Spigot or overslide rod joints.

Derek Gibson

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
3,669
Reaction score
4
Location
shefield, south yorkshire
What's your preference, and why?

I am told that the overslide rod joint eliminates any dead spot. But of all the rods I have ever owned (and that's quite a lot) have all been spigot joint, but I don't recall any that exhibited a dead spot, despite the assurance of some anglers that they do.

Anyone with any views on this?
 

S-Kippy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
11,784
Reaction score
130
Location
Stuck on the chuffin M25 somewhere between Heathro
I don't really have a view as such.....I just prefer the neatness of a spigot joint. Like you I've never noticed a flat spot and even if there was one who cares ? Overfit joints I've always thought might [just might] prove weaker but that's just me being me. I've no evidence they are and no joint has ever failed on me on any rod...ever.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,150
Reaction score
186
Location
North Yorkshire.
When I first started buying top end kit, most of the best rods had spigot joints. For that reason, and little more, I still have a bit of a thing for spigot joints. However, a lot of different rods have seen their way into the tackle den since then. I'm well aware that it matters little on a well designed and well made rod. Despite this, I still maintain that thing for spigots.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
292
I don't really have a preference but as far as i'm aware the overfit joint is the better of the two.....don't ask me why, it's just what i've been told from a few rod enthusiasts.
If you think about it they're all over fit really as the bottom section/spigot goes into the next one up on both versions (except for quivertips). Although I think some rods have overfit quivers...Tri-cast for example.
If I see a rod and I like it I wouldn't be put off it if it had either spigot or overfit joints...I like both.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
Hampshire
Spigots for me every time (except poles, where deflection curve is very much less important than stiffness, weight and butt diameter). I have yet to see a rod with overfit joints that didn't exhibit a slight change in curve at the junction when under load, and some cheaper ones can be really strange, with more deflection below the ferrule than above.

Overfits make no sense to me, mechanically or in production, save one factor I'll come to later. Having the upper section fit over the lower one means you have two different diameters of tube to marry up, so you have to increase the stiffness/diameter ratio of the lower section to compensate. This means using different grades of carbon, or more layers, for each section - a much more complex process. Conversely a spigot jointed rod can be made as a one piece blank, then cut in half (or thirds) and spigots inserted. A proper spigot should fit together so there's a 1/4" gap between the adjacent parts of the blank, to allow for wear. When the gap closes and the joint becomes loose, you can cut off 1/4" of the female and put a new reinforcing whipping on, so the rod's lifespan is increased.

The only reason I can see why manufacturers use overfits (with all the extra work involved at the blank rolling stage) is that the tolerance need not be so precise. It matters not a jot whether one section slides 2" down the corresponding male, and another only 1.75". You can mass-produce a rod safe in the knowledge that any one of the top sections will fit any of the butt sections, meaning there's no need to keep tips and butts paired up through the finishing stages, and it's easy to supply a replacement joint.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,150
Reaction score
186
Location
North Yorkshire.
Another thing I can add, which is a plus point for spigots, is that they don't show wear like an overslide joint can. There are few things more irritating to me than seeing scratches in a gloss finish on a male part of an overslide joint.
The saving grace here is that you can soon spot the liars amongst second hand sellers. "Well looked after" and "minimal use" don't ring very true when pictures show joints that are scratched to hell. Spigots with no wear gap are another good indicator of use.
 

trotter2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
1,584
Reaction score
0
Spigot joints should be better on paper as you have two diameters that are a close match to each other.
Over fit joints should be cheaper to make as spigots' have to be fitted which takes extra time to produce.
Regarding longevity over fits should be more maintenance free.
As a worn joint just pushed further into the male section taking up any wear.
Spigots when they bottom out are finished.
If I was pushed I would probably go for spigots just think they look neat.
 

barbelboi

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
12,632
Reaction score
155
Location
The Nene Valley
I'm going to be different here and from the way I see it , if you take a two piece 12’ spigotted rod it’s made from a single blank, cut in half, then the spigot is fitted to the butt section. This glued section would then surely create a flat spot.

An overslide rod is designed from two blanks with the joint part of the design leaving much less of a flat spot. I seem to remember reading an article by Steve Harrison some time ago as to why he, and other top builders use overslides..
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
292
Another thing I can add, which is a plus point for spigots, is that they don't show wear like an overslide joint can. There are few things more irritating to me than seeing scratches in a gloss finish on a male part of an overslide joint.
The saving grace here is that you can soon spot the liars amongst second hand sellers. "Well looked after" and "minimal use" don't ring very true when pictures show joints that are scratched to hell. Spigots with no wear gap are another good indicator of use.

LOL, you read my mind Chris! Scratches on the end of the over fit joints look awful. I always keep both the male and female sections clean as possible to eliminate the problem with scratches.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
292
I'm going to be different here and from the way I see it , if you take a two piece 12’ spigotted rod it’s made from a single blank, cut in half, then the spigot is fitted to the butt section. This glued section would then surely create a flat spot.

An overslide rod is designed from two blanks with the joint part of the design leaving much less of a flat spot. I seem to remember reading an article by Steve Harrison some time ago as to why he, and other top builders use overslides..

I think your right BB, the over fit joint has gott'a be the better of the two, but some rods with spigots feel and look very nice and the flat spot is negligible.
 

trotter2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
1,584
Reaction score
0
Even with an over fit joint you have a double wall thickness at the joint.
Admitably the over fit cover less area. Not being permantly inserted into the rod at the other end.
Not sure on the math but its one which is thicker Vs the other which is longer:confused:
 

barbelboi

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
12,632
Reaction score
155
Location
The Nene Valley
Interesting thread Derek, don't know how I missed it first time around - must have been fishing, or something. The bottom line for me, although I've stated my personal preference, it's like many aspects of fishing. Otherwise we'd be all using and liking the same rods, floats weights, feeders, reels, line (god forbid;))etc., etc................
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,150
Reaction score
186
Location
North Yorkshire.
I doubt that one type being definitively better than the other is anything like as clear cut as some might think. For a start, I find it difficult to believe that spigot joints are cheaper to produce. I also doubt that they'd be used if the manufacturers genuinely believed they give rise to an inferior product. It's worth noting that the likes of Shimano, Daiwa and Tri-Cast were all prone to using the spigot joint. Generally, the spigot jointed rods tended towards the more expensive end of the scale.

I'd suggest that true spigot joints are getting rarer, if not entirely obsolete. I do see an increasing number of pseudo spigots that are more like an unfinished male tube end with a whipping a fraction shy of the whipping on the corresponding female end. They look like spigots and go together like spigots, but I'm not entirely convinced they really are true spigots. Ultimately, I'd suspect the choice the manufacturer makes will come down to costs and rod design philosophy they choose to follow.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
292
I'd suggest that true spigot joints are getting rarer, if not entirely obsolete. I do see an increasing number of pseudo spigots that are more like an unfinished male tube end with a whipping a fraction shy of the whipping on the corresponding female end. They look like spigots and go together like spigots, but I'm not entirely convinced they really are true spigots. Ultimately, I'd suspect the choice the manufacturer makes will come down to costs and rod design philosophy they choose to follow.

I don't think they are spigots Chris. I think they're normal over fit joints made to look a little like spigots. Maybe it's to stop the male part from getting marked up as they can do with the glossy finished ones. My Harrison Chimeras have this type of joint and if it puts an end to those unsightly scratches then it's a good idea. I think the acolytes have a similar set up. There seems to be a few manufacturers doing this type of joint.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,150
Reaction score
186
Location
North Yorkshire.
I don't think they are spigots Chris. I think they're normal over fit joints made to look a little like spigots. Maybe it's to stop the male part from getting marked up as they can do with the glossy finished ones. My Harrison Chimeras have this type of joint and if it puts an end to those unsightly scratches then it's a good idea. I think the acolytes have a similar set up. There seems to be a few manufacturers doing this type of joint.
That's exactly what I was suggesting. However, I have seen more recent Shimanos, Daiwas and Tricasts that look more like true spigots than the Drennans. I suspect that some still are genuine spigots, but they are a fair bit more refined than what sometimes seemed to be numb lumps of solid carbon that conjure ideas of flat spots.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
292
That's exactly what I was suggesting. However, I have seen more recent Shimanos, Daiwas and Tricasts that look more like true spigots than the Drennans. I suspect that some still are genuine spigots, but they are a fair bit more refined than what sometimes seemed to be numb lumps of solid carbon that conjure ideas of flat spots.
Ok, i've not seem those Chris.
I think the Allerton waggler has those pretend type of spigots.
The hardy marksman float rods have the glossy overfit joints but their avon rods have old style spigots. I've no idea why they've used different joint arrangements for the different models of rods.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,150
Reaction score
186
Location
North Yorkshire.
Ok, i've not seem those Chris.
I think the Allerton waggler has those pretend type of spigots.
Most definitely, there's not even a vague attempt to disguise it with a cap on the male end. It's just a slightly less finished continuation of the tube with an extra whipping. The Acolytes have a cap to disguise what exactly is going on, but it does look more likely to be just an extension of the tubular blank rather than a spigot.

The hardy marksman float rods have the glossy overfit joints but their avon rods have old style spigots. I've no idea why they've used different joint arrangements for the different models of rods.
I have recent Shimanos that are more obviously spigots and some that are less obvious. The ones that seem more likely to be spigots are the more expensive models. None of the rods I own that I know, or suspect to be spigot joint use a solid spigot, even the stuff from the nineties (Daiwa Tommy Pickering Matchwinners, Powermesh Avon and Powermesh Carp). Both of these date back to the time when Daiwa made spigot joints a selling point.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
292
Most definitely, there's not even a vague attempt to disguise it with a cap on the male end. It's just a slightly less finished continuation of the tube with an extra whipping. The Acolytes have a cap to disguise what exactly is going on, but it does look more likely to be just an extension of the tubular blank rather than a spigot.



I have recent Shimanos that are more obviously spigots and some that are less obvious. The ones that seem more likely to be spigots are the more expensive models. None of the rods I own that I know, or suspect to be spigot joint use a solid spigot, even the stuff from the nineties (Daiwa Tommy Pickering Matchwinners, Powermesh Avon and Powermesh Carp). Both of these date back to the time when Daiwa made spigot joints a selling point.

I had some daiwa tournament whisker kevlar carp rpds and they had spigot joints. The Tournament amorphous stick float supreme had spigot joints also...I do wish i'd kept the rod now, it was a really nice rod!

I've no idea which is he best type of joint but I suspect the overfits are the better ones, they're definitely neater in appearance having no gaps in the joints with pieces of spigot showing.

I watched the manager in Harrisons push the bottom section of a two piece torrix rod into a machine and it ground off a layer of carbon the correct diameter and distance down the tube ready to fit into the top section. It took a couple of seconds for him to do and the sections fitted together perfectly. As you said Chris, they then leave the ground down section as it is, put some whipping on at the base of it and then either gloss the blank or leave it plain depending on what is wanted which gives the appearance of the rod having a spigot. It must be a cheaper option than faffing about cutting a length of solid or virtually solid piece of carbon then shaving it to the correct dimensions so as to fit into the bottom section and then slides into the top section correctly and then gluing/fixing it in place.
 

thecrow

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
7,607
Reaction score
2
Location
Old Arley home of the Crows
I have owned/used both, never noticed ant difference but then so long as a tool is doing what I want from it I wouldn't.

I suspect the difference is minimal and like other things in angling its like art with people not really understanding it but knowing what they like ;)
 
Top