Spin top design

[Free]

Hey guys, I'm looking into making a top with a friend of mine and was looking at some posts about it and I also measured all of my tops and discovered a huge variety of info. I just used a cloth tape measure so it's not dead acurate.
Monarch 43.5 54 52 cap ring 4mm/tip 9mm
Mexican 57 54.1 cap ring 5mm/tip 9mm
YYF Acrobat 65 58 56
YoYoJam Fixed 50 56.616
Ripcord 63.3 58 57.429 cap ring 4mm/tip 10mm
Turbo 53 57.5 cap ring 4mm/tip 10mm
Throwback 65 53 56
Quicksilver 61.44 74.25 cap ring 7mm/tip 13mm
Guilia 61 64.14 cap ring 6mm/tip 13mm

Do any of these come close to the golden ratio? I don't really understand that? How do I calculate what ratio these tops have? Also I really enjoy the Turbo which is very wide for it's height but it seems like that shape is mostly frowned upon. Does anyone like wider tops or do most good players tend to agree on the taller narrower model?
Thanks, Free

[John Buechele]

I tend to like fixed tip tops that are taller. I'm not really playing much bearing right now but when I do I think that, at least for smaller tops a more short, round shape works better, eg yyj gates, yyf acrobat, stb 2.0. The idea being that more weight at the rim creates more stability and longer spin times. As far as ratios go I have drawn up a few designs (see below) the first of which is the the ratio that I am going to use making some over-sized tops. The main measurement that I plan on using is that the distance from the base of the top (not including tip) to the widest point is equal to the diameter. This is a measurement that I think Alan Gray uses now.

The second picture is what I understand to be the golden ratio. This is where the diameter is 1 2/3 the distance from the base to the widest point. I don't know if any top in production uses this ratio but it could be interesting.

Disclaimer: I haven't made any tops yet using either of these designs. So I don't know if they will really work. Also I'm not positive about what measurement to use for the overall height of the top. The only thing actually measured in my pictures is the height to the widest point and the diameter, The rest are rough dimensions.

In this design A is equal


In this design B = A x 1.6667

[ta0]

I would tend to agree with John, I prefer my fixed tip tops slender and my bearing tops wider. The reason is that I mainly use bearing tops for specific bearing tricks where stability and long spin are important.

The golden ratio [ x/y = (y-x)/x = (1+sqrt(5))/2 = 1.6180339 . . .] can appear in nature and has been said to be pleasant to the eye. People have claimed it was used in pyramids and other classical architecture, but because of the measurement incertitude it might as well be 2/3 or anything close. However, I would find it neat if Alan used it to make his tops, as those are like classical architecture (even without the buildings on top)

[poptop]

When I measured tops a while back, it seemed that almost everything I had was similar to the old wood duncan's in basic proportions. An exception was the RC and BK (and later the throwback). I think this basically follows what Tao said about stability (v.s "tiltability" of the taller tops). I'm not certain, but I think the combination of center of gravity (mass?), inertia (influenced by rim weight) and height have the most influence on this characteristic.

I've always wondered how/why the duncan folks arrived at the RC/BK shape. Accident? Trial and error? Dumb luck?

[MrYo]

Mmm I always follow my eye, if i like the shape i make a top

Maurizio

[poptop]

You sir, have a good eye.

So far my (very few) turned tops have been "freehand", but I'm looking to impose a little more discipline as I find shapes I want to repeat.

[Free]

so is it A x 1.667 or A x 1.6180339 ? Has anyone every made a top to this exact ratio? What tricks whould be difficult with this ratio and what tricks would be easier? It seems like most tops try for something in the middle so they can be used bearing or fixed? The Throwback and the original mexican bearing trubo seem to use this ratio? How do people feel about those? Is the STB2 like that as well?

[Eric]

Maurizio said:

Mmm I always follow my eye, if i like the shape i make a top

Me too !!!

[John Buechele]

Haha, in my picture it is A x 1.6667 but as ta0 said the golden ratio is that other number and I am too lazy to do all that math. Personally I don't like the idea of interchangable fixed and bearing tops just because I think certain designs lend themselves better to one style of play or the other. What kind of top do you want to design? Fixed or bearing? Something interchangeable?

Maurizio said:

Mmm I always follow my eye, if i like the shape i make a top

Me too !!!

Hahaha my eyes aren't that good.

[MrYo]

Maurizio said:

Mmm I always follow my eye, if i like the shape i make a top

Me too !!!

... The Master...

[jim in paris]

Maurizio and Eric said:

"
Mmm I always follow my eye, if i like the shape i make a top

Me too !!! "

i would tend to think the same after a lot of experiments with shapes

the golden ratio pictured by john
A x 1.6667
doesn't work with a plain wood top : it's so efficient that it wobbles a lot
you need a weight ring to stabilize it//////give it a try and see
for hollow tops , it's a different thing
think of the sofia : : odd shape but incredible spintime and stability


good w-end all

jim

[Watts' Tops]

A word from the solid wood top maker. I use the 4" high 4" wide + the point for all my tops. I tried others at first and came to this and it works.

[Free]

It's going to be bearing...probaby bearing only. I'll have to measure some of my tops like Watts and S8 and compare the widest diameter with the height from there down just to find out. I'm not sure I'm ready to trust just my eye at least not until I've done some more research to find out what my eye and hands want.

[Neff]

1.618... Is the golden ratio. It is not a good ratio for width to length for spin tops, too tall. Follow your eye and experiment.

[ta0]

The ratio of the total height of Titi with the optional tip cap and its maximum diameter is the golden ratio!
Or at least pretty close: 97.8 mm / 59.1 mm = 1.655 or just about 2% more. Pretty good eye, Maurizio!