Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He has not broken any rules that would result in
> him being banned. So the best course of action, if
> you do not care for his conversation simply do not
> respond.
>
> ...................
It is just that easy.

Be pretty slow around here some days without Phil!

It’s never that slow around here. If you feed the troll it just keeps coming back.
Norm

I'm with Lynn. We're not solving anything important here, only having conversations we can learn from.

I defend Phil's right to be wrong and post evidence of such on the internet.

Phil, you just keep doing what you do. It makes for entertaining conversation.

Come on dude. In regard to my area of interest and expertise, fly rods, the blanks have improved consistently over the past 40 years. Carbon fiber and resins have become lighter and stronger, which has increased the ability for rod designers to create tapers today that were not possible in past decades. To deny this is utter tomfoolery. And a manufacturer is by no means required to give you a list of rod performance data, though in some cases that may be nice. Newer rods materials and design also can enable more accurate and longer casts for many anglers. High line speed of light and fast rods enables a lot of performance capabilities.

You argument, Phil, is like saying golf clubs, skis or car engines have not improved in the last 30 years, as people were breaking par, winning downhill gold medals, and driving fast in races 40 years ago.

Speciality rods are part marketing and part consumer demand. On another forum, I made this analogy: I can ski Vail mountain with one pair of skis in any condition, but I can ski more enjoyably and with higher performance if I have a carving ski for days when snow is hard, a mid-fat ski for packed powder or crud, and a wide "fattie" ski for powder days. All have different sidecuts, lenghts, widths and camber.

Rod companies are in business to build fly rods and make money. If they can entice you to purchase a Eruo nymph rod, or a streamer rod, or a dry fly rod for spring creeks, it's a win win. On the contrary, if you wish to fish for trout in all occasions with a 9 foot 5 or 6 weight rod, that's just fine and dandy, too, and there are great all-around fly rods out there.

And, oh by the way, fly lines have improved also, and the number and type of specialty lines is incredible.

I will put an Asquith against a Aetos any day, and I know I can tell the difference and appreciate the performance delta, though the Aetos is a decent fly rod.

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I assume someone has actually tested and revealed
> the breaking strength of rods in the past and in
> the present, maybe even the makers of these rods -
> but they have not made their findings known. I
> assume that reputable rod makers actually test the
> breaking strength and harmonics of their new
> blanks, although their results aren't widely
> shared. I guess the average angler is more
> interested in the soulful, smooth, powerful, and
> sensitive qualities of blanks than in boring facts
> such as feet, inches, harmonics, hoop strength . .
> .


Why would the manufacturer reveal this information, I do know that St Croix has machines to test the sensitivity and breaking strength of their product, but why would they publicly post their proprietary information? If you do a factory tour of the St Croix facility, there are several areas that you are not allowed, and they don't allow cameras for these very reasons, they won't even let a majority of their vendors in to the factory. Why would you give your competition information for one thing and number two what would Phil Ewanicki be able to do with this information? Are you planning on building your own blanks? Most of the information that you are asking for is irrelevant to the average angler.

Mark, how does St Croix measure sensitivity? What are the units of measurement?

Michael Danek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mark, how does St Croix measure sensitivity? What
> are the units of measurement?

Mick...The international unit of measurement for rod sensitivity is called a "bite".

Michael Danek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mark, how does St Croix measure sensitivity? What
> are the units of measurement?


I'm not sure what units of measurement they use, but they are able test with bare blank, handle and blank or complete rods. It's several sensors that will pick up vibrations in multiple places on the rod, can't remember all the particulars, but they do have the ability to test sensativity. They also have a machine that will load the blanks or complete rods and keep track of the information until they break, I have a feeling they as well as any other company will not share the information that Phil wants as it means nothing to most that are not in the business, and those that are in the business won't give the compitition that information.

Phil, I bought a North Fork Fast Glass back in Feb. at the rod show. At 2.4 oz for a 7'4" fiberglass blank, that is very impressive and I'd say a major improvement over any glass rod I've ever held. But I think you already know this stuff. You must be bored today.

Thanks, Mark.

Chris Catignani Wrote:
>
> Mick...The international unit of measurement for
> rod sensitivity is called a "bite".



Awesome! LOL!

Good one Norm!

Tim Rajeff on rod strength and breakage

[www.youtube.com]

Straight from the pages of RodMaker Magazine.

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

It may be that the average rod-builder is not sophisticated enough to appreciate the measured physical behavior of rod blanks and rods, as Mark B. assumes. If so, fine. Such builders could ignore printed information of the physical behavior of rod blanks, but that should not stop blank makers from sharing the physical behavior of their blanks with more sophisticated builders. Others could simply ignore this information - no harm done.

You arrive at what you call the physical behavior of the blank from static measurements. Until you can plainly state some sort of what you call a dynamic measurement you have nothing to complain about. Thus far, everything you say you want already exists and the one thing you called "rod deflection" proved to be worthless when performed with a given weight constant against the achieved deflection. And, of course, that is also a static measurement.

..........

I have searched the internet and could not find any measured correlation of sophistication level relative to measured physical behavior of rod blanks and rods.

Is there a course that one can enroll in to become sophisticated enough to appreciate the measured physical behavior of rod blanks and rods?

I must have slept through that class when I was in high school dreaming about going to college.

Woe is me!

have fun
John

Any good custom rod builder should be able to look at the measurements of a rod blank and tell you about how it's going to perform - where it'll flex, how far it'll deflect under about any given load, how fast it will respond and recover, etc. If you can't do that, don't blame others for failing to provide yet more information - take yourself back to rod building school and study the rods you have now. Measure them and see how those measurements correlate to those rods and how they perform. Now you have a place to start from.

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

John: Yep. Hoop strength of blanks one example, and hoop strength can only be determined by bending a blank, which is an action, not a state of being. Damping of rod blank vibrations (another action) is an example. Tracking (linear behavior of a moving rod) is another example. You could dismiss each of these considerations as trivial and go for the rod which has the most "soulful action" - which was advertised at considerable expense a few years ago but you may have missed while you were dreaming about going to college.