glass vs graphite

[Paul Arden]

Graeme is odd. He took home more photos of rock formations than fish. Quite fascinating learning about rocks actually

[Paul Arden]

and "whip" comes from the mass near the top

Hi Gary, I think of “whip” as being a wave that travels up the rod from the butt. It helps explain quite a lot of what we see.

Cheers, Paul

[VGB]

Is that the Mensa Tik Tok?

Geologists Only Fans apparently. They couldn’t fit many rocks into those tiny purses though

[DryFly]

Hi Phil,

I think a glass rod with an 8 label will often bend more than a CF rod with an 8 label, but some of that is the expectation of the buyers being met by the makers.

For some reason, many of the commercial rod makers like to make very bendy ‘glass rods because we want the “traditional ‘glass feel”

They don’t need to be sloppy and lifeless. If built to be a faster action (stiffer butt) glass rods can be much more fun. I had a few blanks custom built and I really enjoy fishing with them. They feel nothing like the glass rods sold by most makers.

Remember, there is not a rod standard. The label can have any number written on it.

Cheers,
Graeme

I own 100 + Carbon rods from the very beginning - Shakespeare and Fenwick - up to latest designs as Hardy Wraith or Sage Method.
And I also own 70 + Glasrods from the 60ies to modern Epic, CTS, NFC and many cheaper ones. From 5´ to 10´ , from # 3 to # 12.

As Lasse said: Glas - like bamboo - is a material and no action.
It is possible to build very fast glas rods with a high recovery speed. But they are limited by weight.
Thats why there are no glass rods, that are as stiff as modern carbon rods.
But there are glas rods with a high recovery speed and a very calm/non wobbeling tip.
So my # 12 is 8´long, any longer would kill my rod hand. Also #8 I like most with a lenght of 8´ to 8´2´´.

When the CTS from Phill let him feel his line more than on his normal carbons, also the labeling might be the reason and not only the material.
If this rod would be measured with CCS, one might find out, that it is more a #7 e.g.?
Phill, if you could compare your CTS with another Carbon #8 you might feel, that the 2 buttsections of the carbon feels stronger - that means, that it is stronger, can cast more line weight. My NFC glas 8,5´ #8 is more a #8/9 for me. If your CTS is more a #7 they will feel very different even they are both labeld #8.

Also many carbon rods feel softer while casting than others. Often, the "softer" rods are over labeld and the strong ones are underlabeld.
My old Sage LL 9´" #5" is in reality a #4 for me and my RPL+ "#4" is in reality a # 5.
So when I would cast the LL with a # 3 line - one under the "real" line size 4, like Sage wants you to cast the RPL+ , it will not be that soft rod any more that it was when fished with the #5 line.

My CTS 9´" #9" is more a #8, the Epic 686 is a low 5 for me and so on......

Phill, try your rod with some lighter lines and you might get a different feeling.

Surely, it depends a lot on the taper of the rods. A glas rod with a slow taper will not become a fast rod with a lighter line.

I just had a trip to the Bahamas. We had a lot of wind, thats why I fished most of the time my fast #8 carbon.
But I had also 2 old glas rods. A DAM Allround and a Germina, both made in the 70ies., both 7´10´´, # 8 ( the DAM is officially labeld 6/7 and the Germina 5/6!! ( I used long belly Bone fish lines #8 and 9 with them.)
At that time - befor there was carbon - the companys tried to make the best from glass.
So the butt sections of the rods have a large diameter and thin wall strenght. That makes a fast taper with relativly low weight.
Both rods have a steep taper and a high recovery speed.
The best result of the whole trip I had with the DAM one morning with 4 fish.

Todays companies might be afraid to produce such kind of glas rods - large diameter in the butt section, because the fly fisher might not like them?
Or because they want to offer us something very different to the modern carbon?

As Paul wrote, the first carbon rods - Fenwick HMG, Shakespeare Graflit, Orvis Graphite usely had slower action than modern rods.
I have old glas rods that are faster than some of the first carbons.
But thats more due to design than to the material.
I have tuned a few old HMG and Orvis HLS blanks to nice, fast action rods that have a relativ low swing weight. But they are only 8´- 8,5´, shortend from 9´ and 9,5´.
But they are made of 40 years old carbon material and still with the old tapers - more small diameter butt and thick wall.

So if someone wants to have a "glas feeling" he could also try to get some older carbon rods with slow taper. Than he gets the glas like action/feeling with the lower weight thats offered by the material.
Or he casts his modern carbons with lines 2-3 classes up.

Cheers
Reinhard

[Graeme H]

Can you share with me the FG blanks you like? The CTS I just bought was a custom build.

Thank you
Phil

My favourites are the custom blanks I had made at CTS. I've made a few 8' single piece rods that were designed to be 10wt rods ("a few" because I made three for myself and several others for people who had cast mine and wanted the same.)

Even though they were designed as 10wt rods, they cast and fish 6wt through to 12wt lines well enough that I'll happily use any of those lines on those rods when I'm fishing. Generally, I'm using 10wt lines or 8wt if the fish are spooked easily.

I've cast with a friend's Echo BAG 8' 10wt rod and if that had come out before I designed my blanks, I would not have bothered with my own design. That rod is very close to what I was seeking.

These rods all have designs with stiff butts. I dislike most of the "commercial" ones which tend to easily bend all the what through the grip. Their action is generally too slow (slow taper) for me.

I got into glass in the first place because I wanted a tough material to fish with. I tend to be an arsehole to my gear, and glass is a bit more forgiving. I'm sure someone could make an 8' blank that bends the way I like using CF, but I don't think it would survive for long in my quiver.

The point for me is that it's a combination of blank design and the material used that combine to provide a rod I like.

Cheers,
Graeme

PS - I love those agates. I bet the top one displays chatoyancy.

[Graeme H]

Does an 8 wt carbon fiber rod bend less than a modern fiberglass rod cast the same distance with the same line, fly and loop?

So, I'll try to answer this one from my own experience and from watching my students casting my glass rods (or their own.)

My short answer is "it depends" ...

Sorry, but it's the caster who casts any given distance. In my case, I expect to cast the full 8wt line with any rod, so yes, I cast the same distance with the same line with both CF and glass. Generally speaking, 8wt lines are 90' long and I can usually cast one of them to the backing knot on any rod bearing a label that says "8 Weight".

Not all of my students can cast to the backing knot with an 8wt line using any rod, no matter what you gave them.

And now we get into the vagaries of what an 8wt rod is and what taper designs are used on the materials. Most of the students will probably cast a CF 8wt rod further, probably because that paradigm is familiar to them (9' long, stiffer CF material, possibly even a "true" 9 or 10wt rod mislabelled as an 8wt). 'Glass rods tend to be shorter and less stiff, especially the commercially available rods. As Lasse has pointed out so often, we cast further with equipment we are familiar with, and for most, a 'glass rod is very unfamiliar!

I know we are in the "Flycasting " forum, but my preference for my 'glass is not about casting per se. It's about enjoying fishing. When we have learnt to cast very well, the rod becomes transparent when casting and factors other than rod construction material become more important to us during the fishing session. (It's a bit like my enjoyment of tube-based audio amplifiers - they don't measure as well as solid state amplifiers, but they are more fun ... )

Cheers,
Graeme

[Paul Arden]

It’s not even a comparison of fibreglass vs carbon fibre, because we have carbon cloth of different moduli. And then many rods will have a combination of different cloths. In a HT for example there are usually three different cloths layered, sometimes four. Consequently a carbon fibre rod properties will depend on the cloths being used, the shape and size of the cut, and the tapering of the mandrels.

You can make a carbon fibre rod stiffer by using higher modulus cloth. Or by using more lower modulus cloth. You can do the same with fibreglass too of course. To have the same action between fibreglass and carbon fibre you will need more fibreglass, which will result in a heavier rod and normally a tube with greater diameter.

I think the main reason fibreglass made a resurgence in popularity (actually they were never popular in the first place!) is because carbon fibre rods, by design, have become stiffer over the past 40 years. In my opinion many are too stiff and pretty lifeless to cast.

We have several HT12s around the world which have fibreglass butts. This is what Sakari uses for Bluewater. The fibreglass butt on this rod is heavier than the carbon butt. But also will bend far more.

Cheers, Paul

[Torsten]

Hi,

funny, I'd say two decades ago glass fly rods were considered inferior, the retro-trend appeared later - I think this was very clever marketing. Still it seems to be pretty much a niche product, most sold fly rods are from CF, glass seems to be more attractive for the hobby rod builders.

When a CF rod is too stiff you could simply put +1 or +2 higher lines on the same rod or buy a rod with a lower line recommendation (?) Also you could try feel fixers on the CF rod ..

Greetings,
Torsten

[VGB]

For me, the glass resurgence was driven by the hobbyists and the rods were coming out of the garage workshops, not the mainstream dealers. Much of it was lead by Cameron Mortensen and the Glass Manifesto

http://thefiberglassmanifesto.blogspot.com/

Overlining a stiff rod is detrimental to fishing imo and feel fixers are a placebo. It’s a matter of learning to cast for the most part. I’m waiting for the resurgence of wooden rods, that will sort the men from the boys.

Regards

Vince

[Torsten]

I don't know what overlining is, because the number printed on the rod is not determined by objective data. I can use a different line than recommended and sometimes I do that. Typical use case are for instance shooting heads, like AFFTA +1 or +2 for me. The TFM site looks pretty much like marketing to me.
Not all CF rods are stiff, it depends on the target audience, the strategy of the rod maker, in the databases you can find that some Winston rods are softer, and even Sage has series like the LL for instance.