I do a lot of my fishing out of my kayak, where rods are subject to some abuse. I mostly fish freshwater with 10 pound or less test fishing line.

It seems one approach to building rods for this purpose is to find high-modulus, thick walled (small diameter) blanks. What manufacturers make blanks of this type?

thanks,
Rick

North Fork definitely has some like this. In our breakage article work we found them among the most difficult to break due to impact abuse. But I can't speak for the entire line of their product. Only the few selected models they sent.

I'm not sure your best bet wouldn't be to back down a notch in modulus and go with a line that is known for some amount of durability. You'll give up a bit on the performance end, but if you need them to hold up under more than routine abuse it might be your best bet. A broken rod isn't going to do much for you.

...........

I have had great luck (personally) using a few different Cabela's blanks out of my kayaks. Look at the IM7S662-2. It is a 2 pc, moderate action blank rater for 2-10 lb line and 1/8-5/8 lure weights. I have used this for trout (caught an 18 lb, 2 oz brown in the Finger Lakes of NY on this blank), and caught largemouth and pike as well. I also have one of the ORIGINAL Fish Eagle blanks (made into a rod) that I built in 1980. I still use it.
The afore-mentioned blank is currently on sale for $19.99.

High modulus blanks are more prone to breaking due to knicks and "abusive" conditions than one made of a lower modulus material. A kayak rod is a very special rod and the build style is just as important as the choice of blank. Shorter grip lengths for ease of clearance actually create a situation where high sticking becomes a necessity at times. A blank that has a lower modulus fiber lay up on the tip section to increase durability is a big advantage. The line of Castaway XP3 multi modulus blanks use higher modulus materials on the butt end for weight reduction and the lower modulus on the tip section for softening action and increased durability. These blanks are used for several different kayak applications - what kind of fishing are you doing - redfish and bass anglers all desire something different. Incorporate some of the new micro techniques with this rod and you will be amazed!

If we can help with a blank choice and set up please use the Contact Us:

[www.swamplandtackle.com]

Not necessarily - the material is only part of the equation. The structure involved plays a major role in how durable a rod is going to be.

The North Fork IM blanks sent to me for breaking turned out to be the very most durable blanks in terms of the abuse they would take before failing. In fact, we had to literally flog the daylights out of them to cause any sort of impact or fracture failure. Other blanks constructed from much lower modulus fiber failed far more easily from even light impacts and abuse.

...........

The NFC blanks you tested were the intermediate modulus material. Had you compared the next generation high modulus NFC blanks to the IM you tested I suspect the rate of breakage would be higher due to impact damage coupled with high sticking. Apples to apples except in the computer world.

Not necessarily. How you use a material is equally important to the material itself. Any good blank maker can take the very highest modulus fiber and make a blank that is virtually indestructible by virtue of the structure's design. You would pay a weight penalty to do it, of course, but just looking at the fiber/material specs isn't going to tell you everything about the final attributes of the actual item. We don't fish with "fibers" we fish with tubular structures.

It would be fair to say that a higher modulus carbon fiber is less tough or durable than a lower modulus carbon fiber. But it is not necessarily true that a structure made from a higher modulus carbon fiber is automatically less tough or durable than one made from a lower modulus carbon fiber.

...........

Bill,
The higher the modulus of elasaticity the lower the strain energy (the amount of energy that the material will absorb before reaching its strength limit) however, there is no corelation between the modulus of elasticity and impact breakage, at least not a significant corelation.

Tom,
Anything that can be done to make a high modulus blank more durable like reducing the diameter and increasing the wall thickness can obviously also be done to a lower modulus blank. If the design parameters are held constant a lower modulus blank will always be less subject to breakage than a high modulus blank assuming the materials have strengths that are simlar. The lower modulus will be heavier, have a lower resonant frequency and be less sensitive but it will be more durable.

I was hoping that a second contest in the parking lot on Friday before the show was not required to provide Richard sound advice for his kayak rod.

A "sword fight to the finish" between competing blanks would certainly be a site to behold!

Emory,

I would hope that would be obvious to most folks. Perhaps not. But that was not my point.

My point is that you cannot automatically assume that a blank made from a higher modulus material is going to be less tough or durable than one made from a lower modulus material. I keep hearing "apples to apples" but not all rod blanks are made with the same design criteria. I'm talking about the real world, not a theoretical one where all blanks utilize the same diameter and wall thickness. In the real world of rod blanks, we don't have "apples to apples." Each manufacturer chooses a particular design that may be totally different from the next manufacturer.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2009 06:21PM by Tom Kirkman.

Just a personal observation, I can see what Tom is saying. I have used many of the St. Croix SCIV blanks and most all with very good results, except for one. All the models in the SCIV series have been workhorses for me and can take pretty good common bumps and thumps. But...the SCIV 4S63MXF has let me down on three occasions. Failing twice for customers and once for myself in what I do not feel were very bad incidents. Looking at the wall thickness of this specific model it is apparent that is is less than HALF of the wall thickness of most other blanks in the SCIV 4S series. I always suspected this was the problem.

Ken,

That's another way of looking at the same thing - all the blanks in the SCIV series are made from the exact same fiber, but they do not all possess the exact same amount of toughness or durability. This is due to differences in the structure from one model to another.


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

If one wanted to buy a smaller diameter thicker walled blank what would you be looking for in a catalog listing? A smaller than normal butt diameter for a given power level?

I think you'd end up having to possess a great deal of practical experience in blank selection to really be able to do that with a high degree of success. In general you learn which manufacturers and which product lines have gained a good reputation for reasonable toughness and which ones seem to be failure prone unless treated with kid gloves. Even then, there are always less tough or more tough models in any particular blank series. Note Ken's experience above.

What I was driving at here was that it's a mistake to automatically assume that a blank made from a higher modulus fiber is necessarily prone to failure from even slight abuse or mishap. The fiber itself doesn't tell the whole story.

...........

Russel,
I would take Tom's advice rather than looking for the blanks with the smallest diameter. Nothing is for free. There is a price to pay for the smaller diameter. The stiffness of a blank falls off at the CUBE ROOT of diameter. In other words, if you cut the diameter in half you will reduce the stiffness by a factor of nine. This means that as a manufacturer reduces the diameter of a blank they must increase the wall thickness a great deal to maintain the stiffness. The result is for blanks that are equal in stiffness a blank with a small diameter and thicker walls will weigh more than a blank that has a larger diameter and thinner walls. The additional weight means lower resonant frequency (slower response) poorer damping and poorer sensitivity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2009 07:50PM by Emory Harry.

Thanks for all the informative feedback. I am now tending towards an intermediate modulus blank that is thick-walled, two-piece, fast in action and 6 to 6.6 ft in length.

The Cabela's blank seems like quite a deal, while the North Fork blanks are undoubtedly excellent in quality but above my price range.

I will be kayaking and float fishing down the Potomac, looking for smallmouth bass in shallow waters. They do get skittish in clear water conditions, so my ideal blank would be able to cast lighter baits a great distance. I fish wih 6 lb braid and smaller lures, especially Senkos, small flukes and hair jigs.

I built a rod on a hot shot blank that I love, but it is 7.5 ft long and hard to maneuver while kayak fishing.

I realize that I am asking a lot of the blank and appreciate the opportunity to probe your collective knowledge.

Thanks again,
Rick

If you can find a popping blank in the casting range you want, you may be very pleased. But they're hard to come by in anything less than 7 feet. Most often I take 5'6" or 6' light power, fast action blanks, and extend them to 6'4" or 6'6" which also makes for an even faster action. If you have the Volume 7 #1 issue of RodMaker, you will find the recipe for a very nice smallmouth bass river rod, including the means for extending a blank.

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

As an avid kayak fisherman I'm intensely interested in this topic. Good thread so far.

When I look for a blank for kayak fishing, my LAST concern is durability. My kayak rods are babied compared to my boat rods. They never, ever get smacked against anything. Not true of the boat rods. Just TRY to step on or fall on a rod or have someone ELSE screw with your rod while kayak fishing, can't be done. There's really not even a way to strike it the rod against anything very hard. Not even fighting a fish is likely to be THAT hard on your rod, they just tow you around until they tire out. So immediately, any notion of 'durability' just slipped to the bottom of my 'must have' list.

Am I missing something?

No, I feel the same way you do. But we have to remember that not all anglers treat their equipment the same way. Also, some kayak fishermen are launching and fishing in areas where rods do see a fair amount of rough handling.

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

At times when fighting a fish, my kayak will continue downstream. The rod I am handling is fine, but I often carry with me a second rod. This is the one that gets whacked by brush extending into the river or the occasional projecting rock. I do not affix the rods tightly to the kayak to avoid breakoffs, but as a consequence the rod may suffer a series of minor impacts - sometime even falling into shallow, rock-laden waters. These minor impacts are my main concern.

There are dangers inherent in anchoring the kayak in fast-moving waters. I do try to step out of the kayak and wade, but this is often not feasible. I will experiment fishing out of pontoons next year.

Enoying this thread!

Rick