Mike Ratledge wrote:Now, what would everyone think if I said we were looking at using the "JNugg" stock & finish for UC2018 decks? It's something that I just hailed Rick about in the last day or two, so recent he hasn't had time to respond yet, but - it surely could happen! I have a sample Bill sent me, it feels 'right' to me... Maybe not exactly Jerry's Nugget, but as we have discussed before, it's not really possible to do that precisely the way it was done in the 1970's because of the changes (and restrictions) on the chemicals used. We are a cardistry web-site, correct?
I really wish CARC/EPCC/LPCC/Bill Kalush would quit trying to profit off claims that they can make a deck that feels similar to Jerry's Nuggets cards. First of all, while they're slippery,
Jerry's Nuggets don't fan all that well, so why would anyone want to replicate a deck with sub-standard fanning capabilities? Now in the sense that a deck of genuine JNs are over 45 years old, they actually fan pretty well considering it is a deck manufactured almost half a century ago, but compared to a deck of humble modern day Bicycle Rider Backs, it's not even close. I would put the fanning ability of JNs slightly below an EPCC deck. JN's were finished, or dimpled, only on one side of the card and smooth on the other side, and that's why I think they don't fan super evenly like an Air Cushion deck. There's a reason why card manufacturers stopped that practice and switched over to both sides dimpled or both sides smooth - its because dimpling only one side wasn't good enough. So why emulate a finish that wasn't good enough? Plus, enough has been already said about the unavailability of the chemicals used in JNs' finish.
For me, the thing that makes JNs special is not the finish, but the card stock. I don't understand how anyone can say JNs have a thicker stock than other decks. Now fifty years ago, JNs may have been thicker than most other decks made back then, but when you compare a deck of JNs to a modern casino decks like Bee, or even Bicycle Rider Backs, JNs are thinner. But what makes JNs great is that even though they have such a thin stock compared to a Bike, they're much much stiffer. This makes JNs super durable, and when you bend or spring the cards, there's minimal deformation and they snap right back to their straight form. The wood used in the paper stock back in 1970 when JNs were made must have been special, you just don't see this quality combination of thinness and stiffness anymore. I suspect the USPCC, EPCC/LPCC and other card manufacturers use paper stock with too much recycled content to be able to truly replicate JN stock.
This new JN finish may be decent, may be not, but what I do know is that the deck won't feel like Jerry's Nuggets. As guru already said, all this "JN finish" hype is just marketing BS from EPCC/LPCC to lure collectors who never open their decks and therefore haven't the foggiest idea of what an actual deck of Jerry's Nuggets really feel like. So yeah, this is a cardistry website, so let's not fall for marketing gimmicks and stick to real cardistry quality. All the elite cardists, from the Bucks to De'vo to the Virts stick with the USPCC for their signature decks. They don't settle for decent performance decks and cut costs and pad profits by going with EPCC/LPCC, they demand the highest performance decks from the USPCC that's worthy of putting their names on their decks.
Bummer as I was thinking of picking up a couple more 
