Fly Fishing Forum banner

Why does a floppy rod still cast well?...

5K views 57 replies 21 participants last post by  Dingbat 
#1 ·
Hi All,

While I prefer the use of stiff rods. I recently picked up an elderly gents rod off the bank 10ft 8wt. Gave it a few casts. The rod loaded pretty quickly I pushed and released to what I felt comfortable for a basic medium distance cast with not wanting to tangle his leader up. To my surprise it totally pissed the line out and put a thunk against the reel. Pretty much the same for the next 7 casts. I gave the rod back slightly stunned commenting that I couldn't really feel where the power was but it casts very well.

The rod was a custom build by somone back in the day so no real help what rod model was etc even he didn't know.

Anyone any ideas why a floppy soft rod can still cast a fair distance?

I was left with the feeling of I wouldn't like to fish with it, too soft ,but there was no denying you could get some good distance with it.
 
#8 · (Edited)
It's not the rod that casts, it's the caster.
If you are any good at it (I'm pretty average as it goes) and have the rod and line matched (for whatever you are trying to do) then any rod will cast well in the right hands.
True enough. There's a saying from way back. "Let the rod do the work." Well, you could lay the rod on the ground and say, "Work," and it'll just lie there. Until someone gets hold of the blunt end it's just a stick lying on the ground.

There is a series of photos in Tom Ivens' book on stillwater fly fishing from around the end of the 1950's. He was using a 10' cane rod and double hauling. It took him about five false casts to build up the line speed to get out around 23 or 24 yards. A reasonable caster with a modern carbon 10' rod should achieve the same with no more than two false casts. Same result but less than half the grunt. Someone good at it should be able to lift off, one false cast and deliver out to the same distance.
 
#5 ·
Stiff rods can cast further but require more effort to correctly load them, and precise timing to correctly control loop size and any hauls incorporated. Soft rods will still cast a good way with easy loading, easy loop control and more forgiving timing of hauls. A large part of the reason why fibreglass rods have made a big comeback.
 
#19 ·
I think you've hit the nub of it with timing- stiff rods need everything to be right, and errors will be magnified. Soft rods will damp out some of the errors so you can cast further easier up to a limit.

Found this over the last couple of months when when i'd packed the wrong spare rod in the car and was away for 2 months in ireland. The wrong rod was a medium action 9' 8#, i'd meant to pack a fast 9'6" 7-8#. Put an intermediate on the wrong rod and was surprised how well it could cast. Playing around because the fish weren't rising and could just about get a full line out, but it got harder the further i tried to push it and couldn't get the backing out the tip.

Same line on a fast 10' 8# and could get the backing out the tip, but more effort and more variable results.

Much nicer using the wrong rod and leaving a few turns of line on the reel.

The wrong rod will be getting a lot more outings.
 
#6 ·
Hi All,

While I prefer the use of stiff rods. I recently picked up an elderly gents rod off the bank 10ft 8wt. Gave it a few casts. The rod loaded pretty quickly I pushed and released to what I felt comfortable for a basic medium distance cast with not wanting to tangle his leader up. To my surprise it totally pissed the line out and put a thunk against the reel. Pretty much the same for the next 7 casts. I gave the rod back slightly stunned commenting that I couldn't really feel where the power was but it casts very well.

The rod was a custom build by somone back in the day so no real help what rod model was etc even he didn't know.

Anyone any ideas why a floppy soft rod can still cast a fair distance?

I was left with the feeling of I wouldn't like to fish with it, too soft ,but there was no denying you could get some good distance with it.
A bendy rod transmits more energy per effort to bend it, because it bends easier, so you get more out with putting less in, the catch is that arialising more line on a long cast = more weight and more bend so you have big loops and less control.

All a stiff rod does is not get too bendy.
 
#7 · (Edited)
Hi all,

Well the theory of a more bendy rod stores energy better. But fankly had a lot of cheap rods from years ago cheap Eva foam handles around the 30-40 mark they were ****e. Medium distance was all you could hope for. They were soft as.....and lacking power.

This old graphite rod felt like a modern expensive rod, just that timing was slower and that pretty much after you had aerailzed 7 m of fly line felt you were in the sweet spot to fire off a cast. But obviously I kept adding more line which it allowed until I was like any more the rod is going to collapse on me and yet it didn't. Was a very surreal casting experience and I have tried a heck of a lot of rods.

If you imagined a rod with your own perfect parabolic curve and the perfect stiffness when casting ( cause everyone is different right). Well this rod must have had the perfect curve but minus 25-30% stiffness you think it should have had. Probably a rod from way back "you paid the money you definitely getting that extra something for it ". And that is something your don't get with newer expensive rods nowadays and when you think about it you definitely should.
 
#9 · (Edited)
I only use modern glass rods for this reason, very little effort in, maximum distance out- they are just so much more efficient at casting and playing fish and of course impossible to break.
They are slightly heavier weight wise, but in the hand feel the opposite, very light and much less tiring- they cast themselves to a degree.
I learned to cast on hollow glass, had 40 years with carbon, that always felt numb, despite all the hundreds of rods owned, then back to glass and I enjoy my fishing far far more. Will never use another carbon rod, have many friends who say the same too.
If you learnt to cast with carbon, you may struggle with glass or cane as it requires a completely different casting stroke, you load the rod, then steer the cast. As you have much more time, with the longer stroke.
I have some 1970sSue Burgess Copperhead glass rods, with fuji single leg rings and they cast brilliantly and the line flies through the rings silently and swiftly, infinitely better than wire snakes or single legs, fair does, they were top of the tree back in the 70s with very high quality cork, but rods haven't moved on as much as the manufacturer would like you to think they have.
C1366690-1B8E-4611-B0B5-0F53AA6D2F66.jpeg

Plant Grass Font Musical instrument accessory Metal
 
#17 ·
with fuji single leg rings and they cast brilliantly and the line flies through the rings silently and swiftly, infinitely better than wire snakes
Agreed, I am a fan of the old Fuji, aluminium oxide single leg rings from the 80's. They are heavier than wire snakes, though and can be bent or have the liners knocked out. For any set-up where you have a join going through the rings (shooting head, multi-tip line's) they are far less snaggy than snakes or wire single-leg rings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hardrar
#13 ·
You'll never cast as far as you can with a stiff rod of the same length and weight (because the 'floppy' rod creates larger, less efficient loops) but there shouldn't be that much of a difference in the hands of a competent caster.
 
#16 ·
That's right a good top caster can change casting stroke lengths and tracking to accommodate different rod actions. It's all down to the individual. On the other hand some people can't adjust no matter how they try and that's were individual rod preferences come in.
 
#14 ·
The actual caster himself plays a big part in which rod works more efficiently at distance. A powerful caster working on a shorter casting stroke will most likely get bigger distances with a stiff rod. A less powerful caster will achieve better results with something less powerful and a longer casting stroke.
And that's the vast majority of us. You can with anything take it too far.
 
#21 ·
I always liked lined single leg rings, quieter than single leg wire too.

There are floppy rods and then there are slower rods. I expect the blank in quesstion is quality, designed to progressively load and it can handle it.
Many of the rubbish rods,both glass and carbon from the 70s through to the 90s were poorly designed, one dimensional, and only operate effectively at a particilar loading/depth of stroke etc and locked up quite quickly,with nothing more to give.
Well designed rods definitely have gears, pleasant at 5 yards or little rolls and speys, yet can double haul full heads to the horizon.
When we are all fishing the post graphene rods in 20+ years, someone will pickup a Zenith or a RPL etc and go wow!
 
#24 ·
As for rod materials, up to around the 7' 6" length it's probably too generalist to say one material will be stiffer or softer in action than another. A carbon rod may well be softer and slower in action than a split cane rod, it depends on how it's been designed. With longer length rods, the different characteristics of the material usually become more apparent.
 
#25 · (Edited)
Loving this thread as a person who uses mid action. What’s confusing me is no ones mentioning Damping in the blank? Isn’t that a consideration that’s becomes more crucial as the blanks more through action , and why modern glass are technically better than the older ones? The rod I just lost had no flutter/ wobble at the end of the casting stroke and everything felt true . The Greys I’ve borrowed seems to wobble before it settles. Ruining the loops from the backcast and frustrating the shoot on the front resulting in some fail in the turnover and a feeling of playing darts in boxing gloves. I have to really concentrate getting the leader turned over, and dropping into tight spots a lottery.
I thought the fabulous thing about legendary slow rods like the Tom Morgan Favourite and the slower IM6 was this superior damping , yet no one has mentioned it. I have I got the wrong end of the stick here?
 
#26 · (Edited)
Loving this thread as a person who uses mid action. What's confusing me is no ones mentioning Damping in the blank? Isn't that a consideration that's becomes more crucial as the blanks more through action , and why modern glass are technically better than the older ones? The rod I just lost had no flutter/ wobble at the end of the casting stroke and everything felt true . The Greys I've borrowed seems to wobble before it settles. Ruining the loops from the backcast and frustrating the shoot on the front resulting in some fail in the turnover and a feeling of playing darts in boxing gloves. I have to really concentrate getting the leader turned over, and dropping into tight spots a lottery.
I thought the fabulous thing about legendary slow rods like the Tom Morgan Favourite and the slower IM6 was this superior damping , yet no one has mentioned it. I have I got the wrong end of the stick here?
'Wobble' is definitely a thing in distance casting, though they call it the rod frequency. Fast rods will naturally have a higher frequency than a soft one, which perhaps counter-intuitively is better. I don't know where the cut-off is though; if a high-frequency, stiff rod is what you need forl distance they'd all be using broomsticks.

Maybe someone that actually does this will put us right.
 
#29 ·
You might get some ideas reading the 'Understanding Carbon Rods thread" - or just continue where we left off there. Though these discussions always seems to descend into name calling for some reason.


As far as I can take it, the trick for 'wobble' is in both materials and design. If you use high IM carbon, high-end resin and the correct distribution of nano-beads you've got a decent start.

I use a Greys GR50 which is supposed to be fast but it isn't. Still, it's a good rod and I've seen a good caster routinely cast it to the backing - there's nothing wrong with the rod! I've used a Helios 2 and liked it but if you want a really fast rod the Sage Igniter is fabulous. Pity it's £900!

I'm on the look out for a really fast, light rod that doesn't cost an arm and leg but have't found one yet.
 
#31 ·
I think most people find it easier to cast a slow rod than a fast one as there is a bit more room for error timing wise. I'd say most average casters would get on with a very fast rod. From a fishing point of view I much prefer a through actioned rod as I hardly ever loose fish on them. I rather publicly lost one on a new, rather stiff, rod last week and I struggled to cast it too. Straight to eBay with it!! Casting is only a part of fishing and a pretty minor part too.
 
#44 ·
I have a Bruce and Walker river fly bought it new about 25 years ago. Compared to modern rods some may call it floppy I would call it a medium actioned beautiful river rod . Casts lovely open loops when I am fishing teams of spiders on medium rivers . In the autumn and winter it is great for close nymphing when the soft action cushions a fishes lunge on short lines . I don't use it often but on its day it beats more modern stiffer / faster carbon . Its the only rod I have used so much and so long that I had to get the handle replaced

O M W
 
#47 ·
The issue with this is, ( no offence) some guys or gals, can cast a fast stiff pokey rod better than a slower through action rod and other casters the opposite, so the trial just becomes a trial of the caster not the rods. A few Anglers can cast any auctioned rod well!
A lot of people who cut their teeth on modern fast action carbon rods, simply cannot cope or handle the totally different approach needed with a soft through action rod', loads of anglers are currently buying modern "in vogue" glass rods and then quickly selling them as they cannot make any sense of them.
I learned to cast with hollow glass and used to compete in distance competitions when younger and never really liked the steeliness or fragility of carbon and have gone back to glass and find it much more enjoyable in all aspects. I've let other anglers try out my glass rods and they just can't put a good line out, even though they are very good casters with modern carbon.
I have fellow anglers ask me how I put out such a long line with a single back cast, as they are "dyed in the wool" overhead casters who then throw their arms up in despair when I show them the rudiments of Skagit, sh Spey, Switch and jump roll.
At the end of the day it's purely personal preference, as all Anglers are very biomechanically different and as such, have individually different needs for what rod and action suits them best.
 
#50 ·
Another thing that amuses me is when people say that split cane rods are heavy, slow and floppy. Truth is, they vary, particularly shorter length, modern cane rods. I have a 6' 6" impregnated split cane brook rod from the late 1990s that weighs just over 2 ounces and casts like a little laser in comparison to some of the 1950s 8' 6" and 9' cane rods I have. So stereotyping cane rods is akin to saying all carbon fly rods are fast and stiff.
 
#51 · (Edited)
I struggle with some of the terms in use , Floppy / soft / through action / full action. It is as if they are all the same thing . I have a good selection of small stream rods . I would say very few of them are fast action. To me the nearest would be a sage TXL . My favourites are rods that load easily on the back cast but have a fairly fast recovery. That is how I perceive them and they work for me. A couple of examples would be the Sage Circa which I adore and others have been known to pick up and say to noodly. Also the older hardy 7ft featherweight a rod that I beleive is in a class of its own on small streams. Easy loading and a joy to cast. now a older hardy 7ft 3wt I have is very similar but the blank recovery is much slower and I seem to need that bit of extra effort on the forward cast , I have had a number of WInston B2T , DIfferent action again I never seemed to gell with the them. I love the Orvis superfines they arent fast and yet they work beautifully. Truth is I like fishing rather than casting rods , my experience and opinion is that the better fishing rods are not fast ones. I suppose the nearest things I have to fast rods are a couple of Greys XD salt for the tropics , I bet some of you guys think they arent fast at all. Anyway just saying like that bracketing all softer rods as floppy doesnt really work...

O MW
 
#52 ·
May I say based on your preferences as per your post , the best fishing tools are fast, yet not stiff ;-)

fast and sharp (no vibration no counter end,) recovery are definitely a criteria we should all agree on.

Stiffness (ie. How much does the rod bend - from full to tip flex), is much more a matter of preference.

And yes you can have a fast recovery full flex rod ;-) admittedly though stiff rods will more easily have a faster recovery than full flex rods. That said, fast recovery is wanted, fastest recovery not necessarily ;-) Where is the inflexion point is largely a matter of personal preference I believe
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top