Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JohnP

Weight Watchers

38 posts in this topic

RedGreen, CCS isnt really that good of a standard for measuring rods anyways. Sure IP and AA are useful, but they dont fully account for the differences in rods. If you want more info look at sexyloops and some studies that are avaliable online. It will blow your wmind. And even the golf industry, which is way ahead of the rod building industry in terms of consumer info and testing still doesn't know everything (look up sst pureing). 

 

Also line standards. I dont really think its a bad that they are deviating from the standards. AFTMA line standards are pretty arbitrary anyways. SInce when do you only cast with 30 feet, and exactly 30 feet of fly line?

 

I don't think our situation is too bad, just go into a shop with the line(s) you want to cast on a reel and ask to test out some rods. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To go into a shop is the best way. Even better if you are experienced and know what you want and not have to rely on the shop owner or staff totally.

 

But times are changing and fast and so many guys are claiming  that they have no access to a fly shop so have to buy on line.

Many won’t listen about the  complexity of buying on line. Bit like trying to buy clothes  on line.

 

Personally I would travel. It’s about attitude and how much the sport means to you.

 

There needs to be a better system to help them. If I was in the rod and line business I would be making it as easy as possible for potential customers to buy my product. It would be a huge differentiator. Is any one rod company  doing this. Heh two item sell a rod and a line. Salmon Logic do this very well.

 

The CCS system tends to be used by  Custom rod makers rather than fishermen most of who would not understand it or be remotely interested.

 

I agree that AAFTM stds are a bit quirky with the 30 feet thing but it still allows us to calibrate and make rod and line match up better.

 

For Guys who have a big budget it’s not the end of the world if they buy the wrong line but for others on tight budgets it’s just not good at all.

 

It depends on just how keen an Angler is to educate himself. 

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iamnobody,

 

I agree that CCS isn't perfect, but it's the best way I've seen (I want to really stress the seen/familiar with part) for quantifying a rod's action and power level. I'm not familiar with the studies on sexyloops, so of course I cannot comment on that yet. I was not aware of those, and I will have a look at them later today. I'm also not a golfer, so I'm not familiar with pure SST testing either, and also unable to comment on that. I'll have a look later today. It sounds very interesting.

 

I'm not sure about the history and reasoning behind why thirty feet was chosen, but essentially those AFTMA ratings are mass/length densities. For example, a 10wt line is (280 grains)/(30 feet), which 9.33333.... grains per foot. So, if you have an AFTMA 10wt line but with a 50 foot head, you'll find that it's head has a mass of 466.6666... grains. That's the utility of it. Or at least what I get out of it. I agree that it's not so critical as objective quantification for rods, but if manufacturers are going to move away from the line number system then they should make available all line dimensions to us. Head weight, head length, taper profiles, etc. Rio does a good job, as do several others, and I'm very thankful for that. 

 

I agree that the situation isn't too bad IF we have shops available to us that have what we're looking for. The problem is that a lot of guys don't have that. I only have one shop in my area, and it's 45 minutes away. All other shops are Orvis shops, and I don't have the dough to play around in there. I could pony up and take the hike to Basspro or Cabelas, but then I'd be driving several hours to just familiarize myself. All other major fly shops are significantly farther. Bear's den IIRC is something like 4 hours drive from me. If I didn't like what I found, then that's a whole lot of time and gas spent for basically nothing but information in return. That's why a more effective and objective system of quantification would be so valuable. All you'd need is the ability to read and internet connection, and you can find out everything you want to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 mins ago, Mike Oliver said:

To go into a shop is the best way. Even better if you are experienced and know what you want and not have to rely on the shop owner or staff totally.

 

But times are changing and fast and so many guys are claiming  that they have no access to a fly shop so have to buy on line.

Many won’t listen about the  complexity of buying on line. Bit like trying to buy clothes  on line.

 

Personally I would travel. It’s about attitude and how much the sport means to you.

 

There needs to be a better system to help them. If I was in the rod and line business I would be making it as easy as possible for potential customers to buy my product. It would be a huge differentiator. Is any one rod company  doing this. Heh two item sell a rod and a line. Salmon Logic do this very well.

 

The CCS system tends to be used by  Custom rod makers rather than fishermen most of who would not understand it or be remotely interested.

 

I agree that AAFTM stds are a bit quirky with the 30 feet thing but it still allows us to calibrate and make rod and line match up better.

 

For Guys who have a big budget it’s not the end of the world if they buy the wrong line but for others on tight budgets it’s just not good at all.

 

It depends on just how keen an Angler is to educate himself. 

 

Mike

 

I’m lucky to have 2 fly fishing shows within a drive each winter. This is the best way to check rods, and consider blank weight, full weight, swing weight, etc. the only problem is these show are more staffed by pro staff and sales folks and they often don’t want to engage in pressing or difficult questions.

 

you are right though many or most fly companies enjoy the techno superlatives and they sure don’t make it easy to understand the ratings systems.

 

in the spin world it’s usually cut and dry, the rod is rated for 3/4 Oz to 2 Oz lure wt

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, JohnP said:

 

I’m lucky to have 2 fly fishing shows within a drive each winter. This is the best way to check rods, and consider blank weight, full weight, swing weight, etc. the only problem is these show are more staffed by pro staff and sales folks and they often don’t want to engage in pressing or difficult questions.

 

you are right though many or most fly companies enjoy the techno superlatives and they sure don’t make it easy to understand the ratings systems.

 

in the spin world it’s usually cut and dry, the rod is rated for 3/4 Oz to 2 Oz lure wt

 

 

Definitely NOT!  Spinning rods are more whacked out in rating than fly rods by a mile.

Manufacturers intentionally under rate rods to avoid breakage, plus braid has riled up the actual test ratings for a rod completely.  Lure ratings are merely a suggestion as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 mins ago, mumichog said:

Definitely NOT!  Spinning rods are more whacked out in rating than fly rods by a mile.

Manufacturers intentionally under rate rods to avoid breakage, plus braid has riled up the actual test ratings for a rod completely.  Lure ratings are merely a suggestion as well.  

At least you know what they are talking about

 

A 9 wt means what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Good question, especially considering some rod manufacturers have admitted they labeled fly rods one line size up to make them 'easier' casting.

Edited by mumichog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

JohnP,

 

That's why I'm arguing for CCS as opposed to the line weight system. Intrinsic power alone would be enough to quantify a rod's preferred line weight, as it's action angle doesn't effect much other than how it bends under a load. Intrinsic power is defined as the mass required to deflect a rod's tip a distance of one third it's length, measured perpendicular to it's handle. The action angle is the angle that the tip guide makes with the ground while under this load. Again, it's not perfect, there's other things which do matter and will impact how a rod works, but I think that it would be hard to argue that this wouldn't be better than the current system we have in the industry. I'm not sure where the line number system came from, but whatever meaning it once had has dissipated. I think that's something we can all agree on.

Edited by RedGreen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 mins ago, RedGreen said:

JohnP,

 

That's why I'm arguing for CCS as opposed to the line weight system. Intrinsic power alone would be enough to quantify a rod's preferred line weight, as it's action angle doesn't effect much other than how it bends under a load. Intrinsic power is defined as the mass required to deflect a rod's tip a distance of one third it's length, measured perpendicular to it's handle. The action angle is the angle that the tip guide makes with the ground while under this load. Again, it's not perfect, there's other things which do matter and will impact how a rod works, but I think that it would be hard to argue that this wouldn't be better than the current system we have in the industry. I'm not sure where the line number system came from, but whatever meaning it once had has dissipated. I think that's something we can all agree on.

 

I hear ya. If there was some way to describe all that in a sentence, the average fisher may not be intimidated into giving Fly Fishing a try. 

Most of my buddies say it’s all too complicated 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, JohnP said:

 

I hear ya. If there was some way to describe all that in a sentence, the average fisher may not be intimidated into giving Fly Fishing a try. 

Most of my buddies say it’s all too complicated 

I agree completely. The big problem with CCS for the mainstream is making it streamlining it. Assigning intrinsic power values for a specific line weight would be a good start. Say, for example, intrinsic power of 150 grams is the definition of a nine weight. I realize that these values may be entirely incorrect for actual nine weight rods, it's just an example. 

Edited by RedGreen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CCS comes very clear when you measure your own rods which you already know well if you also know the line head weights. Also Moment Of Inertia or at least section weights are good measures too which releals how advanced build technology the blank is but there the guides and wrappings need to be estimated. Then you get a very good idea of a rod when you see its IP, AA and section weights. Then later you can quite accurately learn to say IP, AA and swing weight of a rod when you cast a line you know well.

 

Esa

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 4/15/2018 at 5:51 AM, Mike Oliver said:

 

 

I still use some of my 20 year old rods because they are still good not because of sentimental reasons.

 

 

mike

So do I. If some are heavier than todays, it doesn't really matter to me since I'm used to them. I think balance is more important than weight anyway. Meaning the reel that's on it. I have a big Marquis #10 on a 9.5 trout rod I fish with either a 4 or 5 weight...the Marquis is the right balance for me.

Edited by patchyfog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/04/2018 at 1:56 AM, JohnP said:

 

I hear ya. If there was some way to describe all that in a sentence, the average fisher may not be intimidated into giving Fly Fishing a try. 

Most of my buddies say it’s all too complicated 

John

 

Maybe your Buddies are just plain lazy. Can’t be arsed or plain not interested in fly fishing . Too complicated . Cop out. 

 

It is not possible to dumb  everything technical down to just  sound bites that can be read in a few secs.

 

 

mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 mins ago, Mike Oliver said:

John

 

Maybe your Buddies are just plain lazy. Can’t be arsed or plain not interested in fly fishing . Too complicated . Cop out. 

 

It is not possible to dumb  everything technical down to just  sound bites that can be read in a few secs.

 

 

mike

 

Yeah something like that.

 

Picture this conversation somewhere in a Montauk parking lot, after a long night of fishing

 

 

 

 

Them: “so , let’s say I’d like to try fly fishing. Well now I’m not saying I would actually want to, but let’s make believe just for kicks I had $2,000 that I had absolutely no use for. What would I buy?” 

 

Me: “well you don’t even need that much money. Stuff is a lot cheaper than you think.’

 

Them: ‘well then ok, let’s say I want the best. What am I looking for?’

 

Me: ‘Well that depends. What kind of fish would you be targeting?”

 

Them: ‘BIG fish John. We’ve been fishing together for over 20 years, and you don’t know that? BIG fish.”

 

Me: “yeah yeah, big fish. Well if you want BIG fish throw rigged eels or if that’s too complicated throw out a cut up bunker and let it sit on the bottom.”

 

Them: “exactly, so tell me again why the fly rod is the thing to do?”

 

Me: “well it’s a more complete sport, bunker-head. You need to know the water. You have to master the cast. You have to tie flies. You need to know how to fish em.”

 

Them: “so what kind of rod is that one there? That Sage rod?”

 

Me: “that’s a 9 foot single handed 10 weight.”

 

Them: “I heard that term before. 10 weight. Just what does that mean? I guess it means you can catch fish up tp 10 pounds?”

 

Me: “very funny fish face. It has to do with the weight of the line I can throw.”

 

Them: “oh you mean it can toss 10 ounces... or 10 grams...?”

 

Me: “No, but you are getting close. You see the lines are rated. It has to do with the amount of weight in the forward section of the line”

 

Them: “oh so it’s 10 ounces in the forward part of the line?”

 

Me: “no it’s not like that at all.”

 

Them: “oh man I think my head is going to explode. But is that a 10 weight line you have on there?”

 

Me: “well yes and no. It’s labeled as a 10, but I’d say its more like an 11. They purposely made it heavier than the official line weighting. I only figured that out by buying a 10 for my 9 weight, I often up line, and it felt too heavy for that rod, but it’s perfect for my 10 weight. “

 

Them: “so you bought a 10 for your 9, but it’s really for an 11?”

 

Me:”want another beer?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity , I have a question. When or if you fellows are considering a rod purchase is "swing weight" or the actual claimed weight that much of a factor or something you really look at ? I don't think I have ever taken notice of rod weight and I have older rods (as well as current) and can't say swing weight has even been something I noticed ? A slower action or broomstick yes ....It just seems to me the marketing guys are a whole lot more concerned about it than most people I know anyway ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.