While I'm in the process of getting my workshop up and running again. I am runnig into customers, and a ton of potential customers. The number one thing is never looks, or spiral wrap, or even guides. It is almost always weight. I kow in a few weeks here in TX I will be primarily using hvy powered flipping sticks, and fat glass crankin' sticks (not light). When I compare these rods to any of my spinning rods they feel twice the weight, yet when I compare a moderately priced so called "heavy" flippin' stick compared to my SCIV flippin' stick I can hardly tell the difference. So I think the big problem in fishing is people are getting to accustomed to doing nothing and not fishing enough. If you are in good fishing shape which can usually include all shapes of people you should be able to crank DD22's for 12 hrs on a 7-7.5 ft glass blank and not need that fancy 350$ 1.78957 oz super high mod. graphite blank. I think I've come to the conclusion that people just don't fish properly any more. The key is NOT a light rod but, get off your butt and fish! Do it often, learn to do it well, and love the heavy ones too, they need it and it will pay off for you too. Sorry, but just had to vent to some folks who might understand the point I'm trying to get across. Later, Bryan.

I agree with you, Bryan. I built a popping rod for myself and used a blank with a little more weight on it to use in my boat. I made the handle out of burl cork to balance the weight better. A fishing buddy of mine picks up the rod by the tip and tells me that the rod is too heavy. I had to explain that the rod was heavier than one of those $350 rods but with a reel on it it balanced out really well and the extra weight would not bother me at all and besides this rod would not be so prone to damage in the boat. At some point we have to give up light weight for a better tool. Recently I have had to replace a couple of thin walled rods due to my friends "high sticking" reds.

Yes, I [sort of] agree in principle. I've fished much heavier rods for more hours, and caught more fish than I have on lighter rods. The angler's knowledge, persistence and stamina are more important that the type of stick he has in his hand.

However, that being said, a lighter weight rod will not wear out my wrist as quickly, meaning that I fish it more, cover more water, make more casts, etc. And, many times, lighter weight also goes hand in hand with higher sensitivity, which results in a few more hook-ups in a given day. And finally, reducing the amount of weight on a rod is one of the most significant things that a custom builder can offer his/her client.

So, it is true that weight is not everything. But, it is quite important, and should be a major consideration of the client and builder.

Different strokes for different folks I guess. Personally I have found that my lighter rods were far more delicate and fragile. A few of the fly fishing guys I knew before they moved up to the Sierras spent loads of money on light custom rods and reels. Like it was part of the show-off game or mystique. Few times I fished side to side with them tho, my old Fenwick fiberglass fly bank turned to ultralight spinning rod surpassed them. It isn't catching fish that drives them,,,,,, it is more like bragging rights, chasing a magic tech bullet, and a lot of time thinking about catching fish (rather than fishing). Least that's what I've seen around here.

But hey, people wanting to pop lots of money down for prettier or ligher rods keep most of the professional builders in business, right? People want more fragility or always refreshing technology just improve the business for builders. :-)

Weight (or the lack of it) is important, depending where it is on a rod. I think, the way a rod balances is just about as important for reducing fatigue. Even a light weight tip-heavy noodle rod is more tiring than one that balances in the hand...

But, I also think you are right that some people obsess too much about weight, getting the newest, lightest graphite they can without regard to durability or "fishibility". It is all about the fish, isn't it? So I guess it comes back to whatever works best for you...

RON.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2007 05:07PM by RON NIX.

I'm with Ron....as a fisherman, I would rather have a balanced rod, no matter what it's weight, than the lightest rod ever made if it was tip heavy......Just my two cents. I always try to sell my clients on balanced rods....I'll build them how they want them, but I have found that most who try a balanced rod request that future rods they purchase be balanced.

Steve Buchanan

Steve's Custom Rods

Steve,

With balance, how do you accomidate the changes in reel weights and how that effects the overall balance-not to mention how/where the customer holds the rod-the slighest shift can change balance completely. Especially when a customer buys a new reel every year or so if not before and applys it to the same rod-a balance kit? To have perfect balance you need the exact reel to even balance the rod, and the customer holding it, do you have your customers send you the reel they plan to use? or is the kit the answer? or are we just getting close to true balance?

For me when I am balancing a rod. I like to balance it between the points from were the threads starts on the reel seat (bait caster) to center of the reel foot.

That way if or when a person changes reels, the balance is so close to the center of the reel. That the weight deference between reels has little effect on the rods balance center.

Even for people who hold the rod further back, by having it centered at this point, there is less "tip weight feel" then if the balance were further up the rod.

Steve G,

That makes a LOT of sense!

DR

The only rods I try to balance are ones that are "tip-up technique" dedicated. On everything else, it seems like the added weight is not all that helpful. So, for example, my longer and heavier worm/jig rods have enough weight in the butt to put the balance at the front of the reel seat. But, I don't add extra weight to anything else.

To be fair, though, I rarely build anything beefier than med. power rods, as our local deep, coverless lakes don't really require it. I might think about "balance" more if I was building/fishing lots of longer or heavier action rods.

Andrew;
Some times I add weight to balance a rod, but most of the time I can balance a rod by using the smallest lightest guides I can get away with.

Using just enough thread to hold them securely in place and not adding a lot of decorative type wraps.

Like you the rods I balance the most, are tip up slack line technique rods. Other rods were the tip is down most of the time (like spinner bait and crank bait rods) I balance the best I can with components, but never add any weight, By the same token most of my flipping sticks have added weight.

It seems to me that there is a very good reason for custom rod builders to be obsessed with weight for any rod that will be used to cast with. Virtually everything that a custom rod builder does to a blank adds weight and the more weight that is added the lower the performance of the rod.
Adding weight at the butt of a rod to balance it has much less affect in terms of the rods casting performance than just a little weight that is closer to the tip of the rod. However, that balancing weight will have a significant affect on the rods sensitivity. The sensitivity will go down directly with the added weight.
Plus I think that I would argue that often by adding weight so that the rod balances statically may actually make the rod worse in terms of its dynamic balance. The dynamic balance is more a function of the mass and the distribution of the mass and the inertia that results from the mass rather than the weight.
Another thing to keep in mind is that adding weight has the same affect as lowering the modulus of elasticity. You can get steel that has as high a modulus of elasticity as carbon fiber but we do not use it for rods because it has much higher density (weight) than carbon fiber even though the steel will have higher tensile strength and higher strain energy (toughness). We use carbon fiber because it has a combination of high modulus of elasticity and low density. But adding unnecessary weight is in effect increasing the density.

I am not a tournament fisherman but I fish a lot in the summer and fall. My evolved style is what I call serious/pragmatic and fun. Although I have not kept a written journal, I have done a ton of 'live and learn' record keeping in my old head. AND this general statistic is very prominent for me................... I have lost oodles more fish due to: A.....poor knots ( tied by me), B........poor/old or frayed fishing line (left on by me), C.....weak/unsharp fish hooks, than a half ounce or whatever of extra weight in my rod. I do keep my runner guides as few and small as the line I use will allow. I try to be fairly light in the weight I have at the front of the rod but their does come a point rather quickly where we are just splitting hairs on this weight thing. A feather inlay, or marbling or burl ring back toward or on the handle is going to have minuscule affect on hooking and landing the fish. Point of the hook, quality of the knot, quality of the line!!!!!!!!!!! I can use a very wide variety of rods and catch fish as long as these key three other factors are in place. My humble opinion!

Steve;
I think you have brought this discussion back to the point; catching fish. While I don't doubt Emory's technical accruacy, I have before-- and will again--add a slight weight to the butt of my spinning rod to balance it, if necessary. I know it's an intangible: It just feels better to me and I feel the whole system performs better that way. For me, technical perfection would be to catch every fish I hook.

RON.

Emory:
I have a question;
If I added lets say ¾ oz to butt of rod. How does that effect the sensitivity of the rod between the tip and the reel which (were I hold the rod)?
Or how much does that effect sensitivity?

I counter balance virtually all my flipping sticks. Because I have found that a tip light rod detects subtle strikes in cover better then tip heavy rods. As an example when the rod is tip heavy and a fish picks up lure and just slightly moves after engulfing it.

On a tip heavy rod because of the tip natural tendency to pull down a lot of times I’ll never feel it. But on a tip light rod any downward movement is detected because it reverses the direction that the rod wants to favor.

I guess what I am asking; does the offset in lost sensitivity justify the increase in bite detection? Or is the loss of sensitivity so great that you think I’m shooting myself in the foot?

Have you run any test determined either?

Many years ago when I was young and inexperienced I really enjoyed fishing even though my equipment was not very good. At the time, it certainly seemed adequate and I caught a lot of fish. An old saying comes to mind……”Happiness is not being smart enough to know what to worry about.”

I don’t know that I may be obsessed with weight in the rods that I build, but for me it is a major consideration. I think Emory has made the valid argument in favor of weight reduction. Others may argue that “perception is reality”.

I do have friends that use “good enough” type rods and they enjoy fishing as much as I do. Although they seem to find my fanaticism humorous, they don’t obsess about it.

I would also love to hear the answer to Steve's question, especially a scientific answer(or pseudo-scientific answer, as a true scientific answer would involve quantifying "feel"). Flipping sticks are the true sticking point in this whole debate of "balancing." By definition, they are extremely tip-heavy, and require a LOT of weight to balance, if the builder chooses. And, there are passionate adherents on both sides of the debate. Flipping sticks might be the perfect subject for some sort of actual "real world" testing of the effect of balancing.

I can't really do it, as most of the fish I catch in warm weather are 10-20 foot deep on an otherwise cover-less rockpile or point. Might be an interesting thing to do with a bunch of guides on Fork or Allen Henry during the summer.

Steve,
When the rod tip is at a low angle so that the line is coming virtually straight from the terminal tackle to the reel then the characteristics of the rod, other than its total mass or weight, have no affect and the sensitivity is mainly a function of the total weight and the reduction in sensitivity will drop roughly in proportion to the added weight over the original weight. Lets say, just to keep the math simple, that the rod and reel weigh 4 ounces and you add 2 ounces to the butt. That will reduce the sensitivity or what you feel by about 50%. If you add 1 ounce that will reduce the sensitivity by about 25%.
At a low rod angle the only other major variable is the line and the tension on the line. Sensitivity will also be a function of the mass density of the line, the elasticity of the line and the amount of tension on the line. You can think of the mass density as the weight of the line and elasticity as the amount of stretch in the line. The reason braid is so much more sensitive then mono is that pound for pound it weighs a lot less than mono and it has much higher elasticity or much less stretch. Also the higher the tension on the line the higher the sensitivity.
If the rod tip is held at a higher angle then the issue gets more complicated, too complicated to go over here, because all of the characteristics of the rod come into play. If you are interested in how the other characteristics of the rod other than just its weight affect the sensitivity then I would recommend that you read the article in RodMaker magazine a few issues ago that was on sensitivity.
If you do read the article it does have one major error. It states that the stiffer a rod is, weight remaining constant, the poorer that the sensitivity will be. This is wrong. The stiffer a rod is the better the sensitivity will be for a given weight rod.

As we all know, many of a rods attributes are trade offs. Flipping sticks (as well as other types of rods) can benefit from long lengths, but that length can also be a liability. The longer a rod gets, the more mechanical DISADVANTAGE for the fisherman, plus, the rod gets tip heavy. This can be offset to some degree by adding length and weight to the grip. The amount of weight needed to balance the rod is significant because it is relatively close to the fulcrum point, whereas the small amount of weight at the rod tip is way out at the end of the lever arm. A reduction in rod length of even 6” can make a significant improvement in leverage, balance, weight and (IMO) sensitivity. This can be demonstrated by temporarily taping your reel forward of the reel seat.

"You can think of the mass density as the weight of the line and elasticity as the amount of stretch in the line. The reason braid is so much more sensitive then mono is that pound for pound it weighs a lot less than mono and it has much higher elasticity or much less stretch"

Emory, that statment should read: braid has a much LOWER elasticity....braid has almost no stretch

Jim,

I dont agree with a longer rod being a more mechanical dis-advantage to the fisherman, not at all. The tip may be heavier, but the advantages are: the rod moves more line, casts farther, better leverage and hook setting ability...just to name a few.