Fishing Rods with Broken (& Repaired) Tips??

[LAO162]

Every so often I see "deals" on Rods with broken tips.  I understand that with 2 or 3 inches missing, the action will become faster.

Is there a case where it makes sense to buy a used high end rod at 80% off and then glue a $10 tip on to it.

Thanks

[Delaware Valley Tackle]

This depends on the original specs & how much is cut-off. An inch or two off a 7'6" XF worm rod would probably leave you a usable rod for example.

[Tin]

I use an old busted 7'6" M Croix I busted about 4" off still. It became my frog rod.  ;D

[steezy]

If its a used "high end" rod like a Loomis GLX or St Croix then I would use their replacement program and spend $50 to get a new rod.  If its a Steez rod, you should be able to get an over the counter replacement at BPS or Cabelas.

You would end up with a $300-$500 rod for very little $$$.

[.ghoti.]

With 2 - 3" of tip missing, the action will be slower, not faster. The rod will be stiffer, and slower.

[Tin]

If its a used "high end" rod like a Loomis GLX or St Croix then I would use their replacement program and spend $50 to get a new rod. If its a Steez rod, you should be able to get an over the counter replacement at BPS or Cabelas.

You would end up with a $300-$500 rod for very little $$$.

Why the quotations?

[NorCalFishinguru]

With 2 - 3" of tip missing, the action will be slower, not faster. The rod will be stiffer, and slower.

Beat me to it. On a fast action rod, the bend is mostly at the tip. Snap that portion off and your left with a medium or slow action rod

[LAO162]

I agree that the rod would be stiffer, but I'm working on the assumption that the bend gets closer to the new tip.

For instance, take a 6 foot rod with a moderate action. If it's bend begins 1/3rd down from the tip, that leaves 4 feet of rod below the bend (and 2 feet above). If 8 inches was broken off from the tip, there would still be 4 feet below the bend. However, now there would only be 1 1/3 feet above the bend. That 1 1/3 feet would be only 1/4 of the total rod length (5 1/3 feet). Thus, the bending portion of the rod has decreased from 33% to only 25% (taking it to a faster action).

Now, with less length and leverage from the tip to the fulcrum, will the shorter rod actually have an increased power rating?

Leon

[K_Mac]

Leon the answer is no. The power of the rod is determined by the force needed to cause it to flex and the max force it will take. The effect of braking 2" off a rod is that the action is now faster. There is less flex before the backbone of the rod comes into play. Having been there and done that it will definitely cause the rod to feel faster/stiffer while casting.

Speed is a function of how fast the power of the rod comes into play. A slow action has more flex in the taper and takes longer on a hook set to bring the full power into play. A MH crankbait rod will have the same power as a MHF rod as shown by the Line rating. It will just take more flex (slower)to get to the backbone of the rod.

[LAO162]

Thanks for the info.  More to ponder...

[J Francho]

You're all assuming that the taper is constant, and that just isn't the case.  In any rod that I've broken the tip off, the rod became slower.  I have no idea how making a rod shorter would add stiffness or power, though the sensation may translate to that.  The only way to add power is increase the blank material's strength.  That doesn't happen when you remove the tip.

[K_Mac]

You're all assuming that the taper is constant, and that just isn't the case. In any rod that I've broken the tip off, the rod became slower. I have no idea how making a rod shorter would add stiffness or power, though the sensation may translate to that. The only way to add power is increase the blank material's strength. That doesn't happen when you remove the tip.

It does not change the power of the rod. It does make the rod faster. You have removed some of the protion of rod that is designed to flex as you apply pressure. How does that make the rod slower?

[J Francho]

Because, now more of the rod flexes, and by definition that is "slower."  You associating the amount of force it takes to flex the rod with taper, and that isn't what taper is.  A faster taper gets progressively smaller at the tip.  Break the tip off, and the taper is slower than it was.  Previously, the top 12" or so of the rod flexed on an X-Fast taper.  Remove the tip, and more of the rod will flex, because the flexible tip is gone.   Believe me, I've broken many tips, and I've never had a faster, more powerful rod as a result.

[K_Mac]

John with all due respect, that does not make any sense to me. Go to the thread below and look at post number nine, where the action of rods is shown. If I brake the tip off of any of these rods the result is a faster action, not slower.

http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1141187546

[J Francho]

I understand actions, and I actually don't like that diagram. It looks like the same fast action rod, just with more pressure applied to it. I've got four broken spinning rods in my attic that disputes the faster claim. They are slower.  The geometry of the rod is completely altered when removing the tip. More of the rod flexes when the tip is broken off.

This diagram is MUCH better at illustrating actions:

[roadwarrior]

Hmm...

http://www.flatlandflyfishers.com/Flyfishing101/rodaction.html

I think breaking a tip just makes the rod "stiff".

There's not much action in a broomstick.

:

[J Francho]

Anyone can test this without actually braking your rod...just run the line through all but the tip top.  Pull string.  Note slower action.

[Paul Roberts]

I understand actions, and I actually don't like that diagram. It looks like the same fast action rod, just with more pressure applied to it. I've got four broken spinning rods in my attic that disputes the faster claim. They are slower. The geometry of the rod is completely altered when removing the tip. More of the rod flexes when the tip is broken off.

This diagram is MUCH better at illustrating actions:

Interesting. I'd respond to this by saying: Not for the same amount of force applied. You are right that you do not gain power, but to actually realize that slower action, you've got to apply more power. I don't often use much butt power in my rods, unless I'm maxed in line weight for that power, and then apply it.

Interestingly, I've been thinking about this since I've had some fights in summer, when I go up to max line for a given rod, and use it. My "fast" rods can bend deeply in the butt then. The tip is essentially out of the action -might as well be broken off. I assume with a more "brittle" formula, like a Loomis GLX, I'm at greater risk of busting such a rod -hence the conservative weight ranges on such rods. I have some well made older lower modulus fast rods that I can bend deeply into what suddenly becomes a slower rod as it's maxed.

But action ratings are based on the distribution of power for a given lbs of pull. Exceed that and distortion takes place. If it's an Ugly Stick, keep pulling lol. If it's a GLX, or other super high modulus thin-walled blank, you better back off. Those line ratings mean something.

Another way to say it is: A given rod is not equally "fast" across a broad range of line weights. It may behave XF with 4lb line, and moderate with 20lb line -if it survives.

Am I making sense?

There's a member here, a sponsor maybe I think, who is a custom rod builder. Would love to hear his input. I'll try and find a certain post he made not long ago, and PM him -unless someone blows my thinking out of the water in the meantime LOL.

[J Francho]

You can ponder this all you want, I have broken enough rods to know what happens, LMAO.  They are all slower than they were before.

[K_Mac]

You can ponder this all you want, I have broken enough rods to know what happens, LMAO. They are all slower than they were before.

You can laugh all you want. : The rods in your diagram all have the same amount of force applied. The XF rod reaches the backbone of the rod in the first 25% of the rod. The rod will still bend more beyond this point, but how much force is needed is determined by the power of the rod, not the action. The SLOW rod reaches the backbone of the rod much nearer the handle of the rod. The force required to cause this movement is the same as the XF. What has changed is the is the speed/amount of distance the rod must flex to get to that point.

If a 7' XF rod reaches maximum flex in the first 25% of the rod, then 21" of rod are involved. If I break 2" off a 84" XF rod the point that it reaches full flex is now 19", or 23.1% of an 82" rod. The rod is now FASTER than it was before being broken.

A MODERATE action rod reaches full flex in the first 50% of the rod. Using a 7' rod that happens at 42." 21" more rod have to be moved using a MODERATE action rod than an XF rod. The point where the rod reaches max flex is determined by the taper of the rod, and does not change when the tip is broken. The only thing that changes is the amount of rod involved to get to that point. Less equals faster.

You may have more broken rods in the attic than I do, but you need to show me how these numbers are wrong.

[repper]

they become slower.no question.by breaking the last 2-3" you have removed the fastest,most flexable part of the rod. slower rods do not have the fast,flexable tip that extra fast rods have, so while your math may make sense to you, you simply can not make the rod faster by removing the fastest part of the rod. regardless of where the math shows the "new curve" the rod is slower in action.

[LAO162]

Hmm...

I think breaking a tip just makes the rod "stiff".

There's not much action in a broomstick./ :

So forgetting the action & power, the rod's characteristics may become less favorable if the tip is shortenned??  Sound's like quite a gamble to buy a rod with a shortenned tip, unless sure it can be replaced under expedited warranty service

[rubba bubba]

Flech must be on vacation.  He explained this in detail 6 months or so ago.  JF is correct; breaking the tip lowers the flex point thus slowing the action.

[J Francho]

You can laugh all you want. Roll Eyes The rods in your diagram all have the same amount of force applied.

I was laughing at myself, not you. I had a terrible couple years with breaking rods, after proclaiming I never break rods.  Was trying to add some levity.

Yes, the rods have the same force applied - at the same place, via the tip and guides.  This geometry is altered, and the point where the most force is applied, the tip, has moved closer to the black.  With the shorter rod there will be increased tension in the blank, and slower action.

[J Francho]

Hmm...

I think breaking a tip just makes the rod "stiff".

There's not much action in a broomstick./ :

So forgetting the action & power, the rod's characteristics may become less favorable if the tip is shortenned?? Sound's like quite a gamble to buy a rod with a shortenned tip, unless sure it can be replaced under expedited warranty service

I'd say its a bigger gamble than buying an intact rod, sight unseen.  Thing is, it may be perfect for what you need to do.  I had an 11' noodle rod for bobber fishing for panfish, broke the top 8" or so off it on a walleye.  Thing became a great steelhead rod, a bit slower.  It originally had a progressive slow action, but a really soft tip, too soft, LOL.