This Saturday we will be conducting a casting event which will compare the distances with several different guide models and set ups. It will take place at Miller Field in Staten Island, NY. We have built 4 Fiber Star Composite blanks with the following set ups: (for more info on these blanks click here: [northeastrodbuilders.com])
Fuji K frame concept
Fuji MN Concept
Fuji Low Riders
Cone of Flight

We have 4 casters who will throw 5 casts with each rod, we will record the distances and see which one throws the furthest. We will be using the 1266 blank, VS 200 reel (same line on each), and throwing a weighted tennis ball. This event is open to anyone wanting to attend or participate. FOr directions to Miller Field: [maps.google.com]

Won’t the poor aerodynamics of a weighted tennis ball mask some of the differences? I would think you would want the smallest most aerodynamic projectile possible for the weight. That should help eliminate the influence of the projectile in the results.

As long as you attach and cast the same tennis ball on each set-up, you eliminate such differences.

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

We are going to be weighing each of the tennis balls, and they will be new balls. A 10% difference is the same whether you cast 300 feet or 500 feet. Making 80 casts, walking the weight EVERY cast back to hte rod so the line can be wound tight we do NOt want to be casting as far as possible, it will take too long, and wear us out walking, lol.

I dont' care what kind of comparison testing you do, if people want to find somethign "unscientific" about it they will. If we cast somethign that was aerodynamic, someone will say but how does it cast with a poor casting plug into a 20K wind, like a Bomber. For all intents and purposes, people will at least have a factual basis to see which set up casts best on teh FSC 1266. Right now nobody tha tI know has done such casting, so if you read the LC K MN etc casts/better or worse - they are more than likely estimating and guessing based on their observations casting themselves, or jus tregurgitating what they read somewhere else (which is usually the case)

A tennis ball's aerodynamics, good or bad depending on what you're comparing it to, will be the same each time you cast it. So it doesn't present any serious variable in such a test.

The only variables you're going to have will be any differences in the blanks (comparing CCS measurements would limit that), the wind and the guys doing the casting. Make enough casts and you minimize those last two variables as much as possible.

The results may not be absolutely scientific, but they'll provide good insight into which set up really does work the best from a practical standpoint.

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

Every difference makes a difference - or several differences. This test would gain validity in a vacuum, but casters are well aware of the fickle nature of air currents and their effect upon casting distance. Smaller (more realistic) lead weights would minimize one crucial variable. This test will only prove the ability of various rigs to cast tennis balls. Ballistics tests do not compare two rifles firing nerf bullets rather than lead bullets, although such a test would be valid according to the above reasoning. There must have been some reason for substituting tennis balls for lead weights. What is the reason for this bizarre substitution, other than avoiding walking or posting observers?

Look at it another way - manufacturers of tennis racquets do not test their products using (identical) beach balls rather than tennis balls.

It's not about casting tennis balls. It's about which set up performs the best relative to the others. They're looking for relative comparative results, not trying to see how far any particular object can be cast. The tennis ball doesn't upset anything in that regard.


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

They aren't doing ballistics tests, they just want to see which guide system is better or worse than another. The guide system that casts a tennis ball the farthest will also be the one that can cast a lead weight the farthest.

Tell Mike to hurry up with that KR rod!

Does the tennis ball know it is not a lead weight? I would be curious to see the same experiment done with braid vs. mono. I would suspect that the different set ups would be more forgiving with the braid….but?

Thanks Billy-should be some good info.

Chuck

Chuck, when we did the test the first time (in 2004) we did cast braid vs mono, and much to everyone's surprise, the mono outcasted the braid in one of the set ups. Consistantly, cast for cast, 3 different casters. It was 17# Mono vs 30# braid, same exact reel they just swapped spools.

We will show for this specific rod, reel, line combo which set up will cast the furthest. The results will probably be different if using a 7' rod, or a 13' rod, fast vs slow action, etc. We selected a rod blank with ratings most common for teh fishing we do here. Anyone who would like to do things differently is more than welcome to go out and buy several sets of blanks, components, find time to wrap them, find someone to coordinate, get people to cast, record the distances, walk back and forth.

If anyone would like to come out and be a part of this, let me know. We have people participating from NY, NJ, PA, and CT. It will be a good time, you'll get to check out a new lin eof blanks, and od comparisions for yourself to see which set up casts the best. And in the morning you can jump on teh beach and go Bass fishing, one of hte guys coming caught a 50# Striper 2 weeks ago from the beach not too far form where we are doing this.

I cast weight and bait or weight and livebait and that is closer to throwing a tennis ball than any streamlined lead weight alone would be. This test to me would be closer to the kind of differences i could expect when fishing a pass or jetty.
The VS is a popular reel (if a bit pricey) where i fish too.
The results will be interesting.

I think that is pretty awesome Billy. Thanks for the open invitation. I may cancel my fishing plans

Yes it will be the same for everyone, but if the poor aerodynamics of the test weight make up too high of a percentage of all the factors that go into casting distance it will hide any differences you would see with a good, bad or indifferent guide system. What I expect you are going to find out is that every system casts about the same because any effect of different guide systems is so much smaller than the effect of the projectile aerodynamics on total cast distance. When you are trying to isolate one thing, in this case guide systems, you want to minimize the effect of any other thing to the overall cast distance. There is a reason why in actual casting competitions they use the most streamlined aerodynamic weight they can because it allows measurable differences to show up, it’s also the reason why at High Point a couple of years ago every competitive cast ended up being within a few feet of each other, we were maxing out how far that weight was going to go in those conditions no matter what the actual rod and reel setup was.

Lou, both the VS & 706 = extremely popular, and probably the worst casting reels. One of the problems people have is setting up rods PROPERLY with the smaller guides and larger diameter reels, and they have legit doubts that it will cast well. PEople wonder how well will a set up perform when casting a wind resistant lure, into the wind, with a big reel, and a small stripper guide placed afar away - will there be issues with distance? Who knows? Will this testing prove/disprove these questions? I won't know until Saturday.

Bruce, if oyu're not being sarcastic send me a message and I'll give you more details.

Mike, I can tell you based on our actual experiance doing this type of testing once before, that you are 100% wrong in your assumption. We did this with 9' rods in 2004, here you can go look yourself to see that everything you are assuming is not what will happen: [www.stripersonline.com]

Billy,

You're a better man than I, my friend.

No matter how much effort you and other put into this you will still have a line of critics -
and unfortunately from your average arm chair theoretical physicist who will sits on there duffs and think of 10 reason why you test is flawed. I frankly think you've lost your mind working this hard on a project just to get mocked on this and other rod building forums.

I'll be there and I'll drive 75 minutes each way from Long Island to participate - no matter how flawed your test parameters are lol

Heck, I know for a fact that others will travel further and have spent countless hours on design, set up, application and planning in an effort to test rod / guide design and share the results at no charge.

You're tops in my book but a darn fool lol

The results are still relative. It is not the difference in feet that is important, it's the difference by percentage. This is why the competition in High Point a few years ago was valid. Changing the shape of the item being cast might have changed each caster's distance, but it would not have changed the order in which the contestants finished.

Billy's contest/test will be valid because the item being cast is a constant - it doesn't vary.

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

Mike,

The aero properties of the projectile are a HUGE source of systematic uncertainty in a test for maximum casting distance, but in the case of comparing guide trains, it only serves to limit maximum casting distance. It will, however, make the effects of wind become a larger systematic uncertainty in the case of a tennis ball vs. a hunk of lead. I wouldn't compare a cranking rod casting a 1/4oz. Zara Spook to a rod casting a 1/4oz. Shad Rap, but I would compare different rods with all casting one lure or the other.

In comparing the casting distances of the rods that Billy is testing, I expect statistically significant differences to show themselves as differences measurable in multiples of 5' or 10' (say 15', 20', or more) more between the various systems, but we'll see.

Billy,

It sounds like you have your ducks pretty much in a row for this. Any chance that you will show either the CCS numbers for all blanks involved or at least the flex comparison like you get with the duplicator board? My only suggestions are to try and match the blanks as closely as possible, and if adding weight to the tennis ball, use the same one for every cast. If the added weight isn't placed exactly the same for each ball, you may have some that do not fly well and others that fly much better.

If the blanks are matched well and casting the same weight, provided that enough data points are taken, the statistical analysis will show the differences. If the differences are statistically significant, then the next step becomes varying the systematic variables such as aero properties of the projectile, casting plane, wind velocity and direction, release point, line types, diameters, spool diameters, etc. The study of these variables will then show if one setup is more efficient over a broad range of applications.

I would be more than happy to assist with the analysis of these results and those of other casting experiments.

Joe

Edit: Couldn't even spell my own name correctly ;)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/18/2012 06:54PM by Joe Vanfossen.