Understanding Carbon Trout Rods

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,891
Location
Hawke’s Bay, NZ
You could pose the ERN, but that would be how stiff it is.
The current rod rating systems seem to work great, as everyone knows where to start when matching a line.

After that, folks develop preferences to suit their own whims and fancies.

It really doesnt have to involve rocket science, or elaborate 'understanding' tomes, written by people who don't understand.

Practical understanding of carbon fly rods is in essence a sensory sexy feely individual preference thing; adding numbers to demistify it, does the opposite.

🙃
 

ed_t

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
6,731
"Understanding language would be useful too"
Go for it. Susie Dent will be a better lexicographer than you will ever manage though.

Definition and derivation of words... you'd be xxxxed.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
48,801
"Understanding language would be useful too"

So.....after arguing for a better rating on rods, including perhaps the ERN, you now champion the use of the word 'power' to describe a vague collection of physical attributes, what would your 'power rating' we could use on rods?
 

karlsson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
392
Location
Denmark mostly..
The distance casting records are longer for the single handed #7 than for #5. Why is that?
A 7 weight line weighs more than a 5 weight line, more mass, more momentum. Very little to do with a bendy stick, alot to do with increased mass. Oh, and in your 7 weight class, a foot longer rod is allowed too, a couple of feet longer tip path possible for the good casters.


A 12 weight rod throwing a 5 weight line (thought it was a 3 weight, but took the wrong line from the bag) and a 5 weight rod throwing a 12 weight line, why didn't the more "powerful" rod throw the line further than the much much less "powerful" rod? Mass of line....

Cheers
Lasse
 

karlsson

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
392
Location
Denmark mostly..
A question then ? Why can I cat 20m with my 6' 3wt but 30m+ with my 11' 3wt ? Is it the rod length or that the action is different with the two rods ??
Leverage, longer rod, longer tippath, longer path to accelerate the line. And I take it it's not the same line either?

I can cast +20 meters without a rod and a 5 weight line, low 40's meter with a 9 foot bendy lever and same 5 weight line.

Cheers
Lasse
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,891
Location
Hawke’s Bay, NZ
So.....after arguing for a better rating on rods, including perhaps the ERN, you now champion the use of the word 'power' to describe a vague collection of physical attributes, what would your 'power rating' we could use on rods?
....not much wiggle room left for him now, on rod power.

...bit like measuring the horsepower of horses, and expecting the answer to always = 1

🙃
 

LukeNZ

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
3,891
Location
Hawke’s Bay, NZ
Would that be a carthorse or a Shetland pony?

....it just highlights the absolute practical genius of the AFTM type line rating system.

From the beginning of commercial fly line manufacturing, all the way through the process of fly line / rod, product, and materials development ages, that # line indication measure still irons out all the wrinkles...

And what is more, it is so simple to understand, in its provision of a stable workable point #, in the midst of so many other variables; so that beginners to experts and everyone in between, can't go wrong in matching rod to line.

🙃
 
Last edited:

ejw

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
741
Location
Helsby, Cheshire
Karlsson. same line on the same reel, so same tippet. Just my casting style I think ? Not worried as I can use the right rod for any given situation.
Only flyfish for relaxation and pleasure. Don't have to cast a full line while fishing (only on grass). I dropped my ATFM rating from a 7 in the 1970's to a 5 in the 1990's and now fish 3 weights mostly. Far more relaxing and less strain on the arm. I will still fish 4 or 5 weights, but mostly for sunk line work or saltwater.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
7,275
So.....after arguing for a better rating on rods, including perhaps the ERN, you now champion the use of the word 'power' to describe a vague collection of physical attributes, what would your 'power rating' we could use on rods?

I wondered when you'd notice..

Do you now see why it would be better to have a standard system of meaningful rod attributes rather than have to interpret the vague terms used by the makers and marketers such as 'power' and 'action'?

But until we do, rod 'power' means what I've described.
 

Paul_B

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
5,959
Location
West Riding of Yorkshire
Rod power? it could be better described as the ability of the rod to transfer power, or rather energy.

The optimum line for the transfer of energy from the user to the rod is usually marked by the # mark, this is decided by the rod maker, users can have different needs or wants depending on how they want to use the rod.

Then we get to the long winded, the ability of the rod to transfer power (energy) for a given line weight, reduced to just rod power :unsure:
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
48,801
I wondered when you'd notice..

Do you now see why it would be better to have a standard system of meaningful rod attributes rather than have to interpret the vague terms used by the makers and marketers such as 'power' and 'action'?

But until we do, rod 'power' means what I've described.

I have always managed to get by just using the word that most accurately describes the thing, in this case it's just stiffness, no need to complicate it further.
 

PaulD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
2,728
Location
South Northants
Do you now see why it would be better to have a standard system of meaningful rod attributes . . .
No.

We already have the 'action' very adequately described as between fast, medium and slow which simply describes the distribution of the flex of the rod. The rod also carries a number, suggesting a line weight as a guide to what line is required to load the rod for casting.

I honestly do not see what other information is needed or of use to the angler.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
7,275
No.We already have the 'action' very adequately described as between fast, medium and slow which simply describes the distribution of the flex of the rod.
And all manufacturers apply their own ideas of what is slow, medium and fast.
When Orvis tried to introduce a standardised methodology to help customers, the industry wouldn't use it.
The rod also carries a number, suggesting a line weight as a guide to what line is required to load the rod for casting.
And all rod manufacturers measure it differently with the difference often being 40% or more between 'casting' rods and 'presentation' rods.

I honestly do not see what other information is needed or of use to the angler.
Yes, I believe you might have mentioned that.
 

ed_t

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
6,731
A question then ? Why can I cat 20m with my 6' 3wt but 30m+ with my 11' 3wt ? Is it the rod length or that the action is different with the two rods ??
One other thought on this is that if you are overhead casting the longer rod launches the loop from a greater height so there is more time for the loop to travel before gravity does it's thing.
 
Top