Discussion in 'Spey Clave' started by kamishak steve, May 1, 2012.

  1. Wow, this thread changed directions. I don't even understand where it went. Mass. K constant. Spring constant. WTF? I need to go fishing and I think I will dig out that old CND I got in the garage to fish with. Wonder what line I am going to put on it. Now, please no one tell me what the grain weight of the line I use should be. I could care less.
    Two-Hand likes this.
  2. Please accept my apology, didn't mean to vear it off.
    Get out your CND Kerry, it'll throw all kinds of lines but don't get too aggressive if it's a Custom... they don't like being pushed.
  3. The swing weight of the more massive tip causes the rod to load deeper and that is something that is not attained by making a stiffer tip out of a lighter material.. the physical weight has to be there. we have tried it does not work in the real world regardless of whether it works on paper.
  4. I suspect this is entirely correct. Springs are springs and a rod is a spring as we use it. "K" is dependant on the taper, therefore the spring is dependant on the taper. My Custom 8/9 has become a better caster due to the repairs because the repairs have stiffened the tip, by adding mass.

    If you've broken a Custom, have it sleeved instead of having a new tip made. They get better with a stiffer tip.
  5. If the mass of the tip is something that loads the rod, I'm missing something. The momentum of the line I suspect would dwarf the momentum generated by a tip section. I don't design rods, but it would be nice to have a serious run down on this.....

    BTW, why the serious hate of lighter materials bro? To be honest I'd much rather have the energy go to the line rather than moving and loosing energy due to a tip.... A lighter material by itself doesn't make a rod better, but one would assume that given a less massive rod you'd be able to use the energy more efficiently moving the line

  6. If the tip of a rod is too light it will not activate the rest of the rod.. the more of the rod you use the more power the cast will have..

    I have nothing against light weight materials we use them a lot but to get the highest level of performance you need to have a tip that is heavy enough to actuate the whole rod..

    take the spring analogy posted by klickrolf... two equal springs..
    the first spring you compress just 3 of it's 5 coils.. it shoots off a goodly distance when you release it
    take the same spring and compress all 5 coils and that puppy is gone....

    this is all very over simplified and certainly you don't want a tip that is too heavy for the rest of the rod but it does have to be heavy enough both in stiffness and physical weight to load the rest of the rod.
    most of our spey rod tips are nearly straight when the rod is deeply flexed.. the load is in the portion of the rod that can generate the most energy.
  7. Thnaks, no apology needed. I certainly wasn't offended by the direction of this thread. I don't get into all the techno stuff when it comes to fishing and fishing rods. I still make my own lines and I make them by feel. If it casts well for me then it is the perfect line for the rod. If the rod breaks because of my line then I buy another rod made by someone else. I like keeping it simple.
  8. And I'm still not sure how the mass of the tip provides this. Like I mentioned, I would think that the momentum of the line would load the rod. But I don't know how much a tip weighs versus a line, nor do I know how much the momentum of the line changes as the line loads either by unrolling in the back, or grabbing on the water.
  9. I try and pay attention to how my rods handle their own weight during a normal casting cycle. I think of it as sway. A rod that doesn't load at all under it's own weight can be a workout to cast, as they tend to require a more abrupt power application to load to the same degree. My T&T 1206 has the least sway in my lineup right now. I'd guess my CND Solstice 13'4" has the most. If not it, then one of my other CND rods.
  10. Rob,

    I don't doubt your experience in the slightest, but I strongly doubt your explanation. James is correct in questioning the role of mass in the rod tip. The big problem at the moment is that neither you, he, nor I are compentent physicists to explain this rod and line interaction. (This is beginning to remind me of Yuhina's casting thread of a few months ago that went all ratshit.) I've read all kinds of descriptions by casters who think they know enough to explain the physics, but don't. And I've read an extensive article by a physicist about casting who probably understood enough about physics but not enough about casting and or rod design to really offer a clear explanation. . . . Maybe one of these days . . .

    In a perfect world, the perfect rod is weightless. Then all the angler's energy goes into the line, which is what we are casting. The rod just makes it much easier than casting the line without a rod. The stiffer tip section that you describe for Burkie rods is an attribute shared by my CND rods. They do load smoothly into the mid and even butt sections. I think it is the stiffness and not the mass of the tip section that causes this. Of course the stiffness is achieved by the number of wraps of fabric around the mandrel, and that adds mass, but like James, I don't see how it's the tip mass that sends the bend down to the next rod sections. Particularly in consideration of the weight of the line and the water tension exerted on it; that's got to be considerably more "weight", or is it force, that what is carried by the tip section.

    This could be fun. Will you be at the Sandy Spey Clave?

    Ed Call likes this.
  11. Been chuckin my Skagit Specialist for years and it is my favorite rod! Like 80% of the fly companies out there if you catch them at the right time and place you got a hell of a product. If you caught them after they overextended themselves you lost out...
  12. Ha... thanks for the honor mentioning Steve.

    I was wondering where are those F1 casters?!! I tried to restrain myself and not get into those physics talk... well... if you want my opions. James Mello is correct and right on the topic. The momentum from the LINE pulling/ load is the force useful for the cast. As Steve mentioned, the perfect rod is weightless, the IDEAL Spring you guys are talking about also should be weightless. (look up: Hooke's law and K constant).

    The most common misconception is the confusion between rod action and power.

    "Action" is the term used to describe "Where" the rod bend, the shape of loaded rod. (full-flex, mid-flex, tip-flex), this is independent factor than "power".

    "Power" is the speed, how fast the rod recovery. everything being equal, nano graphite > graphite > fiberglass > bamboo . The ratio of graphite fiber and resin determine the recovery speed.

    Can you tell the difference? the less weight (less resin) in the blank, the relative more power it has. (this is exactly what nano graphite is doing, remove the excess weight from resin, and pack more graphite fibers into the blank to created "near weightless" blank! ) You can use nano graphite to built rods with any actions (full flex, mid action, fast action whatever...), because action is an independent factor.

    Mayfly Aviator and Ed Call like this.

  13. First of all Salmo I will most likely be there one day or the other the company however is not likely to be there in any formal capacity. We have already done a ton of trade shows this year.
    It could be that mass is not the right word. however weight is weight any way you slice it.. Say you have tow tips that are identical in stiffness and power yet one tip is made out of a light weight material and the other is made out of a heavier material the heavier tip is going to load the rod more while in motion. just as if you added a lead weight to the tip of the rod

    say you took a welding rod and taped it to the back side of your tip then strung it up to go out and cast it you would find that 1 it would be stiffer and 2 if would be a LOT heavier that extra weight would cause the rod to load deeper just in the nature of being there even if it added no stiffness at all ha that actually might be an interesting experiment...

  14. I define things a little differently there is power, flex and action

    action is the rate of recovery ( fast or slow)

    flex is where the rod bends under a load ( tip-mid or full flexing)

    Power. power is two fold (1) being performance = casting distance and fish moving ability and 2 being line weight.. what weight line does it throw.

    outweighing all of those factors is "feel" which of course is different for everyone :) but it is an entirely separate entity from all of the above attributes
    During the course of RnDing rods we have come up with rods that had the right action the right flex the right power and great performance but felt bad.. they just had no soul... and it is feel where all the mathematics and physics breaks down. designing a wonderful fly rod is more of an intuitive process rather than an academic one..
  15. If the rod tip is heavier then I have to have a heavier reel to balance it for a long day of swinging flies. I'd rather have all that extra weight as a part of the line that is cast into the river that will not require me to balance and fight against it. I don't know squat about rod design, physics, K or Laws of Motion. What I know is that the right rod, heavy or lighter, can do the job right. My TFO Deer Creek is pretty heavy, casts like I know what I'm doing and feels darn good doing it. My Sage Z Axis is much lighter, casts like I know what I'm doing and feels darn good doing it. My Meiser is in between, casts like I know what I'm doing and feels darn good doing it. At the end of the day, the lighter rod seems to leave me with a bit more in the tank, so that I can make a few more casts with the hope that the 1200th cast might bring the tug that the 1000th missed.

    Interesting discussion. Right now based on the explanation, I'm with Mello and Yuhina, no offense to others, but what they are saying and how they say it makes sense in my confused mind. I think I get parts of what Rob and Rolf are saying, and that makes sense, but I just don't fully get it. (understatement of the year)
  16. E=MC(squared)

    It comes into play with speyrods. To me the best rod is an autocaster. If you're taking a day to fish you'll want an autocaster.

    E is energy, that's what we want in the release, the more the better. M is mass (weight for simplicity), what we need to most efficiently utilize the mass of the entire rod. C is Einstein's equation it was the speed of light in a vacuum...but it works with most other moving objects if we can define the inputs. Here we must assume the inputs remain the same, the caster making identical casts each time, but with a different rod, only the rod can change, nothing else, the line cannot be changed, nor the fly or leader.

    M is the mass of the rod being loaded in the cast. The deeper it loads the faster the line will ultimately move (all else being equal).

    And you know what? all of this sounds stupid because it's the D-loop that loads the rod...the D is critical...but the equation applies!
  17. Rob, I think I'm getting what your saying...let me know if I'm on the right track:

    Two tips with exact characteristics, with the exception of weight, will not perform equally on the same rod. The heavier tip will load the rod deeper, because of the additional mass in it's contruction.

    This sounds reasonable to me, considering the fact that, most when wanting to load the rod deeper, add grains to the line/head. Instead of adding the grains to the line/head your saying add it to the rod tip section!

    Would be interesting to hear if anyone has tested this theory...Perhaps take a balanced set up, one that is balanced in lower end of the rods grain window, and then add some wraps of leaded tape to the tip section, gradually of course and in a tappered distribution. I bet you would feel a definite loading advantage with as little as +20grns.

    Am I close?

  18. I don't think the bottom half of the rod can differentiate between the weight of the top half of the rod and the weight of the line. They are both objects that want to stay put. We bend the rod against their resistance to moving. Eventually, they come along for the ride. It seems like the design trick is balancing ease of loading with speed of recovery and apparent swing weight. The arms race towards faster rods has, to a degree, focused on recovery speed and swing weight at the expense of load-ability. I like firm, light tipped rods too, but I have to work a little harder casting them, and piling the grains on in the line DOES NOT change their essential action, which I see as largely a function of how they handle their own weight.
  19. Where does the interest in "recovery" come from? Once the line is sent it's pulling itself out...a few extra rod tip flops have almost no influence on where the line is going or how fast it gets there.

Share This Page