Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Equipment => Bats => Bat Making => Topic started by: Number4 on September 10, 2013, 09:12:23 AM
-
Awhile ago I came up with an idea of getting a bat made using the perfect or golden number phi. I shared my idea with a bat maker from this forum but nothing came of it.
The plan was to make a bat by using phi.. Dimensions, handle to blade ratio, toe to middle ratio, width to thickness ratio.... Everything would relate to the number phi...
What are people's thoughts?
My thoughts were if you use the perfect number to make a complete bat you would have the perfect bat....
Guess we may never know!!!!
-
Wow..my head hurts just thinking about it :)
-
Wow..my head hurts just thinking about it :)
Wouldn't it be worth for the perfect bat though? ;)
-
If anybody makes these I'll take 2 please ;)
-
what weight?
-
Hmmm. The Golden Ratio....
If you were to do this, you'd end up with a bat that looks like the following:
Handle length: 31.9 cm (29.2cm)
Blade length: 53.2 cm (55.9cm)
Middle distance from toe: 19.95cm
Spine height (using golden ratio of spine height to width): 6.75cm
What I think is quite interesting about these numbers is that they are not far from a normal bat. The normal numbers are in brackets next to these calcs.
Just looking at this, I'd suggest you'd end up with something similar to a Mongoose CoR3 with a mid-middle that would pick up reasonably well, look big and dependent on cleft and batmaker, could be quite heavy.
-
what weight?
If I'm right (which I'm probably not) you wouldn't get a say in the weight, as you'd be working to get the 'perfect' dimensions, so weight would depend on the cleft I'd imagine.
If I've got that totally wrong please can someone correct me lol
-
If I'm right (which I'm probably not) you wouldn't get a say in the weight, as you'd be working to get the 'perfect' dimensions, so weight would depend on the cleft I'd imagine.
If I've got that totally wrong please can someone correct me lol
It would depend on how you limit yourself. If you use the example I gave to give the ratios, i.e. middle position, spine height to width, and don't restrict it more, then you could concave to remove weight. If you wanted to be stricter and include edge to spine height for example, it would become more difficult.
It's basically dependent on how you limit yourself with the golden ratio as to how heavy a bat you could produce.
-
If I'm right (which I'm probably not) you wouldn't get a say in the weight, as you'd be working to get the 'perfect' dimensions, so weight would depend on the cleft I'd imagine.
If I've got that totally wrong please can someone correct me lol
it would depend on the cleft like you say but you can choose the weight to a certain degree. You can get a 30 -50% difference in weight between two clefts.
I have a 2.7 bat which is the exact same size as a 2.11 both with around 35mm edges, 65mm spine height and the same amount of concaving.
B3 and their crown bats that Procricket has are an example of a bat being the same but weighing less. That is a true international players bat, not the just grains but mainly the size for the weight.
-
Can some-one explain to me what phi actually means. Thanks lol
-
the dimensions are pretty spot on as tim says. if the cleft weight it right im sure you would be able to work out a rough idea on finished weight, atleast a weight range. sure someone with slightly more up top than me would be able to work that out lol.
-
If it came with a 6.75cm spine peak height at the measured middle and no concaving, I think you'd be looking at a range between 2lb 9oz and 2lb 13oz dependent on the cleft.
-
If it came with a 6.75cm spine peak height at the measured middle and no concaving, I think you'd be looking at a range between 2lb 9oz and 2lb 13oz dependent on the cleft.
Ahhhh 2lb 9oz my perfect weight ;)
-
Anyway just an interesting concept I thought... And something to get the mathematical minds thinking
-
If it came with a 6.75cm spine peak height at the measured middle and no concaving, I think you'd be looking at a range between 2lb 9oz and 2lb 13oz dependent on the cleft.
Subject to edge size, toe and profile shape. Interesting to see if all the measurements were followed how it would turn out
-
Can some-one explain to me what phi actually means. Thanks lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio)
-
I was talking about this earlier in the year at a Sunday game with some mates. I was thinking you could take it a step further and make a bat that was in ratio to a specific batsman! This idea hasn't yet left the pub though :s
-
I'd be willing to buy (pay for one to be made) a "Golden Ratio" bat next year if no one else has had one made by then. Or if one is made and it looks good I might get one as well!
-
Hummmm,
What width would it be?
Not sure Im buying this...
-
Hummmm,
What width would it be?
Not sure Im buying this...
Max is the standard width in the regs so 10.8 cm.
Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk 4
-
If someone is keen on doing this then ill try and make it. I would need all dimensions etc. I like a challenge. Anyone interested let me know and we can discuss further
-
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio[/url] ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio[/url])
That was my first point of call also lol, but still made no sense!
-
So width is 10.8
Edge size would be 3.6
Spine height 7.2
Short handle bat is 85.09
So you'd want the handle at 28.36333333333333r
Blade at 56.726666666r
And the middle or spine maximum height at 18.98888888r
All in cm.
Is that right? Or did I not understand correctly?
-
So width is 10.8
Edge size would be 3.6
Spine height 7.2
Short handle bat is 85.09
So you'd want the handle at 28.36333333333333r
Blade at 56.726666666r
And the middle or spine maximum height at 18.98888888r
All in cm.
Is that right? Or did I not understand correctly?
Your ratio is all over the shop. Handle to blade should be the same ratio as blade to overall length, and given the handmade nature, 1.6 is close enough. I put the sizes in one of the earlier threads. There are many areas you may wish to use the ratio...
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
-
Anyone with some spare cash and a sense of adventure willing to give it a go? :D
-
one thing that would be interested to know is the shape of the bat. there has been mention of max spine height, edge size etc but you can still manipulate that. for example the max spine height could be achieved in a zona style bat or a high spine on a modern bat which you could obviously concave the back.
is is possible to have say 3 measurements for the spine and the edges. ie max spine and edge height at the swell and then measurements for the shoulder and toe area. would then give a more accurate shape rather than being manipluated.
Does that make sense?
-
Max spine height needs to be in relation to the width of the bat using the 1.6 ratio don't forget though
-
Max spine height needs to be in relation to the width of the bat using the 1.6 ratio don't forget though
I guess you can really pick and choose which ratios you will use.
-
I guess you can really pick and choose which ratios you will use.
I think if you stick with the main ones i.e handle to blade, width to spine, middle position from toe.... I think Tim pretty much nailed the specs earlier in the thread
-
Make them to the formula, then use concaving to achieve your desired weight?
Can anyone use cad? Enter tims numbers in and see what it looks like? And put a pic on here.
-
My brain is aching...... However would major manufacturers not have thought of doing this before? Could be alot of money in it if you can replicate bats to be perfect is shape/dimension etc...
-
Sorry for digging up an old topic...but did anything ever come of this?
Or was it all just phi in the sky?! (sorry!)
-
it makes the handle about 1.5" longer and the blade the same shorter. looks good in nature...
-
I don't think anyone wanted to pay to have a t20 bat made.
Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk
-
So something like this ;
(http://i66.tinypic.com/e16dds.jpg)
love a picture! obviously not to scale!!
The problem I can see with this is the swell would always be in the same place - which we know is not correct. You could have another a+b relationship that dictated the overall length of the bat which would then intern change the position of the swell. But that would mean that the swell position would be dictated by a persons height which I am again not so sure on?
Not sure what the width of the bat has to do with it.
Also the weight could dictate the overall edge/spine a+b - dimension.
Streaky
-
Certainly looks interesting. Can't argue with nature can you?