Why are St. Croix rods so thick compared to lesser rods that are also good?

[tcbass]

All of my spinning rods are currently Cabelas Tournament ZX rods are fairly thin (diameter) and super strong, sensitive, and heavy duty despite their thinness. I ordered my friend a St. Croix Mojo Bass and when I saw one today at the store I was surprised how thick it was. It was like a broomstick compared to a needle.  

 

I looked at Lews, 13 (Fishing), and Cabelas comparable weight and style rods and they were all far thinner and just as light if not lighter.  

 

At $130 the St. Croix was far more expensive than the Cabelas $99, Lews $79, and 13 (Fishing) $100, so why wasn't it comparable thinness. 

 

 

So, why at nearly twice the price as some of the others can't St. Croix make a durable, sensitive, and durable rod that is also thin, because other companies can???

[MassYak85]

How do the weights compare. I have no experience with St Croix but some rod manufacturers are able to save weight by using a larger diameter blank but reducing wall thickness. In essence creating a lighter rod by sacrificing actual size. 

[tcbass]

34 minutes ago, MassYak85 said:

How do the weights compare. I have no experience with St Croix but some rod manufacturers are able to save weight by using a larger diameter blank but reducing wall thickness. In essence creating a lighter rod by sacrificing actual size. 

 

Just as light if not lighter. 

[d-camarena]

Idk but that lews mach rod is a great rod for the price. Sold my mojos and got machs and didnt look back. Feels lighter in hand too. 

[Bluebasser86]

I'm curious as to why it matters? All I care is that a rod performs as it should and how I expect it to.

[Johnbt]

I suppose it's all about feel and how that affects performance. Or simply what you're used to. Growing up using metal rods they all feel good to me.

 

I don't have any St. Croix spinning rods, so I had to look them up. A Mojo Bass rod 

MJS71MF

7'1"

Medium with a

Fast

tip only weighs

3.8 ounces. That seems light to me.

 

The MH worm rod listed under it in the chart is 4.7 ounces. That's the same as my MH Fast 7' Avid casting rod. Could be lighter, but it fishes more like a Heavy than a MH.  St. Croix casting rods are like that. There's no industry standard.

[new2BC4bass]

1 hour ago, Johnbt said:

I suppose it's all about feel and how that affects performance. Or simply what you're used to. Growing up using metal rods they all feel good to me.

 

I don't have any St. Croix spinning rods, so I had to look them up. A Mojo Bass rod 

MJS71MF

7'1"

Medium with a

Fast

tip only weighs

3.8 ounces. That seems light to me.

 

The MH worm rod listed under it in the chart is 4.7 ounces. That's the same as my MH Fast 7' Avid casting rod. Could be lighter, but it fishes more like a Heavy than a MH.  St. Croix casting rods are like that. There's no industry standard.

 

I've never used a metal rod.  I did fish with Kmart specials.  Quit fishing for 23 years.  When I got back into fishing, I also bought my first quality rod...$100 used.  I am still amazed at how light rods are today.  4 oz. is a light rod to me, but a 7' MF Helios and Smoke are even lighter.

 

For a quality rod with a small diameter, try to find some Falcon Experts.  My Falcon Cara also has a fairly small diameter.  Not as small as the Expert, tho.

[LCG]

I recently purchased the mojo bass wacky spinning rod 6'8" m-xf which from my research here on this forum was highly recommended. 

 

I have zero regrets. It is highly sensitive, good hooks sets, and strong backbone. Also great for casting distance and accuracy. The rod is comfortable and fishes very well... It feels right. 

 

 

 

[Turkey sandwich]

Weird.  I have quite a few St Croix rods and the blanks tend to have pretty similar diameters other manufacturer's that I own (Abu, Fenwick).  Regardless, blank diameter or wall thickness matter very little to me compared to how my rods fish and despite whatever differences there may be, I can't see any sensible argument that a $79 Lew's rod is going to compare favorably to a Legend Elite, Avid X, or Mojo 2 simply because of the blank thickness.  

 

[tcbass]

8 hours ago, Bluebasser86 said:

I'm curious as to why it matters? All I care is that a rod performs as it should and how I expect it to.

 

 

Because how thin, light, and agile it is is all about performance. Imagine swinging a hammer all day, what is going to be more comfortable and less fatiguing, a 5lbs. hammer or a 20lbs. hammer, if they both perform exactly the same which one would you choose? I'm guessing the 5lbs. hammer because it will be far more comfortable and less fatiguing at the end of the day. 

 

I don't want to have to use heavy musky style tackle for bass and because of today's technology you don't have to. If you've ever used musky tackle you know how heavy and tiring it can be. No one wants to do that if they don't have to.

 

 

Look at the description of the G. Loomis NRX:

 

Quote

Not just a little bit lighter here or a little bit lighter there - the new G. Loomis NRX Casting Rods offer the best at every level in terms of graphite, resins, and components.  Top-of-the-line from top-to-bottom - you’ve never felt rods with this much life.  The NRX construction method is completely unique in rod manufacturing - allowing G.Loomis to make the NRX Casting Rods at least 15% lighter than similar GLX rods, and up to 20% stronger and more impact resistant as well. By utilizing stiffer, lighter and higher density carbon married with Nano Silica resin systems, the NRX rods can be lighter - yet more durable, extremely sensitive - and yet stiffer.  Light ‘ticks’ turn into thumps, and anglers can easily feel the difference between their lure dragging across silt, gravel and ridges - even at 60-feet.

 

 

Sounds nice, doesn't it? Much nicer than here's a big, heavy, broomstick that you can cast for part of a day before you get tired. 

 

If I can get a thinner, lighter, more agile rod for the same or less money, that's what I want for all day comfort and less fatigue. 

 

Rods have come a long ways and keep getting better with technology, that's why sportsman keep buying these new rods because they are better than their forefathers.

[Johnbt]

"Sounds nice, doesn't it?"

 

Sure, but if they'd publish the actual weight of their rods we wouldn't have to rely on guessing when we're shopping.  

As it is, I have to stand in the store shaking one rod after another and guessing. That is if they even stock the rods I'm interested in and happen to have one left on the floor.

 

Online shopping is even more difficult.

 

I hope I like my St. Croix LTB Sniper Spinnerbait when it gets here. I looked at the NRX and GLX rods on a number of web sites, but there weren't enough hard facts - only percentages and marketing. I'm sure they're real nice though.  

 

John 

 

 

[Turkey sandwich]

Fellas, there's a lot more to a quality rod than simply what it weighs.  You're basically asking the wrong questions and looking for the right answer.

 

Ultimately, what is better balanced and more comfortable in the hands of the fisherman is what that fisherman is going to be most comfortable with.  Everything from the individual's fishing style, the reel attached to the rod, the technique being fished, the rod's other components, the taper of the blank, etc will all impact someone's preferences, likely much more than simply the weight of the rod.  Think about buying a car.  If you bought a vehicle entirely based on horsepower, you're totally forsaking comfort, AWD, fuel efficiency, the quality of the drivetrain, etc... all for horsepower.  

 

As for comparing high end rods to broomsticks, almost anything in the $200 range on up is going to be ANYTHING but a broomstick.  

[tcbass]

25 minutes ago, Johnbt said:

"Sounds nice, doesn't it?"

 

Sure, but if they'd publish the actual weight of their rods we wouldn't have to rely on guessing when we're shopping.  

As it is, I have to stand in the store shaking one rod after another and guessing. That is if they even stock the rods I'm interested in and happen to have one left on the floor.

 

Online shopping is even more difficult.

 

I hope I like my St. Croix LTB Sniper Spinnerbait when it gets here. I looked at the NRX and GLX rods on a number of web sites, but there weren't enough hard facts - only percentages and marketing. I'm sure they're real nice though.  

 

John 

 

 

 

 

True. 

 

I know for a fact that Cabelas Tournament ZX, 13, and Lews are thinner. I held them side by side yesterday. I'm not sure if they are lighter.  

 

But I know that the Cabelas ZX feels incredible in the hand on the water. It's light, thin, balanced, and agile. 

 

Not sure the Mojo Bass would feel like that. It certainly didn't in the store, but obviously that's different than on the water with a reel on.  

 

[Johnbt]

Weight is one of the important factors. If they won't publish it I wonder what I'd be ordering sight unseen.

 

I found an online review of a 2012 NRX 873C CRR.  MH Fast, 7' 3". Price then was $500 fwiw. Weight = 4.2 ounces. That's light. In fact, it's the exact same weight as the 6' 9" MH ModFast Sniper Spinnerbait I'm waiting on. 

 

John

RX 873C CRR

[Columbia Craw]

I'm not a design engineer but this is what I learned in the late 70's.  There are two main factors that address a rod's taper and power, tube diameter and or wall thickness.  Before carbon fibers, graphite, the dominating material was fiberglass.  To obtain a stiffer or faster action as well as power, designers either increased wall thickness or the the diameter of the tube and taper progression.  Those design principals are still applied today.  In the 70's and 80's, designers were experimenting with graphite, boron, titanium and different blends of glass. 

 

When you take into consideration the earlier graphite rods were drift rods and fly rods, bass rod design took a little while to evolve but it did and has. The materials applied today vary by manufacture.  Some designs don't work well and the durability can suffer.  I have friends who worked for two major rod manufactures located in Woodland Washington.  Shouldn't be hard to figure out. Each had a series of rods that experienced significant blank failures. Both had thin walled tube designs and attempted to use a small diameter blank to make them light and still obtain a moderate action. Both companies either discontinued the series and or modified the design. I'll let you figure who was who.  Rod design is a real science and has taken over 40 years to perfect, or at least attempt to perfect. If you've  ever toured a rod manufacturing plant, and I have, you will be amazed at the process. 

 

[Bluebasser86]

1 hour ago, tcbass said:

 

 

Because how thin, light, and agile it is is all about performance. Imagine swinging a hammer all day, what is going to be more comfortable and less fatiguing, a 5lbs. hammer or a 20lbs. hammer, if they both perform exactly the same which one would you choose? I'm guessing the 5lbs. hammer because it will be far more comfortable and less fatiguing at the end of the day. 

 

I don't want to have to use heavy musky style tackle for bass and because of today's technology you don't have to. If you've ever used musky tackle you know how heavy and tiring it can be. No one wants to do that if they don't have to.

 

 

Look at the description of the G. Loomis NRX:

 

 

 

Sounds nice, doesn't it? Much nicer than here's a big, heavy, broomstick that you can cast for part of a day before you get tired. 

 

If I can get a thinner, lighter, more agile rod for the same or less money, that's what I want for all day comfort and less fatigue. 

 

Rods have come a long ways and keep getting better with technology, that's why sportsman keep buying these new rods because they are better than their forefathers.

You're comparing a $400 rod to a $130 rod though, or a hammer than is 4x as heavy. A heavier rod will be likely be tenths of an ounce difference.  A thicker rod can actually be lighter because it has thin walls and then it's just air in the middle. I've owned and fished St Croix rods from the Triumph to the LTBs , they're all nice, and their durability has been great, and so is their customer service. Use what you like, but don't get caught up on a rod being thicker meaning it's heavier.   

[MIbassyaker]

No need to speculate about the weights of St. Croix Rods -- they publish them on the site. The medium power graphite Mojos are all under 4oz, both casting and spinning. Only few of the long and heavy-power casters are over 5oz. The weights are all very compeitive at the price. Here's the mojo listings:

http://stcroixrods.com/products/freshwater/mojo-bass

 

I own rods by St. Croix, Cabela's, and 13 and never once have I looked at them and thought the comparison was like "a broomstick compared to a needle".  And my versions of latter two are even ML power, while my croixs are mediums.

 

The premise of this thread makes no sense.

[Admphlps]

I own rods by a few different companies but I own a lot of the st Croix avid series. All the st Croix I own are a medium power but they fish a lot more like a medium heavy. 

[RoLo]

 

I may not agree with the description, but I think I know where the OP is coming from.

I try to give every rod blank a fair shake, even neglected models like Daiwa Light & Tough,

Fenwick Eagle GLC, Dark Angel ~ ~ ~. I have noticed that St Croix blanks

seem to have limited weight latitude and mediocre casting distance

 

Roger

 

 

[WRB]

Where did you all go to school where they taught you thick and thin was a diameter?

Tom

[Delaware Valley Tackle]

There are two lines of thought among blank makers. Some use a thick wall, small diameter and others a thin wall larger diameter. Different ways to skin the same cat. One is no more right or wrong than the other. 

[NOC 1]

1 hour ago, Delaware Valley Tackle said:

There are two lines of thought among blank makers. Some use a thick wall, small diameter and others a thin wall larger diameter. Different ways to skin the same cat. One is no more right or wrong than the other. 

No, but they do feel different. One of my sons and I were discussing this same thing a week ago. Both he and I like the thinner style because they feel more agile and lithe. The thicker style rods feel clumsy, rigid, sloppy and slow to us.

 

The thin rods to someone who prefers the thicker rods always seem to be lacking backbone, fishing light for it's rating, too floppy and wimpy etc.

 

This is something I wonder about when I'm reading all these threads asking for rod recommendations. No one ever asks about the preference of the person seeking advice. I know that this is a real thing and that it does matter because just about everybody I've talked to about it DID express a preference for one style or the other.

 

 

[Tywithay]

37 minutes ago, NOC 1 said:

No, but they do feel different. One of my sons and I were discussing this same thing a week ago. Both he and I like the thinner style because they feel more agile and lithe. The thicker style rods feel clumsy, rigid, sloppy and slow to us.

 

The thin rods to someone who prefers the thicker rods always seem to be lacking backbone, fishing light for it's rating, too floppy and wimpy etc.

 

This is something I wonder about when I'm reading all these threads asking for rod recommendations. No one ever asks about the preference of the person seeking advice. I know that this is a real thing and that it does matter because just about everybody I've talked to about it DID express a preference for one style or the other.

 

 

It all depends on the quality of graphite and resin. Cheap materials on a skinny ferrule can still make a heavy unwieldy rod.

[NOC 1]

9 hours ago, Tywithay said:

It all depends on the quality of graphite and resin. Cheap materials on a skinny ferrule can still make a heavy unwieldy rod.

Surely, the materials are just as important and there cheap poorly made rods made both thick and thin, but I wouldn't say that  "it all depends" on it. It

 

Let's say that each rod is made of the same material. They will still feel different. They can't help but do so. The taper of the blank is what defines the characteristic of a rod. It's power, it's action, and it's strength etc. 

 

Ask St. Croix. Their IPC technology blanks are are all about how the blanks transfer forces down the rod based on mandrels machined into polynomial curves.  Other makers will choose to make that reduction to the tip in discreet steps, joining more cylindrical sections with fixed angles, or who knows, maybe using a different type of poly curve.

 

Good rods are made in a lot of different ways. I'm not saying only thin rods are good, or that thick rods are best. Just that it is a factor that can be felt when you use the rod. And I think one that people develop a preference for.

 

 

 

[WRB]

There isn't any way to know tubular wall thickness by looking at the rod. Graphite fibers are extremely light weight compared to glass fibers. A glass tubular rod blank with equal wall thickness to graphite weighs more and not nearly as strong but more flexible. A mix of materials glass/graphite composite reduces weight, increase strength compared to glass. The blend of power to action differs between each rod blank to achieve the desired performance.

If the op was talking about wall thickness, I appologize. 

Tom