Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:41 pm
Some people like the known advantages a split grip rod can offer the angler.
We have heard a reduction in a rod’s overall weight – true, but not by much, but they sure make a rod look great.
We have heard that it increases sensitivity – IMHO, yes and no. It depends really on the design of the split grip. Since not all split grips are equal in design, this “increase” in sensitivity must depend on the design of the part of the split grip under the hand/palm holding the rod.
If the shaped cork is short enough such that the palm is in contact with the blank, then I would say that the increase in sensitivity is there so most likely yes.
If the shaped cork is long enough such that it extends past the hand/palm holding the rod and as a result, the handle is in full contact with the cork and not the blank, then I say that there will likely not be an increase in sensitivity.
I came across an article about St. Croix Legend Tournament rods, which I think are awesome looking by the way, in the Sportsman’s Warehouse periodical in which either the author of the article or St. Croix claim the following:
“The hottest rods on the competitive bass fishing circuit now come with “split-grip”/supergrade cork handles. This exciting new handle design increases casting and hook-setting performance by creating an improved fulcrum point – while reducing the overall weight of the rod.”
Sportsman’s Warehouse Periodical - Sportsman’s News April 2008 Page 18.
Increasing casting distance and hook setting performance? Hmmmm… It is not so much that I doubt the claim as much as I, being a visual learner, am having trouble seeing how the removal of a small amount of cork can move the fulcrum point substantially more than a non split grip rod to have the rod display such an improvement in those two traits.
The article is not clear as to whether it is St. Croix or the author making this claim and for this debate I guess it doesn’t really matter.
Are there any rod builders out there that can substantiate or debunk the claim of improvement of the rod as the result of attaining an “improved fulcrum point?” Or is this sheer marketing hype? I can see how improving the fulcrum point can do this, but I am questioning how the removing of that little of cork can improve that point significantly.
What say anyone else?
-ib
We have heard a reduction in a rod’s overall weight – true, but not by much, but they sure make a rod look great.
We have heard that it increases sensitivity – IMHO, yes and no. It depends really on the design of the split grip. Since not all split grips are equal in design, this “increase” in sensitivity must depend on the design of the part of the split grip under the hand/palm holding the rod.
If the shaped cork is short enough such that the palm is in contact with the blank, then I would say that the increase in sensitivity is there so most likely yes.
If the shaped cork is long enough such that it extends past the hand/palm holding the rod and as a result, the handle is in full contact with the cork and not the blank, then I say that there will likely not be an increase in sensitivity.
I came across an article about St. Croix Legend Tournament rods, which I think are awesome looking by the way, in the Sportsman’s Warehouse periodical in which either the author of the article or St. Croix claim the following:
“The hottest rods on the competitive bass fishing circuit now come with “split-grip”/supergrade cork handles. This exciting new handle design increases casting and hook-setting performance by creating an improved fulcrum point – while reducing the overall weight of the rod.”
Sportsman’s Warehouse Periodical - Sportsman’s News April 2008 Page 18.
Increasing casting distance and hook setting performance? Hmmmm… It is not so much that I doubt the claim as much as I, being a visual learner, am having trouble seeing how the removal of a small amount of cork can move the fulcrum point substantially more than a non split grip rod to have the rod display such an improvement in those two traits.
The article is not clear as to whether it is St. Croix or the author making this claim and for this debate I guess it doesn’t really matter.
Are there any rod builders out there that can substantiate or debunk the claim of improvement of the rod as the result of attaining an “improved fulcrum point?” Or is this sheer marketing hype? I can see how improving the fulcrum point can do this, but I am questioning how the removing of that little of cork can improve that point significantly.
What say anyone else?
-ib
Now that, my friends, is marketing genius.