I have a couple or four Penn trolling rods and they have line class ratings on the rods for Mono and Braid. The Mono rating for one of my rods is 20-50 and the Braid rating is 30-65. I needed to know why this was. They gave me a rather unsatisfactory answer about the diameter differences of the line and yada yada yada stuff that made NO SENSE at all. I did find out the most important thing though: The rod is 20-50 and you run the risk of breaking the rod by using heavier line than 50 mono or braid if the reel is set to deliver drag based on line heavier than 50 lb test. I asked so why print on the rod something that would make the rod owner feel safe setting it up for use with 65 lb braid and set their drag pressure for 30% of 65 which in my book is about 22 lbs......ok its 20.5 lbs but its more than 15 lbs which where I fish my 50 lb set ups at strike. Their response was ...... SILENCE. And some folks fish higher than the 30% of line test that I fish and of course some lower so the problem could get worse if you go 1/3 or 33.33% of line rating for drag at strike.
I cannot believe that Penn rated these rods like this for no reason. I cannot believe that they rated these like this because of the difference in diameter between braid and mono either especially when 80lb braid matches up the 20lb mono diameter wise so the "reason" I was given is just horse crap.
we need a better system.
Quote from: alantani on April 01, 2009, 04:18:39 PM
It's common on internet boards to see a guy say that he as a reel and wants to match it up to a rod. It's difficult because rods will typically give you a line weight rating. Just like with reels, I would rather see them list a drag range. I believe that using a drag range is the most reliable way to establish a proper rating for a rod. Experienced fishermen all have a "feel" for what is well balance, but have probably not thought it through in an OBJECTIVE manner. Yeah, there's that word again! Here's the procedure that I go through.
Place any reel with any heavy line (it doesn't matter) on the rod. Button down the drag. Run the line through the guides and tie it off to a milk jug. Place the rod in a holder of some sort so that the rod butt rests at a 45 degree angle. Now add weight (cut a hole in the jug) until the rod bends to the desired flex that you want. I look for the rod to bend until the tip is midway between the top of the arc and the bottom of butt of the rod. You may desire more or less flex. It depends upon the type of rod and your personal preferences.
Now total up the weight in the jug. Let's say that you have a medium weight rod that flexes to a desired amount with only 10 pounds of STATIC weight. You have now determined the proper drag setting for your rod.
Next, choose a percentage drag setting. Different people have different preferences. You might typically fish as heavy a drag setting as 33% or as light as 25%. Anything more risks line breakage (been there). Anything less is wasted unless line abrasion resistance is a concern. Admittedly, I fish some rigs as heavy as 40% and others as light as 12%. Let's just say that we will stay within average parameters. With a desired 10 pound drag setting at a 33%, you need a 30 pound mono.
Finally, decide how much line you really need. Typically you only need 300 yards of line capacity. What kind of fish can take a 300 yard run on you if the drags are properly set? Fer cryin' out loud, guys! That's the length of three football fields. Why in the world would anyone need 1000 yards of line? In the vast majority of cases, it's lack of confidence, low drag settings or you're fishing WAY back. Remember out friend at the dinner party? Yeah, very few fishermen actually check their drag settings with a scale. I'm sorry that this is so harsh, but unless the fish is larger than 5 times the line weight, I see no excuse for getting "spooled."
Finally, select a reel. It has to have the capacity to hold the required amount of line, deliver the required amount of drag and still maintain the required amount of free spool. Luckily, you've got just the perfect reel!
Most people fish with a lighter topshot than the spectra so that if there's a break, it'll be in the mono/fluoro and not the spectra. So if it's rated for 20-50 mono you'd probably be running 30-65 spectra under it.
The rating range isn't accurate on any rod. Usually you toss out the ends of the range and use the middle. Most 20-50 rods are 30# sticks. It would be better if they rated them in terms of #'s of drag!
I normally choose the middle of the mono rating.
He spectra rating, to me, is the rating which relates to an equivalent reels size and what size spectra it would hold.
well, a good simple knot may give you >90% strength w/ mono, but <80% w/ braid... so it kinda' makes sense
Can one rated 30-65# spectra lift 65# of dead weight without breaking the rod?
-steve
Yes we need a better system. Rods rated on lbs of drag would be a great standard to have and the only second rating needed would be kg of drag.
That is one of my favorite posts of all time on any forum. It is where Alan truly shows his genius. Manufacturers ratings are usually given for a reason OTHER than actually informing the consumer about what to expect from the product. Alan always comes up with how to test a product for your specific needs.
Ron
Quote from: oc1 on April 29, 2017, 09:19:10 PM
Can one rated 30-65# spectra lift 65# of dead weight without breaking the rod?
-steve
Not a chance! The assumption is that you're fishing with the drag set to 25-33% of the line rating. Most rods won't fish anywhere close to the max rating. A few can fish to or above the top but most can't come close. A rod rated for 20-50# mono or 30-65# spectra is a 10# of drag rod. Some don't even make that!
Mabey Penn and others just want to get the word "braid" onto the rating section in order to broaden the marketability of their products. Think about a novice, or a 60+ year old guy who's just gettin back into the game and was out before braid was popularized. If it says both "mono" & "braid" they might be thinkin "ok, this one'll have guides that'll handle both". One a the reasons I bought the shotgun I did, was that it was rated for both lead and steel shot. Did that mean the barrel's made a harder steel? I don't know...
Myself I stayed oldschool with mono 'till 2012. When I got some $, I bought new reels, listened to tackle shop guys and started readin up on products. Though not perfect for everything, Braid/spectra's the best finesse fishing line for me, ever.
Gfish
Quote from: MarkT on April 30, 2017, 02:41:32 AM
Quote from: oc1 on April 29, 2017, 09:19:10 PM
Can one rated 30-65# spectra lift 65# of dead weight without breaking the rod?
-steve
Not a chance! The assumption is that you're fishing with the drag set to 25-33% of the line rating. Most rods won't fish anywhere close to the max rating. A few can fish to or above the top but most can't come close. A rod rated for 20-50# mono or 30-65# spectra is a 10# of drag rod. Some don't even make that!
Well I set my drag with deep drop fishing weights and my 50 lb line on that 20-50 rod is set for 15 lbs of drag @ strike and the rod admirably held those 15 lbs of deep drop weights off the ground with a very nice bend in the rod. I feel confident fishing this rod with 50 lb line @ 15 lbs of drag. This is one of the Penn Rampage all roller 20-50 trolling rods.
Glad it worked out for you. Enjoy the fishing.
Ron
in all reality most mono breaks way above its rating, whereas braid breaks closer to it rating.... this would have been an appropriate response!
Alan
I think this is excellent! I started doing something very similar years ago after I learned not to trust the manufacturers rating and set my drag for the rods. I learned to use a scale eventually
WHen fishing in a boat (freshwater)I never needed a lot of line
I have been spooled in freshwater while fishing off end of jetty and also when fishing at a dam in floodwater.you can't use a boat near some of the dams, water is in the trees downstream so you can't go downstream in those situations.I had to get reels with larger line capacity and hope I could wear them down and drag em back up river(sometimes it worked) ;D
Rick
Quote from: alantani on April 29, 2017, 03:56:30 PM
we need a better system.
Quote from: alantani on April 01, 2009, 04:18:39 PM
It's common on internet boards to see a guy say that he as a reel and wants to match it up to a rod. It's difficult because rods will typically give you a line weight rating. Just like with reels, I would rather see them list a drag range. I believe that using a drag range is the most reliable way to establish a proper rating for a rod. Experienced fishermen all have a "feel" for what is well balance, but have probably not thought it through in an OBJECTIVE manner. Yeah, there's that word again! Here's the procedure that I go through.
Place any reel with any heavy line (it doesn't matter) on the rod. Button down the drag. Run the line through the guides and tie it off to a milk jug. Place the rod in a holder of some sort so that the rod butt rests at a 45 degree angle. Now add weight (cut a hole in the jug) until the rod bends to the desired flex that you want. I look for the rod to bend until the tip is midway between the top of the arc and the bottom of butt of the rod. You may desire more or less flex. It depends upon the type of rod and your personal preferences.
Now total up the weight in the jug. Let's say that you have a medium weight rod that flexes to a desired amount with only 10 pounds of STATIC weight. You have now determined the proper drag setting for your rod.
Next, choose a percentage drag setting. Different people have different preferences. You might typically fish as heavy a drag setting as 33% or as light as 25%. Anything more risks line breakage (been there). Anything less is wasted unless line abrasion resistance is a concern. Admittedly, I fish some rigs as heavy as 40% and others as light as 12%. Let's just say that we will stay within average parameters. With a desired 10 pound drag setting at a 33%, you need a 30 pound mono.
Finally, decide how much line you really need. Typically you only need 300 yards of line capacity. What kind of fish can take a 300 yard run on you if the drags are properly set? Fer cryin' out loud, guys! That's the length of three football fields. Why in the world would anyone need 1000 yards of line? In the vast majority of cases, it's lack of confidence, low drag settings or you're fishing WAY back. Remember out friend at the dinner party? Yeah, very few fishermen actually check their drag settings with a scale. I'm sorry that this is so harsh, but unless the fish is larger than 5 times the line weight, I see no excuse for getting "spooled."
Finally, select a reel. It has to have the capacity to hold the required amount of line, deliver the required amount of drag and still maintain the required amount of free spool. Luckily, you've got just the perfect reel!
I put very little stock in the line ratings of rods. I use it only as a relative guide. Every brand rates them differently and there is no standard. The only thing the line rating tells me on a rod, is that a rod rated for 7-12 lb is "lighter" than one rated for 15-20 lb.
I too put little or no faith in the rating of rods by manufacturers. At best, those figures will have been arrived at by anglers on the staff who know their fishing, and we all know that all angers can accurately rate a rod and line to match ::). At worst, the rating will have been guessed at by a technician who may be great at making blanks but who knows whether they fish them or not.
I spent a happy afternoon with my rods (stand-up style in the 30-80+lb range), a big reel, some very heavy dacron (to take stretch out of the equation) and a spring balance. I then measured the pull exerted by the rod at three points with the drag locked down:
(a) just bent, as when handling a fish delicately but keeping tension on the line
(b) the happy fighting curve
(c) eye-watering, pull out the stops ,this rod can take no more moment!
(I felt one or two might actually go bang, but they didn't.)
The figures were interesting and I found that some rods started to bend under a lower load than others even though their 'fighting power' was similar and yet again some rods had a lot more power in reserve than others which bottomed out quickly after the fighting curve point.
Also the 'feel' of some rods of similar mid-power differed greatly when you continued to load them up. Some would bend more and more but not increase the pull on the scales - interesting - whilst some would go 'hard' on me, would not bend further but would really increase the loading on the scales if I pulled harder. Those were the ones I feared might bust if I overdid it just a tiny bit more.
As a guide, the scale readings I got across the whole arsenal varied from 6lb to nearly 40lb though I make no claim to being able to hold anything like 40lb drag in any fishing situation outside of a gameboat fighting chair.
What's the point? Well, now that I know how much power my rods can actually exert in the way I hold and use them, I know which line strength matches them and my own technique. And it confirms that rod manufacturers know not of what they speak.
For example: one maker, two rods, both labelled 50-130. One is perfect for 50lb line, no more: the other is perfect for 80lb line, no more. Neither is capable of exerting enough power to make use of 130lb line, so why the label? If you mistreated the rod, you could break it with those line weights.
This may not be scientific but when repeating the exercise, the results were reproducible enough for me to be content.
I'd like to try this with a better rig, bracing the rod and loading it in front of a grating to show the deflection under increasing load, taking photographs etc. but life it too short ;D
Quote from: UKChris on May 05, 2017, 04:59:03 PM
I too put little or no faith in the rating of rods by manufacturers. At best, those figures will have been arrived at by anglers on the staff who know their fishing, and we all know that all angers can accurately rate a rod and line to match ::). At worst, the rating will have been guessed at by a technician who may be great at making blanks but who knows whether they fish them or not.
I spent a happy afternoon with my rods (stand-up style in the 30-80+lb range), a big reel, some very heavy dacron (to take stretch out of the equation) and a spring balance. I then measured the pull exerted by the rod at three points with the drag locked down:
(a) just bent, as when handling a fish delicately but keeping tension on the line
(b) the happy fighting curve
(c) eye-watering, pull out the stops ,this rod can take no more moment!
(I felt one or two might actually go bang, but they didn't.)
The figures were interesting and I found that some rods started to bend under a lower load than others even though their 'fighting power' was similar and yet again some rods had a lot more power in reserve than others which bottomed out quickly after the fighting curve point.
Also the 'feel' of some rods of similar mid-power differed greatly when you continued to load them up. Some would bend more and more but not increase the pull on the scales - interesting - whilst some would go 'hard' on me, would not bend further but would really increase the loading on the scales if I pulled harder. Those were the ones I feared might bust if I overdid it just a tiny bit more.
As a guide, the scale readings I got across the whole arsenal varied from 6lb to nearly 40lb though I make no claim to being able to hold anything like 40lb drag in any fishing situation outside of a gameboat fighting chair.
What's the point? Well, now that I know how much power my rods can actually exert in the way I hold and use them, I know which line strength matches them and my own technique. And it confirms that rod manufacturers know not of what they speak.
For example: one maker, two rods, both labelled 50-130. One is perfect for 50lb line, no more: the other is perfect for 80lb line, no more. Neither is capable of exerting enough power to make use of 130lb line, so why the label? If you mistreated the rod, you could break it with those line weights.
This may not be scientific but when repeating the exercise, the results were reproducible enough for me to be content.
I'd like to try this with a better rig, bracing the rod and loading it in front of a grating to show the deflection under increasing load, taking photographs etc. but life it too short ;D
I enjoyed that read. You went further than I have thats for sure.
An interesting article I read somewhere; can't remember the location but I will paraphrase from memory:
A blank has two features; power and strength. People often equate the two, but they are very different and in no way inherently linked.
The strength of the rod is it's ability to get bent and not snap. You could build a rod from a fairly thin, barely tapered solid fibreglass rod. Think something like a long horse whip. It would be ridiculously strong; you could probably bend it in a circle, or lift 100lb with it, but it would completely deform. You would essentially be using the "rod" like a piece of rope to pull on the load.
An example of this I've seen in the real world was when a friend tried to break a children's rod, a Shimano KidStix. This rod is rated something like 4-6kg and is a very basic fibreglass blank. It took 34kg (off the top of my head) at a 45 degree angle to snap it. Crazy strong, but very little "power"
The power is the ability for a rod to lift things without collapsing and just becoming like a rope, as per the example above. I fish with quite a few very modern pure graphite/carbon fibre rods, they are exceptionally light, sensitive and have huge amounts of power, but they do not have much "strength" - if they are abused, point-loaded or high-sticked they will easily snap.
Carefully combining fibreglass and carbon fibre/graphite can give you a rod with loads of strength and a lot of power - great example is a modern mechanical jigging rod; they have huge strength and also loads of lifting power.
Here's an extreme example; a Jigging Master Monster Game being pushed right to the limit:
(http://www.fishing.net.nz/forum/uploads/73887/1978828_642590935790422_1685288251_n.jpg)
At this point, in my opinion, the rod has gone past it's "power" rating and folded up completely; at the same time the angler is probably putting on >50lb of pull, and the bend in that rod is just evil!
Isn't what you're calling "power" the same as "action". A fast action rod transfers the power towards the butt slowly and with much effort. A slow action or noodle rod transfers power towards the butt quickly and with little effort.
When all the power and effort reaches the butt it is ready to break. A rod should be designed to break at the butt.
What you're calling "strength" is sort of like what some call "weight". A light weight rod will break with less effort than a heavy weight rod.
-steve
There really is no standard for rating rods but you're usually pretty safe in the middle of the line rating. A 20-50 would be good for 30 or 40lb.
Action usually refers to the taper of the rod so fast action would stop bending closer to the tip and slow action would bend down by the handle.
Power would be the amount of weight it takes to bend the rod.
I've only seen weight used for fly rods for the size line to use.
Also the material the blank is made of will effect the rods performance but it's more in the way it "feels". I don't know how you would rate that. You can take a rod by the same company with same ratings and they can feel very different. "S" glass, "E"glass", graphite/glass composite, all graphite all act differently but the ratings can be the same and made off the same mandrel.
Not likely to ever be a uniform rating system since they're are so many things involved
I would just mention that there are IGFA line class rated rods that adhere to a standard.
Although IGFA rated trolling rods are normally pretty accurately matched to the IGFA line class they are rated for, there is no standard here either and IGFA issues no guidelines nor rates rods on behalf of makers. It's down to the blank maker and the rod maker to decide. Most well-known brands do a good job but in the past some UK rods were woefully underpowered for the rating they were given (and there are still plain silly ratings applied to some rods over here).
For heavy tackle (80lb and 130lb - I'm too feeble to contemplate using '180-unlimited' gear though I have a Harnell Royal VII - a beast), I have found clear differences in the actual power exerted by different rods (as well as differences in the shape of their curve under loading). Thus, I have rods I like for heavy tackle and I've used rods I'm not so happy with.
For example, in the 130lb class (and I'm not a huge, weighty guy), some IGFA 130lb rods I've used proved a little too soft even for me (two very different Shimano models comes to mind) and yet I've used a couple of the more modern 130lb rods that were too stiff for me when fishing blue marlin. I could actually tell the difference in use. The tendency towards stiffer rods might be OK for giant bluefin, but I've not fished for them.
With 80lb rods, I have a lovely old Harnell Royal V rated IGFA 80lb but it is soft when compared to my Penn X (carbon fibre) IGFA 80lb rod.
In summary, and of course it is only my opinion, IGFA ratings are closer to being correct than other more general line ratings provided, but even IGFA class ratings have differences depending on the choices made by the blank maker and rod builder. Most guys won't worry too much and are happy with the manufacturer's ratings but some anglers prefer rods they have got to know through use.
Personally, I prefer a mid-range 130 (such as the white and black Penn and old Fenwick, the Kennedy-Fisher blanks and similar in glass) for 130lb line but either a softer 130 or an extra-stiff 80 (like the Penn X carbon-fibre) for 80lb line.
The reason is simple - if the rod is too soft, I can't use even my meagre body weight to full advantage to lift a deep fish but if the rod is too stiff, I get catapulted out of the chair when the fish kicks hard!
Cheers
I posted this a few years back on this forum. This was pulled of the IGFA website.
The IGFA does not rate rods so whenever a manufacture says their rods are IGFA rated they must follow these guidelines only.
E. ROD
1. Rods must comply with sporting ethics and customs.
Considerable latitude is allowed in the choice of a rod, but rods giving
the angler an unfair advantage will be disqualified. This rule is intended
to eliminate the use of unconventional rods.
2. The rod tip must be a minimum of 40 inches (101.6 cm) in
length. The rod butt cannot exceed 27 inches (68.58 cm) in length.
These measurements must be made from a point directly beneath the
center of the reel. A curved butt is measured in a straight line. When
the rod butt is placed in a gimbal, the measurement from the center of
the reel seat to the pivot point of the gimbal can be no more than 27
inches. (The above measurements do not apply to surfcasting rods.
As you see there is nothing about line class ratings
Quote from: SoCalAngler on May 12, 2017, 02:12:58 AM
I posted this a few years back on this forum. This was pulled of the IGFA website.
The IGFA does not rate rods so whenever a manufacture says their rods are IGFA rated they must follow these guidelines only.
E. ROD
1. Rods must comply with sporting ethics and customs.
Considerable latitude is allowed in the choice of a rod, but rods giving
the angler an unfair advantage will be disqualified. This rule is intended
to eliminate the use of unconventional rods.
2. The rod tip must be a minimum of 40 inches (101.6 cm) in
length. The rod butt cannot exceed 27 inches (68.58 cm) in length.
These measurements must be made from a point directly beneath the
center of the reel. A curved butt is measured in a straight line. When
the rod butt is placed in a gimbal, the measurement from the center of
the reel seat to the pivot point of the gimbal can be no more than 27
inches. (The above measurements do not apply to surfcasting rods.
As you see there is nothing about line class ratings
True, these are the IGFA rules dictating rods designated as legal gear,
But..
There is a tradition and expectation of consistency within a given IGFA line class blank (within and accross manufacturers). The rods were designed with fishing that class of IGFA rated mono, and a reel designed to fish that class, with the ~1/3 drag at strike/ up to ~50% of line class at full... yardstick.
The rule generally means that..
"The IGFA Line Class equates to about 2.5 times the
test curve*, so a 30lb IGFA class rod will have test curve of around 12lb "
*Test curve of a rod is nothing more than the minimum load required to bend it through 90 degrees.So typically a rod marked as 'IGFA' rated will adhere to this guidline and speaks more to the 'backbone' or power rating of the rod.
These can be further classified in terms of action. Action describes how fast or slow the taper is and how quickly it loads, or returns to straight when a load is removed, and how far down the rod it bends.
Rod length and weight, as well as guide spacing can vary within a given rating.. but manufacturers typically recommend specific guides, and spacing for these IGFA rated blanks.
Here's an older AT post on IGFA rod rating...
http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=9074.0