I occasionally hear (or read posts) where anglers (or rod builders) refer to “slow” (or “moderate”) Action rods as having a “soft” rod tip, or, “fast Action” rods as having a “stiff” tip. To me, the opposite is usually the case. If you have two rods with identical “Powers” and one is fast Action and the other is slow (or moderate) Action, the faster Action rod will be stiffer for a longer (2/3rds or more) portion of its length, but have a relatively soft tip. The slower Action rod (of the same Power) will have its stiffness more equally distributed along its entire length, so the tip is probably going to be slightly stiffer than its fast Action counterpart. Tip “stiffness” or “softness” is generally associated with Action. I.E., a “faster Action” would generally have a “softer” tip as opposed to a “moderate Action” in the same powered rod. I’m not saying its how that Action is determined, but it’s usually a by-product. I guess I should also add that Action is most accurately measured by the “action angle” determined by either the CCS or RDA rating methods.

Although I don’t necessarily subscribe to it, it is generally believed that slow Action rods are preferable for fishing crankbaits to help prevent ripping out treble hooks, since the rod’s tip is supposedly softer and more forgiving. I think it has much more to do with a rod’s Power than Action and it’s the rod’s Power that might be more “forgiving” and not the supposed “soft” rod tip of a slower rod. Most manufacturer’s crankbait rods are actually significantly less power than their comparatively rated (line/lure weight) “standard” version rods. For instance: A St Croix 3C70MHM (crankbait) (3/8-1 oz.) Power=124 /Action=58 deg. vs. 3C70MHF (3/8-1 oz.) Power=268 /Action=65 deg.
When you see one of the “pros” on TV putting a deep bend in his big powerful cranking rod, the rod is really a lower powered rod than its non-cranking “equivalent”.
There are situations where I might want to be ripping crankbaits thru weeds that require a more powerful, stiff-tipped (i.e. slower) rod . The downside (trade-off) of the rod I choose for this is that when casting, it doesn’t load well with lighter lures because of the stiff tip. Lower powered rods tend to be more forgiving of slow or moderate Actions when casting, regardless of lure weights.
Anyway, something to ponder while suffering from these long, cold winter days.

Action isn't really related to tip stiffness - it's where the rod initially flexes. Regardless of how stiff the tip is or isn't, if the initial flex is in the upper 3rd of the rod, it's a fast action. Upper 1/2, medium, less than that, slow. You can have two rods, one with a stiff tip and one with a soft tip, and both can have the same action.

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

It’s understood what Action is, but what I’m saying is that it’s unlikely that those two rods would have the same Power.

Perhaps poor semantics, but: “flex” loosely defined as “soft” or “stiff”.
I.E., A fast Action rod would flex more at the tip as opposed to a slow Action rod (of the same Power) flexing less at the tip.

Now add that blank makers do not want there blanks to come back cause they broke cause of too much lure weight

So they lower the lure weight--- Now you see it takes so much weight to load that blank -- but it will not load untill you add more Cause the company lowered the weight
Good loard Can ya winn ???

Now think about fly lines A 5 and 1/2 line weight Makes no sence to me
Plus blanks are OR should be measured with - 30 - feet of line off the tip Who knows what companies use 20 - 60 ???

Seems the only thing ya can do is get the blank Tape some guides on and TEST IT

Or ask here and maybe ya find out if some one built it and found out what lure weight WORKS with that blank

I HAVE NO IDEA

Bill - willierods.com

Tom nailed it as usual.

Here are many pictures that illustrate the difference between slow, moderate, fast and extra fast rods.

None of these pictures have anything to do with the power of the rod.

[www.google.com]

Roger, you missed the point. Why am I not surprised? But you’re right, in those pictures, Action has nothing to do with Power. However, there is a definitely an interrelationship between Power and Action in the way a rod is fished.

I have often wondered why manufacturers don't test the amount of drag a rod can handle and include that figure in their descriptions.

Seems like that would be a bit more objective than just "20-40lb MH".

A little tag with a pictorial warning of how NOT to use the rod, (high-sticking etc), may also be useful.

-chad



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2015 07:51AM by Chad Barlongo.

Bill,
You may be right about some blank makers underrating blanks. In manufacturing it’s common practice for “safe load” situations, to factor in some amount to the calculated “actual load” weights. It wouldn’t surprise me if they also tend to fudge (engineering term) their “fast” Actions toward the “slow” side to provide a bit of safety and to accommodate for situations like high-sticking. I don’t take any of their ratings too seriously and make my own measurements before deciding whether a blank meets my parameters.
I also agree that “testing” is the way to go…..assuming you can get reasonably close to the rod specs you’re looking for. There are times when I select a rod with excessive Power (for a given bait) to meet requirements I feel I need. Obviously, the rod may not load well when cast, so I have to consider a particular Action that would help alleviate that issue. A faster Action is generally preferable, but it can be detrimental if I’m needing a “stiffer” (less “flexible”) tip such as the example I gave in my first post (ripping thru weeds).
In other cases when I use a lower Power rod, the Action seems far less critical. In regard to crankbait rods or cases where hook rip-out may be an issue, I think there needs to be a balance of Power and Action, although I think lower Power (if practical), regardless of the Action, is more forgiving. Lot of this stuff is subjective. I’m sure blank manufacturers that offer “technique-specific” blanks like crankbaiting, do incorporate characteristics/materials to accommodate greater bending forces encountered in the blanks and may use smaller diameters, and/or possibly a blend of lower modulus graphite or a composite with fiberglass, which is more flexible and allows greater bending to prevent failure. I think slower actions tend to be more forgiving because the load stresses are distributed over a greater length of the blank, compared to a fast Action. Lower modulus graphites and glasses are not as stiff and much tougher….and they are also cheaper.

Jim, were you posing a question? Or just pondering/pontificating?

Partly responding to Bill's post and partly pondering/pontificating.

OK Jim

Got to find a 2 pc rod that will handle 6 plus lure weight -- 8'
I searched for what seemed hours found some at 9 and 10 ' So I figured I could trim a blank and or add some to the butt

But I do not have a CCS setup to measure to be on the money Not the best way but I guess I could hang 6 - 8 oz from the tip in different locations - But how should the blank flex to determine if correct

If I got a 8'6 to trim with say 4-5 oz lure weight to get 6 pluss oz I have seen some of mod action gives some room to trim

And it does as I have read here ! that companies do not want to have blanks sent back so they will not show the max lure weight - user error will add more and snap the tip

Some posts I have read of using 2 - 3 more then recamended with no problems
So what to believe ????

Bill - willierods.com

Bill,
Making tip measurements can be a bit risky. A longer blank could be a candidate, but it would have to have greater power initially as it will lose power if you cut it back to your required length. I do this all the time. You say you don’t have a CCS setup, but it’s easy enough to do and the setup doesn’t have to be very sophisticated to get reasonably accurate measurements. It would be the only way I know of to allow you to make adjustments before cutting. According to the URRS lure rating system (Table 2 page 19 RodMaker V10 #4 - Universal Rod Rating System/CCS), you’d need 4 pounds to deflect the rod 1/3 of its length to get the 6 oz. lure weight you’re looking for. I should note that I’ve never used this particular system before to determine lure weights and I’ve placed a post yesterday asking for clarification on its use. The system I presently use is the one Mr. Kirkman refers to as a “stopgap” ‘til Hanneman published his. The “stopgap” has worked well for me, but it seemed a bit underrated so I increased the high limit value slightly. This is it (including my modification)
.8 x cents -20 x .0022857 = minimum weight in ounces
1.8 (I increased from 1.5) x cents -20 x .0022857 = maximum weight in ounces
BTW, assuming I’m interpreting it correctly, Hanneman’s lure weight table seems far more liberal (over-rated), so I’m waiting anxiously for an answer to my previously mentioned post regarding the URRS.

Bill,
Since this thread’s subject matter is “Action vs Tip Stiffness” and may not be getting viewed by guys with the expertise that could offer you advice, you may want to post your specific situation in a new post where you might get more suggestions or perhaps someone could recommend a rod that might meet your requirements.

Thanks Jim I did E mailed the guy told him after trimming no warranty

Bill - willierods.com