DON'T BUY CND RODS

James- I'm honored that you've taken the time to read my posts, but I still think you mildly exaggerate the degree to which people think I'm nuts.

Mark- I'm gonna guess the Beulah 7133. If that's the MKS, you've got a decent bend in it. Using your follow through technique?

My first spey rod was a Sage 9140-4 GIII Brownie. I struggled with it for a while, then I bought a Winston 11' 7wt switch, so that I could at least go back and forth in order to fish. I had a much better time with the winston, in large part, I think, due to the reduced swing weight making the load from the line much more apparent. I'd say the next rod I spent a lot of time with must have been the Loomis Metolius 13'4" which again had pretty light swing weight, giving me great feel for the line. I went on a tear from there buying light rods and enjoyed them quite a bit. I eventually took the 9140 back out and finally got a feel for the rod and was pretty impressed with what it would do. It took me being a better caster to sense what was happening with the line through a somewhat heavier rod. Fast forward a few years, and I'm making an effort to learn to cast a wide variety of rods. One of the characteristics I like to differentiate rods from each other is the whole sway/degree to which they load under their own weight nonsense, as I believe it ultimately reflects in the casting technique that works best with them. I've never had my hands on a copy of Mike Maxwell's book, but I'd read a blurb or two about the "tip heavy" action of his rods and the fact that he used a "body rock" technique that he considered part of true speycasting. I bought a Lamiglas LS1357 and did find that when I was keenly aware of how the rod was moving and flexing on it's own and managed to sync this with what the line was doing, it was an amazingly capable rod, and the tip heavy feel basically disappeared. If you were out of sync with the rod you could probably break your own arm trying to force it to do what you wanted. The rod almost felt tuned to do a certain thing, and if you made it do that thing, the line just sailed, and it never failed to move whatever was attached. Very different feel than my more "modern" rods.

well for one the Sage 9140 brownie well it's a very poor rod,, it folds under it's own weight and is a poor example of what I would call a full flexing heavy tipped rod...

Now lets get something straight.. a tip that is strong is also going to be heavy.. there is no way around it because the way a tip is made stronger is by putting more graphite into it thus adding weight... the problem with the sage 9140 is that the bottom end of the rod has no guts... though not a great rod the St croix Imperial 9140 of the same vintage was a much better rod...

the purpose of a tip on a spey rod ( by tip i mean the top half of the rod) is to push the load down into the butt of the rod so that a larger amount of graphite can be used to generate energy.


In the picture posted above.... notice that the tip of the rod is very nearly straight! the load has been pushed down into the lower portion of the rod.... that generates a lot more energy than a rod where only the tip flexes...
 
True that the brownies are pretty soft, but I had my good moments with it. My first effort, though, was with a SA XLT Spey cut back with a 15' type 6 sink tip and not a single casting lesson or moment spent with another person with a spey rod. I'd never even seen a person cast a 2-hander. Talk about a disaster...
 

yuhina

Tropical member
thanks for chipped in and play gentlemen... I am sure the answer will surprise many people.

Here it is: SAGE TCX 7126 a.k.a The Death Star. if you cast one, you know how light it is, yet, powerful enough to handle T17, I think James got a closest answer! :) Mark

Note to Trevor, it was regular underhand cast,high stop.

Another semi-loaded photo



Full loaded
 

yuhina

Tropical member
Anyone can reproduce that by overlineing a rod.
Rolf,

Just let you know I never overlining any rod. In fact, this is "light lining" the TCX to create a crispy feel. Go cast a TCX 7126 and you will understand what I mean. We have stated the "line momentum" play a major role on the rod load through out the whole thread (not the rod tip mass).

What is my point to post this rod action photo? The point being ...Don't just wiggle a rod to test the rod action, cast a rod with a line to determine the action. You will be surprised how many "tip too light" rods actually are deep flex action.

BTW,("Semi-loaded" photo is used to show you how the rod bend with a small friction of line momentum)

Just for fun, take a guess what line weight I was using for this TCX 7126?

1) 320 grain

2) 430 grain

3) 480 grain

4) 600 grain

Cheers,

Mark
 
You can make a rod bend like that without a line if you swing it back and forth hard enough.
Yeah, I suppose you can, but wouldn't it require more sweat from one's brow to fish like that? When lined I don't think you can get the energy back out through those light tips, you can get the energy in but you can't deliver as much back out on the delivery.
 

Rob Allen

Active Member
here is the problem manufacturers know more about their products than customers do.... many rods can safely be overlined while others cannot.. it is one thing to add a few grains to accentuate the action of a rod it is another thing altogether to change the action of a rod by overlining it.. if you want a rod that will cast a heavier line buy a heavier rod... the notion that it's ok for someone to buy a rod and then lead it to suit their preference is wrong. load it do the manufacturers recommendation or make no complaints when the product fails...

some rods are designed to cast off the tip adding more grains to the line in order to make the rod load deeper is a BAD idea what happens when you do that is very little of the extra load is transferred deeper into the rod but the top end of the rod becomes overstressed.

there is more to the equation than how you want the rod to feel..until you understand the structural integrity of a rod you shouldn't presume to know more than the manufacturer.
 

James Mello

Inventor of the "closed eye conjecture"
here is the problem manufacturers know more about their products than customers do.... many rods can safely be overlined while others cannot.. it is one thing to add a few grains to accentuate the action of a rod it is another thing altogether to change the action of a rod by overlining it.. if you want a rod that will cast a heavier line buy a heavier rod... the notion that it's ok for someone to buy a rod and then lead it to suit their preference is wrong. load it do the manufacturers recommendation or make no complaints when the product fails...

some rods are designed to cast off the tip adding more grains to the line in order to make the rod load deeper is a BAD idea what happens when you do that is very little of the extra load is transferred deeper into the rod but the top end of the rod becomes overstressed.

there is more to the equation than how you want the rod to feel..until you understand the structural integrity of a rod you shouldn't presume to know more than the manufacturer.
Interesting. The Poul Bock article from the GGAC suggest that with respect to Skagit, this isn't the case. His favorite line setup for the T&T 1307 is apparently a RIO 650 skagit! Personally I am more inclined to your beliefs, but there are others that apparently don't follow the same ideas!
 

yuhina

Tropical member

The answer is 1) 320 grain on TCX 7126.
Images were screenshots captured from the video above.
Overlining?! Okay, I will use a lighter line next time! :p
 

KerryS

Ignored Member
Back before anyone figured out grain weights and stuff we used the old formula of 3 to 3.5 times the length of the rod minus the tip length for bellies. You would play with the length and the weight of level line used to make the belly (12 wt, 14 wt, 16 wt) until you found the sweet spot. If the rod broke during this process, you didn't buy that rod again. If the rod didn't perform the way you wanted it to, again, you didn't buy that rod anymore. Pretty simple. During this time I don't remember many rods breaking because they were stressed. I do remember rods getting passed from one guy to another because they didn't fit a particular person's casting style. Again, sure seemed simple back then.
 

James Mello

Inventor of the "closed eye conjecture"
Back before anyone figured out grain weights and stuff we used the old formula of 3 to 3.5 times the length of the rod minus the tip length for bellies. You would play with the length and the weight of level line used to make the belly (12 wt, 14 wt, 16 wt) until you found the sweet spot. If the rod broke during this process, you didn't buy that rod again. If the rod didn't perform the way you wanted it to, again, you didn't buy that rod anymore. Pretty simple. During this time I don't remember many rods breaking because they were stressed. I do remember rods getting passed from one guy to another because they didn't fit a particular person's casting style. Again, sure seemed simple back then.
I wished there were multiple likes... That's awesome Kerry.