In Volume 10, Issue 1 of RodMaker I wrote an article on the factors that determine rod sensitivity. This article contains a serious error that I want to apologize for to all of those that read it and were mislead.
I have not yet worked out all of the math behind the error yet but Mike Naylor has convinced me though a long exchange of posts here where I was WRONG.
In short, I assumed that the more the rod flexed the more movement that there would be at the fisherman's hand and therefore the more sensitive that the rod would be. In other words the less stiff the rod is the more sensitive that it will be. As I said this is WRONG. In fact, any flexing of the rod results in the rod absorbing energy that reduces the movement at the fisherman's hand. Therefore if we look at stiffness alone, ignoring the other factors like mass and length that also affect sensitivity, the stiffer a rod is the more sensitive it will be.
There is a second article planned on sensitivity that Mike is going to collaborate with me on that will have more on sensitivity and will also correct and explain my error in more detail.

Emory,
We will look forward to the article you and Mike collaborate on. Thank you for pointing out the error. It makes your contributions much more valuable. No apology is needed.

Stan Grace
Helena, MT
"Our best is none too good"

Emory your work has been quite instrumental in my involvement with tournament bass fishermen. I had the opportunity to talk with Rich Forhan in High Point about his thoughts. The high success that one of the production rod companies in expanding his market recently is based purely on reduction of rod weight and increased sensitivity. The coupling of "stiffness" and sensitivity is of primary concern at present. Stiffness is accomplished by use of higher modulus materials or increasing the diameter of the blank sections and only one of them will reduce overall weight. The manufacturer I am referring to has chosen to use higher modulus materials which significantly increases cost. His customers are now paying for blank upgrade with rods in the $ 250 - $ 300 range and living with a greatly altered warranty statement.

I have done about as much as I can do with build techniques to reduce weight but have not taken the chance on using the more expensive higher modulus blanks to build bass rods.

The bass customers I have are quite rough on blanks and break more than quite a few. I am now hoping that the business heads in the direction of lighter more sensitive rods and alteration of warranty policies of the production manufacturers. I do not think I can build on high modulus blanks and survive considering blank prices and present no fault warranties.

I hope your work will be shared in a way that can allow custom builders to participate in this presently changing market. By changing I really mean that it looks like the "bassers" may willingly pay more for a "sensitive super light tournament winning" rod and not expect a free replacement if it is carelessly broken. Anything you can do to get all of this in front of the buyers of custom rods will be appreciated. Production builders are beating us to the market. Any quick and dirty write up that I can use for my customers to read would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks for your work!





Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2007 11:34AM by Bill Stevens.

Bill,
I understand your problem. I build mostly Salmon and Steelhead rods but also build a few Bass rods and I think that you are right that Bass fishermen tend to be pretty rough on their equipment. And as you suggest as higher modulus material is used in blanks to get the mass down the strain energy or toughness goes down as the modulus goes up, all other things being equal.
I think that the key thing that custom rod builders can do to improve sensitivity is to add as little mass or weight as possible but there are several blank manufacturers that are now building blanks that make a lot of sense to me that use high modulus material in the butt section where the stress and strain tends to be lower and the strength of the blank higher so as to keep the weight down but then use intermediate modulus material toward the tip of the blank where the stress and strain tend to be higher and the strength of the blank lower. The higher stress and strain toward the tip is particularly true for blanks like the typical Bass blank because of their fast actions. These newer mixed modulus blanks will not be quite as light as blanks constructed of all high modulus material but quite a bit lighter than blanks constructed of all intermediate modulus material and will be a good deal tougher.

Emory,

As you recall, you and I argued a little bit about the point of rod stiffness and how it affects sensitivity after I first read the article. But I don't think it's something that terribly detracts from your work because few fishermen will ever select rod power or stiffness based on how sensitive they want the rod to be. Power or stiffness is pretty much decided upon by the size of the fish the angler is after and/or by the lure weight range he needs to throw.

It's the other things that most fishermen are interested in regarding sensitivity. "What handle material will interfere with sensitivity the least?" "How does weight affect rod sensitivity" "Can I do anything special in regard to handle construction that will enhance or harm sensitivity." Those are the sort of things that most builders confront when wanting to build a sensitive rod and I think you covered them pretty well in the article.

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

Tom I know Emory: Emory is a deadicated man too the craft of rod building. He researchesand feild test any thing to do with the craft of building a top notch fishing rod. So when Emory speaks or writes on a subject you know it comes from years of experiences combined with lots of trial and error work. So when Emory states he made a miss-leading statement and well take steps to correct his statement. To me this is a man of honor, Integrity and cometment to this craft. Just my thoughts of the day
Good Wraps Bob
Emory I am sorry I well not see you in woodland this year. I was hoping were culd contunue our discusion on speling and gremer ::-)

Tom,
Yes, I remember discussing it with you and that you were suspicious but I was so damn confident that I was right that I convinced you. Now I wish that you had been more persistant with your questions.

Bob,
I do not want this to sound like a mutual admiration society but I think that you are one of the nicest guys in custom rod building and your spelling and grammar are more entertaining than a good stand up comic.

Emory want to be my stage manegar, We can take this act to OK. when I leave in April. You do not know the pains I took to write that statement to Tom. Blew 3 spell checker fuses::-))
Good Wraps Bob You know me I give credit good or bad where credit is due. Speaking of credit I need a moneyloan so I can take my show on the road

I really liked the article and look forward to the next one.

While the soft tip section might mask the sensativity going to the hand, I think many strikes are detected with the eyes when the tip deflects and a soft tip would increase the sight recognition. I have been taught to watch the line and tip as well as fingering the line and rod blank. What does the fish feel?

rhr

Emory ...
It's a fine article. Well written and comprehensive. It takes someone "special" to go back to rethink / reexamine and correct oversights. Thank you very much for all your time and effort. Like Bill Stevens (and I suspect others) too am leery about the jump to higher and higher modulus blanks with their thinner walls / reduced weight (and durability). My feeling (admittedly that is all it is) is that there is a cross-over point where the durability of a rod surpasses how light the rod is or how "fast" or "sensitive" the rod is. I see this repeatedly in saltwater applications as well - which to me makes even less sense. Customers / consumers need to be better educated that is: sometimes a good composite fiberglas rod is better than high strain graphite - it depends on what the rod is to be used for (species of fish) under what type of fishing (trolling, deep jigging, casting) and under what conditions (yanking bass from tangles of lily pads or top water / buzzing). A high sensitivity broken rod does not make for a good day fishing. Gosh this sounds like a reasonable article beginning!

I agree with Ralph. In a lot of cases, jig-n-minnow or soft plastic fishing, I think a softer tip is a little better. If you have rod that is very stiff, the fish can feel you as good as you feel it.
The softer tip allows you to feel the fish some, without it feeling you as soon. Anyone else use this "feel" too?

It seems that most of the focus on sensitivity is on transmitting vibration. Speaking as mostly a finesse fisherman, it seems that what we are usually feeling for is a change in weight or a heavier sensation, than any type of actual vibration. If a fish hits hard enough to thump it, you will feel it if you have a soft or stiff tip.

For finesse fishing, I think Emory's article is pretty accurate as-is.

Just my $.02.

Marc,
The term vibration was used to describe any movement whether it is an actual vibration or a yank on the line or just a pull on the line or even a release in the tension on the line.
I would not argue with you that some fishing techniques require a softer or less stiff rod but they will not have as much sensitivity.

This goes back to what different fishermen refer to as "sensitivity." I once had some flounder fishermen come to me for some sensitive rods for their type of fishing. Turned out, that what they wanted in terms of sensitivity was a very soft glass rod that had an extremely light tip that they could see twitch or move. They didn't even hold the rods in their hands - kept them in rod holders and relied on sight alone to detect a hit.

...........

Tom, Deadsticking FLuk is a really effective method. The reason tehy needed that "sensitive" tip is so the hook isn't pulled out of the fish's mouth, and the fish doesn't spit the hook when it bites. I've had people argue with me how sensitive an Ugly Stick is, and when they described to me what tehy considered sensitive, I couldn't even argue.

Billy --- Exactly the way I learned to fish for what people here call flounder (all year long) when really they mean fluke. Fluke (flounder) tend to pick up a bait & spit it out once or twice --- especially with minnow / squid 'sandwiches'. If you pull at the first twitch the fish will not be there. In this area most fishermen drift for flounder/fluke & use a conventional reel & thumb the spool with the reel in 'free'. When the fish first hits you let your thumb off the line slightly to release a bit of line & engage the reel on the second 'hit'. Thus "sensitivity" & "vibration" are confusing until you figure out how the fisherman is going to use the rod.

I do not think that rod sensitivity should become a question of semantics. If it does then attempting to quantify it or measure it or determining the variables that affect it or attempting to compare one rod to another all become in my judgment a waste of time.
I defined sensitivity as the amount of the energy in the fish's bite that gets to the fisherman's hand. I did this in an attempt to remove as much subjectivity as possible but I will admit that this definition is not perfect. If someone has a better definition that is fine. I am certainly open to suggestions. However, I do not think that we should make it a word game. I cannot see how an Ugly Stick is a sensitive rod by any reasonable or rational definition of sensitivity.

Ken,
I am glad to see you back posting again. Have you been off chasing bad guys again?
I completely agree with you that high modulus and therefore lower weigh, and more sensitive rods are not always the best choice. In most boat rod applications where high sensitivity is not required I would agree with you that lower modulus or even much lower modulus and therefore much tougher glass rods are very often a better choice.
However, with all due respect to your knowledge and experience, your age and also to your charming personality I might have an argument with you about the way that you used the term "High Strain". I know that this term can be confusing to many because several of the blank manufacturers use the term in ways that are confusing.
If you look at the modulus of elasticity curve, stress (applied force/square inches) on the vertical axis and strain (rod deflection) on the horizontal axis, the steeper the curve the higher the modulus of elasticity. Or the less strain there is for a given amount of stress by definition the higher the modulus of elasticity, Or the higher the strain for a given amount of stress the lower the modulus of elasticity. In other words "High Strain" is just another way of saying low modulus of elasticity. If you do not change anything else like the tensile strength then increasing the strain means by definition that you are decreasing the modulus of elasticity.

Generally, when someone speaks of "sensitivity" I think of the ability to be able to feel what's going on at the other end of the line. My point was only that some fishermen may have something totally different in mind.

The article dealt with the former and such was made very clear early on.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2007 10:52PM by Tom Kirkman.

Emory ... ok. Let's go fishing LOL ... Way more fun playing with fish than playing with words. The article that Emory wrote stands 'cause I clearly had it BACKWARDS by definition.