How does the placement of the reel seat being placed higher or lower on the Rod affect the power and action of the Rod.

Glenn McMurrian



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/2017 11:51PM by Glenn McMurrian.

What type of rod?

It doesn't really change either if you consider that you are still using the entire rod - the portion behind the reel seat doesn't go away. However, where you grasp the rod will make a difference in the blank's ability to handle certain loads. For instance, if you grasp the blank ahead of it's most powerful area, the deadlift capacity will be reduced to whatever that portion of blank just forward of your grasp can withstand.

............

If you use the parameters of CCS to determine power and action, then it won't change at all.

If you use the method Point Blank uses, I forget what they actually call it, something like effective rod length, where they base their measurements on a length shorter than the blank itself (they subtract the length of the rear handle) then the power and action will be different than a CCS measured rod.

A member of this site did some research and posted a great thread on his findings. I just can't remember his name. You could try using the search function and see what you come up with. Wish I could help with what kind of wording to use to perform the search.

I'll try a few searches of my own, and if I find it I'll most certainly post a link in this thread for you.

Found it ....... it is actually a thread posted by Jim Spooner, with a link in it to a chart about how trimming a blank affects the power, so it's probably not actually what you're looking for.

In the thread Jim mentions that he uses a method other than CCS or RDA measurements, to measure his rods. Perhaps he'll chime in on this thread. If not, perhaps a thread addressed to him may get a response. Wish I could be of more help.


Here is a link to the thread I've been referencing. [rodbuilding.org]

Unless you cut or extend the blank the power and action are unchanged and remain in place. But grabbing the rod at different places will affect how much load you can apply before it breaks and where that load is distributed. Assuming the butt in your gut or on your thighs as for stand up rods, the higher up you reach the less you can lift before the rod would break and the more the tip is in play. For purposes of maximum strength you would want your point of effort to be as far back as possible. But sometimes what you want is a position that allows you gain back a little leverage lost to the fish which means having the seat a little further up. Maybe if you outline what it is that you are trying to get from that blank we can help you more.

Another thing you can do is just mock up the rod. Don't really need any grips, just the seat on some tape shims and a generic guide set up, enough to safely distribute stress. Install a reel and get a feel for different positions. Load with enough weight to be able to feel the difference in leverage various positions offer. I've had many people do this and they almost always end up putting the seat back a tad bit further than where they thought they were going to like it. You might be like them, or you may be different. But 10 minutes trying it can give you a better feel for what position is going to suit you the best.

..................

one thing you can do is to place the reel seat as Tom suggested on with shins for a standard placement and try it in the up lock position and then try it in the down lock position that some times make it feel /act the way you want that transfers the reel weight by what ever the thread distance is on the seat and will change the balance just a bit but won't affect the power of the rod where it is a real noticeable. It changes the balance not the action.

The best day to be alive is always tomorrow !!
Think out side the box when all else fails !!!
Wi.

This question illustrates one of the fallacies of CCS in the case of any rod where the measurements are of the whole rod but the actual casting use of the rod is based on the seat location and not the whole length. Especially in the case of one handed casting. I know I'll get "shot" for saying it, but it is, in my technical judgment, true.

To show the fallacy, check the CCS of a 7 foot rod fully assembled with the seat 10 inches from the butt. Then with the seat 24 inches from the butt. The CCS numbers as defined by the CCS procedure will be unchanged. But cast the rod both ways and try to argue the action and power are unchanged.

This is using extremes to illustrate the trend, but every movement of the seat affects the actual user-experienced power and action of the rod.

This does not detract from the value of CCS for characterizing rod performance since ergonomics usually dictates that the seat will be positioned approximately the same distance from the butt in most cases. In most cases with freshwater spinning and casting rods the CCS numbers, based on the total length of the rod will be more representative for fish fighting, where most of the time the butt is used, than for casting where it is not (in the case of one-handed casting).

OK, ready, aim, fire!

Manufacturers have to rate the rod blank as it is sold, not as somebody might use/build/alter it. They list length, weight, etc., based on the product as it is, not what it will be if someone cuts is, extends it, adds other components to it, etc. So there is no "fallacy" in regards to the CCS, it simply works on the same basis all other relative systems of measurement. We should be well beyond the idea that such systems can be flawed - they're not and they're all the same. If one is flawed, then they all are. It's like saying that your laboratory scale is flawed because it does not tell you how much your blank will weigh if you trim 4 inches off of it. Of course it can't - to determine that you're going to have to cut 4 inches off and weigh it in that manner.

It is the job of the custom builder to view the measurements/data as the blank exists and make wise estimates as to how he builds the rod will change it's original inherent properties. No manufacturer can accurately guess where any individual builder will locate a reel seat, possibly trim the rod, extend the rod, etc., etc. Thus the measurements are as the blank exists as sold by the manufacturer.

The CCS "Big Picture," or what some call the RDA, allows the builder to take measurements on portions of the rod blank in order to see how his particular set up will differ from the original unaltered blank. Again, good rod builders can view the original specifications and reasonably accurately judge how their particular modifications or lay-out will affect things like action, power, length, weight, speed, etc., from the original measurements. And once they have the blank in hand, the CCS can be used to determine what you're going to have, before you actually permanently alter the blank.

...........

That didn't take long. OK, not a fallacy in the system. Shame on me. But it illustrates how the objective system cannot be used totally without judgment. I'm in a way just saying about what you did in talking about "leverage." I think the discussion is valuable in pointing out what many fail to see, that just because one has defined the characteristics of a blank, he has not yet described the characteristics of the rod. And the original question about how the reel seat position affects power (and action) is not answered by the traditional CCS measurements. The "Big Picture" does, but traditional CCS does not.

The Big Picture is part of the CCS and always has been. It was included in the original manuscript as received by me. I broke the various parts up to better allocate space for various other articles in the magazine issues in which they were published.

You cannot expect any system of measurement to tell you what something is going to be once you alter it or in the form in which you choose to use it. The best any such system can do is measure the item as it is at the time it is measured. No system of relative measurement includes a crystal ball, but that doesn't mean they're flawed in any way. They accurately do what they were intended to do. A hammer is not flawed because it will not turn a screw.

It is the job of any qualified technician, and I include the custom rod builder in that classification, to look at the specs for a rod blank and be able to tell how they will change based on what he/she intends to do with the blank, including cutting, extending, adding components, locating seats, etc. And in many ways, this is what differentiates the better custom builders from everyone else - they can choose the right rod blank for their customer's needs because they know how what they plan to do with the blank will affect the initial characteristics of that blank. Few learn to do this overnight, of course.

................

Glenn McMurrian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How does the placement of the reel seat being
> placed higher or lower on the Rod affect the power
> and action of the Rod.

You can look at the listed specs for the blank and figure that if you put the seat up really high then the power you have available will be a little less and the action will be a little slower than what is listed. Thankfully you only have to figure this sort of thing in one direction because the blank specs are for the naked blank at total length so you cannot increase the power or make the action any faster than it already is unless you extend the blank from the butt and put the seat behind the actual rod blank. Just working with the blank without extending or cutting it you can only reduce both the higher and higher you place the reel seat.

The CCS is an objective way to measure certain rod blank parameters; no more no less. If you change the blank you change the measured parameters.
Norm

I think the system of measuring should be determined by what your intent is for the ratings. For blank comparisons and for two-handed casting rods, the CCS is probably more appropriate. With rods being cast using two hands, the entire length of the rod is part of the dynamics of casting (and fish-fighting), so using CCS, where overall length is relevant, would be preferable. If you want a means to compare all other rods by Power/Action, I think the “Big Picture”/RDA with only the "working length" measured, is the more appropriate system.

Whichever system is used, consistency in the measuring method is important. I.E., the method shown in the original CCS article using books or other means to immobilize 10% of the butt end would not result in the same readings as using a two peg set-up, which is commonly used. The two pegs (fulcrum/force) rightfully allow the flex at the butt end to be part of the measurement. Ironically, the books or some other means of totally immobilizing the butt end of a rod would be a better means of measuring for the “big Picture”/RDA, where only the “working Length” ratings are desired. The two peg set-up used with RDA allows skewed measurements because of flex between the pegs.

I make my measurements by using a fixture made from an old reel seat which I can install the rod onto. I then clamp the grip to prevent movement at the butt end of the rod. My “working Length” is consistently measured from where the reel is located and allows me to make rod Power/Action comparisons very easily by referring to my Rod Spec Sheet.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/08/2017 08:46AM by jim spooner.

The manufacturer has no way of knowing how the builder is going to cast the rod, where he is doing to locate the reel seat or what else he might do to or with it. So they best they can do is provide measurements for the entire rod blank, as they do with weight, length, etc. That way, all rod blanks can be compared to each other at the outset. As I said earlier, good rod builders can ascertain how the ratings and specifications will be affected by how they build the rod. But to do that, you have to know what you're starting with.

........

I agree. If all manufacturers provided the CCS ratings it’d be helpful…..along with length, butt diameter, tip size and weight, line/lure ratings, and any other info that would help categorize blank characteristics. Unfortunately, many blank/rod manufacturers show little interest in measuring and/or posting CCS ratings. Even for those that do provide the CCS data, the rod builder has to understand that the measurements can vary from blank to blank….in some cases, significantly, within the specified model, but it’d still be useful info and a good starting point. Whether the CCS blank measurements would be relevant and/or useful after a blank is configured into a fishing tool would be debatable.