|
Walter & Group...
[GH] Dan McCrimmon comes in with a great SHORT ANSWER to the question of description of ROD SPEED and ROD ACTION :
Rod speed - where it bends
Rod action - how much it bends
For a given weight of line
Dan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Dennis Grant dug out this excellent message on fly rod action sent by Troy Miller in Feb., 2007. Despite the fact that it is not the one Troy had suggested, it is worth reviewing :-
From Troy Miller:
There's only one way to decide if a soft action rod is useful to you. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that probably more than half of today's flyfishermen started flyfishing after "The Movie". There really haven't been too many genuine "soft" rods on the market since then. Truth is, for some people, a soft rod is the perfect choice for certain applications. And I mean this from a performance standpoint, not just aesthetically. It's the fundamental reason that I fish bamboo. Here's my rationale:
If I'm fishing close all day (and I usually have a good idea beforehand if I think that will be the case), I could choose to fish a stick (TCR-type). Sure I could. Some guys do. But with 15 to 25 feet of the "correct weight" flyline off the tip, we all know it won't load appreciably unless we absolutely hammer the stroke. Does the rod need to load? What happens if it doesn't (i.e.- broomstick casting)? I could also choose to cast a softer rod, which will basically bend just under its own inertia. Some rods will load to the grip without any line on them - without even having to hammer the stroke. We caneheads call this "self-loading", and while it's very useful on short distance casts, it can limit long distance casting for many casters.
Gordy, recall your comment about two things a rod blank can do. Exist and return to straight when a load is removed (methinks there's a third thing - it can resist bending, all by itself). That "return to straight" concept is central to why I often will choose a less stiff rod for close in. In terms of accuracy, the potential error in 3-D trajectory is highly influenced by two things - the path that the rod tip traversed during the final stroke, and the alignment of the rod's unloading WITH that SLP. The balance between how important each of those contribute is based largely on how stiff the rod is. For instance, a broomstick doesn't unload. So the trajectory of the loop will be 100% dependent on how perfect the SLP was that the caster caused. On a short cast with an ultra-stiff rod, that will not be much linear distance. If it was off a couple degrees on that short stroke, you'll miss your target. If the stroke was longer. it'd be easier to align with the target.
Also, the deeper the rod loads, the longer the distance it will travel as it unloads. If you made a reasonable SLP (even if not perfect) then the unload will be very straight. When you combine the more easily aimed "long stroke" with the planar unloading of the rod, your accuracy in the X-Y (horizontal) plane will be VERY good. Then you just have to adjust for distance. Accuracy at close to medium range is much easier to achieve with a softer rod, IMO. The best way I can explain this is, think about accuracy when you're shooting a long-barrel sniper rifle, vs. a 2" snub-nose .38 SP.
We're back to the old argument, USE THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE JOB. Forget hyperbole and keeping up with the Joneses. I try to instill this in my students understanding whenever I can. Think freely and make up your own mind.
Regards -- TAM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Another good one on rod action by Troy, retrieved by Mike Rehr. This one on parabolic bamboo rods :-
|