1. The Fly Rod as a Hammer....and as an Earthworm

[crunch]

You visit there occasionally! Please read original CCS and concentrate understanding relationship between ERN and rod weight. Then Moment of Inertia is very accurate and revealing value and makes CCS almost perfect. You have written you notice when casting as you notice rod stiffness and that is in CCS too.

 

Imagine rod which weights nothing and has no wind resistance. Only line weight would bend it. Extreme example but it should help you to understand smaller differences.

 

Please, please do make your rod heavier as I explained above and cast it. I remember you wrote you have an old rod. Don't you find it different? I know you do and CCS shows how different it is much better than your subjective casting experience.

 

And again 1/3 bend is ENOUGH to find rod stiffness and for simplicity there is only that bend. If it is more there is no Angle of Attack calue anymore as Peter has proofed in his load tests. When one rod is stiffer there it stays stiffer through the range and this Peter and so many others have proofed. Only when rods have different Angle of Attacks there is difference how they bend when loaded. This I would like to see Peter will do. I did measure mine but You do not believe me. See what Tim Rajeff says.

[formula1]

Esra I've read the CCS pages many times before.

 

I can tell you from an engineering standpoint and actual experience it is fatally flawed.

 

CCS frequently rates stiffer rods as being 2 line weights heavier than they are rated by the manufacturer. I've tested this on my own and found that without exception that CCS is 100% wrong. I up line 8 and 10 wt rods by 2 line weights as stated by CCS and the rods invariably lost their crispness as well as casting distance in my hands. An 8 wt rod that I could cast 110 ft loses 10-15 ft of distance when I try to cast a 10 wt with it regardless of what CCS says and regardless of what 10 wt line I try on it. All the theory in the world still has to be proven and in my average casting hands CCS does not work.

[wjc]

Formula,

 

Between you and I , how many times do you think together we have told Esa that the rods in the CCS database are rated 2 line weights too heavy?

 

In the case of a factory built TCR 8 weight it is rated 2.7 line weights too heavy. I like the 8 wt, but there is no way it can handle an 11 wt line. or a 10 wt line or a 9 wt line the way I like to cast. I think it is properly rated for casting an 8 wt WF fishing line.

 

I have not tried a shooting head since 1969 and do not know about them. For the fishing I do, they are more trouble than they are worth.

 

The best way to determine what rod to buy for what line is to take the line to the shop and try different rods. That method is the best there is now. Word of mouth is a good way to narrow down the ones you want to try if you know people who have similar tastes in rods.

 

Cheers,

Jim

[Peter Patricelli]

TimS,

I am sorry if I stated things in such a way as to be potentially misunderstood. I did not intend to insult The Fisherman at all. Or to even disagree with him. "Good on you" was an honest way of sayig "congratulations...that works for you". There are always exceptions. He is, casting-wise with the weight rods we are discussing, an anomaly. He knows that. The rest of it was just an attempt at light humor around the issue of anomalies. Nothing more intended.

 

I apologize to The Fisherman if he took it otherwise.

 

I will try to be more clear in the future.

 

Peter Patricelli

[Peter Patricelli]

Formula1,

 

"An 8 wt rod that I could cast 110 ft loses 10-15 ft of distance when I try to cast a 10 wt with it regardless of what CCS says and regardless of what 10 wt line I try on it."

 

But that may state more about your strength limitations when it comes to accelerating the additional mass of a 10 wt head, given the shortening effect of the lever in that rod. I don't know ANYONE who can cast a 10 wt as far as they can cast an 8 wt. There might be someone...but certainly not me. My distances drop off from an 8 wt on up...for the rods I have. But then, also, above 8 wt I am primarily throwing full lines. I haven't set up an equal comparion. But there is, inevitably, a strength limitation issue that will eventually demand a distance price from everyone above a certain weight.

 

Is your distance with a 10 wt line on a 10 wt rod the same as your distance with a 8 wt line on an 8 wt rod.?? More??

 

Peter

 

 

[The Fisherman]

Peter, no worries. Sometimes it's hard to read tone on the internet, and I hope you knew I was being sincere when I said I appreciate the energy you bring to your experiments and research.

 

I have a lot of respect for all of you who know so much about casting and mechanics, and especially your passion for it.

 

Steve

[crunch]

CCS Part 3: The Rosetta Stone contains research of line selection. It looks good but so far I don't say anything of its validity because I don't know it enough.

 

ERN is just a measurable VALUE (Edited: variable to VALUE)

 

CCS don't suggest what line to use. It is left to line caster. I have not suggested to use as heavy line as ERN is because line and rod selection has too many variables and it is so personal and condition dependent.

 

I know this discussion of CCS does not go anywhere and now I apologize my participation.

 

Jim, if you have not measured your TCR it might be different. My TCR5 is stiffer and slower than any other TCR5 there is. Have you casted any stiffer 8wt labeled rod? Have you found any lighter but stiffer rod? Have you casted better distance casting rod? Wouldn't you like to know it there is without buying it when there is no possibility to test cast it?

 

I have bought many rods without test casting them but I don't thrust advertising BS much.

 

[Mike Oliver]

Crunch

 

As I understand it the CCS was the hope of custom rod builders to be able to evaluate a rod blank in terms of action and power before buying it rather than rely on subjective manufactureres marketing babble. I was interested in CCS as a custom builder at one time, but one big flaw is that the data base being constructed was being done by custom builders and who knows how controled or accurate their measurements are. I have my suspicions that the accuracy of many of those measurements is wholey suspect. Truth is some Guys fondly imagined that if they found a blank say with the same ERN and Action Angle of a premium blank, that the cheapie blank would offer same performance. Yes course it will and I am going to catch a 50lb Striper on the fly in the fall.

 

For me there is absolutely no substitute for getting my hands on a blank and better still a finished rod and casting it to determine if I like it and to establish what line goes well on it and weather it is fast ,slow or medium action as I see it. When building for customers this is vital info for me to have. No way am I going to rely on some dodgy data base of CCS figures. I need to know for sure.

 

It would be great if there was a bullet proof way to describe rod power action and feel and to be able to buy a rod not seen. But why do we worry about this so much. Most of us still try on clothes and shoes before we buy and test drive the car of our dreams. Rods are way more important than stuff like that.

 

I never believe the info that rod makers put out. This means that I have a limited knowledge in terms of the rods I know about. But it does for me and my work. In the days I had some cash I would buy blanks just to find out what they were about. Not any more. Way too many out there.

Crunch you are a very intelligent Guy you don't need CCS to evaluate a rod you are interested in. Anyway not many makers do a 7 foot 6 inch 10 wt:D. Anyone do any measurments on such a blank.

 

I love a good rod but really all they are, are bendy sticks that help us cast a fly and then fight a fish.

 

Esa, we both need to get back into the salt again. Don't drive yourself nuts before then.

 

Mikey O

 

AKA MAD Mike and Notorious Mike by various USA factions.

 

 

[formula1]

Formula1,

 

"An 8 wt rod that I could cast 110 ft loses 10-15 ft of distance when I try to cast a 10 wt with it regardless of what CCS says and regardless of what 10 wt line I try on it."

 

But that may state more about your strength limitations when it comes to accelerating the additional mass of a 10 wt head, given the shortening effect of the lever in that rod. I don't know ANYONE who can cast a 10 wt as far as they can cast an 8 wt. There might be someone...but certainly not me. My distances drop off from an 8 wt on up...for the rods I have. But then, also, above 8 wt I am primarily throwing full lines. I haven't set up an equal comparion. But there is, inevitably, a strength limitation issue that will eventually demand a distance price from everyone above a certain weight.

 

Is your distance with a 10 wt line on a 10 wt rod the same as your distance with a 8 wt line on an 8 wt rod.?? More??

 

Peter

 

 

Hi Peter

 

I cast further the higher up in weight I go with the rods. I can definitely cast further with a 10 wt, and further yet again with a 12 wt. My best casts, distance wise, has been with 12 wts. When I was really serious about distance casting I used to cast 135+ with a 12 wt - my best being 3 casts of 137 feet (measured of course). The weight of the rod and line start to have an effect on my casting when I hit the 14/15 wt area plus not many lines are full length, they are all pretty much billfish lines in my arsenal.

 

So yes, again my own casting experiences show that the CCS system is flawed.

[James3shin]

I agree with F1, casting heavier weight rods is easier - hitting 120ft and further with a 5wt is rare territory.

[Steve Schullery]

... When I was really serious about distance casting I used to cast 135+ with a 12 wt - my best being 3 casts of 137 feet (measured of course). The weight of the rod and line start to have an effect on my casting when I hit the 14/15 wt area plus not many lines are full length, they are all pretty much billfish lines in my arsenal. ... .

 

In case it wasn't audible, I'll repeat here--wow!

 

Steve

 

 

[BrianBM]

My goodness. This thread is entirely over my little balding head.

 

Now I have to go hunt up this CSS stuff, so I can figure out the debate a little better.

[formula1]

I agree with F1, casting heavier weight rods is easier - hitting 120ft and further with a 5wt is rare territory.

 

I hate 5 wts for casting distance - they feel too much like toys after all the SW fishing I do. That said, those distances you are thinking of are done with specialized fly lines with very long heads and thin running line sections. All my casting is done with standard off the shelf floating lines with 35-45 ft heads. When I used to do a lot of this it was an issue because I'd have to carefully lay out my backing on the ground next to me or else it would tangle during a cast.

 

How is your casting going these days James? Get to that 100 ft mark you were shooting for a few years ago?

[Gilbey]

My goodness. This thread is entirely over my little balding head.

 

Now I have to go hunt up this CSS stuff, so I can figure out the debate a little better.

 

Or...........we can just go fishing and enjoy ourselves .

 

Alan

 

[Andrew S.]

But this is one of the things that makes fly fishing fun: you can get as "into" the various parts of it as much as you wish, or not. For some of us, fly casting is a fun and interesting thing in and of itself (much in the way skeet shooting is of interest to some bird hunters, but not all, and some skeet shooters aren't hunters at all). Fly tying is the same, of course. I mean, do we really need 10,000 fly patterns for hatchery rainbows? Of course not, but for a lot of fly tyers, that's not the point.

 

So, you all who say none of this casting stuff matters to the fishing are right...but are also missing the point!