I based the part of my latest post concerning perhaps not building your first build on a textured blank such as a Point Blank, on the texture of the original unsanded NFC X ray blanks. Norman has a lot of experience with Point Blank blanks, and if he says you'd be good to go, then you would be good to go.

If the texture isn't that aggressive, then it may actually help at certain areas. So if you want to build on a Point Blank for your first build, I say why not?.

And Jason, interesting observation you shared. If you ever get a chance to build or have a rod built on one of the RX 10 Eternity blanks, I'd love to read your opinion. I built a rod on one of the RX 10 blanks, and I feel it is slighty more sensitive than the rods I have built on X ray blanks.

And the feeling of a rod that just seems to float in your hands, is nirvana in my book. And is the exact feeling I have been able to achieve by adding weight at the butt of a rod to get the rod and reel combination to balance the way I like, I agree with Michael in that I would try it first. And I wouldn't just try it in your living room, or your work shop. Take one of your rod and reel combinations that may not be balanced to well, and tape on weights until it feels good to you, then take it out and fish it. Be sure to take tape with you so you can change how it is balanced while out on the water. You may find you like it one way better than another. Or you may find that you don't like it at all.

The great thing about building your own rods, is that you can tailor them to your specific preferences. And rod and reel balance is one of those preferences. And for certain types of rods, one of the most important ones in my book,

Anyhow ....... I'm off. I'm headed up to Pymatuning reservoir on the Ohio / Pennsylvania border to do some fishing with my brother.

All good advice from David, in my opinion.

However, I would not call a Point Blank textured at all. There is nothing on a Point Blank that affects the wrapping of the blank. I don't like textured blanks because the initial wrapping is more difficult, and packing is tougher to accomplish. Additionally, moving nail knots used for trim is not as easy as it is on a smooth blank.

I have had absolutely no issues with these texture-induced prolbems with Point Blanks.

So which is more important? Sensitivity or Soulfulness? ;)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2022 10:36AM by Michael Ward.

Thank you Norm and Mick for sharing more TNF data and rationale. Much appreciated!

"Gripping a rod more tightly will dampen some of the sensation your hand feels. Therefore, IMO, the better balanced rod is going to feel more sensitive."

The heavier the rod is, the tighter I have to grip it to hold it. Right? Doesn't that dampen sensitivity?

The least sensitive rod I have is the one I don't use. If balancing it with extra weight will make it more comfortable or fit a technique better, then, yes, it becomes more sensitive to me; compared to not using it at all. Realistically, an extra ounce of weight is not going to be that noticeable on some of my rods, but does it reduce the TNF? Does the extra weight in the butt section affect the TNF at the tip? Or does the frequency of the blank flow through the entire blank and not just the tip section? (I tend to think the whole blank comes into play in one way or another.)

At some point, my nervous system reaches it limits with how small of a vibration it can detect. (Thank goodness I don't feel every particle of dust landing on my skin or I would go insane.)

Finally, aren't Balance and Sensitivity two different things?

Is there a sweet spot between sensitivity and durability? Seems I am either marsh fishing in the kayak or climbing through rhododendron forests to get to the next creek opening. Not saying I have broken a tip or two, but….
I tend to not like XF rods, but the specs on a few of the PB are interesting. A bit pricey, but for a one off purchase (vs anNFC discount order) they are certainly not out of line.

I don't know about a sweet spot, but can attest from an ugly incident that the Point Blanks are not the least bit fragile. I wrapped one so far around my trolling motor shaft that I was amazed that it was not damaged. Have caught many fish since with no fracture.

One way to help avoid rod damage when carrying through brush and woods is to carry holding the grips with the tips facing rearward.

Leslie, regarding balance and sensitivity, yes they are two different things. The discussion is about how balance affects sensitivity.

Adding additional weight anywhere along the blank whether it be the butt middle or top will NEVER increase sensitivity BUT it can often make the rod feel more sensitive if it accomplishes making an unbalanced build feel more balanced to that particular person.

No issues wrapping PB's, the "texture" is not an issue. I agree with David's last post. Go figure.

Leslie, in answer to your question "don't you have to grip a heavier rod, tighter"? No, you don't, and you can demonstrate it to yourself. And here's how ...

Do you have a rod and reel combination that is tip heavy in your possession? If so, grip the rod as if you were fishing it, now release your grip, but be sure to be ready to catch it when it starts to fall out of your hand. Next, tape weight to the butt of that rod until it no longer feels tip heavy, then grip the rod as if you were fishing it. Now release it. Does it fall out of your hand? What I am describing would be IMO, a neutrally balanced rod and reel combination. My personal preference is to have the balance be tip light, but not so tip light that the rod would fall out of my hand when I open my hand.

And before anyone tries to be funny and say "Dave, I tried it with a spinning rod, and the balanced rod and reel still fell out of my hand when I let go". You have to be supporting the rod from underneath to preform the experiment. LOL

Also Leslie, as to your question "aren't balance and sensitivity two different things" That depends on how you define how sensitive a rod is. Do you define how sensitive a rod is by the numbers it scores in a bench test? Or do you define how sensitive a rod is by what you can feel with it while it's in your hands, being used? If you define it by the latter, then balance can be part of sensitivity. I'm not trying to be funny here when I say that either. This is a point that I have tried to make any time this kind of discussion occurs. But somehow it's always glossed over.

The only way to determine how sensitive a rod is, is to pick it up and use it. A bench test isn't going to tell you how sensitive a rod is. Using it will.

Here is an analogy I have used in the past that I think fits perfectly. A dyno may tell you you have a high horsepower motor in your race car, but unless you can utilize that horsepower to its' fullest, your car isn't going to be as fast as it could be. There is more to winning a race than just the horsepower the motor in the car has.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2022 08:47PM by David Baylor.

Bench tests on blanks/rods and dyno tests on auto engines can be very accurately predictive of future product performance. Yes, there is more to it than them, but without them we limit our predictive capability. I doubt if there is a race car team that doesn't right up front know the dynomometer numbers of its engines.

I am confident these sensitivity measurements were made at the rod tip and compared to tests made at the rod tips of other blanks. However, anglers do not sense movement at the rod tip but at the end of the line! More line stretch=less sensitivity. More line mass=less sensitivity. More line diameter=less sensitivity. People feel movement, and movement can be measured, but I've never seen a credible (double-blind) sensitivity comparison of different rod blanks with the same lines of the same length and the same deflection. Guess we must continue to rely on advertisements and hearsay.

OOPS!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2022 01:54PM by ben belote.

Phil, you may remember when freshwater rods had foregrips..It was very handy for gripping the rod and feeling the line at the same time..then one of the bass pros said we don't need this..I guess you don't, if your fishing for ounces..lol..It was another reason to build your own rods..

The most bite-sensitive way to use your rod involves bait and a forked stick. The more flexible the rod the more sensitive it is. While you are reeling in line all the movements of your arms and hands and the rod obscure any gentle bite which might occur.

Phil, how much sensetivity do you need in a rod fishing a streamer when every line strip is a possible hook set?

Ben: It would be easy enough to get a rod, a reel, a line, and a blindfold, then put the end of the line through the guides and through a pulley thirty feet away. Tie a little cup on the end of the line. Have somebody blindfolded hold the rod and somebody else gently squeeze water from an eyedropper until the person holding the rod can feel the added weight. Or you could just claim, without proof, your rod is more sensitive than other rods and write advertising copy repeating this unfounded "sensitivity" claim.

The physics of mass and flexibility of materials are well known. The heavier an object (like a fishing rod&reel) the more energy it takes to move it, and movement is necessary for the sensation of touch. As for flexibility and sensation, the more flexible an object the less sensation it conveys. Think of a piece of hair and a piece of steel wire the same diameter pressed against a finger.

Revisiting and reading back through the thread, Leslie asked a question wondering if adding weight to the butt of the rod for balancing purposes, affects the rod's TNF. I saw the question and expected Michael to answer, but he missed it, probably getting caught up in some of the other stuff going on in the thread.

So to answer that question based on Michael's findings in TNF testing, the answer is yes. Adding weight to the butt of a rod in the name of balance does affect the TNF of the rod. Here is a link to a past thread that discusses a number of things.

[www.rodbuilding.org]

In it you will find a post from Michael saying that how little weight low on the rod affects TNF.

Also, if interested, you will find an experiment I did trying to ascertain how much difference in rod tip weight there is between a rod that has no weight added to the butt, versus one that does have weight added to the butt. In reading back through that post I didn't express some of the results in a proper way. After looking back over the data, the differences are even greater than I first thought.

Anyhow, there is a lot of good reading on the subject of weight and balance in past threads of this site. As I said earlier, it is one of, if not the most lively debated topic on this site.

"Leslie asked a question wondering if adding weight to the butt of the rod for balancing purposes, affects the rod's TNF. "

Yup, missed it.

I have to ask why you come to the conclusion that TNF is affected by adding weight to the butt. The posts you link to do not involve TNF. You cannot know for sure until you run the TNF process, and I don't think you have. But based on the TNF process, where the butt is clamped solidly, I do not believe that TNF would be affected by adding weight to the butt. I don't see how it could be.

With some blanks even the reduction train weight, probably within limits, doesn't affect TNF. This of course brings into question the belief that sensitivity is truly proportional to stiffness to weight ratio. But it tends to confirm the generally accepted belief that the characteristics of the tip are the most important determiners of sensitivity.


So, if adding weight to the butt affects sensitivity, I maintain that TNF will not be able to detect it. Since there is no sensitivometer, no one can prove me wrong.

Sensitivity is, as has been mentioned, pretty complex, meaning different things to different people, and most likely will continue to be an elusive characteristic of the rod.

I still believe that TNF is good at evaluating blanks, revealing which ones are most likely will allow building into the most sensitve rods, and it can detect the effect of different weight guide systems, and their effect on recovery/response time of the rod.

I’m not sure how added weight to the butt end of the rod affects TNF measurements. When I do theTNF measurements I secure 10% of the blank’s length to my CCS support, just as I would do to measure IP and AA. Because of this I’m not sure if the added weight would even be relevant, because it is completely associated with the CCS support. If it does affect TNF I would suspect it would me minimal. I’ll try an experiment, and measure TNF with and without an ounce weight added to to the butt of a blank and see what I get.

Norm
Edit - Just saw Micheal’s post, and I agree with him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/16/2022 06:07PM by Norman Miller.