| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 oldschoolcane |
Tradition & perfection | #21 | ||
|
Posts: 204 03/13/2009 10:19 |
Peales, I agree with you completely. It's a very progressive statement to say "this is good enough". I'd encourage anyone here to grab an old
L.C. Smith and take it bird hunting & tell me how this side by side can be improved? Sure you could carry something thats faster & lighter, but why?
Tim |
|||
|
|
||||
|
quadrate |
#22 | |||
|
Posts: 36 03/13/2009 18:41 |
This is a very interesting thread. I have had this conversation several times with other rodmakers/collectors over the years. There really have been only a
couple of major innovations if you take out the evolution of rod tapers.
Tonkin Cane was the first innovation. It simply is the best cane for what a rod is made to do. The next was flaming/heat treating to temper the cane to enhance its characteristics. I personally don't think you need all of the highly "accurate" devices that some makers use. Its a natural material and every culm has different moisture content, fiber density, enamel thickness, etc. You are not working with a static material so how accurate can you really be with the moisture stuff. The next major innovation is urea formaldehyde glues. Still used today, they were developed in the 1940s. Hollow building is probably the final major innovation to be of consequence. It is very popular today but I would say the jury is still out on the actual longevity of these rods considering there are not that many that have been through a couple of generations of use like older rods. There are a decent number of E.C. Powell rods that show stress cracks parallel to the cane which calls into questions the strength of this process. I have not seen any Winstons with problems so their method may have more merit as far as durability. Finishes, guides, hardware have little impact on the rod compared to the actual taper so I don't really think they are innovations. Most of those are more cosmetic in nature. As far as ferrules are concerned I think the both step down and Super Z are structurally fine. Using the proper ferrule for the taper is more important. If you take taper design into consideration, that is still evolving as a result partially of hollow building and partially because of plastic fly lines. Older rods were designed for silk lines. Just look at those small guides on the rods. Today's rods are designed to shoot line more. The real major innovation in taper design was the Parabolic rod. It is very conducive to modern lines and have enough mass at the tip so that the rod never gives up. Paul Young probably took this further than anyone but Pezon et Michel, Payne and others were on that path as well. Some of these so-called innovations are not really innovations in the sense that they are not practical to produce any quantity. For something to be considered an innovation it has to be used by a larger number of people otherwise it will be sort of gimmicky. The other part of innovation is that it should be better than what it is replacing. I can't honestly say that a bamboo ferrule, graphite/glass ferrule, or some crazy hollow building design is better than the existing designs. Can anyone show me a rod that will cast circles around a Para 15, Perfectionist, Driggs, Para 17? That would be innovation if someone can come up with that kind of taper. There is a limit with bamboo as with any natural material and it may be close to reachin its pinnacle. The rods being built today by some makers are the best that have ever been produced in any era. Keep the thread going. Its an interesting one. Tim Zietak |
|||
|
|
||||
|
tim simbari |
#23 | |||
|
Posts: 323 03/13/2009 19:42 |
How about a potential claim for the greatest bamboo rod innovation as the modern beveler. As to some of the great masters, great tapers, and biggest
development in rods, it is interesting to note how a variation of that invention is woven throughout rodmaking history.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
quadrate |
#24 | |||
|
Posts: 37 03/13/2009 21:02 |
Tim,
That machine alone allowed the mass production of precision rod sections. Tim Zietak |
|||
|
|
||||
|
tim simbari |
#25 | |||
|
Posts: 324 03/14/2009 14:15 |
I guess my point was not so much the efficiency as the precision about that and the generations it spawned from the modern Leonard that begat T&T, the
Morris Kushner machine that had a relationship to Young ultimately evolving to Summers. Many of the principles even working to the Morgan machine that has
ended up in so many locations. Perhaps no single innovation in some form or variation can connect it's genetics to so much bamboo craftsmanship.Between
that and the 1878 patent ferrule design, man that covers a lot of the great ones.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
ZenCane |
#26 | |||
|
Posts: 109 03/14/2009 15:49 |
And as far as your question and I qoute you; " To what degree can you participate on these fronts and be satisfied? "
How about a bamboo rod that loads and unloads with no additional ocillations or sine waves after the first load and unload, a rod that tracks perfectly true and its point of recovery after being flexed is instantaeous? I am very satisfied with the performance of the rod and it is so far out of the box it is not funny. and there are a few who have cast that rod and will verify this statement. Ask Bob Nunley how the braided bamboo rod performs, it may be ugly but it is a very viable tool. As a large number of fish will personally testify to how well it whipped them;-) Jeff, You may have done this before, if so I apologize, but could you post a photo of your braided rod? Thanks. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Blue Quill |
#27 | |||
|
Posts: 19 03/14/2009 17:42 |
Tonkin cane may not be the best cane for bamboo rods. When it was isolated for rodmaking the rodmaking industry was looking for a raw material that met certain
criteria while also being available in sufficient quantity to support industrial production. There are likely species available in artisnal quantity that may
be better. It may or may not be worth the effort for the gains in performance, but the potential is there.
Glues are another evolving area. Bamboo has very little tensile elongation. When several laminated pieces are bending in unison, as in a rod, for the most part it is the glue that is allowing it to happen to the extent and manner that it does. Make the same taper with the same heat treatment with different glues and the difference is very appearant. Glue is an integral and critical part of rod performance and there are new glues every year. Casting styles and line designs are always evolving. Most people "arm-cast" today. In Payne's day most people "wrist-cast". In the 70's and 80's it was somewhere in between. Couple this with ever-changing line designs, rod-length conventions, and fishing techniques and this is a complicated and ever-evolving matrix. Some bamboo rod design improvements require the support of the flyfishing public. A nickel silver reel seat with a burl insert alone weighs more than a cork reel seat with sliding bands, ferrules, guides, and stripper combined, and affects rod action, but put both next to each other on a rod rack and see which sells first (for reference, once you get down to the 7'-0" 4wt range and lighter, many unfinished blanks with ferrules attached weigh less than some of the hardware people expect to see on a bamboo rod). Staggered ferrules are another area; excellent performance but never popular here in the US. Alternating materials are still another (I've made 6-strip rods with alternating solid strips of bamboo and cedar that are significantly ighter and more responsive that comparable lenght/line hollow rods). Bamboo is an excellent material to make rods that do everything a fly rod needs to do. There's plenty of room for innovation. How they can be improved upon or need to be is relative and subjective just like anything else. Chuck |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Pentalux |
#28 | |||
|
Posts: 63 03/14/2009 20:45 |
Well said Blue Quill, I completely agree with you. This is a great thread.
Mr Bruce Day, Peter Werner - he is a member of the board - wernercase - his website is www.awbookbinders.com - He is mostly known for his guncases and books - superb work... Peales - A most interesting perspective - Please explain and perhaps give detail as to what you mean when you state "There are many products out there of great utility that have reached their zenith, their limit. When a person(or group of people) start messing around with 'innovative' ideas for these products it often times ends up lapsing into a degenerative exercise. History is rich with forgotten self-indulgences. A good designer knows when not to design... when something is already well designed. Those energies could have been better spent addressing a real design problem. There is no 'problem' with bamboo fly rods..." I look forward to your post. Thanks - very interesting indeed. quadrate, Not sure how fair it is to remove tapers and then comment on E.C Powell rods as he built one of the widest ranges of taper speeds in his rods than any other maker - perhaps the failures are specifically the result of pushing the envelope with the taper as I have owned several E.C. Powells, one that I somewhat abused with heavy sink lines for a while, all superb casters and all rods I would consider tough to beat today... basically have personally had no issues with his rods - but they were B and C tapers I could see a fast A easily compromising the cane, what taper and rate were they? Also curious what number of units or number of people need to use an item or a rod before you no longer label it "gimmicky"? Best Regards to All, Rob |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Gnome |
#29 | |||
|
Posts: 1974 03/14/2009 23:03 King of the Gnomes |
Zencane,
Here you go and no problem. It was a definite head scratcher in Montrose today at the Gunnison Gorge Anglers fund raiser. A friend of mine was so mystified by it that he has orderd one and I have made arrangements with another fellow in the area to sell the rods through his outdoor/flyshop on the road to grand mesa just on the edge of Cedaredge. Here is the A category prototype with its first large pond fish 
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
ARTHURK |
#30 | |||
|
Posts: 213 03/15/2009 04:51 |
Hi All,
I'm a fan of many modern rodmakers who think out of the box. I love chatting with makers about their little 'experiments' and I'm constantly amazed by their points of view. IMHO, cane rod 'evolution' is in part taper, aesthetics, construction methods as rightly mentioned by Blue Quill but I deeply believe that like everything that requires the 'emergence' of new ideas, we need a large and active Canerod Community contributing all sorts of ideas, 'good' or 'bad'. Such a vibrant canerod community has its own way of finding the truth behind the ideas. 'Gimmicks' casted, fished and built by a bunch of 'educated' folk will not survive scrutiny and will be discarded... until the next 'twist' brings it back as a idea of relevance. Educated folk respect history, but are not quick to kill new ideas as they understand that 'wisdom' means 'been there done that My Way, and only at a certain point in time' and times are always changing. I do not believe that genuises ( replace with 'the best classic rodmakers') are individuals who appear and are never found again. I believe the community gives rise to the genius and I'm truly excited to find out what this great canerod community will create in future. My gratitude and admiration to those who investigate the past and to those who trod the unbeaten path. Arthur |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Peales |
What is Innovation? | #31 | ||
|
Posts: 22 03/15/2009 18:32 |
Pentalux,
I'm happy to respond to your inquiry. With regards to zenith; within handmade knife making circles there is a lot of agreement that Bob Loveless, Ted Dowell, and a handful of others perfected the design of the hunting knife. They had synthesized the functionality, ergonomics and materials into a superlative design. Design innovation hit the wall, everyone knew it, Loveless became a household name. To put a positive spin on it, the utility/hunter knives had arrived at their zenith in the drop-point hunter. Loveless was sort of like our Mr. Jim Payne. If you look at the following twenty year trend(s) in the handmade knife making culture you would see a degeneration of design and a proliferation of 'fancy' knives. 'New' was everywhere, but more and more the design and function of the knives seemed to become incidental as makers 'innovated' with an aggressive materials investigation and baroque* blade and handle designs. *Design academia generally refers to Baroque as being a degenerative stage in which the participants are at a loss as to how to advance the 'classic' stage. They resort to self-indulgence and a critical narrative of the 'classic period' to justify their product. Contemporary toothbrush designers are participating in the Baroque stage, and are defiantly not in touch with reality. Is the compound-bow an improvement of the recurve? In the same way that the recurve might be considered an improvement of the long-bow? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for innovation. But I think we all have to use good judgement and decide at what point we should except an entire paradigm shift. If we were to examine the quality of innovations pertaining to bamboo rods over the last fifty years I think we would see smaller gains with the progression of time. Thats not to discredit these gains, or those who contribute to them. But perhaps the rewards to the 'innovator' are less frequent and less significant. As I see it, there are a few minor problems that exist for bamboo rods as product. Two of them might be the perceived weakness of nodes and the fact that eventually ferrules wear out. Knife blades still need to be sharped, and so too ferrules need to be replaced. Can anyone out there make a 'wet' metal that will never wear out? Can anyone grow bamboo without nodes? We will still have a progressive relationship to technology and innovators still solve design problems. Just look at what the aerospace technologies did for fly rods. Look at what Mr. Popeil did for pockets!
Last Edited By: Peales 03/15/2009 23:21.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
|
|
||||
