pipemakersforum.com

There's been a trend lately for pipe makers (and some pipe buyers) to fall into a numbers game when talking about stems. How thick it is behind the button expressed in thousandths of an inch.

Like wattage is to audio system performance (meaningless without knowing the efficiency of the loudspeakers plus a bunch of other stuff); and horsepower is to auto performance (meaningless without knowing the weight of the car plus a bunch of other stuff); the thickness of a stem behind the button is to comfort... meaningless without knowing a bunch of other stuff.

The problem is people love simplicity, and they love shorthand-style labels when they think it captures the essence of a thing. ESPECIALLY if the label is a number.

Nothing is quite so easy---and quite so likely to lead you to a wrong conclusion---as a first-pass quantitative comparison, if the thing/attribute/feature/whatever is expressed as a quantity that is meaningless on its own.

I have a Joura pipe in my shop right now with a stem that's .175" thick behind the button. It is amazingly comfortable. Why? Karlo knows his shit.

Carvers who routinely get thousands of dollars for a pipe usually do.

Grumpy Guy out.

Well... fuck me, I agree with George.

I went down the road of "how thin can I make this bit before it fails" and the answer is... pretty thin! But there is a point past which you are offering a product which is likely to implode upon use. Or overuse.

I've been lucky or unlucky enough to have a few of my pipes back in my shop over the years now, for repairs, replacement, service or just for a vist. And I've been astonished at how mangled some of them were, and not really super fine ones to start with either.

What's amazing is how sensitive your mouth is to the tiniest change. A couple thou and a bit feels totally different.

I make mine "about thin enough". I've only ever measured in retrospect.

LatakiaLover wrote:There's been a trend lately for pipe makers (and some pipe buyers) to fall into a numbers game when talking about stems. How thick it is behind the button expressed in thousandths of an inch.

Like wattage is to audio system performance (meaningless without knowing the efficiency of the loudspeakers plus a bunch of other stuff); and horsepower is to auto performance (meaningless without knowing the weight of the car plus a bunch of other stuff); the thickness of a stem behind the button is to comfort... meaningless without knowing a bunch of other stuff.

Dear Grumpy,

We're not making cars or stereos. This isn't that hard. For most things there's also a critical factor; that one main thing to focus on to maximize the likelihood of success. For stem comfort thickness is certainly that factor. New carvers aren't usually scared to make a narrow enough stem for comfort, but they are too scared to make it thin enough. Numbers aren't the end game, but they do tell a very important story.

So, I guess, enlighten us. What bunch of other stuff do we need to know?

<.150 or die.

You don't need to know nothin' else.

Hope this helps.

Rad

Now is that "at" the button or is the whole bite? As someone who has mostly completed one stem. If there was a formula for a comfortable bite what would it be? I think I like a little thicker button but maybe that's ignorance? Help me out here. I'll measure mine tomorrow


Sent from my banana phone.

Well, I was a half sentence away from finishing a detailed response to Tyler, had a power interruption computer shut-off (T-storm moving through the area), and lost everything I was working on in every open window.

Damn, I hate that shit.

Maybe later when I get over that "wanting to sledge hammer my computer into junk" feeling.

IDNAWR

LatakiaLover wrote:Well, I was a half sentence away from finishing a detailed response to Tyler, had a power interruption computer shut-off (T-storm moving through the area), and lost everything I was working on in every open window.

Damn, I hate that shit.

Maybe later when I get over that "wanting to sledge hammer my computer into junk" feeling.

IDNAWR

Dang.

Don't worry Ty, once you've made another half dozen pipes or so, and you really start to hit your stride, you'll "get it".

an interesting comparison;

http://www.fumeursdepipe.net/arttuyauxroan.htm

RadDavis wrote:<.150 or die.

You don't need to know nothin' else.

Hope this helps.

Rad

YES!

RadDavis wrote:<.150 or die.

You don't need to know nothin' else.

Hope this helps.

Rad

"Now that's some real conversation for ya ass" Dr.Dre

I typed out a cure for cancer for you guys to market and make millions off of but my power flickered and I lost it all. Oh, well.

In my experience, guys who talk about how silly certain accepted standards are do so because they aren't skilled enough to meet those standards. (I'm totally busting your balls here, George, because I've seen you do stemwork.)

Tyler wrote:
We're not making cars or stereos. This isn't that hard.

Actually, it is. That's why there are only a few hundred first rate stem makers on the planet, out of 7.1 billion people. Hell, go to any pipe show and looks at what's on the tables, or read the archives of PF. Making good stems drives people nuts.

For most things there's also a critical factor; that one main thing to focus on to maximize the likelihood of success. For stem comfort thickness is certainly that factor.

No, making a stem super-thin just subsumes other execution errors that can cause discomfort (at the cost of greatly reduced durability). That situation makes thickness SEEM to be critical when it actually isn't. Else the comfortable .175" Joura pipe I mentioned earlier wouldn't be possible.

New carvers aren't usually scared to make a narrow enough stem for comfort, but they are too scared to make it thin enough.

Such fear in beginners is the result of a lack of skill when working on a pipe's most notorious "unrecoverable error... must start over" area, together with the notion that a sub-.150" bite zone measurement is essential. Would they be scared if they knew they could stop at .165"? Probably not.

So ... what bunch of other stuff [is involved in stem comfort]?

-- Stem width
-- Bite zone cross-sectional shape
-- Button height
-- Button profile contour
-- Button "vertical view" contour
-- Stem taper rate (all stems taper, even saddles)

wdteipen wrote:I typed out a cure for cancer for you guys to market and make millions off of but my power flickered and I lost it all. Oh, well.

In my experience, guys who talk about how silly certain accepted standards are do so because they aren't skilled enough to meet those standards. (I'm totally busting your balls here, George, because I've seen you do stemwork.)

I've re-read both those lines several times and can't figure out if you are just towel-snapping in the time-honored MF tradition, or are seriously calling me out (so to speak). Plus, we've never met, never mind been in a shop together. Please clarify.

Sasquatch wrote:Well... fuck me, I agree with George.

No worries, Sas. It was bound to happen sooner or later. You'll get over it in a couple days, and by next week it'll be only the faintest of memories.

LatakiaLover wrote:

Tyler wrote:
We're not making cars or stereos. This isn't that hard.

Actually, it is. That's why there are only a few hundred first rate stem makers on the planet, out of 7.1 billion people. Hell, go to any pipe show and looks at what's on the tables, or read the archives of PF. Making good stems drives people nuts.

For most things there's also a critical factor; that one main thing to focus on to maximize the likelihood of success. For stem comfort thickness is certainly that factor.

No, making a stem super-thin just subsumes other execution errors that can cause discomfort (at the cost of greatly reduced durability). That situation makes thickness SEEM to be critical when it actually isn't. Else the comfortable .175" Joura pipe I mentioned earlier wouldn't be possible.

New carvers aren't usually scared to make a narrow enough stem for comfort, but they are too scared to make it thin enough.

Such fear in beginners is the result of a lack of skill when working on a pipe's most notorious "unrecoverable error... must start over" area, together with the notion that a sub-.150" bite zone measurement is essential. Would they be scared if they knew they could stop at .165"? Probably not.

So ... what bunch of other stuff [is involved in stem comfort]?

-- Stem width
-- Bite zone cross-sectional shape
-- Button height
-- Button profile contour
-- Button "vertical view" contour
-- Stem taper rate (all stems taper, even saddles)

Interesting, for me button height is HUGE! Many pipes are made with buttons that are too high for my comfort zone. That Radice I was talking about in another thread is one of those. I have several, and I just gently take them down until they are comfortable.

LatakiaLover wrote:

wdteipen wrote: (I'm totally busting your balls here, George, because I've seen you do stemwork.)

Plus, we've never met, never mind been in a shop together. Please clarify.

you made a video on stem/button work. by that logic, everybody on here has seen you do stemwork, George.

on this topic, what would you say is the minimum width a stems bite zone could be. (across the stem, to clarify)

LatakiaLover wrote:

wdteipen wrote:I typed out a cure for cancer for you guys to market and make millions off of but my power flickered and I lost it all. Oh, well.

In my experience, guys who talk about how silly certain accepted standards are do so because they aren't skilled enough to meet those standards. (I'm totally busting your balls here, George, because I've seen you do stemwork.)

I've re-read both those lines several times and can't figure out if you are just towel-snapping in the time-honored MF tradition, or are seriously calling me out (so to speak). Plus, we've never met, never mind been in a shop together. Please clarify.

No, I was seriously just towel-snapping. I was referring to the stem video you posted awhile back. Don't worry, my sense of humor is lost on most people.

wdteipen wrote:

LatakiaLover wrote:

wdteipen wrote:I typed out a cure for cancer for you guys to market and make millions off of but my power flickered and I lost it all. Oh, well.

In my experience, guys who talk about how silly certain accepted standards are do so because they aren't skilled enough to meet those standards. (I'm totally busting your balls here, George, because I've seen you do stemwork.)

I've re-read both those lines several times and can't figure out if you are just towel-snapping in the time-honored MF tradition, or are seriously calling me out (so to speak). Plus, we've never met, never mind been in a shop together. Please clarify.

No, I was seriously just towel-snapping. I was referring to the stem video you posted awhile back. Don't worry, my sense of humor is lost on most people.

This is all Walts fault. He's a bad influence on Wayne. Teaching him to be mean.