feeder tips and test curves - how to measure

[peytr]

I tried to get a grip on the properties of my feeder tips, after discovering the lightest tips give me (on certain venues) better results. After that I wanted to know what the properties of my feeder tips actually are in order to enable myself to do a somewhat coordinated search for better tips, or even maybe make them myself.

So I made a test stand and started adding weight. Much to my surprise the lightest tip of one of my Daiwa (admitted el cheapo) feeders needed about five ounce in order to show something of a perpendicular deflection. I put the top section in the stand - if I would omit the top section and just put the tip in the stand I would even find higher weights!

What is going on here? I see (expensive) tips for sale specified at 0,5 and 0,75 Oz and wonder what these will need to deflect to 90 degrees.
Or is there another definition of the classification of feeder tips and is it not like the definition of test curve?

Is this another can of worms?

 

[Alan Whitty]

T.C.s are never the same with any manufacturer and that is with rods, let alone quivertips, my own findings on these tips is somewhat different to rod manufacturers who say the very thin carbon tips are the most sensitive, well not for me, thick glass slow taper tips are more sensative(unless you are fishing for drop backs)of 0.5-1.5oz being best in that regard, add to that the fact that the rods blank will definitely have to bend to achieve a classic bream wrap round, so your blank choice needs serious thought too, also, any tow will equate to having to use a heavier T.C. tip, which goes up when range is longer, there is little 'simple' fishing, lol....

 

[nottskev]

It's a good question, but for me not one that can be answered on a test bench. As Alan said, the nature of the taper makes a big difference. Generally, I'd expect to get a tip working well by matching slow taper ones to still waters and faster taper ones to moving water, and on water with pace carbon tips, light or heavy, stand up to the pressure of flow better and there even with lighter tips eg 2 oz carbon seems to work better for fast bites and small fish. As a rule of thumb, the lower you can get away with positioning your rod, the more likely a glass tip will be right; the higher you need to position it, the more it's asking for carbon. (I'm discounting method feeder, where a bell on the end is best).
The figure printed on the tip is a rough guide, but I've found you end up weighing up your swim, looking through your tips and maybe flexing a couple, and pick your best shot, changing it if it's not working properly.
A lot depends too on the water and species - in some places chub will bend a bare rod top, in others you'll never make a catch of roach or skimmers without a carefully matched tip.

 

[@Clive]

I have no idea how they are rated. But I was surprised with my friend's new quiver tip rod. It came with three tips; 2oz, 3oz & 4oz yet struggled to cast a loaded 2oz feeder. With the 4oz tip fitted the rod blank flexes before the tip.

 

[peytr]

thick glass slow taper tips are more sensative

Agreed. I just started using the glass tips recently and these actually started my search for even more sensitive tips. In fact I used a very bad rod in what must have been the stone ages which had an extremely light, slow tapered (and glass) tip and I would realy like something like that now. The tips are still here but the rod is long gone and the tips are just a bit too thin to fit my current rods. Continuity of the bend would also be dramatically lacking I think. However I might try and fit one of these just for an experiment.

in some places chub will bend a bare rod top, in others you'll never make a catch of roach or skimmers without a carefully matched tip

Yes, the 'problem' occurs on some venues. On many others I can only use the heavier tips. When we fish on de nieuwe maas at 8 meters of water with the tide going out, there's no need for lighter tips, only more anchors on the feeder and a longer rod to get the line out of the water.

The interesting thing is that I feel the lightest I have could still be lighter.

there is little 'simple' fishing, lol....

All part of the fun I'd say.

Thanks for bringing the idea of slow taper to the table. I'll give it some thought but I feel that's limited by root diameter. There is a fixed point where the tip root needs to fit the rod. Moreover my head tends to explode when I'm trying to get everything working towards a lighter tip: root diameter (fixed), material stiffness (given unless I would work from raw materials, which I could consider but is quite a hassle), tip diameter (free but limited by structural demands) and finaly taper. And I agree slow seems the way to go but then you would need soft material because the root diameter is given.

For now my conclusion is that I'll have to build a splitcane, slow tapered tip or make blanks with a number of fibre mixtures and sand them to a slow taper . Or -the easier alternative- come to peace with the idea of structurally ending mid ranking every year.

 

[nottskev]

About the “root’ - the bit that plugs into the female carrier section …. on some tips, like all my old Daiwa ones, the roots are the widest part of the tip, and the tips taper from there. But tips on my 90’s /00’s Shimano rods have a thinner root, then swell to a wider section, then taper from that. For reasons I won’t go into, I sanded a couple of Daiwa’s to fit the Shimano rods, and cut the thin end off a couple of Shimano’s to fit, with a bit more rubbing down, the Daiwa rods.

A favourite old Shakespeare rod, a Quattro, has 4 slow taper tips, great for shy bites. In fact they are virtually parallel for a fair length, and it’s the length that makes the action different. It’s a lovely stillwater rod up to 40m out, but only the shortest tip works in water of any pace.

 

[Alan Whitty]

If your fishing venues with a flow(not a fast flowing river) or tow you need to feed the bow(facing the direction the tow is going), not to get drop backs, to lessen the pressure on the rod and allowing the fish as little resistance as possible, on certain occasions of heavy tow a 3oz tip will be more sensitive than a 0.5oz one, sheer mechanics as a 0 5oz tip bent round in said tow in affect becomes the rod blank...

 

[peytr]

Onze again you're giving me food for thought. Thanks for that! I've been thinking about building my own tips, because it would be fun.

I'll let you know once I have te courage to start.

 

[RMNDIL]

Can't speak for others but Drennan tips quote the weight needed to pull the VERTICAL tip through 90 degrees. Always have

 

[Keith M]

I once built my own Quivertip Rod back in the 90s to fill in a few hours on a cold winters night and this is how I built the tip section using what we then called a ‘Donky top’:

First I inserted the donkey top into the cut rod blank upside down and marked it (the bit that was to be inserted) then after cutting it I added glue to it and inserted it correctly into top section of the rod blank. then whipped across the join.



Keith

 

[Blue Fisher]

I once built my own Quivertip Rod back in the 90s to fill in a few hours in a cold winters night and this is how I built the tip section using what we then called a ‘Donky top’:

First I inserted the donkey top into the cut rod blank upside down and marked it (the bit that was to be inserted) then after cutting it I added glue to it and inserted it correctly into top section of the rod blank. then whipped across the join.



Keith

I put a carbon tip into a Diawa whisker fly rod to make a short trotting rod last season. I used a similar technique leaving about a 2 inch overlap. I did not add glue, I whipped across the join, and sealed with epoxy, some of which probably crept into the join. Used it about 5 times since with no problems.
Regarding tips I suppose pulling it around to 90 degrees is one way to characterise a tip, but would it make more sense to pull it about 3 inch and measure the force? It’s more like a bite then than a 90 degree pull.
however I think tip character has got all the same issues as rod test curves. And can anyone can really understand what a rod is like given a tc.
Good subject though peytr Ive never thought that much about tips and got so quickly confused. I did not know you could get parallel taper tips, Hats off to those modifying tip tapers for specific uses.

 

[RMNDIL]

3" from where though ? Different taper, different tc = different results. At least a 90 degree verical ( NOT horizontal) tc is a constant

 

[Blue Fisher]

I can see why tc has some value for rods since you hope that one day you will see the rod bent like that. But for tips I feel the force in oz that is required to produce a specific deflection might be more informative. Of course like tc it only tells you two things, less deflection will require less force and you know the force at the measurement point. These two pieces of information won't fully characterise a tip but knowing the force required to produce a known deflection at least tells you something about the force in the range of deflections that bites occur. I should imagine that it is rare that a tip is pulled to 90 degrees so knowing the force that situation requires is not very informative.
But to be honest the other tip variables of material, taper and the behaviour of the rod it is attached to are also major influencers. So it’s always best to try it or at least bend it in your hands. Use your own experience and select something to suit your style of angling.

The best tip I ever had was that on a northwestern kevlite barbel rod it suited my style of angling and the rivers I fish very well. I fish for Chub in rivers with a good bit of flow. I broke the kevlite by my own stupidity, I did not realise how delicate it was, or perhaps the previous owner damaged it and it was destined to snap. I still have the tip and one day I will build it into another rod but I fear it will never match the kevlite.

 

[peytr]

At least a 90 degree verical ( NOT horizontal) tc is a constant

That would be one way of doing it, but all tips I tried measure much higher than their 'designation' if I test along this idea.
So I'm quite sure manufacturers are not using this 'classic idea' of TC for their tips.

But for tips I feel the force in oz that is required to produce a specific deflection might be more informative.

That would be a good thing, but as far as I can see, manufacturers are doing something along these lines and probably are doing what the other one is doing. It would need a strict definition, which is not exactly what fisherman and manufacturers of fishing tackle excel at.

To be honest: I've been using my five feeders with different tips for years and generally am very happy about what they are and what they do, especially when the fish are delivering proof.
I'd just like to try how light one can go and what light means.

In the mean time there's tons of literature and years of Youtube content, in which specialists tell us that a 1 Oz tip tip is what to use in this or that environment. There is however no way of telling what this means anything more exact than 'a light tip'.

 

[mikench]

Maybe if you swapped the term” light” with floppy you might have a visual aid to tell which tip moves the most and with least resistance. In windy conditions the breeze will cause the tip to move, the tow on the water will do the same so you chose a heavier or less floppy tip. Try a swing tip and you would see just how floppy it is. Floppy can mean sensitive. I am slightly curious why some tips are longer than others. The longer the tip the floppier it is and vice versa. When I get back I am going to try a glass tip as opposed to carbon- a few in fact.

 

[Alan Whitty]

There is 'no' set tip for anything, only the right tip to achieve your desired method, when I'm bream fish on stillwaters I find that a 2oz glass tip is being used more often than not, but if there was little wind, and I was fishing at less than forty yards I would be putting a 1oz or 1.5oz tip on, we must get into the habit of realising nothing is written in stone, only perhaps as starting points, like picking the right size float...

 

[Alan Whitty]

Maybe if you swapped the term” light” with floppy you might have a visual aid to tell which tip moves the most and with least resistance. In windy conditions the breeze will cause the tip to move, the tow on the water will do the same so you chose a heavier or less floppy tip. Try a swing tip and you would see just how floppy it is. Floppy can mean sensitive. I am slightly curious why some tips are longer than others. The longer the tip the floppier it is and vice versa. When I get back I am going to try a glass tip as opposed to carbon- a few in fact.

Mike, as most of your fishing is on stillwaters I would say glass tips are the way forward, but I'm sure Alan Scotthorne or Matt Godfrey would tell you different especially with their history of working for big tackle companies, Alan (whom I have the utmost respect for[and Matt]) has put videos on YouTube about Acolyte hooks, for me the whole range are pitiful, a step backwards in hook development imo, yet if you watch the video they are superb, well not for my fishing they're not, I do use carbon tips, for chub fishing in winter, or fishing for drop backs on rivers, both carbon and glass will show bites on all venues, but venues pick which is best...

 

[RMNDIL]

That would be one way of doing it, but all tips I tried measure much higher than their 'designation' if I test along this idea.
So I'm quite sure manufacturers are not using this 'classic idea' of TC for their tips.

You might want to complain to that/those then for mislabelling. The only Drennan tip I can think of which is noticeably higher in TC than stated is/was the 4oz (regardless of carbon or glass as the material is totally irrelevant for tc) because quoting the actual was considered off-putting to the angler. Something which was sadly inherited from 1987 (original Big Feeder)

 

[Keith M]

Mike, as most of your fishing is on stillwaters I would say glass tips are the way forward, but I'm sure Alan Scotthorne or Matt Godfrey would tell you different especially with their history of working for big tackle companies, Alan (whom I have the utmost respect for[and Matt]) has put videos on YouTube about Acolyte hooks, for me the whole range are pitiful, a step backwards in hook development imo, yet if you watch the video they are superb, well not for my fishing they're not, I do use carbon tips, for chub fishing in winter, or fishing for drop backs on rivers, both carbon and glass will show bites on all venues, but venues pick which is best...

My 12ft 10inch Drennan DRX ‘River feeder’ rod has four Glass quiver tips which I’ve used to win or get placed in a few inter club matches on the Thames in the past; fishing a downstream bow in the line for Chub; However; they are ‘fast taper’ Quivertips.

If the river is pushing through fairy hard; like in near-flood conditions; then I might use one of my carbon Quivertips.

I do usually prefer to use glass Quivertips on stillwaters.



Keith

 

[Alan Whitty]

Carbon tips were originally designed for fishing for drop backs on rivers(utilising carbons responsive nature), so your usage was perfect Keith, today's rods have carbon tips for everything, lets also add that matches can be won with good and bad tackle, or should i say in spite of it, lol, making use of an anglers eyes to convince that thinner ìs more sensitive, it obviously works as they sell stacks of rods...