering during the hit
3. 5 times superior
4. No parasitic reaction
5. No lateral or radial displacement
6. Charges are distributed equally
It has to do with "global harmony" and "capacity of non hazardous repetitiveness". Just read the text. The scientific evidence is omitted in order not to confuse the reader.
05-14-2002, 07:43 AM
If you did inhale, you probably wouldn't remember that you did inhale and you would claim that you did not inhale.
Rich R.~~~not sure whether to believe Dan and Eric.
05-14-2002, 08:00 AM
It worked for Bill C. I figured if he didn't inhale, well...None of us did.
Eric >it was for medicinal purposes
05-14-2002, 08:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Eric.:</font><hr> It worked for Bill C. I figured if he didn't inhale, well...None of us did.
Eric >it was for medicinal purposes <hr></blockquote>
I just don't remember if I did???????? Rich R.~~~Hmmmmm.
05-14-2002, 08:46 AM
I actually read the whole text and I got a little confused, I guess I'm not very smart. I'm going to twist one up and then reread it and see if I get it.
05-14-2002, 01:34 PM
To read the whole text is actually quite something! I must admit our writings can be little confusing in the sense that it was very hard to express something that is part of our experience and our understanding in everyday language. Moreover, it was translated in english by myself, and english is not my first language. I believe the text in french has more nuance to it. If you need to understand the idea of the conical joint in a few words I would put it this way:
1.more surface of contact(5 times more), which means more sensibility (a feeling of control)
2. perfect coaxial fit which means a very stable hit (a feeling of precision)
3. Less energy loss caused by joint compression which means you don't need a king kong stroke to move around the cueball.
Actually all these characteristics should make this cue a good break cue and it is. Tiffany Nelson who has the strongest break among women and Danny Hewitt who certainly has one of the best break in the world also break with this cue and both say it really generates a lot of power (or more precisely it loses less power).
OK that was suppose to only be a few words.
Any other question?
05-14-2002, 01:49 PM
Is the conical joint adaptable to other cues? Let's say for instance, I had a custom made butt, that I'd used for several years and a predator shaft for it. Could I have a cuemaker install one of the conical joints for me?
05-14-2002, 03:05 PM
Up to now, it's our decision to install conical joints only on our cues. We believe this joint to be an important part of our cues, but it's not the only thing that makes the cue hit the way it hits. From our point of view, a cue always has to be considered in its globality, the joint being an important part. So yes it could be adapted to some cues (not all of them though) but we do not want to sell only the joint part. I'm sorry. Some day maybe when we'll have a 6 years waiting list (hoping it will never happen!)
05-15-2002, 01:40 AM
> A conical joint is usually referred to as a "spliff". If built correctly,they hit very well. LOL,Tommy D.
05-15-2002, 05:25 AM
Just keep it simple. Fancier, and/or more complex, does not always make something better.
05-15-2002, 09:23 AM
It's a bit more lathe work, to make the pieces, but I doubt that assembling the conical joint into a cue is more difficult than attaching a 'regular' joint. As for the design itself, it's not much different than a countersink (-sunk?) screw head.
I think the explanation/salespeak is much more complicated than the joint concept.
And, although I generally agree that "Fancier, and/or more complex, does not always make something better," sometimes it does. Ask all those who love their Predator shafts. . . .
05-15-2002, 10:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Thierry Layani:</font><hr> ...our writings were translated into english by myself, and english is not my first language. I believe the text in french has more nuance to it. <hr></blockquote>Thierry, I suspected that some of the wording you used may have had different nuances in French or may not have been translated into the most equivalent English words.
- Perfect coaxiality: do you mean perfectly centered? (p.s. Coaxiality may not be an accepted form of the word coaxial.)
- The surface of contact is 5 times superior: do you mean 5 times greater area?
- No parasitic reaction at the junction: I don't know parasitic means in this context.
- The charges are distributed equally even with sidespin shots: By charges, do you mean forces?
05-15-2002, 12:42 PM
Actually the conical assembling is one the most simple and efficient type of assembling you could think of. That's why it's used in many machines or tools that need to be put together and put apart often. A conical joint could be made on a lathe but we have it machined by very precise cnc machine so that we are guaranteed high tolerances. The conical joint is much more complex to install than a normal joint because it's always installed at the very end and a decentering of 0,001 in. can cause a run-out of 0,0030 in. We needed to construct special tools in order to install it (correctly that is).
Nature like music is a simple thing to appreciate but a very complex thing to understand.
Simplicity like complexity lies in the mind of the observer not in the thing itself.
05-15-2002, 12:45 PM
Thank you for your remarks. That's what I mean when I say english is not my first language. But at least you were able to understand it! I will make the corrections. I had the text read by english speaking persons and it seems it got pass them.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.