Understanding Carbon Trout Rods

JoeOh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
344
If all this technical squabbling isn't amusing you, probably best to just ignore us.
Thanks for your reply. Maybe I just worry that one of ye will actually blow a blood vessel.
----------------------
I've never been able to test a rod. I bought my first when I couldn't really cast and used it for 30 years. A beginner doesn't learn anything from waving a rod around. These days it's almost impossible to try before buying as all the shops have disappeared. We mostly have to rely on recommendation and reviews don't we?
You are right about many of the shops disappearing. Most of my earlier purchases were from Don's of Edmonton, sadly gone for a while now, and all fly rods could be tested with a shop loan reel on the grassed area behind the store.
The Lodge at Rutland has also allowed me to test rods in the harbour area at the front.
And if in the higher purchase zone, Atomsix will send you a rod to test.
But as you say, not so easy for most
Cheers Joe
 

diawl bach

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
8,143
Garry Evans is very good, in the past he's lent me a rod to wander off with to see how I get on, I'd imagine this would apply to anyone who'd put the money down on the rod(s) in question. Maxcatch are at a bit of a disadvantage in that respect.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
43,862
Wherever the rod bends, the ERN would measure it's overall power because it's measuring stiffness of the whole rod.......


.........But of course there's more to a rod than that. Where it bends matters and how fast it recovers and so on.

In my view this shows you didn't quite get the simplicity of what I posted, you are trying to measure or define the entire length of a blank as though it bends and gives 'power' the same from butt to tip.

Which obviously it doesn't, the measurement would be meaningless, there is no 'stiffness of the whole rod', every modern rod bends more at the tip than it does at the butt, that's a different rating at either end and a progressive variable all the way from one end to the other, as you point out at the end.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
6,047
In my view this shows you didn't quite get the simplicity of what I posted, you are trying to measure or define the entire length of a blank as though it bends and gives 'power' the same from butt to tip.

I'm just informing you that that is what the ERN measures - total deflection. A measure of stiffness which IS directly related to power.

Which obviously it doesn't, the measurement would be meaningless, there is no 'stiffness of the whole rod', every modern rod bends more at the tip than it does at the butt, that's a different rating at either end and a progressive variable all the way from one end to the other, as you point out at the end.

Sorry, but a rod does have an overall stiffness that can be measured and all rods ever made bend more at the tip than the butt. The degree of bending and where is measured in the CCS by the Action Angle AA. We haven't got into that because I suspect it would end our beautiful relationship.

“The AA is a measure of the angle the tip top forms when the rod is so deflected. These two values provide unique coordinates for that rod on a chart plotting the DBI as ERN vs AA. This is extremely useful for comparing completed rods, i.e., the final destination of the rod maker’s odyssey (See Common Cents Figure 5 in RodMaker 6 #2.)

While knowing where a rod ends up is important to the consumer, the keen rod maker is more concerned with where the journey began and the route followed to the final destination. In other words, one would like to see the BIG Picture.

Since bending for a fully loaded rod is defined as equal to one third of the rod’s length, a DBI can be determined over any length of a rod blank, tip, mid-section, or butt one might choose. By combining such measurements, one can create that BIG Picture.”

 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
43,862
I'm just informing you that that is what the ERN measures - total deflection. A measure of stiffness which IS directly related to power.

And I just explained why it is meaningless for what I think you are trying to achieve.

You have tried a helios 2 and couldn't tell it from another rod, what did the ERN tell you there?
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
43,862
I'm just informing you that that is what the ERN measures - total deflection. A measure of stiffness which IS directly related to power.



Sorry, but a rod does have an overall stiffness that can be measured and all rods ever made bend more at the tip than the butt. The degree of bending and where is measured in the CCS by the Action Angle AA. We haven't got into that because I suspect it would end our beautiful relationship.

“The AA is a measure of the angle the tip top forms when the rod is so deflected. These two values provide unique coordinates for that rod on a chart plotting the DBI as ERN vs AA. This is extremely useful for comparing completed rods, i.e., the final destination of the rod maker’s odyssey (See Common Cents Figure 5 in RodMaker 6 #2.)

While knowing where a rod ends up is important to the consumer, the keen rod maker is more concerned with where the journey began and the route followed to the final destination. In other words, one would like to see the BIG Picture.

Since bending for a fully loaded rod is defined as equal to one third of the rod’s length, a DBI can be determined over any length of a rod blank, tip, mid-section, or butt one might choose. By combining such measurements, one can create that BIG Picture.”


When you build a bridge the engineering data is very useful, when you claim to be speaking for the average person and trying to help them know which bridge to drive over you don't ask the architect.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
6,047
And I just explained why it is meaningless for what I think you are trying to achieve.

I explained why you were wrong. Now what?

You have tried a helios 2 and couldn't tell it from another rod, what did the ERN tell you there?

Nothing, because the rod I used was a #7. I don't know the ERN for the #7. But, if we make the assumption that it is a near true to weight #7 because the #5 is, then that would be why my line worked well on it.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
6,047
Maybe I just worry that one of ye will actually blow a blood vessel.

I think that's what we're trying to do :)

Apart from the odd toxic troll that pops up to say something useless and generally vile every so often (best ignored), it's just an old married couple bickering. Doesn't mean much.

And if in the higher purchase zone, Atomsix will send you a rod to test. But as you say, not so easy for most
Cheers Joe

I keep looking at the Atomsix, but my rod's fine, it's me that needs work :)
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
6,047
I guess nothing, I have tried to help you where I can, you don't appear to understand it or want to acknowledge it.

You guys keep telling me I don't understand. I do understand, I just think we're talking across each other. The number on your Helios rod now does not tell you anything about the magic properties you say it has does it? And neither does the ERN.

It's just that I say the ERN is the better number to write on the blank if you're going to write ANY number on a blank. Because it's a standard and objective measurement.

An alternative would be rod weight in grains/grams according to line profile as in the Spey AFFTA. Though I still have questions about how that is established.
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,008
Location
Hawkes Bay, NZ
Rods create power by mechanical advantage - by being levers, and by storing energy - acting as a spring. It's generally reckoned to be 80:20 lever:spring.

We don't need your personal definitions, it's all been done decades ago. I suggest you do some reading.

.oh for an ounce of casting ability...
10,000 words of your understanding thesis, wont help you with that,

Just wondering how many people (other than yourself) do you know, that struggle with understanding which line to put on a 5wt. rod?

(Hint - the clue is in and around 5wt.) 👍

🙃
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,008
Location
Hawkes Bay, NZ
The theory of a rod storing power is a bit of a misunderstanding I'm afraid. There is some contribution to line speed from the spring effect but this is somewhere under 20% of the actual energy transferred into the line during the casting stroke.
Rather than storing power, the flex of the rod does a couple of other more important things to make the cast work. Firstly, when the rod flexes due to being loaded it enables a straighter line path of the rod-tip which is more efficient. Secondly it allows the energy applied by the caster to be applied over a greater distance. Thirdly it allows a smoother energy input into the line.
We need the rod to flex to make the cast work and there is probably an 'optimum' amount of deflection though this will vary according to different casting styles.
The amount of flex is entirely dependant on energy input and line weight. You then need to consider how this feeds into line speed. Back to our old friend the TCR, this is stiffer because it is designed to flex with a much higher energy input which directly translates to line speed. For a 7wt and a 5wt line to be carrying the same amount of energy the 5wt needs to be moving faster and will go further.
This brings us back to Tangled's continuing inability to accept that a rod can be designated as a #5 but is as stiff as some #7's.
The TCR is an anomaly but it's a rod that is designed to cast a 5wt line at high line speeds and therefore greater distance.
All the energy stored in the rod and transferred to the line, does come from the angler. There is nothing else exerting force, or adding energy.
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,436
Location
West Oxfordshire
All the energy stored in the rod and transferred to the line, does come from the angler. There is nothing else exerting force, or adding energy.
Some of the energy applied by the caster is stored in the rod and released at the stop, but the majority is transferred directly to the fly line via the rod.
A fly rod by itself cannot store a lot of energy, simple practicable experiment.. fix the rod butt solidly to something, pull out about 30' of line, hold the end of the leader and flex the rod as much as you dare.. and let go. You'll be lucky to get anymore that 10' of distance 'cast' over the other side of the rod.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
43,862
I did say the use of the term 'power' was going to an issue at some point.
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,436
Location
West Oxfordshire
I did say the use of the term 'power' was going to an issue at some point.
I raised this some time ago but agreed that we could settle on power as a shorthand term for stiffness. That's why I always put 'power' in parenthesis...
It is however the completely wrong term.
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,008
Location
Hawkes Bay, NZ
Some of the energy applied by the caster is stored in the rod and released at the stop, but the majority is transferred directly to the fly line via the rod.
A fly rod by itself cannot store a lot of energy, simple practicable experiment.. fix the rod butt solidly to something, pull out about 30' of line, hold the end of the leader and flex the rod as much as you dare.. and let go. You'll be lucky to get anymore that 10' of distance 'cast' over the other side of the rod.
All the energy in the system comes from the caster. Efficiency of its transfer is technique.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
6,047
I raised this some time ago but agreed that we could settle on power as a shorthand term for stiffness. That's why I always put 'power' in parenthesis...
It is however the completely wrong term.

It's universally used. There's no point worrying about it, unless there actually is a better definition.
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,008
Location
Hawkes Bay, NZ
I did say the use of the term 'power' was going to an issue at some point.

What goes in all comes out, somewhere. Through technique and efficiency, the aim is to transfer as much of what goes in to the line..

Power = available useful energy.

Available useful energy = input energy divided by efficiency.

🙃
 
Last edited:
Top