I understand the argument between adding weight to the but of a rod so it feels more balanced in the hand and not adding weight to keep the overall weight down. What I am curious about is can adding weight to the butt of the rod help with casting? I am thinking about the physics involved. Think of a trebuchet, the counterweight at the base of the arm (rod) is what propels the payload forward. When surfcasting, it helps to push the top hand forward while pulling the bottom hand back which accelerates the tip. So would the extra weight in the butt help the cast as it does with a trebuchet?

Although, if the extra weight helped, wouldn't competitive distance casters add weight to the butt of their rods? Since they do not, I assume there is no advantage. In fact, distance casters just use a long lever with a very short butt and no added weight. Your thoughts...?
I am especially interested in an explanation from someone with an engineering or physics background.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2009 08:49PM by Scott Lewis.

I think not. The trebuchet's counterweight is accelerated downward by gravity-increasing tip speed. The counterweight's mass greatly exceeds the projectile's mass. Weights added to rod butts might have to exceed lure (projectile) weight by 100X to achieve that effect-if that is even possible. Your push/pull reasoning also applies during backcast to load the rod-pulling on the butt while pushing with upper hand at point that becomes the fulcrum-effectively loading the rod by applying force to both ends at once.

No physics background-only horse sense.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2009 09:02PM by Chris Davis.

Chris Davis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> No physics background-only horse sense.


That works too!

Thanks for the reply.

no physics or engineering here, but -

Trebuchet - gravity driven

Rod - mechanically driven - no gravity to propel the tip to launch the mass, only applied force

If you look at handle length, using the same pivot point - a 9" handle being moved 3" (measuring at the butt) equals 20" of tip movement. A 15" handle moved 3" is only about 10" of tip movement. Kinda like gearing. I would guess that is part of the reason for short handles on distance casters?

Interesting concept.

-----------------
AD

Curious why you are interested in distance casting. Can't you cast far enough to catch fish now? Not how I wanted to put it. Sounds smart alecky, but not. A serious question.....why do you want to cast farther? I do NOT want below my wrist to be heavier than the tip, and therefore the butt goes down while in my hand and the tip goes UP. I want the rod to balance in my hand. I have tried boaf ways. With a tip heavy rod my wrist did not take long before it wore out. Got tired of holding the tip UP out of the water. And vice versa. I wouldn't increase weight on the butt end even if it did give me a longer cast. Furthermore when I have to carry my rod two miles to fish....I again get tired of holding the tip up.

Jim, I read various posters recently wondering why one needs to cast further. In my case, we often fish in large lakes from shore - or even from boats in a particular location. As area covered is squared of casting distance, an increase of 20% in casting distance increases area of coverage by 44%. If I can cast 50% further than the guy next to me, I'm covering 125% more area where fish may be. I have often caught fish at the extreme end of my casting range using longer rods. It's fish that the guys next to me are not able to catch at that moment. Of course, if I was fishing small streams as we encountered recently in Colorado, then it makes no difference. In those cases, I'm wondering if the 27' long pole with a 20' line tied to the tip end would not work better than any casting method as I can just dangle something slowly and with great control. (I picked this stuff up overseas by the way as they don't sell it here in the US.)

Mo

..
A rod that casts the greatest distance makes "normal" fishing distance casts effortlessly. If I can build the rod in such a way that it will cast 130 ft with some effort, it will cast that 50 ft I need it to with a flick of the wrist. I will be much less fatigued at the end of the day.

This might help a little. I think I got this on this site.

Balancing a Fly Rod
In 1889 R. C. Leonard, a tournament caster, stepped to the platform without a reel on his rod and simply coiled the line at his feet. With that abbreviated rig he proceeded to smash all existing distance records, including his own, by a wide margin. It was a shocking thing to competitors and spectators alike. It was a momentous discovery from which not only tournament casters but fishermen as well should have profited. That early-day pioneer discovered an extremely important principle in rod dynamics. It amounts to this: That the caster must move the useless weight below the hand as well as the useful weight above the hand; that the removal of dead weight below the hand helped to overcome inertia more quickly, increasing the tip speed, thus imparting a greater velocity to the projectile or fly line. It should have been a valuable lesson to everyone, but it wasn’t. It remained only among the tournament casters for many years.
If you examine the books and catalogs of those early days you will discover that manufacturers and fishermen-writers discussed very learnedly and extensively such things as “fulcrum point,” “counterpoise,” “balancing the fly rod,” and “letting the rod do the work,” none of which has any merit whatsoever. Not until very recently has there been an awareness of this valid principle. It is evidenced by the availability of numerous fine, very lightweight reels on the market today. In view of this trend I should not be discussing this subject at all, except for the fact that I am frequently surprised by the comments of writers and the recommendations of suppliers or manufacturers prescribing a specific size and weight of reel to balance a particular rod. There can be no such thing as balance in a fly rod. There can never be a fixed “fulcrum point.” Every inch that the cast is lengthened or shortened changes the alleged balance and every unnecessary ounce in an unnecessarily heavy reel dampens and degrades the cast. If you wish to explore this a little further, you can try an experiment as I did some years ago. If you have or can borrow enough reels, let us say in two-ounce increments, all the way from the lightest, about two ounces, to something about eight or nine ounces, you will have enough to make the experiment. Use the same weight of line on the same rod for all trials. With the lightest reels the casts are sharply and cleanly delivered flat out with enough velocity to turn over the leaders. You also get a tighter front bow if you want it. As the reels get heavier there is a noticeable lagging in the forward loop until finally with the heaviest reel there is decided dropping of the loop, and probably a failure to turn over the leader properly. This effect is most pronounced on long casts. And consider how much worse it could be with those reels that were manufactured with a hollow arbor into which the purchaser was urged to pour lead pellets through a little trapdoor in order to correct the balance of his fly rod!
You can suit yourself about these matters but for me there is only one sound system and that is: Use the lightest possible reel of good quality and adequate capacity no matter how long or heavy the rod may be . . . .
---Vincent C. Marinaro, In the Ring of the Rise, Crown Publishers, Inc., New York, copyright 1976, pp. 30-41.

Wow!
Thanks for the article by V. Marinaro. That does make a lot of sense!

Thomas good points when dealing with and using fly rods.
I too use the lightest reels I can obtain
If I ever get into using fly rods extensively were the reel is behind my hand instead of in or in front of it during the cast I will consider what you are proposing.

But with casting and spinning rods things are a bit different and casting techniques are different and weight affects each differently. Depending on what you are looking to accomplish with each.
Weight added to the butt can and does improve the overall performance of some casting and spinning rods.

One man's feist is another man's fodder. I understand all the above. However I was fishing with my 11' 6wt rod and using the 6wt reel that came on the Orvis Green Mtn 6wt combo outfit from Wal-Mart. Fishing a lake from a boat. Within a 1/2 hour my wrist began to tire. NOT from casting....from holding the tip up while stripping in the fly.

Soooo...as it says above...you can suit yourself. I understand the exact balance point changes as line is out or in. But for me the balanced rod will do. I can cast and catch fish. I am one who does not want either a tip heavy outfit or a reel heavy outfit.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess.. Now I catch fish with all the line out to backing on a particular lake with a wet fly. But not casting it that far....using an inflatable kick boat. I have lot's of fly lines now and do not know them all. But I fished this particular lake with a cheap sinking line...that didn't seem to know it was a sinking line. I caught nice Apache trout. But I put on a #12 Eagle Claw hook with four beadheads on it...then attached my dropper fly, a BH Canadian Orange Simi Seal Leech. I let ALL the line out and I catch Apache's on this particular lake.

Anywhooo...if I were into distance i would care more about the details. But for me it's just fishing. And I like balanced rods.

The physics part is well beyond my thought process, all i know is what works for me. When the question of distance comes up, I tend to agree with Mo Yang, when fishing a feeding school of stripers, the further away you can be when you ease up to them and still cast into them the less chance you have of spooking them. Plus if you can cast further into them or across the entire school you have your bait in front of them longer, the same with casting to feeding stripers on the bank or a heavy fished lake, If your fishing parallel to the bank the distance gives you longer time to present your bait.
I am not a bass fisherman but i do know that it gives you more time to get a deep diving bait into the zone you want..
As for balance. the smooth feel of a balanced rod in your hand is nice, your mind is on what your doing not being pulled at by a unnatural feel in your hand.

My thought would be why not consider the placement of the reel seat, reel, and length of handle to get the best balance. a rod that feels like an extension of my arm rather than me holding something adds more confidence to what i am doing.

Ok one thing the handle length on the distance casting guys rods is not any shorter that regular rods. They just throw in the "Low ree" position. Yes the reel is only about 6-9" from the butt of the rod, but the placement of the upper hand is still in pretty much the same place. I am into distance casting as well. I'm right handed, and use the low reel postion when casting, my reel is 7" from the butt cap of the rod. My left hand controlls the reel and right hand is free. THe theory to this is with the reel being lower it helps with the Push/Pull or "hit". Im no expert at distance casting or much of anything for that, but did want to clear up teh short handle thing

Another thing to clear up regarding balance on a SURF rod. They are tip heavy to begin with, shortening the butt grip will make them even more tip heavy. Moving the reel seat up on some of these rods to balance will result in a butt grip which is too long resulting in you being unable to cast since the butt will be in the way. For surf rods you pretty much have to keep teh reel in a position which allows you to be able to cast and control the rod. THis is why Scott adds weight to the butt of the rod - I don't care what anyone says, it's much lighter holding/fishing a properly balanced rod than one which is lighter and unbalanced.

How many builders live close to an operating oil field or have seen pictures of the walking beam pumping units that pump the oil out of the ground. The ones that endlessy go up and down! One the hole side of this thing there may be 3,000 feet of 3/4 inch steel sucker rods that are connected to a pump that is down in the hole. The heavy rods operate the pump day and night to bring the oil to the surface. The motor that drives the entire thing is a small electric power unit in some cases less than 10 HP. On the back end of the steel walking beam is a huge counter weight - it allows the small motor to effortlessly rock back and forth raising the heavy load without expending much additional external work or effort. Any seasoned bass fisherman who uses a 7' 6" or longer "derrick" to flip or punch grass with a 2 ounce creature bait, all day, is a sucker if he does not try a rear end balance hub to reduce his work load.