If a rod maker produced a rod that has demonstrably superior accuracy you bet your booties that maker and its advertisers would be all over that fact, and would advertise the bejeebers out of it - including the factual, Measured Distances in Feet and Inches. I can't believe that rod makers are so coy or modest that they withhold positive proof, in feet and inches, of the superior accuracy of their product? The rod industry Does believe in feet and inches - they write them on the blank to indicate the length.

Aaron Petersen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Phil,
>
> It is likely due to not having a standard test the
> industry can agree on for such data.

OK, I'll take the bait on this one...

Rods do not have a casting distance. Humans do. A rod can only cast as far as the person holding it has strength of muscles to cast it. Give that rod to a 10 year old kid and there is no way he can cast it as far as Hulk Hogan. Point is, rods do not have a casting distance measurement of any worth or value.

Let's see if I can get the hook out of my mouth... I was trying so hard on this one...





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2021 12:02PM by Kent Griffith.

As I stated before, it needs to be standard testing where equal casting force is applied to each and compare deltas. To use your analogy, Hulk Hogan casts as far as he can but with two different rods. Did they cast the same distance?

I am not saying the rod will or will not make a difference. I am simply stating the scientific model to actually find out.

Edit: For clarity, I really don't care much. I am happy with performance of myself and my rods and have no desire to split hairs. I also have no desire to spend capitol on research. I am just brainstorming a method for actually finding out. The amount of physical factors that go into casting make it a complex subject. By removing the human element we still only reduce the factors to rod, reel (including friction levels within), line, and lure. So even with the human element removed there are a ton of factors. To assume the rod has zero effect in that equation is a poor assumption. Of course it has an effect. But is it enough to notice? How much? Only scientific standardized testing could tell. Examining the research done on other flexible graphite structured sports equipment the research would suggest it is noticeable. IE; Hockey sticks, tennis racquets, golf clubs... The way the shaft loads and unloads has a physical presence. When a rod is loaded (action) it will unload (opposite reaction)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2021 12:50PM by Aaron Petersen.

If there is someone here who would like to put this to rest and actually run a study I would gladly donate engineering design input and process input for the project. It is interesting. The study could even be done as rod "X" vs rod "Y" in separate ERN classes. This would protect against brand battling. Once somebody bet on graphite when it was not working well. Someone was curious enough to run scientific studies and became the first to hold and document a tubular composite study.

To really settle some debates we can even build the rods on straight axis and then spine them and run it again to compare results. But if we did this, what would we talk about?

Aaron, notice that at least most of the time I had "FACT" in quotation marks, indicating doubt as to how factual they are. Things were presented as facts, but in the case of the accuracy, it cannot be proven that rods have 0 effect on accuracy. You can run all the tests you want but you cannot prove that the NEXT rod will be inaccurate, or will not allow accuracy by the caster. You can prove that all the rods you've tested don't contribute to inaccuracy I suppose, and you can deduce from that that at least most rods don't contribute to inaccuracy, but you have not proven and you can not prove that no rod will contribute to inaccuracy.

It is notable that my question as to how the accuracy "FACT" was proven is still unanswered by the one who presented the "FACT."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2021 04:10PM by Michael Danek.

Accuracy is the problem. Like with firearms the term accuracy is misused when judging equipment. It is consistency that the equipment should be judged by. Repeatability.

I am really just curious about the process of a performance study of consistency in tubular stress and unloading honestly. I don't mean to drag it out.

Also the one who presented "FACT" historically is proven to not present proof. There is a rule somewhere that says don't feed them. But I find it a fun exercise of the mind to provoke thought even if it is contradictory to your own or reality.

Phil,
How in the world can a rod be measured in terms of casting accuracy.

I suppose that one could make a machine to emulate a person's cast and have it 100% repeatable to get an accuracy number.

But, my personal feel is that if a rod is straight, and the guides are aligned in a straight line, and if the tip of the rod follows a straight line - the lure will reach the exact straight point - as measured by a chalk line from the tip of the rod to the source.

Now, can a person replicate time after time after endless time - Nope!

The simple reason is that a person is not a locked in place machine will replicate 100% the previous cast or the cast that was 100 casts ago.

Hence my belief that no person is going to be able to reclipate a previous cast with a future cast with 100% accuracy.

Perhaps a better way to advertise would be to give 100 fisherfolks two different rods. Then, have them all fish both rods for equal amounts for 30 days of usage.

At the end of the 30 days of usage - return a quality check list with boxes to check for all of the common areas of a fishing rod performance based on a total of 10 for a perfect score.

Casting distance really isn't a fair comparison - the most powerful rod will cast the specific line the furtherest. And thus the problem when the FF magazines rate the longest casting "5-weight' or whatever. The most powerful rod will cast the given line the furthest. Not all 5-weights possess the same power.

..........

Keep the thread going I have a good chance to win the pool.

Rods have been advertised as being "accurate" and as being "soulful" - each claim backed by the exact same amount of actual evidence. Advertisers have robbed our youth of common sense.

In search of real, reliable, objective, facts and data, I'm going to get back to reading my wine labels.

Aaron: Thank you for so concisely stating what I have so poorly attempted to say: "Repeatability". Given he same input will a rod cast to the same spot? I contend that, given the same input ANY rod will cast to the same spot - so long as the rod handle, guides, and tip-top are firmly attached and the ferrules are tight. You can't build or buy more a more accurate rod - any more than you can build a more accurate baseball bat.