Spey Pages banner

1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,052 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Can somebody catch me up in layman's terms about the latest trends in modern graphite.

My limited understanding is that Sage came up with the "One" which was an upgrade because the technology used enabled a lighter, smaller diameter stick that was still powerful. Does T&T have similar technology? How about Berkhiemer and Miezer? Is this super duper ultralight, powerful graphite upgrade industry wide now, across the board? What will be the difference in a Miezer or Burky ordered today as opposed to a few years ago? How has this effected the mid range rods like Beulah and Echo etc? I'm pretty much still in IM8 country, but it doesnt seem to bother me.:hihi:
 

·
I only have 2 hands
Joined
·
176 Posts
I am certainly seeing a significant rise in marketing technology. As far as the graphite goes ?..... Bow and arrow tech has taken some leaps over the years but for me it has not improved on the one thing........that cannot be upgraded.......the thrill of the hunt. I have recently had a chance to cast a One and Method then a Winston BIIIx all in the 13' 7 wt range give or take a few inches. They were superb rods but when I thought about throwing them around in a boat or truck I was happy to go home to my T.F.O.'s and A.R.E.'s that have a story with every scrape and scuff and no worries when they get beat up. The tech and performance of two handers is getting better but can't replace the thrill of the bargain hunt.
 

·
Relapsed Speyaholic
Joined
·
5,499 Posts
Hoping Bob Meiser chimes in here. I was talking with him two weeks ago and he was quite excited about his new rods and the changes in the graphite blanks. I will defer to him as I would likely not pass the specifics on accurately but the end result was smaller diameter but more durable blanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,937 Posts
Orvis Helios "baked in autoclave" technology leads stiffness/weight ratio and Sage One/Method "connetic" technology where fibers come aligned length vise comes very close.

Nanoresin use leads to strong blanks but they are not light.

I have not yet read anyone uses carbon nanotubes building fly rod blanks but on golf club shafts and bicycles they are used.

Esa
 

·
''Speydo-masochist''
Joined
·
1,265 Posts
I believe the advances in materials is centered around the resins rather than the carbon; but you have to factor in developments in the production methods as well.

Certainly the materials will only function at their' optimum when they are correctly assembled & baked etc. So I think that picking a producer with a long established record of producing high performing & robust blanks is a better option than just trusting to the marketing claims about a new carbon from a manufacturer with no pedigree.

I loved my Loomis GlX Classic 15 footers so when I wanted a shorter rod I bought the then new NRX as I felt confident that they new how to put the bits together to make a properly functioning blank; several years later all seems pretty good.

Regards, Tyke.
 

·
Drags are for Sissys
Joined
·
324 Posts
lost in speyce

I lost track when IM 6 graphite rods were introduced. :)

The lighter rods sure do change the feel of the cast. Are they better? - well is a Jetta better than a Cadillac? The scientific answer is: it depends.


... looking forward to someone answering this as the original poster had intended.
 

·
Lip Ripper
Joined
·
324 Posts
The materials, resins and construction techniques have all advanced significantly over the last 10 years. None of that means "improvement" if they are not properly designed and utilized. The only improvement you will see is if a good designer knows what to do with the technology.

Jmho
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
In most cases all the best materials are available to anyone and it is up to artist/designer to design a great rod.

Saying that, hype and marketing of mediocre rods based on new materials will never end......., just watch follow this thread
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
I had this conversation with a rod designer not long ago and what he told me is that, like Tyke said, the improvements are primarily in the resins, not as much with the carbon fiber itself. The new nano resins are stronger and weigh less, therefore allowing for lighter construction. Where I think this will really help is in longer rods, especially the lighter weights.

The nano rods I've cast were great but they didn't help with my top-hand spasms on a single spey.
 

·
Scandit sublima virtus
Joined
·
2,263 Posts
Our descendants will probably be fishing 19' 2 weights with a 1/8" diameter blank, and still won't be able to cast worth a damn. :chuckle:

As I understand it, only a few manufacturers make the scrim, but there's healthy competition in the resin side and a sort of an arms race going with the manufacturing process.
The upshot is lighter, smaller diameter blanks with more precise taper metrics being used. Smaller diameter blanks mean you can use thicker walls, thicker walls mean less ovaling, controlled rebound, and greater resistance to breakage.

Light weight is nice and a selling point for marketing, but is I think one of the less important characteristics of the newer generation rods compared to these other benefits. But some amazing things can be done with lighter, stronger materials that weren't possible before. That's what I'm eager to see and cast this year at SpeyStock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,735 Posts
I am in the camp of newer is ok but really not sure how much benefit any of this is? No question for rod manufacturers to make it, they have to come up with new and "improved" rods quite frequently and I do not begrudge them this - it is pretty cool to see the innovation moving forward!

but face it - If I could only have one trout rod it would be a Scott 904 G that was first produced back in the 70s and it can do anything I would want out of a trout rod and do it extremely well!!!

If I could only have one 2 hander it would be the Scott 1287 ARC - developed in the 90s - same comments about what it can do!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
fly rods are made up of tapered tubes of rolled up graphite. the primary sources of weight are the graphite content and the resin content.

fly rod manufacturers have already pushed the bounds of the materials when it comes to graphite content.. If more graphite is removed to make rods lighter they will not be made up of enough material( plies of material) to hold them together.

although resins have increased the strength of the rods of today they do not allow for the removal of more material in order to make rods lighter.

rods of today may be slightly lighter than they were 15 years ago but that is due to improved manufacturing processes rather than changes to materials.
the new nano type resins are wonderful for making parts stronger.. insanely strong to be honest, at least according to our in shop testing, they do not however change how much material we use to make the parts.

and with all that said we have also tested a lot of non nano resin parts which were also insanely strong, just slightly less insane.

all i can say is that we at Burkheimer and i suspect this to be true of all manufacturers, are making insanely strong and durable fishing rods.


if you saw the testing we have done you'd agree that insanely strong is the only way to describe it.

traditional resins are great.. nano resins are greater. but there is a lot more to designing a fly rod that the material that goes into it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
As already stated, the newer materials are great, but much of the changes are in new designs and in the actual building of the rod. Only each individual can determine for themselves whether or not these improvements help them in their fishing enough to warrant putting out the coin.

Now to answer directly what I feel the major improvement is for the newer high end rods. And to be clear I am talking SH rods as I don't have enough experience with two handed rods to make a judgment.

The new materials combined with newer designs and manufacturing technologies the last couple of years has led to rods that are much more accurate casting. These rods flex in line with your casting motion and they flat out throw the line where you intend it to go. I am partial to Sage rods so I will talk specifically to them. Certainly there is much advertising hype around their Konnectic technology. But I am also seeing on the water real life improvement

I have an arsenal of Xi3s and I love them. They fit my casting style extremely well. But I got a chance to pick up the new Salt in a 9wt. Wow is all I can say. My casting (ok which still sucks :chuckle:) improved immediately. Not much change in distance but when I see a redfish crawling along a flat I am just that much more accurate with the Salt then even my beloved Xi3.

So again each of us has to decide if the value is there. But there is no question that the newer rods are improvements. Just a matter of cost/benefit.

PS - And one last point on rod weight. While the differences in weight between an older rod and a newer rod of the same length and line weight may be measured in only fractions of an ounce. That difference can be HUGE after a long day of fishing. Especially for fishing games like steelhead where you are making tons of casts. That little weight reduction can make the difference between making one more good cast at the end of the day that is rewarded with a bite. Over a long day the more tired a person gets the less quality they are making in their casts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
678 Posts
I question how much of the new technology is developed by engineers and how much by marketing types in the big companies. I prefer to buy my rods from builders that lack a fully staffed marketing department.

While I'm as interested in new rods on the market as the next guy/gal, its usually a new configuration (length x grain window combination) that gets me excited, not the new technology.

Case in point for me is 9 wt single handers. I've had a few, including some of the newer ones from high end manufacturers, and despite the promoted technological advances (and associated price tag), I've been disappointed. Despite the new technology and razzle-dazzle, none have measured up to an old Sage RP that I purchased used 20 years ago for about $125. That rod has mojo galore!

My two-cents. YMMV.

Tom
 

·
Spey Is The Way
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
Very interesting question. I read through the thread quickly and I don't think it was mentioned, but aren't new rods usually a faster action the their predecessors. The One is a little faster than the Zaxis, the Method is a little faster than the One, etc. I know the Accel is slower. Not sure what other manufactures do. Just my thoughts, I could be all wrong. I'm still a learner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,937 Posts
The new nano resins are stronger and weigh less, therefore allowing for lighter construction. Where I think this will really help is in longer rods, especially the lighter weights.
I'm afraid not! Loomis NRX and Hardy Sintrix rods are not light. Loomis NRX and my first "batch" of GLX 9ft 10wt did weight the same 128g. My Orvis Helios 9ft 10wt weights only 98g. Also Hardy Sintrix and Angel series weight about the same but where Angels were brittle the Sintrix are very strong.

Esa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,937 Posts
aren't new rods usually a faster action the their predecessors.
Current rods are stiffer than 10 to 20 years ago and rod stiffness should follow line rating but it does not because there is no standard which rod manufacturers use. Fly lines have two standards but they are not used much either.

Rod "speed" means what king of action it has and rod which tip bends the most is called "fast".

Rod "recovery speed" is more complicated feature but after obvious fly line weight the stiffness is what has the most effect and rod blank and guides weight has some effect. There is no such rod which bends very easy and straightens very fast.

Esa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Current rods are stiffer than 10 to 20 years ago and rod stiffness should follow line rating but it does not because there is no standard which rod manufacturers use. Fly lines have two standards but they are not used much either.

Rod "speed" means what king of action it has and rod which tip bends the most is called "fast".

Rod "recovery speed" is more complicated feature but after obvious fly line weight the stiffness is what has the most effect and rod blank and guides weight has some effect. There is no such rod which bends very easy and straightens very fast.

Esa
I believe that is backwards...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,937 Posts
I believe that is backwards...
Partially yes! I did not write that very clear :eek:

Fast action is not very good rod definition. Tip action is better but the Action Angle by Dr Bill Hanneman Common Cents System is the best we currently have. Here in this a youtube link where Tim Rajeff presents very good explanation of rod action and power. See what happens to rod span, length between rod tip and handle, which is the best feature of tip action rod.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHlJQUOm7wM

We can use wider casting stroke and still achieve straight line path when rod shortens more when line is above us WITHOUT causing too much bend to the rod. Rod bend is good feature to line loop "quality" but not very good feature to line speed because rod bends backwards and it cause delay to line acceleration. Some of this stored energy is gained back when rod straightens but the efficiency of "spring effect" is not very good.

Esa
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Top