I have a guy that I went on my trip with and he was interested in a 7' 9" 4 wt 2 piece. Could I take Don Anderson’s 5 wt and deduct .005" from each station (totaling .010" diameter reduction) and give that a go, or would that be a bad idea. Or, better yet, has anyone built a rod like this that they like? If so, could you share the taper? (Eamon Lee)

I took Don Anderson’s Dimensions for his 7'9" 5 wt and asked Hexrod to change it to a 4 wt keeping the same stresses. It is saved in the Hexrod library as rod ID EL794. Have a look a let me know what you all think. (Eamon Lee)

I actually wound up building two of these and they are descent rods. Not great, but pleasant. No big character, but an easily serviceable "long life rod". (Eamon Lee)

When you change the line weight on a specific stress curve, using Hexrod, always run the dimensions back through to get a more accurate stress curve. Then, if you want, you can adjust the dimensions to more closely match the original stress curve. (David Dziadosz)

I always do as David suggests, and tweaking the numbers until I get them as close as possible to the originals. There is more latitude with which to work on larger weight rods. Smaller rods will come out dead-on, and there's no room for tweaking. (Martin-Darrell)

When I've adjusted a taper, I've worked with percentages as opposed to specific amounts. The affect of a .010" reduction at the tip would be more significant than a .010" reduction at the butt, and with percentages you reduce the rods entire profile on a more equal basis. So if you reduce the dimensions by 10% you might get closer to what you want to do, than by reducing an even .010" throughout. This is just theory, with no practical proof on my part. I've never adjusted one of Don Anderson’s tapers, so I have no idea how this sort of adjustment affects that specific rod. (Chris McDowell)

I messed up one section of roughed splines, so I have to shorten the next rod. Looking through Wayne’s book of 6’ and 6’3” 4 wt tapers, how can I tell which is going to be faster actioned? (Peter Van Schaack)

Look at the Hexrod stress curves to get an idea of each taper's feel. Hexrod models a rod as a cantilever beam and calculates the bending stress along the rod's length. While many have correctly argued that this calculation is not accurate, the shape of the Hexrod stress curve will be an indicator of a taper's "speed." All tapers will show a low bending stress near the tip and then the stress will rise to a peak as you go down the rod toward the handle. Past that stress peak at usually 10 to twenty inches below the tip, the shape of the stress curve is the indicator. A fast rod will show lower stress values toward the butt end. A parabolic taper show lower stress toward the middle of the rod and then a bending stress increase toward the handle. A slow action will show a relatively constant stress along its length. So, the shape of the stress curve is the indicator

Making sense of the stress value is trickier. Here, you must remember a comment made by Wayne at Grayrock. Each stress curve in his book is shown using a double taper line and at the casting length determined subjectively to be the practical maximum. Thus a four weight shown with a line length of 50 feet will be a more powerful rod than one shown with a line length of 40 feet. Wayne's book shows fewer stress curves than it does tapers and does not make it clear which curve is for which taper. You can bet that the publisher took some liberties with Wayne's manuscript. You can look at the Rodmakers taper file to get individual curves with line length info for many of Wayne's tapers. If the design that you are considering is not there, then you will have to run the calculation yourself. (John Sabina)

Some how I missed the original question - perhaps it got lost in the Viagra spam - John gave an excellent overview of of stress curves and tip impact factors - the discussion can become very deep. To preface - a rod taper can be very personal - it can be as specific to be reflective of a particular stream - a hatch - and the person casting the rod - there are no set standards - or ideal that can be easily shared. Over the years the Garrison mathematica has been used as somewhat the standard (I was not the first or the only one to computerize it) for those feeling that stress curves are a valid indicator of a rods 'Character' - I have come to use that word more than any to try to explain this methodology. A stress curve represents a character - when a tip impact factor is added to the mix - you generate a taper - the other factor is the number of sections and the ferrule locations and weight. In theory it sounds workable - some say it does - others feel it is similar to waving a chicken around in the air - I will pass on that debate.

The idea at one time was to investigate all rods and then use the curves as a standards index - and for me it still is a mission - although it is still in the future at some 20 years of this - and I guess as time goes by others may have picked up that torch more so than I - Frank has done an excellent job with his online site - and -truth be known - perhaps years ago I settled into this rut of influence - I know what I enjoy casting - and I only fish on 2 rivers during a year - and I found or created a taper that I prefer. So several years ago - I shared some tapers - which was a little forward for the time - it used to be like trading marbles on the playground at recess - "I'll trade you 2 Leonard tapers for a Young" - very very different than today's world.

Usually the - first rod taper question surfaces that starts threads as such - with the linkage today - the new comer is trying to take advantage of as much information as they can - but again that can be a bit clouded - first there so many tapers out there - and secondly the other influences come into play - the fishing situation and more importantly the person. This is where the suggestion to get to a gathering and cast would be the sage advice. But when doing so - mask the name and focus at the rod and how it handles for you - and in the same bounds as you would fish it on your favorite water. Having been to many flyfishing shows over the years I have this term - The Penile Effect - it usually effects a male within 15 foot of the casting pond - and it focuses at one thing . . . . . . distance. And with that focus one can miss other very critical facets of a tapers performance.

Then - the arm wrestle with publishers - they think 16 page signatures - so if you contemplate writing a book - make sure that it fits into those guideline - or "they' will find a way to make it fit. (Wayne Cattanach)

A guy wants to have a bamboo rod, about 7' # 4 and with fast or medium fast action (still some g------e influence I guess). Which taper is recommended by Grand Jury? Dickerson? Cattanach's Ballan Special? (Pekka Hyvonen)

You might use the Heddon Folsom taper. I made one this spring, and Doug Easton can attest to its prowess. A great snappy rod. (Bob Maulucci)

I think you would have to look hard to find two better tapers than the Sir D and/or the Payne 98. (Dewey Hildebrand)

I insist on adding the Driggs to that. (Geert Poorteman)

I made a Dickerson 7012 and liked it a lot. Good taper, you won't regret having chosen it. Probably not as fast as some of his other tapers. (Jeff Schaeffer)

Come to think of it, after I made a Heddon Folsum I gave the Dickerson to my nephew. Total brain fart there- when I cast the Folsum at Grayrock, I basically wanted to leave then and there and get home as fast as possible to start one of my own.

I think this is a new low- I just realized I was posting to my own message. I think this is first for the list. See what rodmaking has done to me. (Jeff Schaeffer)

I just cast Bob Maulucci 's version of that Folsum taper. Jeff's right on. It makes a really nice rod. Smooth with good punch. Highly recommended! (Doug Easton)

I've never met anyone who doesn't like the Payne model 98. (Ted Knott)

It was Ron Barch's suggestion as a first cane rod for my son, who's fished that synthetic stuff for years. He loves it. (Neil Savage)

I know most of the content on this lists deals with the anyone have a suggestion for a fast 7'6" 4 weight? (Lee Orr)

Payne 100, Sir 'D' stretched out. (Mike Shay)

PHY perfectionist. (Chris Obuchowski)

Yes, a PHY, indeed! But ONLY if you already know that you like parabolic rods. And ONLY if you can find a good, representative taper for this model. Then, you can't go wrong.  (Bill Harms)

The Perfectionist is not a semi-parabolic rod, as are many PHY tapers, but a fairly linear (hence a progressive action) fast taper, producing a quick, powerful 4 wt (at least the taper that I got posted in the archives is, from the copies myself, and a recent student, have built). If you like to overline your rods, some might think it a 5 wt, though I prefer a DT 4. (Chris Obuchowski)

I have a friend that would like a 8' blank. Are there any stiff 4 weight tapers out there? (Lee Orr)

I am also interested in this one. I want to make myself a fast stillwater 4 wt that will cast a fullish line (if it could handle a full line that would obviously be ideal!) I have started roughing a 4 wt Hexrod conversion of the Dickerson 8013, but would be interested if anyone has an alternative 8’ to 9’ 4 wt they could recommend.  (Stephen Dugmore)

What about the PHY 'Perfectionist'? or the 'Sir D' (that everybody raves about)? (Patrick Mullen)

I would convert the Leonard Tournament 8' 3 wt. It is on Rodmakers in Frank's Hexrod interface.

Actually, I'm going to do this - someday. (Jerry Madigan)

A.J. Thramer has one that I use all the time.

Look under the taper archives it is the 84 PX

I increased the tip a little and use it for nymph fishing and high sticking on dry flies. (David Ray)

Not trying to be funny or mean, but there are many very good graphite rods available today in longer, light line configurations. There are limits to any material, and fast, light tapers in longer lengths approach those limits in bamboo. One of these days all of us bamboo nuts are going to be forced to face how fantastic today's graphite rods really are.

Having said that, I'd strongly recommend taking the 8' 3 weight Leonard Tournament in the Taper Archives at Jerry's Rodmakers page, and converting it to a 4 weight with Hexrod. Though the action of that rod is progressive, it has an extremely fast tip. (Harry Boyd)

Just a brief comment on bamboo rods and their limitations. I do recall a comment , I think it was in Jack Howells or Wayne C.'s book but if elsewhere please accept my lack of acknowledgment as a sign of old age, that cane has a "sweet spot" range reflecting a relationship between length and line weight. Once rodmakers get well outside that range then it is less likely that the rod will perform well. That is not a reason not to to go outside the range, just a warning that it is harder to get a good design.

My recollection of the range is as follows :

#4 - 7' to 7'6"
#5 - 7'6" to 8'
#6 - 8' to 8'6"

I have found this guide generally to be pretty accurate and many of the "famous " tapers fit into it. It means that I use a graphite rod when fishing a #8 rod on the Tongario (although I do intend to make one of those 14-14 spey casting rods to use there just to shock the locals!). (Ian Kearney)

There are several Fred Divine tapers in the 8'-6" to 9'-0" range for a 4 weight. Many have praised the Divine tapers. Check out RodDNA.  (Tom Vagell)

It occurred to me that Lee, and perhaps others who are relatively new to thinking about tapers may not really understand what this discussion is really about. So with apologies to those for whom this is old hat, and perhaps to Lee if I have misjudged this, here is the issue as I see it. Lee, what set off the discussion is that you asked for a STIFF 8 foot 4 weight. There are plenty of longer slow tapers around that are good rods, but when you start going for a faster rod, you run smack into the problem that cane rod designers have always faced. Bamboo is a relatively heavy rod making material. In order to produce a long rod with a fast action, you need to have a thick, heavy butt section just to have the rod support it's own weight, before you even factor in the weight of the line being cast. To give you an example, I cast an 8 1/2' fast action 4 weight this summer that cast the line very well, but it felt like a 6 weight rod to my hand. It was sort of like driving a tack with a sledgehammer. It works, but it just does not feel like the right tool for the job.

There are two ways around the problem, one is to go with a narrower butt and learn to love the slower action, the other is to hollow build. I personally feel an 8 foot moderately fast action 4 weight is a doable thing, provided you hollow build the butt to keep the weight within reason.

If I were going to try this, I think I would start with the 8 foot F.E. Thomas taper at Frank Stetzer's site. I would leave the first two feet of the tip alone, then increase the rate of taper such that the butt end was about .015-.020 thicker. I would build it two piece with a light weight ferrule. I would use the Powell or Winston method to semi hollow build the butt section. (Tom Smithwick)

Can you explain the differences between the Powell and Winston hollow building methods? I searched the archives and did not find what I was looking for, nor do I have Bob Milward’s book. All I found was taking off the pith to an approximate thickness of .07 and "fluting". (Chris Hei)

Bob Maulucci has a great article in Power Fibers. It was in issue 17. (Ralph Moon)

In addition to Bob's very fine article, also check out Bill Harms' web site and read the design pages. (Tom Smithwick)

All, my son in law has the idea he'd like a "fast" 8' #4 cane rod. I'm looking at the A. J. Thramer 8' PX taper, the stress curve looks to me a lot like the Dickerson 7613. Any comments are welcome. (Neil Savage)

Your son in law is asking for something that is really pushing the envelope. An 8' 4wt. fast cane rod is an oxymoron. What is listed as fast by cane rod standards is actually a lot slower compared to graphite. I can envision a fast taper at this length and line weight as one with a hollow built butt and tip, with a compound taper and a ferrule that drops at least 1/32 from butt to tip section. This would lead to a mightily tricked-out rod design. The quickest rods with your SIL's desires might be a Maxwell Leonard 40-4 Hunt, or a recent vintage Thomas and Thomas Limestoner.  I am not familiar with A. J. Thramer’s taper, but he is one of the finest people in our craft and I would therefore think his taper is very good, but it might not meet your SIL's expectations. Just my $.02 worth opinion. (Tom McDonnell)

P.S. I have not seen the tapers posted for either the Hunt 40-4 or the T & T Limestoner

On this subject, any ideas for a taper that is a short 8 weight. We have a river in Oregon that is very small with big rainbows. You need a heavy line, but an 8 foot or (preferably) shorter rod would be great. Any suggestions? (Rob Clarke)

Could you make do with a 7wt. If so I'd suggest the Dickerson 8014 Guide. I have a 6wt taper that Jeff Fultz posted on the Classic Flyrod Forum that was taken from an original that he worked on recently. I also have the taper off Sante Guiliani (fishin' Banjo) original Dickerson that is beefier and he said it really sings with a 7wt. Orvis had an 8' 8wt model but I don't have the taper for that one. (Will Price)

I'll second the Dickerson 8014 Guide. Great taper. (Steve Shelton)

I've got an Orvis 8', 2/2, 8 wt. in the rafters in the shop somewhere (never been used, imagine that). I'll mike and post it, should anyone want it. At the moment, we're in the midst of a full-gale snow and ice storm. I anticipate a prolonged power loss at any time. (Wally Murray)

The taper is in the Hexrod taper archive. It's under A. J. Thramer, the AJ 84 PX if you care to look at it.  (Neil Savage)

Neil and anyone else wanting a taper they can't find;

I've found the online Hexrod to be very good at changing lengths and line weights on various tapers, I suggest you take a taper that you know and use Hexrod to change it to what you are looking for. For a fast (for bamboo) 8' 4 wt, I make the 8013 taper from the taper archives as a 4 wt, it works out very well. (John Channer)

To compliment what John said about Hexrod I would also spend some time learning RodDNA. It has the proverbial steep learning curve and can be a bit quirky in terms of the interface, but it is a very powerful tool. For what you want to do (Neil), you can plug in Dickerson's numbers, then alter the length of the rod (or line weight, or pieces etc.) and the program will spit out the specs for your altered version. In theory it should cast similarly to the original.

As Tom pointed out, however, there are material limitations and all that little stuff can add up to difference in rod character. I would think that the farther you get from the original design, the more chance there is for the theory to break down. And I should point out that I am just learning this tool. I just screwed up a mid section on a three piece conversion from a two piece that was going to be my acid test for how well the program converts two piece to three.

There it is..my confession hidden in another post!

Maybe someone with more experience building from RodDNA conversions could chime in? I like the topic! (Carl DiNardo)

I guess I should have been a little more clear in the first place. I'd really like to stick with a proven taper, rather than try to design a new one (or modify one to the new specifications) that's why I was looking at the Thramer taper. Son in law is quite familiar with cane as well as gr****te, so he won't expect "fast" to be gr****te fast. (Neil Savage)