Rod Database

[Lasse Karlsson]

The one....

[Tangled]

Lasse/Paul/anyone, if you're picking a distance casting rod, would you generally pick the one with the largest ERN? Given the various ERNs of the TCR #5, would you pick the highest over all the others or is there something else you're looking for?

The Streamstix T5 won competitions with an ERN of #9, but not everyone uses them, what's the other magic attribute that you need?

I read the 8 casters 8 rods article

https://www.sexyloops.com/articles/8rod.shtml

They set out to establish whether it's stiffness that matters for distance or not. I think they lose track of their objective a bit by getting overexcited about a #5 rod have a wide range of ERNs and didn't do any correlation tests.

When I try to correlate ERN and distance from their results I get a bit of a mess.

In those tests
. there is no statistical correlation between furthest distance cast and ERN (r=0.09)
. there is a reasonably strong correlation (r=0.46) with average distance cast and ERN. But it's negative! ie the lower the ERN the better the average distance cast!

I think they missed something very important here, the lower ERN rods produced the most consistent results which means - as they say - that the casters adapted to them the easiest. They only allowed 4 casts per rod and no practices. By disallowing any practice, I think they compromised the test and finished up testing how easy the rods are to adapt to! With more time to adjust to the harder rods, it's possible that different result would be found. For example the TCR achieved the longest cast with three of the casters but also two of them made their shortest cast with it.

The highest ERN (9.0) rod, the Streamstix T5 - came last on average distance which is a surprise given it won the last distance competition with 34m. Again I'd say that was practice with that rod and line.

So I remain puzzled about the relationship of ERN, power and distance cast.

[Paul Arden]

Hi Colin,

As I understand ERN in lower numbers it’s about 1 suggested line weight lighter than what I would use to go fishing. What I would use as a 10WT rod to go fishing I think is optimal for 5WT MED distance. So this might be around ERN 11. I would need to measure up a HT10 to confirm this.

It’s not consistency that matters in competition of course, which as you suggest comes from practise; what actually matters is your longest and sometimes second longest cast.

So anyway, something around a 10WT goes furthest for me with a MED5. That raises the question what about a 12WT? Well I think there is a point when the rod can be too stiff. Certainly a 12 for me is too stiff for me.

Cheers, Paul

PS I think there is more than just stiffness. There is weight, swing weight, action, frequency and tip damping to consider. But I do think stiffness is the most important attribute (assuming the rod is not excessively heavy).

[Merlin]

Hi Colin

To me the main parameter of a rod is not stiffness but the frequency level of the tackle (with carry), with a low MOI.

Fitting a #10 rod with a #5 line looks strange but in fact you likely carry more than the double of the reference weight of the 5 line (you may carry more than 18 grams for an official 9.1 grams line). Somewhere it is as if you were carrying slightly more than 30 feet of #10 line. With this weight the #10 rod has something like 1.45 Hz to 1.55 Hz loaded frequency, and you could even go higher if the rod would not go too stiff. You could generate more speed if the rod would go up to 1.8 Hz with the same carry, but this is not compatible with the design of a #10 rod. You may need to choose a #12 rod to reach that level of frequency. Then beware of the MOI for your joints and muscles.

A #10 rod is already a stiff one, and the “ideal” competition rod should be as fast as possible and as soft and light as possible at the same time (in a relative way). It should have the smallest possible MOI to keep your joints safe and to minimize the torque you have to generate. Consequently there is a limit depending on the physical capabilities of each caster.

ERN like line number has something to do with rod stiffness, but the range of validity of ERN goes from about 8’6 to 9’6 foot rods. I think there is no rod maker using that scale anymore (CTS gave up). Beware that ERN is 0.5 number higher than ELN (which corresponds to a line number).

Casting technique takes likely the lead for distance IMHO, I am not sure that the rod per se is the key, you have to find a rod with which technique stays comfortable up to some point. It may be a 9, an 8 or whatever. However, if you compete with people using heavier gear in the right way, you chances to win get smaller.

Merlin

[Paul Arden]

Thanks Merlin. I learned something there. It’s quite complicated because you have frequency, tip path, the height of the line above the caster (angles) and other considerations.

Sorry I’ll get this database sorted. I’m around tomorrow but offline Thurs/Friday. I meant to do it last weekend. I’ll try my best to get it done next weekend.

Cheers, Paul

[Tangled]

Thanks people - a lot to think about there.

[Tangled]

I suspect you guys have seen this paper (about the timing of the double haul in distance casting) but just in case:

http://aassjournal.com/article-1-499-en.pdf

They used two different line profiles; the shooting head and the long belly. Unfortunately they also used different rods on each - 9' #5 for the long belly as in the competitions, and 9.5 to 10' for the shooting head lines.

The shooting head lines provided the greater distance but was that due to the lines or the longer rods? Would you normally expect to cast further with a shooting head than a long belly all other things being equal? I expect so, as friction is lower, but line carry is also lower so...

< @Paul, nudge :-) >

[Lasse Karlsson]

Shootinghead. Even with all else being equal, just take your long belly line, chop the belly at the appropriate length ( carry outside the tip, minus haul length) and attach a thin mono. Less drag from heavy runningline...

Cheers
Lasse

[Paul Arden]

Ah yes need to do this Heading out tomorrow to fish the bottom of the lake. I’ll try to do it one afternoon shortly after this. Been flat out and it slipped my mind (again!).

Thanks,
Paul

[Tangled]

:-)