Rod Sensitivity

[Catt]

Sensitivity strarts in the hands & continues up to the brain.

 

I've fished everything from Fenwick's first graphite to the top of the line G. Loomis. I currently fish Shimano Crucial which I find every bit as sensitive as any.

 

Let me explain it this way!

 

I could put any high end reel on any high end rod, spool it with braid for maximum sensitivity, tie on a Texas rig & then give it to my wife.

 

She could not "feel" any difference if I had rigged it up on a Berkley Lightening rod!

 

Why? Cause what is transmitted up the line, down the rod, through the hands will be lost in the brain.

 

She doesn't fish & would not be able to interpret what she is feeling.

 

Even for the average angler a certain amount of "sensitivity" is lost in the brain.

[WRB]

4 hours ago, Team9nine said:

Tom - similar to this?

 

 

Gary Klein was the first pro I saw fish this way when worm or jig fishing (late 70s/early 80s). Hank also seemed to have that same (or similar) style.

Yes. Gary Klein still fishes the same way watching MLF events he participates in. I also point the rod tip at the jig as much as possible when retreiving jigs on a long cast to reduce the slack in the line and time to make an instant reel set and rod sweep hook set. Worms I like a higher rod tip to shake the line more and usually have more time to get a good hook set.

My first graphite rod was a Fenwick HMG in '71 followed a Lamiglas in '73, Phenix boron in around '78 and back to custom Lamiglas rods from '79 to 2012 when they stopped making them and went to ALX with Lamiglas blanks I use today.

Tom

[WRB]

A little history about graphite rods, Fenwick was the 1st to offer them for bass fishing.

Gary Loomis solved the problem with graphite rod failures and worked with Lamiglas to design thier early graphite rods.

Before Fenwick was bought by Pure Fishing they came out with the Tachna AVC rod series that was $300+ price point in the mid 90's and the forerunner of today's light weight rods before production went off shore. Find a Fenwick AVC 70MHF in good condition on eBay under $100 for a good budget jig/worm rod today.

Phenix was a west coast state of the art rod builder and thier boron rods were very popular before they went out of business for reasons unrelated to the rod business.

I am very familiar with state of the art rods and sensitivity is a subjective topic as it differs with every angler. I watch angler tap the rod tips on the floor when checking sensitivity or put the rod to their ear and flick it with a finger nail, what they thinking is anyone's guess.

Tom

[Junger]

I think they should put rods in the Large Hadron Collider to finally put this debate to rest.

[Tennessee Boy]

24 minutes ago, Junger said:

I think they should put rods in the Large Hadron Collider to finally put this debate to rest.

I'd pay $600 for a rod tested in the Large Hadron Collider... I mean it would have to be better... right?

[papajoe222]

4 hours ago, Tennessee Boy said:

1) When it comes to detecting bites,  familarity with your tackle is more important than the tackle you use.  When I was a kid,  I averaged probably 15 hours a week during the summers fishing creeks.  I always used the same cheap rod, reel, and line and 95% of the time the same crankbait.  It was like I had a camera on my lure when it came to detecting strikes or when the lure hit something.  It wasn't superior equipment,  it was the fact that I was so in tune with the feel of the cheap equipment I was using.  

 

I don’t know if familiarity is more important than the tackle used, but I will be the first to admit that the ‘sensitivity factor’ seems to multiply when using familiar equipment/presentations. 90% of my cranking is done using one combo and the majority of the time use one brand/model of crank. I swear I can feel a fish following that crank. If I switch to a different crank, I have difficulty feeling when it is beginning to contact vegetation and often will crank it down into the weeds. It may take me an hour to get in tune with that bait and combo and I know the rod didn’t loose sensitivity, I lost concentration.

[jbrew73]

The opinion expressed below is based on my personal gear, hands and techniques.  Your experience may differ and you are welcome to your opinion just as I am.

 

   If you use or have to use your fingers on the line to detect strikes you should trade in your 1970 fiberglass rods and trilene mono for some modern gear or work on your rod holding technique. 

 

I played around this afternoon letting  bluegills nibble on a plastic worm. There is no way in hell that fingering the line equates to better strike detection when using modern moderately priced gear. Maybe back in the day when lesser quality gear was available this technique helped but not with today’s equipment.  I strongly believe how you hold the rod and the tightness / looseness of your grip are key factors to knowing what’s happening at the other end of your line. All this said, spinning rods might be able to detect strikes better ( more “sensitive “)do to the way they are held but I don’t use spinning rod enough to have a solid opinion on it. 

 

I was was taught to fish with my finger on the line so I am familiar with this technique but it has no place in my fishing Arsenal in 2018.

 

 

 

[BigAngus752]

On 7/16/2018 at 6:32 PM, Arcs&sparks said:

I had to look up these rods/guides ‘cause I haven’t heard of them.   I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around why they would be more sensitive vs metal guides.  Do you know why this is the case?

 

   Most metal transmits vibration very well of course, that’s a no brainer,  and why I’m confused lol.  

 

On 7/17/2018 at 1:53 PM, Stephen B said:

I definitely agree with Junger.

 

My one question would be that if the line is in contact with the tip top with the guide insert wouldn't a harder material such as a Torzite isnert trasmit more sensitivity as it would be a harder material than SIC or Alconite?

 

I am not a highly experienced fisherman so I can't speak to the "feel" as the many experts on here can, but I've been a gunsmith for 20 years and, based on that experience, I can speak to some of the materials that are being discussed.  

 

These are some simplified general rules.  As you get lighter and lighter (aluminum, titanium, scandium) there are fewer electrons in the outer shell of the atom and the shell is wider, thus you can pack fewer atoms into the same amount of space.  Why is this important to a gun owner?  The lighter the metal, the less it will readily accept and hold lubricant.  Steel holds lube easily.  Aluminum less; titanium much less, scandium? - forget about it. 

 

Steel packs more atoms into the same space as titanium, thus it weighs more and has different characteristics.  Steel is generally 5% stronger but titanium is about 40% lighter.  Steel is stronger but titanium is more thermally stable.  This also applies to the materials ability to transmit vibrations.  The more atoms packed into the same amount of space the more interruptions (damping) there are for the waves of energy (vibration) passing through the material.  

 

I would suggest that rather than thinking of a material as "harder" or "lighter", think of it in terms of the number of atoms that are packed into a specific area and understand that less damping occurs with those materials that have fewer atoms in that space.  You SHOULD be able to "feel more vibrations" being transmitted through AGS guides than "less rigid" materials.  

[Stephen B]

2 minutes ago, BigAngus752 said:

 

I am not a highly experienced fisherman so I can't speak to the "feel" as the many experts on here can, but I've been a gunsmith for 20 years and, based on that experience, I can speak to some of the materials that are being discussed.  

 

These are some simplified general rules.  As you get lighter and lighter (aluminum, titanium, scandium) there are fewer electrons in the outer shell of the atom and the shell is wider, thus you can pack fewer atoms into the same amount of space.  Why is this important to a gun owner?  The lighter the metal, the less it will readily accept and hold lubricant.  Steel holds lube easily.  Aluminum less; titanium much less, scandium? - forget about it. 

 

Steel packs more atoms into the same space as titanium, thus it weighs more and has different characteristics.  Steel is generally 5% stronger but titanium is about 40% lighter.  Steel is stronger but titanium is more thermally stable.  This also applies to the materials ability to transmit vibrations.  The more atoms packed into the same amount of space the more interruptions (damping) there are for the waves of energy (vibration) passing through the material.  

 

I would suggest that rather than thinking of a material as "harder" or "lighter", think of it in terms of the number of atoms that are packed into a specific area and understand that less damping occurs with those materials that have fewer atoms in that space.  You SHOULD be able to "feel more vibrations" being transmitted through AGS guides than "less rigid" materials.  

Awesome. Interesting to see the scientific side of things. 

[BigAngus752]

20 minutes ago, Stephen B said:

Awesome. Interesting to see the scientific side of things. 

Well don't be too impressed.  I'm just regurgitating information I've received going to classes and seminars put on by many major gun manufacturers over the past 20 years.  But I've met some incredibly smart engineers, machinists and metallurgists!

[Stephen B]

12 minutes ago, BigAngus752 said:

Well don't be too impressed.  I'm just regurgitating information I've received going to classes and seminars put on by many major gun manufacturers over the past 20 years.  But I've met some incredibly smart engineers, machinists and metallurgists!

I just like things back by science, math, engineering, etc. While fishing does have information that can be backed and confirmed by science and others, a lot is heresay and opinions. An example of this is what the entire thread was started for in that measuring sensitivity of a rod. I may have missed it but when rods are able to be independently tested via a independent company by a sensitivity measuring device and labeled will be a amazing step forward in the sport of fishing for consumers.. That would be extremely interesting.

[Todd2]

On 7/19/2018 at 8:27 AM, Team9nine said:

Tom - similar to this?

 

 

Gary Klein was the first pro I saw fish this way when worm or jig fishing (late 70s/early 80s). Hank also seemed to have that same (or similar) style.

This is exactly how I fish jigs and plastics on BC. Line between thumb and index finger. BTW, the index finger and middle finger are both on the blank (opposite sides) also so I really do know where the sensation is coming from, I just know when I feel anything, I reel down and swing.

[Choporoz]

When fishing bottom contact and very slow moving plastics, I first detect many bites in the tips of my fingers holding the reel handle.  This means for me that the line, the rod and even the reel all play a big part.   If the spool is tight, or the knob bearings are dirty, overall sensitivity is affected...at least for me.

As the picture of Gary Klein above illustrates, your bite detection can/will be affected by how the reel and the rod handles feel for you.   One big reason to handle rods with a reel attached before deciding on a purchase.

[Fishydishy]

On 7/19/2018 at 8:39 AM, WRB said:

Yes. Gary Klein still fishes the same way watching MLF events he participates in. I also point the rod tip at the jig as much as possible when retreiving jigs on a long cast to reduce the slack in the line and time to make an instant reel set and rod sweep hook set. Worms I like a higher rod tip to shake the line more and usually have more time to get a good hook set.

My first graphite rod was a Fenwick HMG in '71 followed a Lamiglas in '73, Phenix boron in around '78 and back to custom Lamiglas rods from '79 to 2012 when they stopped making them and went to ALX with Lamiglas blanks I use today.

Tom

Obviously I came across this thread couple of years later and found this rod holding method fascinating. And I had to ask how do you set the hook with the way you hold the rod? I can’t imagine I could perform a solid hook set this way.

[WRB]

Just fast crank the reel @ 2’ per turn and sweep set the tight line, works far better the the old rod cross the eyes set.

Tom

 

[Deleted account]

On 7/19/2018 at 1:11 PM, Junger said:

I think they should put rods in the Large Hadron Collider to finally put this debate to rest.

You may have been reading too much nano technology ads...  

[NOC 1]

On 7/16/2018 at 10:08 PM, Stephen B said:

If that is true, then how does sensitivity actually travel to the blank? It can't be 100% through the line as a NRX is noticeable more sensitivity than an E6X with the same reel, line, etc. It would somehow have to be a combination of through the line, and from the guide to the blank itself. But I am unsure as this is just a theory. I'm all ears.

I would say that the vibrations travel mainly through the line and the difference between a sensitive rod and one less so is that the less sensitive rod dampens the vibration more than the more sensitive one does.

[Deephaven]

6 hours ago, NOC 1 said:

I would say that the vibrations travel mainly through the line and the difference between a sensitive rod and one less so is that the less sensitive rod dampens the vibration more than the more sensitive one does.

Exciting a limp line to carry vibrations is WAY harder than the rod.  Changes in force on the line due to pulling/moving/etc however isn't so hard.  

[Mat_ski]

Only tip transfers vibration to the blank or rather it transfers the most vibrations to the blank. 
For example daiwa steez ags uses titanium tip and ags (carbon) guides the rest of the way. Titanium transfers vibrations very well.

[CrankFate]

I think everything transfers vibration or not. Hard light materials and tight tolerances all carry more sensitivity. Everything from the brittle reel seat, the brittle reel, the rigid guides and inserts all add to feel.
 

As far as feel goes, there is data out there that says if you are sitting there for days at a time feeling and doing something, over time, you will recruit more nerves and muscles and they will get better at doing whatever it is you keep trying to do.  Talent matters too though. Some people will get better at some things than others.
 

I’m not going to lie. I don’t give much advice on how to get bass, because I’m not that good at it. I’m just very persistent.

[Deephaven]

Vibration is sinusoidal or a combination of sinus waves.  What you feel is a force, not a vibration.  Modal response of the rod and mechanical energy transfer can surely be quantified based on frequency but weight/pull/bites are not a vibration.

[NOC 1]

11 hours ago, Deephaven said:

Exciting a limp line to carry vibrations is WAY harder than the rod.  Changes in force on the line due to pulling/moving/etc however isn't so hard.  

???  A limp line will be dead for sure. A line capable of deflecting the rod tip, even a tiny bit is not a limp line. Those changes in forces, pulling/moving/etc, are what is causing the vibrations I'm referring to. Technically speaking I suppose that the line itself is not vibrating as much as it is the vehicle the action of which causes the rod to vibrate.

 

This exactly what happens as you drag a wacky head across the bottom or whatever. Each tiny little tug and pull as the lure rides over little pieces of gravel or whatnot displaces the rod tip and the rod oscillates as it tries to recover its resting state. Every tiny change in tension will cause a vibration providing that it is not a constant force. But it is in any case the line which carries the original input.

 

I've fished rods that dampen almost all vibrations and all you are left with are the tugs and the large shifts in weights. That is because the rod dampens vibrations well. I have other rods through which you can feel much more, even texture changes in the mud and individual pebbles.

 

Vibration might be better described as an oscillation that occurs as a material, electromagnetic wave, or other medium disturbed from a state of equilibrium settles back to that state of equilibrium. And for the record, a vibration is not limited to sinusoidal wave forms. There are examples such as a jointed pendulum in which oscillation is random, or structures such as trees that are fractal systems which may develop all sorts of wave forms as the wind blows. The sound of a trumpet is not a sine wave (though it is a derivative).

 

I don't know where you are going with the reference to the modal response of the rod. I would expect that the resonant frequency of the rod and the associated harmonic nodes and the overall frequency response curve would play into how sensitive a rod is to various differing vibrations, but if this discussion isn't already in the weeds, going further down this road would certainly be less than useful for most I think.

 

 

[roadwarrior]

WOW!

[Deephaven]

2 hours ago, NOC 1 said:

. Those changes in forces, pulling/moving/etc, are what is causing the vibrations I'm referring to. Technically speaking I suppose that the line itself is not vibrating as much as it is the vehicle the action of which causes the rod to vibrate.

Exactly.  Before you described the line as vibrating, but the line transmits force and is the forcing function moving the rod.  If you feel vibrations from a dead pull on a rod it is the mechanical response of the rod that is vibrating and not the line.  Some rods are surely dead feeling in this regard.

[Michigander]

27 minutes ago, Deephaven said:

Exactly.  Before you described the line as vibrating, but the line transmits force and is the forcing function moving the rod.  If you feel vibrations from a dead pull on a rod it is the mechanical response of the rod that is vibrating and not the line.  Some rods are surely dead feeling in this regard.

So should we stop asking if a rod is sensitive and start asking which have the lowest threshold for mechanical response?