In the workshop with Mark Tunley -YouTube

[Alan Whitty]

Yes Ged,but he also stated that shorter rods have more leverage=power than short rods in the same format,glass rods had a far softer playing action and usually didnt have a progressive action,his point being that you could have a 13ft Torrix 3lb TC carp rod but it wouldn't be as powerful as a 10ft Torrix in the same TC(if they made one)...

 

[Ged28]

Yes Ged,but he also stated that shorter rods have more leverage=power than short rods in the same format,glass rods had a far softer playing action and usually didnt have a progressive action,his point being that you could have a 13ft Torrix 3lb TC carp rod but it wouldn't be as powerful as a 10ft Torrix in the same TC(if they made one)...

Highlighted red - Should that read, Yes Ged,but he also stated that shorter rods have more leverage=power than longer rods in the same format? If so that's what I've been saying, the anomally being that I still felt more in control with the longer rod.
Highlighted blue - To me that statement contradicts itself, I've always found glass rods to be more progressive than carbon which equates to a softer playing action.
Left black - It would be the same power, but you'd have to exert more effort to realise that power. To simplify it, imagine a rigid 12ft rod with the butt tucked firmly into your groin. There would be an approximate 5:1 ratio between the amount you'd have to pull at the reel fitting and the load imparted at the tip. ie to exert a load of 3lb at the tip you would have to pull around 15lb at the reel. With a 10ft rod this reduces to around 4:1, so for the same load at the tip you would only have to pull about 12lb at the reel fitting.

 

[mikench]

Mine is a 2lb tc Torrix blank. If it breaks it breaks. I doubt it though.

 

[nottskev]

Mine is a 2lb tc Torrix blank. If it breaks it breaks. I doubt it though.

Never heard of it myself Mike. The posts on that carp forum claiming it happened seem to be from people trying to cast big leads extreme (by most standards) distances. I'd imagine the stresses involved are very different to underarming your bait out a couple of rodlengths and playing fish. Your Preston Carbonactive feeder rod has a metal reel seat - has your rod exploded yet?

 

[mikench]

No Kev it hasn’t. If I ever wanted to cast 100 plus yards with a heavy bait ( akin to poking my eyes out with a sharp stick) I would walk to the other side of the lake and plop my bait into the relative margin. That would never happen though because I would rather catch a cold than some bloated carp.

 

[Alan Whitty]

Highlighted red - Should that read, Yes Ged,but he also stated that shorter rods have more leverage=power than longer rods in the same format? If so that's what I've been saying, the anomally being that I still felt more in control with the longer rod.
Highlighted blue - To me that statement contradicts itself, I've always found glass rods to be more progressive than carbon which equates to a softer playing action.
Left black - It would be the same power, but you'd have to exert more effort to realise that power. To simplify it, imagine a rigid 12ft rod with the butt tucked firmly into your groin. There would be an approximate 5:1 ratio between the amount you'd have to pull at the reel fitting and the load imparted at the tip. ie to exert a load of 3lb at the tip you would have to pull around 15lb at the reel. With a 10ft rod this reduces to around 4:1, so for the same load at the tip you would only have to pull about 12lb at the reel fitting.

But your comparison is between a glass 10fter and a 12ft carbon(or so i read it),so not of the same format(maybe if it was a 10ft ballista of the same test curve,add to that Mark Tunley is saying exactly the opposite to you for the power aspect,though doesn't quote ratios....
Our own experiences show what we think are flaws to his beliefs,who is right who knows,maybe more to the point,who cares,as long as the individual is happy with the performance of his chosen rod...

 

[Ged28]

By format do you mean material? If so it's of little importance in the context we are talking, a faster recovery rate helps casting and striking but is of little relevance when playing a fish or pulling against a set of scales.
Can you explain in what way Mark Tunley is saying the exact opposite? Either I've missinterperated your writings, or you mine. You can put more strain on a fish, or a set of scales, with a rod of a shorter effective length than a longer one. If you can hold a constant strain with your rod hand of 20lb, the pull against the fish would be about 4lb with a rigid 12ft rod or about 5lb with a rigid 10ft rod. In practical terms these figures would increase due to the decrease in effective length as the rod bends.

 

[@Clive]

It's a cold wet day here so I find myself looking at MT's video on rod design and rings, probably the one Alan referred to. He's just told me that the reason I don't fancy a 5-ring barbel rod is caution about anything new driven by evolutionary survival instinct! Just as "cave man" (sic) didn't run up to cuddle the first tiger he saw, my residual stone-age mentality stops me appreciating rational rod design.

There's a lot of interesting stuff in his videos, but some patronising waffle, too.

So its nothing to do with the steep angle that the line takes leading to increased stress on the line and rod for no reason other than a potential increase in casting distance that is not actually required on stalking rods?

I think my aversity to these rods is evolutionary caution to connerie.

 

[Alan Whitty]

By format do you mean material? If so it's of little importance in the context we are talking, a faster recovery rate helps casting and striking but is of little relevance when playing a fish or pulling against a set of scales.

By format I mean identical blank...

Can you explain in what way Mark Tunley is saying the exact opposite? Either I've missinterperated your writings, or you mine. You can put more strain on a fish, or a set of scales, with a rod of a shorter effective length than a longer one. If you can hold a constant strain with your rod hand of 20lb, the pull against the fish would be about 4lb with a rigid 12ft rod or about 5lb with a rigid 10ft rod. In practical terms these figures would increase due to the decrease in effective length as the rod bends.

I misread your post,my bad,in my own experience I gain nothing with extra length playing decent fish,the gains are tackle control or fishing deep water on the float,keeping an much line of the water when feedering/legering running water,or casting extreme distances on the same tackle imo...

 

[Philip]

Just catching up with this thread.

Some really interesting chat and points being raised by good anglers..i guess when you get to a certain level of ability you know whats best for you rather than what a rod builder or anyone else might tell you is "best" and even if they can (sometimes) back up thier claims with actual statistics and hard facts it can just boil down to the angler just preferring what he prefers as it suits thier style of fishing.

Thats why I have trouble getting my head around "Custom rod builders" who then tell you how they will build your rod!!!!

One point i will comment on is the point about shorter rods giving more control when playing a fish. I think its very easy to generalize here as people often focus on quite a narrow range of lengths, for example they will try and compare a 15+ foot rod with a rod of 11 to 12 foot.
However (to me) once you start getting below 10 foot things start to get worse again. I have rods in most lengths from about 15 foot down to less than 6 foot and i dont like playing fish on the shorter rods, its almost like there is not enough rod to do anything with and if you need to reach out to get the line away from marginal weed, snags or whatever you can be in trouble. I have a few 10 foot carp rods and while i like thier practicality and ease to carry about and use in confined swims, i much prefer playing fish on 12 footers. Same for my little DV 8 foot rod..lovely to use on little venues but i dont feel totally at ease playing fish on it. I had some good Roach and even some decent sized Carp on it and my hearts always in my mouth when i am playing them.

If we are talking purely length and put materials, action and so on which all play a part to one side then for me there is a sweet spot around 11 to 12 feet that feels just right from a fish playing perspective but i accept it can be a very personal thing too.

 

[Ged28]

One point i will comment on is the point about shorter rods giving more control when playing a fish. I think its very easy to generalize here as people often focus on quite a narrow range of lengths, for example they will try and compare a 15+ foot rod with a rod of 11 to 12 foot.
However (to me) once you start getting below 10 foot things start to get worse again. I have rods in most lengths from about 15 foot down to less than 6 foot and i dont like playing fish on the shorter rods, its almost like there is not enough rod to do anything with and if you need to reach out to get the line away from marginal weed, snags or whatever you can be in trouble. I have a few 10 foot carp rods and while i like thier practicality and ease to carry about and use in confined swims, i much prefer playing fish on 12 footers. Same for my little DV 8 foot rod..lovely to use on little venues but i dont feel totally at ease playing fish on it. I had some good Roach and even some decent sized Carp on it and my hearts always in my mouth when i am playing them.

If we are talking purely length and put materials, action and so on which all play a part to one side then for me there is a sweet spot around 11 to 12 feet that feels just right from a fish playing perspective but i accept it can be a very personal thing too.

I quite agree with you Philip, that's what I was trying to get across, for all you can put more pressure on with a shorter rod I prefer playing fish, and feel more in control with a slightly longer rod.

 

[Keith M]

In spite of the basic leverage advantage that a shorter rod would give me; I find that when I’m ‘playing’ a large fish on a longer rod it enables me to change the direction of pull from the rod a lot easier and faster; and I find that trying to steer a large fish away from snags and weed beds is often far easier with a longer rod, because with a short rod I can usually only pull it roughly towards me, whereas with a longer rod I can exert a lot more side strain; in my view the basic leverage advantage that a shorter rod would give me is only a small part of playing a large fish all the way to the net safely.

Which is why I much prefer a slightly longer rod of around 12ft (or even 13ft) to a 10ft rod; (even taking into account the increased leverage that a shorter rod would give me); because leverage is not the be-all and end-all of defeating and landing a larger fighting fish and I much prefer the extra control that a slightly longer rod usually gives me overall during a fight. But each to their own and it will depend on the venue and it’s topography of course and whether or not there is overhanging branches around me or I’m fishing in a tight swim, (or even in a totally ‘snag free’ swim); when a shorter rod may then come into its own.

Keith

 

[Steve Arnold]

A medium fast action blank will probably have a lot of power in the butt third and a very flexible top third. The middle third is probably where a lot of the rapid load recovery will be delivered whilst casting.

It's so much easier to build a blank of 12' to 13' with a nice progression through those three zones.

When casting the middle and butt will progressively load and give the power. A decent tip helps ease the loading and gives directional control.

When fighting a big fish the tip may help avoid hook pulls, but under maximum load almost points down the line. That's when a 12' rod can exert much the same control as a 10' rod. It would take a few photos of bent rods of similar test curves but different lengths to illustrate my point, but "leverage" changes depending on the action and loading of each rod.

We all have different requirements of a rod and there are so many different styles of fishing, it's impossible to put it into words. I know what I like, but that would not suit everyone.

Rod butt length is so important, and this certainly should be for individual needs - not dictated by custom rod builders! The correct length from butt cap to reel fitting is so individual. Even then it varies depending on the type of rod, users casting style, where the rod is most likely used etc, etc.

Most rods I think have too long a reach to the reel. I am fairly long armed but still need to cut about 3" off the butt of most carp rods for efficient casting.

For casting in tight swims the locals here generally use 10' carp rods, many of those rods have the same length butt as the 12' rods. It's the bloody butt that gets in the way, for Gawds sake!!!!!

Enough!

 

[@Clive]

You also have to factor in the angler's strength and other factors. The longer the effective length of the rod, the more strength is required to hold or control a fish, and more weight is also applied to the angler's wrist by virtue of their being more rod. Obviously older cane rods and fibreglass rods will add more of this than carbon rods, but the longer the rod, the more strength it requires to control it. Every angler will have a sweet spot regards the length of the rod that they feel more comfortable with.

 

[Steve Arnold]

You also have to factor in the angler's strength and other factors. The longer the effective length of the rod, the more strength is required to hold or control a fish, and more weight is also applied to the angler's wrist by virtue of their being more rod. Obviously older cane rods and fibreglass rods will add more of this than carbon rods, but the longer the rod, the more strength it requires to control it. Every angler will have a sweet spot regards the length of the rod that they feel more comfortable with.

When playing a heavy fish an overly long butt is a hindrance. I have seen carp anglers sticking the excess butt length between their legs, whichever way you care to read that - it is NOT to be recommended!

That is another reason I cut a few inches off the butts of standard build carp rods. Get the length from butt to reel stem right for your arm length and you can sit the butt cap on your thigh. Must be the "stand-up" boat angler in me, but I know it works!

I also put a proper Fuji rubber butt cap on these rods (those tiny alloy branded finishes binned!). Stops that butt slipping and makes sure you are not bruised!

The other way I have seen carp anglers playing fish is with the rod just tucked under the forearm. Only practical with a big fish if you work-out your muscles in the gym, totally inefficient way of pressuring a big fish!

I have various injuries/wear/disabilities to my arms, gathered over a lifetime, and have to pay attention to the practicalities of all this. I guess many on this forum will be in a similar category. Has any "custom rod builder" ever asked questions relevant to the individual customer - I doubt it!

If you want a custom shotgun you need measured, what is so different about a rod?

 

[@Clive]

The 'custom' part seems to relate more to the trim and colours rather than length and action.

 

[Steve Arnold]

This is my idea of "custom"...........

A lockdown project for me, a winter spate rod, using what bits I had available. It was a Sportex Morion 12' 2.5lb carp rod. The carp guys will,no doubt, be horrified!

I wanted a Fuji Concept type guide setup, the idea being to reduce the line coils rapidly to small guides spreading the load efficiently along the blank.

First job was to cut a few inches off the butt, to suit my casting style and how I play fish. The extra guides also help when pressuring fish amongst the snags under the rod tip.

In that photo the butt guide is only taped on, it would need a casting session to decide exactly where that size of guide would avoid line bunching with the spool size of the reel I was fitting.

To the butt I added a fore-grip and butt-grip of a diameter that suited my hands. The original skinny shrink tube is too thin to grip comfortably, a fore-grip helps the reel hand add extra pressure and control when finishing the fight under the rod and bring the fish to the net.

This is all so retro and against current fashion, maybe showing just how old I am! BUT, maybe it's time to go "Back to the Future"

Nowadays the production companies are looking for much cheapness and good profits. Their marketing guys have made a good job of brainwashing anglers into accepting cheap production finishes as "fashionable"

Me? I want efficient guide placement and a decent, proper 'andle (it's for holding, isn't it?)

 

[chevin4]

The 'custom' part seems to relate more to the trim and colours rather than length and action.

I have had 14 rods built for me on Harrison blanks I always go for a basic build. IMO the key is the quality of the blank and action rather than the "tackle tart" extras which is where the rod builders make the money

 

[Steve Arnold]

Hi guys,I've been watching a few of Mark Tulney's short videos recently and found them interesting,this particular one is very thought provoking(to me at least),he says rods are built the way they are for historical reason,explaining that a barbel rod blank would function perfectly with around six or seven rings without flat spots,now I would like to chat with him about this as yes the blank would have no flat spots,but the line would be be taking the shortest route between rings,which when under pressure would cause more friction/wear on both,we all know for casting minimal ringing is best,but not all fishing is about casting to the horizon,similarly a float rod has to have plenty of rings to function correctly,if you get time have a look at the vid and tell me your views please...

One of my more recent posts about a cheap allround rod had me remembering this thread. So here is a photo which, I think, shows perfect guide placement with a sensible choice of guides and placing.

There are 9 intermediate guides and they are copies of the Fuji K series guides which are very popular - but which many rod builders do not use in the Fuji concept way that the guides were designed for. On this cheap rod I think they have been placed perfectly for casting and loading the rod.

One of the advantages of using plenty of intermediate guides is that the angle the line takes over each guide is shallow. Braid line can create quite a lot of noise "rubbing" over the guide liner when the angle is steep. Too few guides, the current fashion, and you can have a noisy rod for reeling in under load.

Funny how cheap rods can get it right!

 

[Alan Whitty]

Unless your trying to maximise casting distance, then the more guides reduce the cast, to me, rods are more about playing fish as in the real world good fish aren't all sitting miles out...