Rod sensitivity subjective?

[Hobie-Wan Kenobi]

Is sensitivity all that important in a cranking stick? A jerkb8 stick? A topwater stick? Frogs?

I'd say no but, with cranks and less so with jerkbaits, it's nice to feel what your lure is hitting.

Topwater and frogs, no. That's what I use a Daiwa Jupiter for frogs and random moving baits. It's has ok sensitivity but it's super light. It retailed fire 70 bucks. I picked it up from Walmart for 20

[reason162]

Okay. So who's doing the testing?

Anyone can do it, as long as they show the methodology. I'd say TT is the natural choice, but they may or may not want to deal with the aftermath...

The results can then be interpreted/debated by people on the internets, just like we do now with every other aspect of fishing tech

[BucketHunter]

Easy fix. Test bare blanks. Make it a metric in the custom rod building world. They already have tons of specs about blanks that are never discussed publicly by big rod companies, like RDO.
Built rods introduce too many new factors in how pleasurable a rod feels in your hands. Let the consumer decide what's the best for them. There are certainly styles and types of build for everyone...

Input a signal into a bare blank, and measure it at the other end. Find out if different frequencies behave differently. Nail down what frequencies are most helpful in aiding the human hand detect vibration. It can easily be done well.

[uljersey]

Easy fix. Test bare blanks. Make it a metric in the custom rod building world. They already have tons of specs about blanks that are never discussed publicly by big rod companies, like RDO.
Built rods introduce too many new factors in how pleasurable a rod feels in your hands. Let the consumer decide what's the best for them. There are certainly styles and types of build for everyone...

Input a signal into a bare blank, and measure it at the other end. Find out if different frequencies behave differently. Nail down what frequencies are most helpful in aiding the human hand detect vibration. It can easily be done well.

You're still taking the human element out of the equation, which renders this approach moot. Your idea could be successfully utilized in, for example, a device that detects subtle ground tremors that could potentially lead to earthquakes. A device such as this that requires no human input or interpretation. Once you introduce the human element, there is no solid established baseline from which to measure sensitivity.

[reason162]

You're still taking the human element out of the equation, which renders this approach moot.

Why does it matter? Consider the current paradigm: companies just claim their rods are the most sensitive. According to what?

Weight and length are both objective measures, but can be rendered subjective to the user...depending on height/strength etc. Test the bare blanks for sensitivity, and put the numbers out there, let us sort it out.

[njbasscat]

You're still taking the human element out of the equation, which renders this approach moot.

Why does it matter? Consider the current paradigm: companies just claim their rods are the most sensitive. According to what?

Weight and length are both objective measures, but can be rendered subjective to the user...depending on height/strength etc. Test the bare blanks for sensitivity, and put the numbers out there, let us sort it out.

You will run into an issue with this. Once a company adds a handle, guides and paints the blank, it complete changes the sensativity. I remember when listing the type of graphite was all the rage a few years ago. Problem was when you used two different rods with the same listed material, they felt completely different.

[njbasscat]

You're still taking the human element out of the equation, which renders this approach moot.

Why does it matter? Consider the current paradigm: companies just claim their rods are the most sensitive. According to what?

Weight and length are both objective measures, but can be rendered subjective to the user...depending on height/strength etc. Test the bare blanks for sensitivity, and put the numbers out there, let us sort it out.

You will run into an issue with this. Once a company adds a handle, guides and paints the blank, it complete changes the sensativity. I remember when listing the type of graphite was all the rage a few years ago. Problem was when you used two different rods with the same listed material, they felt completely different.

[reason162]

You will run into an issue with this. Once a company adds a handle, guides and paints the blank, it complete changes the sensativity. I remember when listing the type of graphite was all the rage a few years ago. Problem was when you used two different rods with the same listed material, they felt completely different.

Lol so test the completed rods, either way works for me. Depending on the results, some companies might not like it...but why should we care about that? All the subjective factors mentioned here still apply, and everyone will still debate the "in hand" feel, but it'll be more information than we have now.

[lzeil]

i agree rod sensitivity is subjective. one "lesson learned" i've experienced was how important a reel contributes to overall sensitivity (cumulus, ch50e vs ald50). on occasion, i've been tempted to try using the strain gauge equipment in our engineering lab if it wasn't so destructive, just out of curiosity.

[mhood]

Isn't line type a factor? Braid makes everything more sensitive.

[Handler]

Any quantitative testing of fishing equipment is time consuming and laborious, but there are some companies that solely exist to do this type of thing. They do the testing and reporting, mix in some ads and we consumers read the articles and click the links.

Obviously all rods aren't going to get tested, but maybe the ones being reviewed do. That would be a good start.

[Hogsticker2]

Any quantitative testing of fishing equipment is time consuming and laborious, but there are some companies that solely exist to do this type of thing. They do the testing and reporting, mix in some ads and we consumers read the articles and click the links.

Obviously all rods aren't going to get tested, but maybe the ones being reviewed do. That would be a good start.

Yes. Time consuming labor that most companies evidently aren't willing, wanting, and obviously not needing to do. Take any two popular rod companies. Company A makes these testing results readily available, company B does not. Are you going to stop buying rods from company B? Every manufacturer would have to hop on the same train. Neat idea, but likely more of a dream. . . . For some. I find the materials and manufacturing process of rod blanks way more interesting. Hell, you can't even get most rod companies to tell you who's blanks they're using unless they roll their own.

[Hennessy]

If you just go ahead and buy a nrx, zbone or steez ags, the last thing you'll be worried about is sensitivity.

[Hobie-Wan Kenobi]

If you just go ahead and buy a nrx, zbone or steez ags, the last thing you'll be worried about is sensitivity.

Add the 13 Fishing Archangel to your list

[Obz]

If you just go ahead and buy a nrx, zbone or steez ags, the last thing you'll be worried about is sensitivity.

Did you feel the steez AGS was more sensitive than OG steez line or compile-x?