PLEASE NOTE: In order to post on the Board you need to have registered. To register please email paul@sexyloops.com including your real name and username. Registration takes less than 24hrs, unless Paul is fishing deep in the jungle!

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

Moderator: Paul Arden

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 3719
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#31

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:02 pm

Bernd Ziesche wrote:Hi Aitor,
I do not believe in such a test:
Highest avg. 30,12m Orvis T3
Lowest avg. 29,06m Streamstix T5
1s up to 3,18 :ninja:
Problem is when you measure until the fluff: Leader straight = + 2,5m & leader collapsed = -2m
So only with the leader you can produce 4,5m in difference while lines end is in the same spot.
Hi Bernd

There is a huge difference between a straigh leader and a collapsed one. The straight one needs alot more speed at distance than the collapsed one. Same with fishing, I want my fly to end up furthest when throwing far. The test has it's shortcomings but quite clearly show that the stiffest rod is also the hardest to adjust to when having a very limited time. Compare that to the 6 rods of different stiffnes I did in the fall here. And it's quite clear that one throws furthest with the rod one is most familar with, or the stiffnes one is most familiar with.
But the important point is: That test was held indoors = no wind. The stiffer rods DO give huge advantage for tight loops to cut winds in m book.
I do not believe that anyone with an avg. bamboo rod will cast as far as he could with a stiff graphite rod.
Would be interesting to try, I haven't tried with two rods of the same length, so can't say, but bamboo can be thrown pretty far. Nevertheless it's a pretty much apples to potatos comparision if the graphite is a stiff one and the bamboo is a noodle, give them same stiffness and we can see if the weight does play such a huge factor ;)
Casting in the wind the bamboo rod will show HUGE bend and that will open up your loops significally in my experience.
Stick a shootinghead on it, and a mono shootingline and the counterflex will matter much less witht he right amount of overhang...
Since the bamboo rod needs more energy to rotate the rod itself, this should mean the efficiency between energy input by the caster and the output to the line should be better for the lighter graphite rods, shouldn't it?
Greets
Bernd
Yup, question is how much does that really matter in distance?

Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 1812
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#32

Post by Bernd Ziesche » Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:29 pm

Lasse Karlsson wrote: There is a huge difference between a straigh leader and a collapsed one. The straight one needs alot more speed at distance than the collapsed one.
And it's quite clear that one throws furthest with the rod one is most familar with, or the stiffnes one is most familiar with.
Hi Lasse,
the difference is, that in such a test the collapsed leader may position the rod on the lowest ranking, while the straight leader might position the rod on the highest ranking.
If I look at the max (30,12m) and minumum (29,06m) avg. results and compare the (1,06m) difference with the range of standard deviation (1,78-3,18) for each single rod, this tells me that the test results are not reproductable in my book.

If one throws furthest with the stiffness one is most familiar with, then what was the final ranking based on avg. results over all different casters good for anyway? Seems to me, as if you are saying, that the test can not work well this way (and that's what I said, too).

A straight leader is not only a question of line speed but of technique, too (I think). We all know that one cast may be totally straight while the next one ends up with a piled leader, even though in both casts we aimed for the same line speed (and maybe achieved it, too).

About the stiffnes one is used to... It's not that clear to me. I think the one being used to a pretty stiff rod will achieve a benefit in very windy conditions, while the one using a pretty soft rod may have to shorten his carry significally. I believe that every outfit has its pros and cons based on the situation. Besides that being used to a specific rod always is a huge plus. I agree on that.
Lasse Karlsson wrote: Would be interesting to try, I haven't tried with two rods of the same length, so can't say, but bamboo can be thrown pretty far. Nevertheless it's a pretty much apples to potatos comparision if the graphite is a stiff one and the bamboo is a noodle, give them same stiffness and we can see if the weight does play such a huge factor ;)
Are you saying, we were comparing apples to potatoes in Norway (we all were using completely different stiffness profiles)?
If so, I agree. :p

Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Casting in the wind the bamboo rod will show HUGE bend and that will open up your loops significally in my experience.
Stick a shootinghead on it, and a mono shootingline and the counterflex will matter much less witht he right amount of overhang...
Even if you compare a bamboo rod and a graphite rod of a smiliar stiffness while casting into a wind (what this thread is about), you still will be faced more air resistance to overcome with the bamboo rod.
I agree, that we can throw some fine distance with a bamboo rod. But it will not go further than it will with the graphite rod. That's all am saying.
Besides that most bamboo rods are softer compared to graphite rods as far as I know it.
I am pretty sure that not a single caster in Norway was using a stiffness profile that would match with the one of an avg. 5wt recommended bamboo rod. Instead all casters were using higher stiffness profiles.
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Since the bamboo rod needs more energy to rotate the rod itself, this should mean the efficiency between energy input by the caster and the output to the line should be better for the lighter graphite rods, shouldn't it?
Yup, question is how much does that really matter in distance?
Seems as if it mattered enough, that no one was using a bamboo rod in Norway nor in any other tournament I know of.

Do you think you can find any bamboo rod that would offer you a longer 5wt. MED carry than the one you achive with your 6wt. TCX? If so, that would surprise me. :cool: (Am open minded for any test of course. :) )

Greets
Bernd
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 3719
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#33

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:37 pm

Bernd Ziesche wrote:
Lasse Karlsson wrote: There is a huge difference between a straigh leader and a collapsed one. The straight one needs alot more speed at distance than the collapsed one.
And it's quite clear that one throws furthest with the rod one is most familar with, or the stiffnes one is most familiar with.
Hi Lasse,
the difference is, that in such a test the collapsed leader may position the rod on the lowest ranking, while the straight leader might position the rod on the highest ranking.
If I look at the max (30,12m) and minumum (29,06m) avg. results and compare the (1,06m) difference with the range of standard deviation (1,78-3,18) for each single rod, this tells me that the test results are not reproductable in my book.

If one throws furthest with the stiffness one is most familiar with, then what was the final ranking based on avg. results over all different casters good for anyway? Seems to me, as if you are saying, that the test can not work well this way (and that's what I said, too).

A straight leader is not only a question of line speed but of technique, too (I think). We all know that one cast may be totally straight while the next one ends up with a piled leader, even though in both casts we aimed for the same line speed (and maybe achieved it, too).
If the casters can't throw a straight leader with that particular rod, and don't forget they are all top level tournamentcasters, then it sort of blows a hole into the myth that stiffer rods throw further. Hand the rod to the average caster and the results will be even worse ;) Linespeed is a product of technique, not the other way around.

And by having eight casters, even if one is familar with one of the rods, the other seven will not be and that makes the results plausable.

And the test really rams in the fact that the gear does not give you a advantage unless you can control it. There's no free lunch :pirate:

Would be cool to reproduce the test today with a new bunch of rods and see how things have progressed. I bet distances would be up a bit, but the final results would be similar...
About the stiffnes one is used to... It's not that clear to me. I think the one being used to a pretty stiff rod will achieve a benefit in very windy conditions, while the one using a pretty soft rod may have to shorten his carry significally. I believe that every outfit has its pros and cons based on the situation. Besides that being used to a specific rod always is a huge plus. I agree on that.
Two casters of same high skill level, I doubt there would be much difference.

Lasse Karlsson wrote: Would be interesting to try, I haven't tried with two rods of the same length, so can't say, but bamboo can be thrown pretty far. Nevertheless it's a pretty much apples to potatos comparision if the graphite is a stiff one and the bamboo is a noodle, give them same stiffness and we can see if the weight does play such a huge factor ;)
Are you saying, we were comparing apples to potatoes in Norway (we all were using completely different stiffness profiles)?
If so, I agree. :p
Nope, I'm not saying that. This is about same caster throwing distance into the wind with two different rods, not different casters with different rods (some) throwing distance they have practiced with same rods...
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Casting in the wind the bamboo rod will show HUGE bend and that will open up your loops significally in my experience.
Stick a shootinghead on it, and a mono shootingline and the counterflex will matter much less witht he right amount of overhang...
Even if you compare a bamboo rod and a graphite rod of a smiliar stiffness while casting into a wind (what this thread is about), you still will be faced more air resistance to overcome with the bamboo rod.
I agree, that we can throw some fine distance with a bamboo rod. But it will not go further than it will with the graphite rod. That's all am saying.
Besides that most bamboo rods are softer compared to graphite rods as far as I know it.
I am pretty sure that not a single caster in Norway was using a stiffness profile that would match with the one of an avg. 5wt recommended bamboo rod. Instead all casters were using higher stiffness profiles.
Not following the more air resistance argument, sorry?

The trend for bamboo is softer today, absolutly, but the stiffest rod I've cast was a bamboo :upside:

And no, not a single bamboo in Norway, I only know of a few local tournaments where people cast bamboo for distance. But I do know that there was at least one competitior usiing a rod that would match a bamboo rod, he was using a glasfiber rod, I cast it there :pirate:
Since the bamboo rod needs more energy to rotate the rod itself, this should mean the efficiency between energy input by the caster and the output to the line should be better for the lighter graphite rods, shouldn't it?
Yup, question is how much does that really matter in distance?
Seems as if it mattered enough, that no one was using a bamboo rod in Norway nor in any other tournament I know of.
Interesting deduction, longest switchcast in the world was done with a greenheart rod, didn't see a single one in Norway, maybe it didn't matter enough either :p
Do you think you can find any bamboo rod that would offer you a longer 5wt. MED carry than the one you achive with your 6wt. TCX? If so, that would surprise me. :cool: (Am open minded for any test of course. :) )

Greets
Bernd
It's not the rod that offers me anything in that regard, that's technique ;) Pretty sure if I found the right bamboo, and I used it enough I would at least get similar results. So would more practice, I'm not that good a caster in line carry, lots of people carry significanlty more :)

Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 12404
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#34

Post by Paul Arden » Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:03 am

It all comes down to this mistaken rod loading belief that many instructors still hold. The rod is a big spring, since a bamboo rod has more mass in the tip it can load deeper for the same stroke, therefore it's going to help me when it unloads. Now all of us here know this is nonsense. The reason the author could cast into the wind was because of his ability, not the rod. In fact the cane rod probably made it harder not easier.

Off to catch a big fish!

Cheers Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions

User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 1812
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#35

Post by Bernd Ziesche » Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:12 am

Lasse Karlsson wrote: And the test really rams in the fact that the gear does not give you a advantage unless you can control it. There's no free lunch :pirate:
Morning Lasse,
I agree with that. That also matches with what (I think) we have seen in Norway.

I don't agree, that ERN (stiffness) as well as rod length don't matter for distance. But that is what the test results tell.
The one rod being 10cm shorter than the others showed a higher avg. distance than the one rod producing the longest cast of the whole test. Also ERN is going up and down all the way through the ranking.

I instead think that there is a good reason why manufacturers like Sage offer pretty stiff (fast action) rods when aiming for long casts, long lines to throw and/or casting into heavy winds. Those rods of the lower stiffness profiles as well as those of shorter length are never recommended for such a expert distance purpose (as far as I can remember it). Also the Streamstix T5 was build for the purpose to achieve long carries and long casts with the XXD line.
You think all those rod designers are generally wrong? :???:

The whole tournament in Norway showed, that it sure matters a lot, if one is used to the rod or not. It also showed everyone having his personal preferences here. We are on the same page with this.
But still I saw a clear tendency about using stiff fast action rods for the distance purpose. Yes, not all rods have been as stiff as those 8wt. TXC rods we saw in the tournament. But the avg. stiffnes was significant above ERN 5,5 for throwing a true 5wt. line. In my book that proves all those rod designers to be right.
And I agree with Paul, the cane rod probably made it harder to throw highest distance into the wind.

Greets
Bernd
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.

Dennis Pat
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 5:02 pm

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#36

Post by Dennis Pat » Fri Feb 15, 2013 11:02 am

Thank you Bernd and Aitor for the detailed explanation and interesting discussion on rod loading and the "big loading" misconception.

cheers,
Dennis

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 3719
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#37

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:51 pm

Bernd Ziesche wrote:
Morning Lasse,
I agree with that. That also matches with what (I think) we have seen in Norway.

I don't agree, that ERN (stiffness) as well as rod length don't matter for distance. But that is what the test results tell.
The one rod being 10cm shorter than the others showed a higher avg. distance than the one rod producing the longest cast of the whole test. Also ERN is going up and down all the way through the ranking.
Afternoon Bernd

I'm not saying that stiffness doesn't matter, I'm just saying that it's not right to make the assumption that a stiffer rod casts farther.

There's an old saying, the stiffest rod you can handle is the one you will cast furthest with. I'm partialy agreeing with that, I'm saying the rod you're most familar with will give you the biggest advantage. And when we are at the top of the game, it's very small numbers we're looking at, not 10-20% increases.
I instead think that there is a good reason why manufacturers like Sage offer pretty stiff (fast action) rods when aiming for long casts, long lines to throw and/or casting into heavy winds. Those rods of the lower stiffness profiles as well as those of shorter length are never recommended for such a expert distance purpose (as far as I can remember it). Also the Streamstix T5 was build for the purpose to achieve long carries and long casts with the XXD line.
You think all those rod designers are generally wrong? :???:
Nope, I do not think those designers where wrong. I'm just saying ther's more to it than that :)
The whole tournament in Norway showed, that it sure matters a lot, if one is used to the rod or not. It also showed everyone having his personal preferences here. We are on the same page with this.
But still I saw a clear tendency about using stiff fast action rods for the distance purpose. Yes, not all rods have been as stiff as those 8wt. TXC rods we saw in the tournament. But the avg. stiffnes was significant above ERN 5,5 for throwing a true 5wt. line. In my book that proves all those rod designers to be right.
ERN 5,5 is just a number, it doesn't say that the rod is a true 5 weight, it's a number to tell about the stiffness of the rod, nothing else.
And I agree with Paul, the cane rod probably made it harder to throw highest distance into the wind.

Greets
Bernd
I agree, but we're not in this because it's easy, we're doing it because it can be hard, and doing something in a harder way is sometimes alot more fun, than taking the easy route :cool:

Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 1812
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#38

Post by Bernd Ziesche » Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:50 pm

Lasse Karlsson wrote:I'm just saying that it's not right to make the assumption that a stiffer rod casts farther.
Hi Lasse,
I agree and that is what that rod (comparing) test rammed in as you wrote.
Lasse Karlsson wrote: There's an old saying, the stiffest rod you can handle is the one you will cast furthest with. I'm partialy agreeing with that,
I think when shaping tighest possible loops, controlling a noodle is as difficult as it is to control a broomstick. Those who can control both will achive their tighest loops on the broomstick in my experience.
But then again when it comes to a long line or distance one will need highest possible line speed, too. This requires a relatively long distance of acceleration. So we increase the size of arc. And this is what makes it extra hard to still shape tight loops while using a broomstick. Most very good casters I have seen here, immediately loose their tight loops and the cast easily collapses. Also a broomstick or a very stiff rod will mean more mass and higher swing weight. This in addition may slow down rotational speed too much for a lot of casters.

So we are on the same page. There is way more to take into account then just increasing stiffnes to throw faster and tighter loops. Probably every caster has his personal point at which a rod simply gets too stiff (or too soft either) to achieve an overall benefit anymore (depending on the purpose).

I too love to make things harder sometimes. :pirate:
Trying to form a tight loop on a wooden noodle can be a pain in the ass and it also means a lot of fun sometimes.
At least it is, when the fish takes! :p

Greets
Bernd

Image
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.

Unregistered
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:22 pm

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#39

Post by Unregistered » Fri Feb 15, 2013 6:22 pm

Dennis Pat wrote:Thank you Bernd and Aitor for the detailed explanation and interesting discussion on rod loading and the "big loading" misconception.

cheers,
Dennis
Thank you Dennis for reading those "explanations". I think that, one more time, we have lost perspective: it was about explaining in understandable terms why "rod loading" isn't the holy grail of fly casting, not about never ending discussions on technicalities. :blush:
Have you got why what you read is mistaken? Because that is the most important issue.

Svend
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:06 pm
Location: Denmark mostly

Bamboo rods. Casting into the wind

#40

Post by Svend » Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:46 pm

Hi Dennis,
if you can accept, or even understand, why the big spring concept is misleading, you're already ahead of the game. So that's a good thing. Flyfishing is really all about skills, flycasting being one of them. The type of gear is actually rather unimportant regardless of what advertisement campaigns and sales blurb want you to believe. What really happens when you're casting into the wind is that the wind amplifies all your casting faults so that's what you have to deal with, not rod choice.

Oh and by all means go and get a bamboo rod. But don't get it because somebody told you that it is superior to plastic, get it because you like fishing a bamboo rod, because you love how it feels in YOUR hands, or maybe just because you appreciate the craftsmanship and skill that went into making it. It'll cast into the wind just fine, provided your casting is up to par.


Cheers,
Svend

Post Reply

Return to “Flycasting”