METAL JOINTS AND FERRULES.
It appears that COR iz an almost meaningless and useless term even in its own realm. And u karnt expect to uze it to predict the performance of something in another realm, eg cue joints.
It appears that there iz no such thing az the COR of a material (eg steel) -- and there iz no such thing az the COR of an object (eg a steel ball) -- and no such thing az the COR of an impact (eg steel ball on steel ball).
Koz, COR depends on material(s), shape(s), and speed (permanent deformation kills).
Allso, COR depends (a little) on what type of test -- ball to ball, ball to anvil, cylinder to anvil, etc etc.
For example, steel might hav a COR of 0.56 (ie mainly due to permanent deformation) at low speed and 0.99 at very low speed.
Two balls of lead giv a COR of 0.20 -- two balls of cast iron giv 0.66 -- but a lead ball to iron ball givs only 0.13 (dissimilar materials).
I would guess that a small lead ball to big iron ball (or viceversa) would giv less than 0.13 (same shape, but dissimilar size).
Thusly COR iz unlikely to hav much relevance to joints and ferrules.
For example, wood iz sayd to be 0.26 (some say 0.50). Yet cork iz sayd to be 0.65. But u wont find a player preferring a cork to cork joint rather than wood to wood.
And, a 1pce cue iz in some ways similar to a 2pce cue with a 100% wood to wood joint (no steel no plastic), what I meen iz that most would agree that a wood joint iz the nearest thing to a 1pce cue, yet wood haz a COR of 0.26 or 0.50 or something (ie less than implex or steel). I think I giv up.
Brass iz sayd to be 0.52 at low speed, 0.75 at very low speed, and 0.99 and almost zero speed (I guess probly 0.3 for balls at hi speed).
Aluminium iz 0.62, 0.75, 0.99 (I guess probly 0.3 for balls at hi speed).
Lead iz 0.35, 0.45, 0.81 (I guess probly 0.1 for balls are hi speed).
Hard bronze iz 0.83, 0.96, 0.99.
Carbon steel iz 0.70, steel iz 0.56, cast iron iz 0.66 (don't know how or why -- u kan probly halve these for balls at hi speed).
I bort 12 new Eliminator sneaky petes (13.2mm). And I hav now thinned 4 of them down to 9.9mm, 10.0mm, 10.3mm, and 10.9mm.
Theze 4 hav a parallel taper 12-1/2" long -- and quickly thicken to 14.1mm at 14" (ie they have a shoulder, look like 2-stage rockets).
9.9mm shaft........ 4.11oz originally --- 9 growth rings at joint --- grain iz straight near tip, slightly crooked near joint -- haz original lepro tip (dark brown single layer).
10.0mm shaft...... 4.20oz originally -- 19 growth rings at joint -- grain iz straight near tip, slightly crooked near joint -- i replaced the lepro (it died on the operating table) with an elk tip (grey single layer blob of glued shredded leather).
10.3mm shaft...... 4.79oz originally -- 14 growth rings at joint -- grain iz straight near tip, very crooked near joint -- i replaced the lepro (a chunk sheared off it) with an elk tip (elks shood be called leatherite, or leatherene, koz they aint real leather).
10.9mm shaft...... 4.74oz originally -- 14 growth rings at joint -- grain very crooked near tip, straight near joint -- i replaced the lepro with a triumph tip (lite brown single layer, red plastic backing).
I prefer the 10.0mm and 10.3mm -- I will uze these for league for a while (English billiards, 12' table, 2-1/16" balls, 141gm).
The 9.9mm shaft gets the most spin, but it haz too much squerv at long range.
The 10.9mm iz the best shaft at long range koz it haz least squerv -- but it haz too much squirt at short range (when wanting sidespin).
I havnt played well lately koz I hav been standing too square (ie too face-on). I hav been standing with my feet 30dg off square -- this feels good, u hav a good eezy view of the shot. But I go better standing with my feet at 45dg to the shot -- my stroke iz more accurate and consistent (but I need to twist my neck to see the shot). In fakt 60dg off square iz working best -- I will try that this week (team knockout finals, and individual knockout finals) -- and i will report back.
I won all of my games this week. So on Friday I will be playing a teammate in the league singles grandfinal -- 700pts up (English billiards here). But I didn't uze my parallel taper Eliminator shafts (see above) -- I used a new fast-taper Eliminator shaft that I made a few days ago.
One of my teammates Allan kame over to show me hiz new Hunt & O'Byrne snooker cue (3/4 joint) -- cost him $2000. Its 9.2mm, elk tip, brass ferrule -- ash shaft -- black ebony butt (4 splices) -- with rosewood also (4 splices). This woz the best cue I hav ever used. Koodnt miss. Side, skrew, koodnt miss.
So when Allan left I stuck a 13.2mm Eliminator maple shaft into my brother's wood lathe and made a replica taper (except that mine iz 9.3mm). It iz what I call a fast-taper, the dia thickens very quickly for the first 4", and then less quickly. The shaft looks like it needs to go on a wt-loss diet -- very fat, very stiff.
U kood rank tapers -- parallel, nextly conical, then fast (I think pro-taper iz nearly parallel, and euro-taper iz nearly conical). Many top snooker players hav a fast-taper nowadays, some hav a very-fast-taper.
Anyhow, my teammates sayd that my play woz almost back to the good old days (I hav played krapp all year). I will still take my 10.0mm parallel taper shaft along to the game, and I might uze it when I need lots of slow sidespin.
In addition to the 9.3mm fast-taper -- I made a 9.5mm with a very-fast-taper -- and a 9.4mm with a super-fast-taper. I go well with allovem. I guess I will end up using the one with the best tip.
Allan told me that the old hunt & obyrne woz almost unusable when it arrived -- there were lots of holes in the shaft where ash had been lost over the years (cue made in 1991) -- it woz too ruff to uze. Allan uzed an old cuesmiths trick of uzing superglue to fill the holes -- uzing ebony sawdust in the dark grainy bits.
When measuring the size of a qtip I uze a cheap plastic micrometer.
When comparing shaft tapers I uze a circle-guide (used for drawing circles).
The guide-holes are eech about 0.5mm oversize (ie bigger than the stamped size) to allow for the thickness of a pencil.
I poke the shaft into a hole, and draw a pencil mark on the shaft at that dia -- I do this for 10.5mm, 11.5mm, 12.5mm, 13.5mm, 14.5mm.
Then I lay the shafts sidebyside and compare the markings -- thusly comparing thickness and taper.
Ok, I hav made 4 shafts with parallel-tapers, and 3 with fast-tapers.
I hav 5 new shafts remaining. I guess I will havta make a few conical tapers.
I am getting good at shaving 13.2mm shafts down to 10mm.
I wrap pvc tape around the shaft to protect it from the jaws of the 3jaw chuck. And I wrap pvc tape at the thick end for protection where it pokes out of the "pipe" at that end.
I jam thin wedges at the thick end, so that the shaft spins without any wobble. Sometimes I pack layers of paper under one of the 3 jaws to get rid of 100% of the wobble.
First kut on the white plastic ferrule iz with an angle grinder -- using a flap-wheel (this haz sandpaper spokes, uzed for wood). U kan take a plastic ferrule down to about 9.2mm (if u don't hav any wobble) before u are in danger of seeing maple.
After the ferrule iz almost at korrekt size (uze micrometer), I then remoov maple (with angle grinder).
While using the angle grinder (on top of the spinning shaft), I press up under the shaft with a brick of cork (wood will do).
Second kuts on plastic are with a sharp file (and finish with sandpaper).
Second kuts on maple are with sandpaper. I uze two pieces of sand paper, one under the spinning shaft and one over -- u kan apply more pressure without getting any bending or wobble.
Get rid of uneven work by using sandpaper held over a flat base (I uze the flat cork brick).
Out of the lathe finish with fine sandpaper, then linseed oil, then very fine paper.
I won the singles title last nite.
But I used the 9.4mm super-fast-taper Eliminator (I didn't uze the fast-taper shaft, nor the very-fast-taper shaft).
The super-fast-taper iz amazing. I kan stand face-on or side-on or anywhere tween, and my skrewbacks kum back pure, no sidespin.
I kan uze a pendulum action, or I kan uze a pumpulum action, or any sort of action, and my skrewbacks kum back pure, no sidespin.
Something strange iz happening, and I like it. Also, i like the way it responds to backhandpivot, and to fronthandpivot.
The super-fast-taper looks weird (looks az if dunn with a pencil sharpener) -- it goze from 12.0mm at 5", tapering to 9.4mm at the ferrule.
So, mission accomplished -- but i hav other ideas too.
My opponent Wayne used a John Parris (snooker) cue (cost praps $1000).
Mac used an Eliminator pool cue ($22 plus $11 postage).
THE WORST JOINT IN THE CUE.
I wish my sneaky pete Eliminators had 7/8" joints, ie 0.875" (22.22mm).
But of the 16 that I now own, the thinnest iz 0.827"(21.00mm) -- and thickest 0.870" (22.10mm) -- most are 0.854" (21.70mm).
Kilby says that the industry usually uzes 0.840" for piloted joints and 0.850" for flat joints. Kilby uzes 0.870" for pool and 0.880" for 3cushion.
For English billiards on a 12' table using 2-1/15" balls (141gm), 0.854" iz too thin. Not enuff stiffness, too whippy. I am using a 9.4mm elk tip, and super-fast-taper. But even when using the nonmodyfyd 13.2mm (lepro tip) the Eliminator iz too whippy near the joint.
Hell, some of my snooker cues hav 0.843" (brass) midjoints, for hitting piddly little snooker balls.
And I tryd the 13.2mm with my 2-1/4" balls (169gm) pool balls -- too whippy near the joint, and too stiff at the tip (but I don't play pool).
I am surprized that some better pool players havnt learnt to specify 7/8" (0.875") joints, or even bigger.
Anyhow, yesterday I made myself a stiffer Eliminator, and I will test it over the next few days.
STIFFING AN ELIMINATOR.
An Eliminator would be stiffer if the 0.854" joint woz 4" further up the cue (thusly the cue would be 0.898" at mid-length, ie 0.055" thicker).
So, I kut 4" off a shaft -- and added 4" to a butt -- and I made myself a stiff cue (looks good, now i will see how it plays).
Shortening a shaft iz eezy.
I kut 4" off and tapered the shaft down to 11.1mm (and glued an 11mm Triumph tip)(shaft wt woz 4.25oz -- mini-shaft iz 3.78oz).
Lengthening a butt iz eezy.
Firstly i sawed 4" off a spare butt. Unskrew the rubber bumper. Skrew out the wt-bolt with an allen key. Wt-bolts are 3-1/2" long (2.78oz), or 4-3/4" long (3.78oz), or 5-7/8" (4.78oz). U want 4-3/4". Saw 4" off the butt. Skrew the wt-bolt into the fat end of the butt, halfway in -- now u are holding your new 4" mini-butt (ie butt-extn)(probly weighs 5.69oz) -- with say 1-3/8" of threaded steel sticking out (probly 9/16" with 10 tpi Acme I think).
Nextly, remoov the rubber bumper off a spare butt, skrew out the wt bolt -- skrew in the 4" mini-butt -- u now hav a long-butt (wt = 12.48oz + 5.69oz = say 18.17oz). Some Eliminator butts hav no wt-bolt -- some hav a very fat short type of steel wt -- u karnt uze theze.
Skrew mini-shaft into long-butt -- u now hav a stiff 3pce cue (wt = 3.78 + 12.48 + 5.69 = say 21.95oz)(length 58-1/8", balance 18"). The wide flat end of the mini-butt will sit nicely gainst the wide flat end of the main butt -- the ruff sawn end of the mini-butt will be on the end (u will need to sand away the sharp edge).
LENGTHENING A BUTT AINT EEZY.
Eliminator don't care about installing their wt-bolts dead center or dead on-line, i guess it aint essential, but it messed up the trueness of my mini-butts alignment. Anyhow I did a quick-fix. I skrewed the wt-bolt half into the fat flat end of the 4" mini-butt, so that the fat flat end sits gainst the fat flat end of the main butt. Fitting the mini-butt backwards like this minimized the off-centre error -- and the natural flex of the steel pin etc half fixed the misalignment error -- and flat meets flat nicely.
SHORTENING A SHAFT IZ EEZY.
Aktually i allready had a mini-shaft (4" shorter) from when I played around with some Eliminators a few years ago -- I remember that back then I woz looking for extra stiffness (just like now)(and I hav 2 other short shafts). I like this (11.1mm) mini-shaft, but the first butt that i uzed (ie the 21.95oz above) gave me a 3pce cue with a slight wobble. So, i went throo all of my butts and found 2 butts that fitted the mini-shaft perfiktly (ie giving a straight cue with zero wobble). I will test different combos of shaft and butt and see which plays best.
Pix of some bits n pieces of my 12 Eliminators project.
Pix shows Eliminator woodtowood joint and 13.2mm lepro -- and two modyfyd shafts.
A 9.1mm with a 9.5mm elk tip -- and 9.4mm with a 10mm triumph tip.
Both shafts hav a super-fast-taper in last 4".
Gary called it a beer bottle taper -- I like this -- koz it describes the sudden taper, and it describes the allmost parallel bit at the qtip, ie like a long neck -- fast tapers don't uzually hav a neck, and their sudden taper aint so sudden. So from now on I will call this taper a bottle-taper.
Both shafts hav been shortened by 2-3/4" (offkuts shown).
Both shafts hav a flat Bakelite disc to stop the maple from burring and splitting (disc iz the backing off a triumph tip).