Ok. Forgive me for my ignorance but I could not sleep last night and a thought come across my mind that I just know has been discussed many times but I can not recall the discussions. It all started with thinking about extending a blank to add power / increase action. (I have a particular build that needs a little more power than a 843 but not quite an 844, has a faster action and needs a 10" rear grip). I understand how the power and action of a blank is determined but I have one simple question. Why don't we measure the power and action acting as though the reel seat is the butt of the rod. Keep in mind that I build primarily bass rods.

Lets take two MB843's for example. If I set the seat at 10" on one and 7" on another they will differ in power and slightly in the feel of action.....correct? If this is so then it seems that I should be measuring the power as though the seat is the butt of the rod. Now, that being said, I understand that the rod can flex into the seat and depending on how you hold the rod will determine how much back bone is being used. However, it seems that the way most bass fishermen hold rods the majority of the power that is used is from the seat to the tip top.

Lets take the same two 843's and extend them 3 inches. The blank now has more power than it had before and a slightly faster action. However, if I set the seats at 10" and 13" they should have very similar power/action as the non extended 843 with a 7" and a 10" if measuring from the seat...correct?

Sorry again for my ignorance. I also had another brain freeze moment last night but I will hold that thought for a lil while.

The manufacturer has no idea where you're going to be locating your reel seat, handle, etc. Thus they can't possibly measure those inherent characteristics on anything other than the product they supply - the bare rod blank.

Obviously, your point of effort determines how any particular rod's action and power is going to be applied, but only you can determine that.

You can always use the CCS to determine action and power for any specific section of the rod.

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

Thanks Tom. That is what I was getting at. I have been using the CCS for a while now but I have always conducted my measurements using the bare blank. For some reason I just didnt give it any thought until I was explaining how extending the butt will increase power to a customer.

I measure all my rods & builds so the front of the real seat (or where it would be if a blank) is over the cam on my test jig. That gives me an accurate idea as to how my blanks compare in action angle and power. I believe that is what Tom is saying in his last line. You can use any % of the blank in your CCS testing. This gives you data that makes sense for you, and you can compare blanks and do what you want. If my handle length is different than yours, our data will differ on the same blank. You can also use weights other than pennies if you are measuring heavy power blanks.

You should take a look at the Blank Tester on the Backlash Tools site. They are a sponsor on the left. Here is a link - [www.backlashtools.com]

This unit allows you to visually compare blanks.

Chuck

_________________________________________
"Angling is extremely time consuming.
That's sort of the whole point." - Thomas McGuane



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2011 01:55PM by Chuck Mills.

I'v never been criticized as been the brightest color in the box and I am not sure why just now I am thinking about this. Anyway, thanks for the input. My next brain freeze is in regards to a particular action vs lure.

" your point of effort determines how any particular rod's action and power is going to be applied"

This statement seems to be a strong argument to extend rod blanks if done well, as long as:
1. The additional weight of the extension is not an issue
2. You want a faster action, longer rod with a slightly increased lure weight range
3. You are able to add the extension to the blank so that it helps balance the weight of the resulting rod

Is this correct?

What is the down side?

Thanks,

rick

Scott:

Your question is thought provoking. Trimming two or three inches off the blank's tip would likely cause a noticeable change in a rod's inherent characteristics. Moving the reel seat, the fulcrum of the rod, two or three inches in either direction seems likely to cause an even greater change in the finished rod's inherent characteristics.

I think both rod builders and their clients would profit from an objective method of determining the type and the rough extent of change in a rod's essential behavior which would result from moving the reel seat a certain distance and direction away from a "standard" reel seat placement for that type of rod - before the rod is built.

I would dare say that measuring the blank in any and all configurations that you want. Say the bare blank first. Then with any extension you were thinking of on the bare blank.
Putting you reel seat in different positions will also give you a difference.

Measuring the blank at different positions from the tip will also give you different weights the blank will need to load it well. - Before trimming it Of coarse.

Wright it all down with the changes before you do any thing to it Then let it sit and think about it

Bill - willierods.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2011 11:44AM by bill boettcher.

Scott, i like and enjoyed your question and analysis.
Now to throw another kink in the mix. Does not your theory only work if you hold the rod at the real seat?
When you grab the butt to aid in fighting a fish(as all of us usually do in some form or fashion or location) then you are applying the butt to the equation as well as not just from the real seat junction. It seems that in grabbing the butt area you bring that portion of the rod into play. I think depending on where and how tight you hold this butt area also can determin how much of the butt comes into play.

I’ve found that making measurements of “Power” and “Action Angle” in two separate configurations are advantageous.

Taking standard CCS measurements of bare blanks using the deflection of 1/3 of the overall length facilitates categorizing and makes the selection of blanks based on the desired criteria easier…. especially now that some blank makers are providing CCS data.

ALSO, taking CCS measurements of completed rods using the deflection of 1/3 of the length from the REEL SEAT to the TIP provides a rating system that allows relative Power and Action based on the dynamics of the rod in actual use. Once the reel seat location is selected (determining “effective length”) and the rod is assembled, its characteristics change from that of a bare blank. There’s not much correlation of power or Action ratings between the blank and the finished rod. I noted that the blank vs. rod Power ratings differ from 22 to 39%. It depends on where the reel seat is placed and the blanks taper. What this means to me is, that if I had the CCS Power rating for a finished rod (based on 1/3 of the deflection of OAL), it wouldn’t necessarily be indicative of its actual Power as its used. If however, I had the rating based on the deflection of 1/3 of R/S to tip, I could compare it to my other rods.

While I believe the bare blank should be measured with two supports (utilizing a fulcrum at 10% of OAL) which would provide a means of categorizing and comparing to other blanks, another measurement of the finished rod as its fished dynamically should made as a different measurement. Unless the rod is to be cast two-handed, it should be completely immobilized at the grip/reel seat so as to prevent flex transference into the free length. (The two support method would not be adequate.) The free length of the rod can then be deflected 1/3 of the free length for the Power and AA readings. This method would negate the affect of various grip lengths and give comparative ratings of finished rods.

I list my rods from highest to lowest relative Power/Action ratings which make selection much easier for a given application/technique. The same spec sheet gives me each of the built-on blanks Power/AA, which allows me to make future blank selections to build similar rods.

John makes a good point. The dynamics is completely different when casting one-handed as opposed to two-handed. Casting single handed would be kinda like throwing a baseball…..try that two-handed (Ha). One handed casting effectively shortens the flex length of the rod whereas two hand casting causes the rod to bend throughout its entire length. It could be argued that both methods each have their own unique advantages. Also, when fighting or landing fish, the grip length can come into play as it relates to Power.

Thanks for the comments everyone. While it seemed fairly simple that I should be reading the CCS data after the build and measured from the seat in most cases, I just didnt recall seeing or reading anything prior to now. In the future I will be testing before build and after. I would also like to see what kind of power gains are actually made by extending the butt at different lengths for future reference.

Scott,

I posted these results on a recent post but I'll add them again here since they directly answer your question.

I recently built on a Rainshadow XMB843. I measured the CCS AA and ERN at 5', 5'5", 6', 6'6" and the full 7'.

I don't have the exact numbers in front of me but I believe the AA went from 64 or so up to 70. The ERN was perhaps 22 to 26. With this particular blank there weren't huge jumps in the numbers but I'm sure adding 2' to other blanks may yield different results.

I'll edit this post when I get home from work later today if the numbers are greatly different than what I've provided.

Thanks,
Chad Huderle

Huderle Custom Rods
Prior Lake, MN

I think it could be looked at as what class of lever you have. I mostly fish salt water so the butt end of the rod is the fulcrum and my hand (force) is well forward of the reel seat. The fish is load (we hope). IIRC that makes it a 3rd class lever.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

I think Russ has it right. A meaningful measurement of a rod's action and power can only be determined after the rod's fulcrum has been established.

IIRC a base ball bat is considered a 3rd class lever too. I have a hard time seeing the small end of the bat as a fulcrum as it isn't suppoted but I guess it makes no matter.

There is a big difference in the pressure you can put on a fish depending on how the butt of the rod is supported. I always get a kick out of guys that want a 50# class rod with a butt long enough to put under their armpit. No man can effectivly fish 50# class like that. Your back just can't handle the fight for very long.

To me it isn't always so cut and dry. A harness and proper technique would appear to me to make it a different class lever.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

I think I understand what's being said here and I had a thought. If what I understood about the 2 different crankbaits with 1 rod could it be possible to take a 7'-6" rod and make the real seat adjustable with the butt attached? Wouldn't you basicaly have the 2 rods in which you'r looking for. Let's say it's a 7-6 m that can be brought down to a 6-6 wouldn't it gain power. I'm not sure if this is possible but it's to late for me to think this hard.

I think I understand what's being said here and I had a thought. If what I understood about the 2 different crankbaits with 1 rod could it be possible to take a 7'-6" rod and make the real seat adjustable with the butt attached? Wouldn't you basicaly have the 2 rods in which you'r looking for. Let's say it's a 7-6 m that can be brought down to a 6-6 wouldn't it gain power. I'm not sure if this is possible but it's to late for me to think this hard.

I think I understand what's being said here and I had a thought. If what I understood about the 2 different crankbaits with 1 rod could it be possible to take a 7'-6" rod and make the real seat adjustable with the butt attached? Wouldn't you basicaly have the 2 rods in which you'r looking for. Let's say it's a 7-6 m that can be brought down to a 6-6 wouldn't it gain power. I'm not sure if this is possible but it's to late for me to think this hard.

I think I understand what's being said here and I had a thought. If what I understood about the 2 different crankbaits with 1 rod could it be possible to take a 7'-6" rod and make the real seat adjustable with the butt attached? Wouldn't you basicaly have the 2 rods in which you'r looking for. Let's say it's a 7-6 m that can be brought down to a 6-6 wouldn't it gain power. I'm not sure if this is possible but it's to late for me to think this hard.