Phil,
AAHH the errors of a misspent youth.

However, My dream did come true I made it to college (G.I. bill) and studied engineering and with of all the problems ,exams, labs, demonstrations, etc, a rod blank was never an example. Maybe rod blanks are addressed in post graduate work in tune with more sophisticated students.

I enjoy reading your posts and responses and occasionally you slip in a gem worth remembering.

Good luck with your crusade against the advertisers and manufacturers.

Against my better judgement............

I

"PONGED"

You are a good button pusher.

Regards

John
.

Damping is "speed." Hoop strength is of no concern and most would have no use for it nor know what to do with it. Dead lift strength is the better indicator of how much a blank can lift before failing. There is no such thing as "tracking." The rod moves along whatever axis you move it along, although marketers like to use that term to foster the idea that their product does something better than someone else's.

All the information you want is already available.

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

As a rod builder I have not purchased a rod in some time, but I still see lots of rod advertisements, and besides rod length and (less frequently) rod weight, these ads contain no useful information about the physical attributes of rods - or rod blanks. Adjectives about rods don't count but physical properties of rods do, for me at least. Howeverl, asking for measured, dynamic properties of rods seems to infuriate anglers who prefer advertising copy to physical measurements?

Advertisements don't usually contain such information, but the catalog listings do.

There is no such thing as a "dynamic property" of a rod. You made that up just like the advertising people do. It's as bad as saying a rod has a "soulful action."

..........

Regarding: "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."


Hit the nail right on the head!

For you which is the most important attribute of a custom-built rod: its appearance or its performance? I can recall but one post on this site which provided physical facts about a rod's performance - with numbers - but then my memory isn't what it used to be. Before length and weight "any good custom rod builder" would wish to know the materials used to fabricate the rod. BTW: There are two schools of thought as to what constitutes a "good" rod builder: the one who makes the the most beautiful rods or the one who makes the best functioning rods; Show versus Go. For over 60 years of rod building I have favored performance over appearance.

Plenty of physical facts have been presented on this forum over the past 20 years. Ten times that number have been in the magazine over the past 25 years. Data. Facts. Measurements. Test results. You choose not to look at them.

..........

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.

It wasn't an assumption, no rod manufacturer is going to share that information with an average rod builder, much less their competition. Sharing your proprietary information with your competitors isn't something any manufacturer rod builder or other will share. Phil Ewanicki is assuming that companies are willing to share information with someone that is more than happy to steal that processes and incorporate it into their manufacturing process, companies that are on top of the game don't share with those that aren't willing to put the work in themselves. Sounds like Phil Ewanicki should do some reverse engineering and share with the rodbuilding community instead of wishing someone else would do his work for him.

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are two schools of thought as to what
> constitutes a "good" rod builder: the one who
> makes the the most beautiful rods or the one who
> makes the best functioning rods; Show versus Go.
> For over 60 years of rod building I have favored
> performance over appearance.

I have found over the years that anyone who makes this statement doesn't have the ability to actually build a show quality rod that performs as well as a "Performance" rod. Usually the people that make this statement can barely build a presentable rod.

Another name for the "feel" of a rod blank (and a rod) is its resonance. This numerical measurement is a whole LOT more informative about rod performance than "medium" or "fast" or even "extra fast". The vast majority of rod builders are perfectly capable of understanding this scientific measurement and its implications for selecting rod blanks - that is, selecting the blank which best suits the type of rod they are building. Why don't blank builders publish the resonant frequencies of their blanks? It certainly is not the cost of doing so.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/2022 12:47PM by Phil Ewanicki.

Because most builders and fishermen wouldn't know what the heck RF was or how to use it. You'd have to spend untold amounts of money to educate the general public and most wouldn't care to begin with. The other terms you used are very, very important. They describe the action of a rod and over many decades a good many rod builders and fishermen understand what those terms describe. If your goal is to sell rods, then you make things simple.

But nothing anyone says here will satisfy you. You're complaining about things that no one here has any control over. I'd advise you to take your complaints to the blank and rod manufacturers. In the meantime, I think the forum would be better if you took a little "time out" and allowed everyone else to get back to rod building topics.

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

I warned everyone, when you feed a troll it will never go away. For a troll it’s all about provoking a response. I really get tired of this nonsensical back and forth.

This is the problem with forums where posts pop up to the top anytime a response is made. It turns into a chat room style place where a half dozen people just chat or argue back and forth and the people who want quality information interaction end up going elsewhere. It has ruined more than one forum and it will ruin this one. You have 20+ years of proof that this forum worked. Why hand it over to a few people and ruin it?

Mike Ballard has a point. A number of these posts wind up being "placate the poster" threads and turn into ego battles. A lively discussion is always good but when it becomes a crusade it gets monotonous and irritating and having it pop up to the top each time a rebuttal is made it only exacerbates the situation.

When a post moves down the list it tends to become less important and dies out more quickly..

I apologize for pushing this thread up, but I had to add my two cents.

I disagree. The problem is not the format. It is something else.

I tried the current "return to the top" format early on. It didn't work for the very issues that John outlined. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of what we know happened. That's why I got away from it and the forum flourished under the descending posts format.

Alex has said that something having to do with the ability to post photos on the forum requires the return to the top format. So the best thing to do if someone can't let something go is just don't respond.

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

Hello All.

Tom X 1000.

Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.