Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    the river
    Posts
    1,024

    Default How far can fishing tackle develop?

    When I first started fishing gear was pretty basic and perhaps 'industrial' compared to todays modern equipment. Nowadays lines, rod and reel materials are lighter and perhaps stronger and subsequently some are very expensive and way beyond my means to afford.
    I see new gear released each year and last seasons rod is suddenly out of fashion having being replaced by one that can cast that little bit further and weigh that little bit less.
    I wonder how much further fishing tackle development can go at the rate it has over the past 20 years. How much lighter can they become, does it matter if you can cast 40 yards compared to 38!?
    What is the next development that will change gear again and make what we have just now 'obselete'?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Paisley strathclyde.
    Posts
    3,530

    Default

    The next rods will have built in computers to direct your magnet made to look like a flee to cover the metal shaped fish which have been placed in a man made pond. The pond will be no more than a few inches deep filled with anti drowning water which will not wet your clothes.
    There will be disabled access all round with toilets every few yards and a number of wardens to lift the litter and to check that you are obeying all the rules.
    Everywere there will be signs stating that all fish must be returned and anyone found with a fish will be hanged [not in front of the children]

    Well seeing i can not get out with this weather.
    Bob

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    STRABANE N.IRELAND
    Posts
    835

    Default

    I think that the tackle designed nowadays catches more men than fish .

    So basically as long as we keep buying it , it will keep evolving .

    I caught most salmon in my first year fishing with a 10ft ugly stick rod and a bag a flying Cs .Now i have a garage full of hi tech gear & my mumbers of fish caught has fallen drastically .

    But i am a tackle tart
    SUBWAY - EAT FRESH

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Nordic Noir
    Posts
    4,459

    Default

    I've an incling that the high tech approach is reaching the buffers.

    There is a finite limit to weight reduction - the handle and reel fittings.

    My observation is that the manufacturers are bringing new ranges/models out at ever increasing rates, but the general buzz and clamour to buy them is running out of fizz.

    There is a clear move, in trout & coarse to split cane, where you can have a custom taper made to your exact requirements, in a lightweight trout rod up to 8 feet or so.

    salmon is a different matter, a tiny bit at least, due to the physicality, though of course the books/catalogues say that the rods cast themselves. With a shooting head I'd tend to agree but with a 70 foot plus line, you have to propel the line into the loop.

    Of course, Grant, McEnright, Malloch could cast 65 yards with greenheart/cane nae a prablem.

    It would be interested to see if any of today's bermuda shorted dudes could even come close to that with their state of the art sticks of plastic.

    What do you think?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Stirlingshire
    Posts
    473

    Default

    I'm fairly convinced that as far a single handed rods are concerned tackle has for all practical purposes been static for a number of years. In some ways it has got worse.

    It's less robust. For the sake of a very few grams we now have rods that need a very good warranty as they can shatter with a light bump off a branch or the rod falling while it is being set up.

    Single handed modern rods don't spey cast nearly as well as most of those from 20 years ago. Single handed rods for the most part have become too fast to bend fully for spey and roll casting. Yes there are exceptions but fairly few.

    They don't cast much further:

    As compagnito pointed out Grant was spey casting 65 yards with greenheart. Why? Possibly because it was better for distance spey casting than the latest carbon. I can't see another reason - he didn't have the line technology, the physical training or the scientific understanding of a cast that we have yet his record was only beaten in 2008.

    I believe he also had an overhead cast of 222 feet wih the same rod.

    Unless I am mistaken, in order to cast further you have to have greater terminal tip speed (given identical lines - and I don't believe Grant's lines were better than ours) so Grant had a tip speed advantage over 100 years ago!

    By the way the 180ft single handed cast was first made in 1938 with a split cane rod!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    "Middle England"
    Posts
    2,012

    Default Tackle innovation

    If you believe certain tackle co's marketing dept's you would need a new rod every year to keep up with what is best and new.
    they like to bring out new rods each year so the shops have to buy them.............................................. ........

    the latest lighter stronger blanks are in fact the result of a new glue and resin mix as much as they are the base carbon material.
    less scrim, resin , glue saves a lot of weight.

    at near on double the cost of rods that are already very light and strong are they TWICE as good? NO of course not,
    but some anglers just have to have the newest latest model.

    what impresses me more is innovation and invention in small tackle items/gismos and also flylines,
    the new rods made next year will not be far ahead of what was made new last year.


    LG
    When your time is truly up, the Grim Reaper comes to smile at you.
    And all you can do in all reality, is to just smile right back at him...............

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Solihull
    Posts
    4,154

    Default

    Rod designers still have lots of ways to “improve” their products and get us to part with our cash for the latest “must have”
    I recently visited a Formula 1 company and during the tour went to their carbon development office. I started talking to the designers about different sorts of carbon weave and resins that they use and was shown a 2’x2’ piece of a new one that they are working on that costs £2000 per piece. Can’t wait for the first 15 footer to use that, the house is already on the market in anticipation.
    Regards Gary
    Fishing for 60 years and am still trying to understand why I do it, but I love misunderstandings

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Brunei Darusallam
    Posts
    1,591

    Default

    Gwelsher,

    Excellent point. Take the first carbon developments in aerostructures in the 1960's, they are still far more advanced than that used in most rods.

    Even with the use of silica resins, it is allowing fibres that were a little too brittle to use before- typically with a higher modulous of stiffness- and with the extra strength the resin brings, you can use less of them.

    But, is there not a point you get to where no matter the rod, your technique is limiting the cast. Once your at this point is buying another rod not just an indulgence and a toy, instead of a need. I'd agree on both.

    Take looms, the Glx proprietary graphite blank came in back in 1993, albeit with a few tweaks, it's still being used by anglers worldwide happily.

    On F1 carbon, it's cost comes from the fibres, and the number of ply's used. To gain strength (ignore the direction) you stagger the layup. Say a base ply, then the next rotated to 45 degrees, the next at 90 degrees. Taking it further you can go down to 5 degree increments or more. McLarens nose was 6mm thick in 2008, and was most of the impact crash structure. This is overkill for a tapered tube, so it's horses for courses.

    On lines, there's an area with plenty of scope left.
    Last edited by Scanny; 08-12-2010 at 05:35 PM.
    "In Britain we have a saying for situations like this.......difficult, difficult, lemon, difficult"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    cotswolds
    Posts
    2,102

    Default

    Ahhh - what happened to the much vaunted "D" flex configuration that was going to take fly rod design by storm. Is David Norwich still promoting it??
    Last edited by tenet; 08-12-2010 at 05:24 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    173

    Talking reversing Technology

    high tech can be fun I guess - and the tackle manufacturers have a vested interest in making it sound like you need the newest item to catch more or bigger fish.

    but, since my goal is to enjoy the process ---I fish split bamboo for Trout - and I am building one for Salmon next-

    Scholars have long known that fishing eventually turns men into philosophers. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible to buy decent tackle on a philosopher's salary. ~Patrick F. McManus

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •