Several manufacturers have introduced blanks that incorporate graphite material with different modulus of elasticity in different sections of the blank. The couple that I have talked to are using a higher modulus toward the butt of the blank and lower modulus toward the tip.
I have thought about this a little and would be very interested in the thoughts of others. My thoughts go like this.
Most rod breakage tends to be in the tip section so a lower modulus material toward the tip will make the blank tougher and therefore reduce breakage. However, a rods sensitivity is more a function of the distribution of the weight than the actual total weight and the effect of added weight increases dramatically as it is added toward the tip. So this approach will result in a blank that is more durable than a blank made entirely of high modulus material, is slightly less durable than a blank made entirely of lower modulus material, is only slightly more sensitive than a blank made entirely of the lower modulus material and not nearly as sensitive as a blank made entirely of the higher modulus material. Therefore if these blanks are priced like the lower modulus blanks then they make sense but if they are priced like the higher modulus blanks they do not make much sense.
It would also be nice to know how much of each material is used and exactly where it starts and stops in the blank. This approach may make a bit more sense if only a little of the lower modulus material is used just in the tip section in very fast action blanks and less sense in blanks with slower actions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/26/2005 11:44AM by Emory Harry.

This subject will undoubtedly head off in a lot of directions. I am sure that all of us would want a "ugly stick" toughness in a highly sensitive super light blank. The manufacturers will have to find a way to protect their warranty position while at the same time espousing super light - sensitive blanks. There is so much room in between that the marketing will surely paint a lot of pictures that will confuse us all. Somewhere in the middle is the blank that will meet most of our needs. I would think the middle ground will be the best for the manufacturer, builder and fisherman. The engineering and use in field will ultimately find that blank that is best.

Thanks again for help with the popping rods - they are fantastic!

Gon Fishn

Early graphite composites contained different graphites all rolled together. Didn't make much sense - the higher modulus material was just carrying the lower modulus material. Newer designs, such as you mention, strategically locate different graphites into different areas of the blank. This makes far more sense and is likely to be much more effective but the weight distribution scenario you mention is worth a look.

Obviously, the blank designer is making a compromise and has to decide if he is gaining what he wants on one end of the spectrum without harming the other end to any degree that makes such a compromise unwise.

There are fishermen who would glady trade some durability for an even lighter more sensitive blank. Other fishermen would trade some performance for a bit more "toughness." Everybody else falls inbetween the two. I think that's where these designs are aiming.

Plus, it sounds impressive to be able to say your blanks contain "multi-modulus" construction. To the unknowing, it's probably a great marketing term. Why have a blank or rod made from a single modulus fiber when you can have a rod made from a "multi-modulus" fiber. Surely the one made from more than one fiber must be better.

.........

Tom,
Yes, I think that you are right. Making a blank of medium to high modulus fiber and using a lower modulus fiber as scrim makes more sense to me. But I thought that I would post it in case I was over looking something and to see what others thoughts on the subject were.

The old Loomis Hybrid stand-up blanks were made this way and for that type purpose I thought it made a lot of sense - so too the Seeker CLB which are sort of done in a similar fashion (full glass construction, outer graphite wrap up to 2/3rds blank length. I'm not sure that the benefits outweight the disadvantages on lighter power rods, however. Maybe they do, maybe they don't - I don't have enough personal experience with them to really be able to state an educated opinion.


..............

Emory,
You said "if these blanks are priced like the lower modulus blanks then they make sense but if they are priced like the higher modulus blanks they do not make much sense. "

I don't agree with that statement. From a purely performance standpoint that my be somewhat accurate, however we are leaving out a lot of variables that can and do increase cost on this type of construction


You also said "It would also be nice to know how much of each material is used and exactly where it starts and stops in the blank. This approach may make a bit more sense if only a little of the lower modulus material is used just in the tip section in very fast action blanks and less sense in blanks with slower actions. "

I absolutely agree with the above statement, for without knowing that information, it's somewhat like shooting in the dark to form an opinion on this type of construction. I'll talk to Stephen at CTS to see if he'll allow me to provide all of you with this info.


ANdy Dear
Lamar Manf.

Emory, what manufacturers have introduced these blanks.

This is probably a good thing for the Australian rod builder, who seeks this style of performance in a blank without having to go to a blend as a compromise.

Emory, do most of the high modulus blanks that you personally know of (that have broken) all break in the upper region of the rod?

I'm asking because of the last 20 or more breaks I've seen on high modulus, only two were in the top 1/3 of the blank. The others were very near the 1/2 way point or lower.

Putter
Williston, ND

The GUSA "B" and ASW blanks are multi-modulus.

Myles,
I know that both Rainshadow and Lamiglas are and I suspect that several others are as well. I am not sure of which models of blanks from either though.

Putter,
Obviously a rod, high modulus or not, can break anywhere but the vast majority of broken rods that I see that appear to be broken due to being over stressed are either broken in the upper one third or just a few inches in front of the ferrule. This makes sense because that is where the stress will tend to be the highest in normal use. Personally I have not noticed any difference in where rods break based upon whether they were standard, intermediate or high modulus.

If a rod is loaded to the point of failure, that will generally happen in the bottom half - this is assuming that the angler is not high sticking the rod, but applying maximum pressure with the mid and butt areas as should be done. At that point, the upper half of the rod is pretty much out of the equation - it goes straight and has very little load upon it.

.........................

Yes, I think that I agree. Obviously none of us have a large enough sample to be statistically valid but I think that the vast majority of broken rods that I see are abused in one way or another. In fact, I think that I might argue that it should almost not be possible to over-stress a rod to the point that it breaks down toward the butt unless it is over-lined. It is also going to be somewhat a function of the rods action. The faster the rods action the farther up toward the tip that the breaks will tend to be and the slower a rods action the farther down toward the butt that breaks will tend to be.

Hmmm?? 95% of the rods I build are fast or extra fast. Through the years, the high majority of breakage on them is near the middle of the blank, Emory.

Putter
Williston, ND

Many failures on bass rods occur due to extremely violent hook sets, sometimes on stumps and other water debris, when the gorilla is using braided line. Most of these, although not a classic example of high sticking, will take place in the bottom half of the blank. I have watched while a fisherman is trying to remove the hook when the rod is standing up, with the butt on the deck and no slack in the line and the reel spool engaged - he looses his grip and the fish falls free - snap - tip end failure. When the blank engineers solve all of these problems what a fine world it will be.

I condensed the Rodmaker article on blank breakage to a one page hand out and force it on all of my customers - it has reduced my return failure rate dramatically.

I know some of the real blank engineers monitor this board - I wonder why none have volunteered any general information on this thread. Everything can not be kept a "secret" forever!

Gon Fishn

At the FFF Northern California Conclave in October, there was an exhibitor, Sisters Compound Rods, who was showing some rather strange looking but interesting rods. What they were, was a rather stiffish graphite blank, put together as a fairly normal looking rod. Where it became strange, was between the tiptop and the first guide, there was mounted a metal female ferrule, offset maybe as much as 1/4 inch from the top side of the rod, that is the side away from where the guides were mounted. In this ferrule would be mounted a fiberglass tip section with maybe one or two guides and a tip top attached to it. This tip section extended well beyond the main rod. The line was strung up the main rod and out its tip and then throught the fiberglass tip. I cast a couple of them and found them quite pleasing. One of the claims made for them is that they are fairly insensitive to the weight of line they are casting, that is they can cast a wide range of line weights. I tried this and found that it seems to be true. The main thing that seems to be against it, is that it just looks so strange, like a biplane amid a bunch of jets. The guy who makes it has a patent on it-- [patft.uspto.gov] which describes some of the details.

Mike