Rod " POWER"

(On the idea that most modern rods can handle lines of greater rating than those of the rods as the reason many casters, "upline" when using shooting tapers).

Sorry Gordy - I have to take exception to that. I was hoping someone else would raise this so I could see it done in an non-antagonistic fashion

but let's see if I can handle it. I will be quite happy to accept my lumps if I'm wrong though. I'll also take the short answer/long answer approach.

Short answer - All 6 weight rods are in reality 8 weight rods? Not true.

Long answer - While I realize that a very fast or ultra fast 6 weight may have some characteristics in common with a medium or medium fast 8 weight there

are a number of factors that determine the action of a rod - for example, stiffness of the base material, shaft diameter, wall thickness, taper, length, placement and weight of the guides and wraps used to finish the rod. So even though fiberglass has a modulus of 6,000,000 and modern graphite rods

range from 5 to 9 times that we can't just say that the higher modulus material always yields a rod that is better suited for a higher line weight.

In addition, rod manufacturers look at different ways of rating rod actions. Tip deflection with a given load is the most common method but how fast a

rod goes from loaded to rsp, and the position where the rod bends under a given load are others. So the idea that all 6 weight rods today cast an 8 weight

line in the same fashion as an 8 weight rod of a few decades ago simply can't be quantified.

I realize that most people prefer medium fast to fast action rods but there are a significant percentage of people who prefer ultra fast rods or medium action

rods. Another consideration is that if I was to find that the 3 weight rod I've purchased for small fish on small streams so that I can make delicate dry fly

presentations is in reality a 5 weight rod and I have to go through all kinds of contortions with line selection and leader design to get those delicate casts

I would probably be a bit annoyed with the rod manufacturer.

Recommending that shooting tapers should always be up-sized 1 or 2 sizes from the rod rating is overly simplistic. As in all cases when helping a

student choose a rod a line I recommend casting the potential combinations until the student finds the one that has the preferred feel. Yet another

reason that fly casting is an art rather than an exact science.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You beat me to it. (I was about to hit the sack after a bout with tarpon this morning..... but you fired me up.)

You are also absolutely correct that increased modulus does NOT necessarily result in greater ability to handle heavier lines. It also holds true, that not every good caster, "uplines" when using shooting tapers, and those who do, don't do so with all rods.

Bottom line, as I see it, is that stiffness, alone, does not result in greater rod power. ONE CAN HAVE A SOFT 8 WT. ROD WHICH IS ACTUALLY MORE POWERFUL (able to handle a bit more line wt.) THAN A STIFF 8 WT. ROD OF HIGH MODULUS.

Going beyond that simplistic concept, we note that the best fly rod designs for fishing handle a wide RANGE of line weights. That is an important advance in the technology of modern fly rods.

Even the idea of rating a rod's, "power" as its ability to handle line weights is narrow minded. Big game fly fishermen don't look at it that way at all .... they rate a rod's, "power" in terms of the lifting limit of its butt section in some cases, and of it's "power" to subdue large fish by the tip and mid section flattening out so the angler ends up fighting the fish on a relatively shorter lever arm in others.

At our Continued Education Course which we gave at Marlboro, Mass. this winter, Tim Rajeff gave a clear presentation on the subject of relative rod power. I'll see if we can solicit his comments on all this.

Putting it another way, I look at it as the power of a rod being determined not by the modulus of its fibers or its composite structure alone, but more by its DESIGN PARAMETERS.