World Sea Fishing Forums banner

Do you prefer a thicker rod or the new ultraslim versions

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I thought I would put this question out as a poll as I am curious.
I am finding some of the modern beachcasters to be overly slim for my hands and it makes it more of a chore than a pleasure use.

I can go back to the old Conoflex two piece models where they were the best part of 30-35mm+ diameter, something that was nice to cast and good for grip when it was cold as well as reeling in as you have a full grip.

So over to you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,683 Posts
I prefer thinner rods, given a choice. But use anything enough and you'll get used to it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,273 Posts
Hi,

Same here : i prefer slim rods as i dont have big hands and find it easier to hold the spool from multipliers. 25mm butt is a max for me, but i really like 20mm/23mm.

Gert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I don't have don't have small hands , but using some of the bigger more powerfully rods with multis and a larger diameter rod can be quite challenging, as said above trying to got you hand over the spool and round the rod is pretty hard.if you have small hands be no means are you able to use my setup, I always think for casting thinner rods are better . It's quite a shock when you go from a thick rod to a thin rod from my experience
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Looks like I will be the oddball on this subject, I don't have big hands or at least I don't appear to, but I am still a fan of a thicker rod but, will have to get used to it as rod manufacturers are not going to change anytime soon and the time of the thin rod blank is here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
Not to worried about the rod diameter, it's the blank walls that interest me, some rods the walls are so thin you could see through them lol, wouldn't take a lot of abuse or knocks, ok, carbon has come along way but being a bit old school I like to see a bit of meat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Not to worried about the rod diameter, it's the blank walls that interest me, some rods the walls are so thin you could see through them lol, wouldn't take a lot of abuse or knocks, ok, carbon has come along way but being a bit old school I like to see a bit of meat.
You echo one of my thoughts, I can handle the game and coarse fishing rods being light and dainty as they do not suffer as much punishment as that of a lightweight beachcaster hitting the deck numerous times when the wind blows up on a storm beach!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Split decisions this end as having recently used my new conti for the first time it was an experience to say the least.. thinner, far lighter, but boy could I push it out. Before my long break I was using thick and ready for anything, including the old faithful Silstar which only recently pulled me a beaut that I lost right at the wall. However, first impressions of the Sunset were and are good.. uncertain before purchase if it would handle or fold, but it performed well and i'm looking forward to the next outing with it. My only reservations are as above with regard to protecting the lightweights. Impossible to keep new, but the first time it gets marked i'm probably going to be gutted..
 

·
I'M PROBABLY SICK OF IT
Joined
·
13,649 Posts
I find the lightweight rods a blessing and its something i evaluate when purchasing , the carbons have allowed this and the higher grade more expensive carbons usually equate to a lighter rod , easier to cast too and to continually hold and reel in over the hours . I still use my older rods for really heavy punishing weed venues . Those rods that i thought were light in comparison to rods of 30 years ago now seem heavy themselves .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
Having fished for years , both sea angling and freshwater. I've seen the development in rods change dramatically.

Rod technology has allowed people to fish later on in life. There a lot easier to handle than old rods .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
Having fished for years , both sea angling and freshwater. I've seen the development in rods change dramatically.

Rod technology has allowed people to fish later on in life. There a lot easier to handle than old rods .
or they would and should be if the manufacturers did not keep increasing the legnth every time they bring out the latest model, that itself can negate the advantages of a light rod for those who wish to continue to fish in later life (meaning strong rough ground models not continentals here chaps ) only alternative is to chop them or use some of the models from 20 odd years ago that tended to be shorter in general, unfortunately this means they may have softened up to much for that style of fishing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
Most of the rods years were 12'-14 ' .

Yes the continental have came in and replaced a lot of the older style rods.

Bass rods are a great option for anyone looking for a good rod that can cast a distance.

My partner uses 2 bass 11'.5" bass rods , as beach rods are to hard for her to control.

It does boil down to what suits you're own style and obviously the ground you fish.

We fish mixed grounds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,715 Posts
Thicker rods/tubes are stronger/stiffer than thinner ones.

Trouble with making rods thin is you need to increase the wall thickness which generally means they are heavier. Make a thinner and longer rod and they can become unbalanced, tapers need to change or they can begin to feel sloppy.

It becomes a bit of craft getting things right. Imo the Italians seem to be getting this right with Italcanna and Veret being good examples of long, slim extremely lightweight rods. The new Italcanna LA, strikes that beautiful balance but there are a few others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,717 Posts
Building surf rods from a number of different suppliers and styles (SA, UK and Continental), I find that generally UK blanks are quite heavy - even the modern ones, while Continental style are slightly lighter, but still quite heavy. The optimum we have found are the SA blanks from Blue Marlin, as they have consistently worked over the years to develop the carbon tube to be slimmer, yet with out going to huge wall thickness. Then comes the difference between more 'social fishing' applications and 'full competition' style blanks. In the social class of rods, the blanks have come down considerably in diameter and weight - to be just under 500 grams for a 5-6 oz 14' rod - it casts like a dream, but is not up to serious heavy weight fishing for big sharks, but exceptional, through using some very balanced high strength carbons combined with Kevlar tape for hoop strength.

Here lies the big problem for blank manufacturers, the cost of the higher spec materials seriously impacts the final price of the rod. The structure of a blank is basically a few base wraps of glass/carbon scrim to give the blank 'hoop strength', then wraps of the long strand or uni-directional carbons to give the rod casting strength - when added all together this fixes the weight of the rod. More recent times there have been advances in the scrim layer to just carbon (lighter and more expensive), which allow the core of the blank to be lighter, however what still remains is the thickness of the outer layers of carbon. Here enters Kevlar, which by just designing the carbon uni-directional layer to a much thinner wall thickness end up with a compromised strength and hoop strength element - but a single wrap of very expensive woven Kevlar replaces about 3 or 4 wraps of heavy carbon.

The design principles of slimmer and lighter rods, are aiming for less resistance of the rod when passing through the air, hence rods with butt diameters of 20mm or potentially even less, but still having the strength and rigidity to cast 5-6oz sinkers + bait.

Just some thoughts on the matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
i recently bought a old conoflex rod with a view to use it over rough ground and the butt looks enormous in comparison to modern blanks. Things have come a long way since carbon fibre made an appearance but i'm glad that the old rods still have a place in among the newer gear and still sell well .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,145 Posts
Split decisions this end as having recently used my new conti for the first time it was an experience to say the least.. thinner, far lighter, but boy could I push it out. Before my long break I was using thick and ready for anything, including the old faithful Silstar which only recently pulled me a beaut that I lost right at the wall. However, first impressions of the Sunset were and are good.. uncertain before purchase if it would handle or fold, but it performed well and i'm looking forward to the next outing with it. My only reservations are as above with regard to protecting the lightweights. Impossible to keep new, but the first time it gets marked i'm probably going to be gutted..
I have Sunset Conti.... I looked long and hard before I purchased... I now never buy any rod that has a coloured laquer glaze as they mark up badly just by looking at them, I always buy rods with no colouration at all, just the natural blank colour, for the reasons you gave , I also carry my contis in plastic rod tubes in the holdall, it makes the holdall a bit more bulky, but really protects the rods.When I rebuild any of my own rods, nine times out of ten I leave the blank unglazed, no laquer at all, just high build on the whippings ,it is easier just to give them a good clean and a spray with silicone polish. The fish dont care, and not being a tackle tart neither do I .

So far as thin/thick rod butts are concerned, I have no preference either way. I have rods with thick alloy butts, med butts , thin butts, they all do the job and I dont have any problem using any of them, although the beefier rods are for rock and rough ground, I keep the contis for snag free beach work.

Dave
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,425 Posts
Hiya John,
I'm 6ft 2in so have probably slighter larger than normal hands. For me a 25mm dia butt is about as thin as i personally find comfortable without being too thin to wrap my hands round securely/properly.
26mm to 28mm are in my comfort zone with 30mm being about the biggest dia before i struggle for a decent grip.
Rick;)
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top