<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Shawn,<br>
<br>
First of all, I don't think you are restricted to just a ball end with
the Fujan. Talk to Steve and see what your options are. The advantage
of a ball end is the reduced stress on your hands and wrists, which
translates into a lower possibility of discomfort and repetitive-use
injuries. I preferred a ball end right from the start to a traditional
handle, but you have to use what you're most comfortable with.<br>
<br>
I own (and regularly use) both the Fujan and the Faulk carbon fiber
tuning hammers, so maybe I can help give a fair answer to your
question: The Fujan is more rigid than the Faulk, because of the larger
diameter of the carbon fiber tube. This is not only theoretical, but
both tuning hammers have been tested for their flex (deflection). The
Fujan may be more rigid, but both carbon fiber tools are significantly
more rigid than any tuning hammer with a steel or titanium shaft (this
is proven, not my speculation).<br>
<br>
So why do I use both, and which is better? It really comes down to a
matter of length, and that is the biggest functional difference between
the two tools. I think for most uprights and for many grands, the
longer Fujan is a better choice. For some grands, I prefer the way a
shorter Faulk responds. The shorter tool also has a better balance when
moving from pin to pin (both tools are almost identical in weight). I
could probably achieve the same thing by having two Fujans of different
length, or switching out different lengths of carbon tubes. But as much
as I like the high-tech look of the Fujan, there is something very
special about the tool Charles made, with a handle made from a piece of
rare amboyna burl - I think it's a work of art.<br>
<img alt="http://mesapiano.com/cf/cf.jpg"
src="cid:part1.04020504.02080806@mesapiano.com"><br>
<br>
The bottom line is that both tools are fantastic and you can't go wrong
with either. The Fujan has a few technical advantages, such as more
rigidity, interchangeable head angles and shaft lengths, but it's also
a lot more expensive. The Faulk has a more traditional look that
appeals more to some, is less expensive, and also has the ability to
adapt to both Jahn and Watanabe tips.<br>
<br>
A note on materials:<br>
<br>
The reason titanium has been a popular choice for tuning hammers is
because it's lighter than steel. What most people do not realize is
that titanium has more flex than steel. That extra flex is great for
golf clubs, but is a disadvantage for tuning hammers.<br>
<br>
Carbon fiber is lighter than both steel and titanium, and considerably
more rigid than either metal. This makes it a superior shaft material
for tuning hammers:<br>
Less mass = less momentum = more control over the tuning pin<br>
Less mass = less strain on your body lifting it and moving it from pin
to pin all day.<br>
Less flex = less "spring" energy absorbed into the shaft = more control
over fine tuning pin motion<br>
Less flex = better tactile feedback of what is happening with the
tuning pin and string<br>
<br>
Some people prefer heavier, more flexible tuning hammers because that
is what they are used to. There is nothing wrong with that, but I often
hear people say that a heavier tool is better. There is no reality or
physics supporting that claim, unless you're trying to manhandle the
tuning pin or turn it back in after a splice or repair. I've also
heard people insist that titanium
is more rigid than steel or carbon fiber. That is simply false.<br>
<br>
Hope that helps,<br>
Mark Purney, RPT<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Shawn Brock wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:00a201c90660$5742c330$fdc8a8c0@ownerf9ede2044"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16705" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">I would be interested in hearing
what you folks who have tried and or owned both of these tuning hammers
think of them. I have thought of going the carbon fiber root, I don't
think I will be buying the Fujan lever anytime soon. At this time I'm
using a Jahn and a Watanabe both with 15 degree heads (love the 15).
Anyone prefer the titanium over the carbon fiber? Was going from a
"conventional lever handle to the handle on the carbon fiber a big
deal? That's one other thing that makes me shy away from the Fujan, I
could never get things to work with a ball end hammer! Waiting to hear
some comments from you guys!</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Shawn Brock, RPT </font></div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>