Probably the #1 thing that confuses people new to tenkara is the way rod actions are described. And I can see why. 5:5? 6:4? 7:3? What the heck do these numbers mean? While there are many good charts out there that (I think) describe these actions well, I still see a lot of people who are a little confused. They think the numbers are based on the number of segments in the rod or that they describe how stiff or soft a rod is. So in an effort to clear up any confusion, I asked my good friend Anthony Naples to put together a chart for me, and I’d like to offer another way to think of tenkara rod action.
The Numbers
First, let’s clearly spell out what the ratings in the Japanese system are. There are basically four:
5:5
6:4
7:3
8:2
It’s Where, not What
Now, let’s clear up a couple of misconceptions. These numbers have nothing to do with the number of segments in the rod. For example, you could had two rods that both have a 6:4 action, but one rod has 10 segments, while the other has 8. They also don’t tell you how stiff or soft a rod feels. I have 6:4 rods that feel extremely soft and 6:4 rods that feel really stiff. The bottom line: these numbers only tell you where the rod flexes most along the blank.
Think in terms of “%”
Look at the diagram above. In fig. 1, we’ve numbered the entire length of the rod from 0-10. 0 at the tip and 10 at the butt. So that puts 5 right in the middle of the rod (the length of the rod doesn’t matter–we could do this with any rod). Now, it might help to think of these numbers as “percentages”. So a 5 would be 50%, right? And 50% would be right in the middle of the rod. The green color represents where the rod flexes most easily. So, if a rod is a 5:5 (i.e. 50%/50%), that means the rod flexes most easily down to the middle (fig. 2).
In fig. 3, the rod is 6:4, so that means the 40% closest to the tip will flex the most (i.e. 60%/40%). And in fig. 4, the 30% of the rod closest to the tip will flex the most easily, and so on. Basically, you’re thinking of the second number as a percentage of where the rod will flex most in relation to the tip.
A Quirky System
Admittedly, the Japanese rating system is a a little strange and pretty inaccurate since it doesn’t really give you a complete picture of how the rod feels. Because of this, some manufacturers like Tenkara USA have decided to start phasing it out, favoring a more qualitative rather than quantitate method of description (it will be interesting to see if other follow suit). I’ve advocated for a more precise system, but have yet to see one. Probably the best one to date is the so-called “Common Cents” system advocated by Chris Stewart of Tenkara Bum and Tom Davis of Teton Tenkara (click the links to see how Common Cents works).
I don’t know what the “perfect” rating system would be. But, to paraphrase what Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography, “I can’t define it, but I’ll now it when I see it”. Until then, I’ll continue to tell people the only way to really know how a rod will feel and perform is to fish it. Unfortunately, since the majority of tenkara rods reside in the realm of online retailers rather than brick-and-mortar shops, it’s difficult to make a physical side-by-side comparison before buying. But having witnessed the exponential growth of tenkara over the last few years, I predict that that will soon change.
Another term that gets thrown around a lot is “backbone”. WTF is that? People think that a higher rating rod like 7:3 or 8:2 has more backbone and therefore is a stronger rod and is designed for large fish.
Flex ratio has absolutely zero to do with rod power. It is all about the angler’s preference in rod dynamics.
I look at rods like this:
5:5 is a full flex rod
6:4 is a mid flex rod
7:3 is a tip flex rod
8:2 is a fast action tip flex rod.
Each manufacturer in Japan uses their own method to determine rod flex index. There is no industry standard measurement. A 6:4 Nissin Zerosum is different than a 6:4 Oni Type 1, a Shimano mid flex is different than a Daiwa. Shimano has never used the index system.
My personal preference in rods are Oni rods and Nissin. I like the action, feel, and consistent high quality of these two companies rods. I’m not saying they are better than other rod companies, the way these rods feel when casting match my casting style better than others.
I believe that at first, just about any good quality rod works for most beginning/intermediate tenkara anglers. As skill improves and refines, many anglers will develop a liking for one rod manufacturer over another based on how those rods feel and perform for the individual angler.
All good points John, and a great contribution to the discussion–especially what you said about preference. A skilled caster can cast any rod but they know what they like. Lefty Kreh or Steve Rajeff could cast a $20 K-Mart bought rod 100 feet. But I’m sure they’d prefer to actually fish with a high-end Sage or Winston. Any rod could work, but like you say, we all refine our tastes over time as we develop our skills.
Oh, John, one more thing about “backbone”. People tend to think that the stiffer a rod is, the bigger the fish it will be able to handle. In my experience, softer rods actually handle bigger fish better because they offer more of a “cushion” as tippet protection. Do you find this to be the case as well?
I’m not sure if softer rods offer more tippet cushion. Sounds reasonable. Learning to properly load a rod has more to do with successfully landing big or powerful fish. For carp I like a very stiff 6.2m Keiryu rod. I like the stiff rod because at over 20 ft long, I need the stiffness to keep my long lines off the water. Learning to use/load every inch of that 20ft monster rod is where the skill of the angler comes into play.
Most tenkara anglers fight fish by pointing the rod straight up vertical. This just loads the top 2-3 segments. The big powerful tubes in the lower 80% of the rod are not being utilized.
There are several techniques to load more segments of the rod. I’ll wager that 99.5% of fish are landed by 20% of the available power in the rod.
Don’t worry about “backbone” (whatever the hell that is), learn how to use the full power in the rod you have in your hands.
I actually like to use the word backbone, for at least the rods I support. Flex point is not the reason I would say the Yamame or Amago have a strong backbone, but history has show these two models catch pretty darned nice sized trout and other species over time. The Amago at 6:4 is actually the rod I consider has the most backbone of the models Tenkara USA offers yet the Yamame is a stiffer rod at 7:3. The extra leverage, slightly softer Amago has shown over time to be one of our big fish rods consistently landing trout in the 20+” range (ask Jacob Johnson) and other large fish including a Pike, Tarpon, and sure a few Carp have been landed too. Yet they are still all really designed for trout in mind up to 20″. But yes, I like to use the word backbone for various rods and it works for me. One of definitions of backbone is “Strength of character; determination: displayed grit and backbone in facing adversity.” I think that works for any rod that shows grit and power in landing bigger fish a tenkara rod was not necessarily designed for. Just my opinion. TJ
The Rod Flex Index has not been mentioned above, which is an adjunct and support for the Common Cents System of rod action description, that was thought up and produced by Tom Davis, of Teton Tenkara. Here is a link to it: http://tetontenkara.blogspot.com/p/rod-flex-index-chart.html
While Jason is right: The best way to determine the best rod action for any individual angler is through fishing or at least casting with any given rod, that just is not possible or practical for most of us. But the 5:5, 6:4 and so on rating system tells pretty well where most rods bend. The Common Cents rating system gives an accurate reproducible indication of the relative power that different rods have, while the Rod Flex Index is an indication of the relative backbone available between any number of rods, at least those rods that have been tested and rated by Tom Davis. So when you put all this information together, you can get a much better idea of how any given rod will perform for you and under the conditions you fish under, if, and this is a very big IF, you have some idea of what you need and like. And I think it needs to be pointed out that there is no consistent and simple system available for rating rod actions versus power or backbone for Western fly rods either.
As John indicated above, most anglers beginning their journey down the Tenkara road will not know what they really need or will end up liking in a fixed line rod. So the best thing to do is buy a rod and get on with T-style fishing business as best you can, and almost any rod bought will work pretty well and efficiently for most anglers. But as you become more experienced and fish in different kinds of waters, or fish with different makes and styles of fixed line rods, you will probably develop some different needs and preferences over time, and end up buying a number of different rods to meet those different needs. Fortunately, the cost of fixed line rods is very reasonable compared to the cost of top of the line Western fly rods, which are presently running in the 600.00 to 1000.00 dollar price range for the cream of the crop. For that amount of money you could buy a whole quiver of fixed line rods of very good quality.
For my own fishing I have pretty much settled on 4 rod length ranges: 2.4, 3.3, 3.9 and a 3.8 to 4.3 meeter long length Zoom Rod, to cover everything from tight, small brushy trickles, larger more open thin Blue Line streams, bigger and more open steams and meadow creeks, to fishing warm water ponds, high elevation alpine lakes, to float tubing in large man made power lakes. The rods that cover this range of fishing conditions are made up of all 3 types of the major classes of fixed line rods:
Keiryu rods, which are bait fishing rods that are better geared for the catching of big fish, fishing higher breaking strength tippets, fishing under windy conditions, fishing indicators, long lines and deep in the water column, and casting and fishing with big and heavily weighted flies but will still cast Tenkara style lines and flies just fine in most cases, and having the expanded rod blank for their grips.
Tenkara rods, which are better suited to fishing moderate sized mountain streams with fairly open stream side riparian plant life, casting only a light single Kebari style fly pattern to not very big fish, with the rod length being in the middle of the total length range, with the T-rods having an added grip, usually of cork.
And Seiryu rods, which are intended for fishing to the smallest of trout, in the smallest of thin blue line trickles, having no grip other than the rod blank, an interesting video of which can be seen here: http://tetontenkara.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-short-game-video.html
For sure there is a lot of over lap in these 3 classifications and the edges can get very blurry, one shading into the other quite usefully. So rating a rod’s action and relating it to a specific intended purpose is not an exact science with hard and fast rules. But any angler who has the desire and a willingness to do a little experimentation with out investing a huge sum of money can come up with any number of rods that will meet his needs very nicely. And I believe you will pretty quickly be able to determine if you fall into the fast tip casting rod or the more full flexing rod casting preference camps before much time or money has gone under the bridge, so that isn’t an overly big consideration at all for most people. Either style of rod will catch fish well enough. The question is: Do you prefer to cast and fish with faster or slower casting and fish fighting rods?
When I am interested in a Tenkara rod, I want to know the length, weight (balance) and the flex of a rod. Measuring a rod’s length is easy, measuring the flex is pretty easy too. It’s done with the flex profile system as it has evolved in Japan where the Tenkara community has decades of experience over anywhere else in the world. Tenkara, with telescoping rods, not other versions of fixed line fishing… Anyway, the 5:5, 6:4, 7:3 is a quick estimate of where the rod flexes as Jason and John has indicated.
The matrix or what the rod is made of determines the power and speed the rod contains.
Rods are typically made of carbon fiber or with a little fiberglass mixed in, this is the matrix of the rod. Mixing in a little fiberglass into the rod will change the return rate compared to a all carbon fiber rod. Higher modulus carbon fiber or smaller more condensed fibers will increase the speed or return rate of the rod.
The taper of the rod effects the flex profile too. A long thin triangle will flex deeply into the base and a short fat triangle, the tip only flexes. Higher content of carbon fiber, the long thin triangle returns to a resting state faster than the same taper with all fiberglass. Fiberglass is used for durability, carbon fiber is used for lightness and speed. This description has been greatly simplified for illustrations sake.
A rod with more sections has more joints, joints are areas where the material is doubled, more joints, stiffer rod, less joints, more flexible.
It’s really a complex make up that determines the rod “feel” and how it will cast.
The Japanese came up with the flex profile for people like me that want a reference and to know the initial characteristic of the rod, beyond the flex system, the Japanese often use the term, “soft or hard” tone. The tone of the rod is how much force the rod takes to bend.
Nissin rods, which John and I have experience with have a softer rating across the board for all their flex profile ratings. Anglers who use these rods know this if they have used many other rods as well.
John touched on the rating system, I agree with his comments. Jason generated the content so I appreciate that with my time here.
The penny rating system is another way to look at the static load or flex profile of a rod. It does not take into account, the different matrix or material make up that effects the speed of return. Yes, it measures resistance but it does not differentiate the difference in materials that effect the rate of return or speed of the rod. I appreciate the effort but it is not simple as it is made out to be.
A couple of Tenkara enthusiasts have adopted it to Tenkara rods in an attempt to further describe the rod’s personality. The CSS has gained more traction in the Tenkara community which is very small compared to the community of which it came from. By and large, it’s just not used in fly fishing. The system of tip, mid and full flex as well as describing the rod’s “action” with slow, medium and fast is used in fly fishing. Again, John described it well.
Rod companies in Japan have been making Tenkara rods for decades. If there was a way to describe a rod’s profile more accurately and succinctly, I’m quite confident that it would have already been done. The system, while imperfect is already in place and it is simple and easy to understand.
Length, sections, flex profile, weight and matrix all come together to make up the rod’s “feel” Describing “feel” in a simple, objective fashion will be difficult but it is being done now, the subjective is done by common knowledge.
I’ve asked Dr. Tom to pen an piece for us that further describes the common cents system and his rod comparison chart. Even though I am not a fan of common cents method, I do find the results (the multi rod chart) interesting and I have used it for my own comparison and I do find it useful.
Thank you for the read and John, thanks for the further comments.
John, I used to sometimes fish the Colorado River at Lees Ferry with a 0-weight rod. My friends would fish the same water just up and downstream for the same size fish. I could consistently land fish much much faster on my 0-weight rod than the same guys with 5 and 6-weights because, I could feel the breaking point of my 6x much better than the guys with the heavier rods. This was for rainbows up to 20″ give or take.
I believe that this is what Jason is referring to, the cushion or more pressure that a softer rod can apply to tippet and feeling it better before parting ways.
I have fewer break offs using a fuller flexing rod than I do using a rod with a tip flex and faster action BECAUSE I can feel the pressure much better than I can with a stiffer rod. I can actually pressure the fish in harder with a softer flex rod. Not a noodle rod, a 5:5 or a 6:4 medium tone rod.
Here is the thing that you probably do, you adjust the rod flex to your expected fish size. I believe that is where some of us part ways. For me, a rod has a sweet spot for the pressure it can provide to protect a tippet.
Fuller flexing rods will protect and apply more pressure than a stiffer, faster rod. The “window” of pressure tactility is larger than a stiffer and faster rod for the given same size tippet. Faster stronger rods, heavier tippet.
Like trying to measure a rods feel, there is a lot going on and for me, I like simple and simple is a reflection not an absolute.
Thanks for reading.
My two cents – show me a picture of the rod under a load and a load rating (common cents or similar). Based on that I can get a pretty good idea of what the rod is going to feel like. One without the other is not very useful to me.
Common cents rating without a picture of the rod under load doesn’t tell me nearly enough about the rod.
Two roads can have the exact same common cents rating but be completely different rods based on flex.
Of course the x:y system is supposed to give us that flex info – but it seems to vary way too much from company to company to be real useful.
A simple photograph would clear it up.
And conversely the flex profile without some standard deflection rating is not very useful. Two rods can have the same flex profile – but take quite different loads to create that same profile with the same amount of deflection.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
A little off topic – The real trick is to quantify the balance and more importantly the dynamic balance. Static measurements cannot completely capture that. If you cast enough rods you’ll notice that certain rods seem to want to keep moving when you start the backcast – I’m not sure how you quantify that.
Another problem is quantifying the return to static after casting – and accuracy issues related to oscillation…. you might be tempted to look to modulus of elasticity – but I don’t think that gets you there – it doesn’t take into account enough of the design
Early on Chris (TenkaraBum) did a lot of this kind of thing in promoting the rods he sells. Now, not so much, which is understandable enough as I am sure doing photos of rod deflection profile tests took a lot of time and effort, and may not have been appreciated all that much by the general rod buying public. But it puts a face on some of what Anthony was talking about above. Here, take a look: http://www.tenkarabum.com/daiwa-neo-tenkara-rods.html
The Common Cents System is based on the amount of pennies it takes to deflect any rod to 1/3 of its total length in feet and inches, but in all the rod comparisons Chris ever did, a constant 10 penny weight was used, so all the rod’s reactions can be compared to one another using the same reproducible weight, which is a static load to be sure. But if you do this test yourself on your rods, you will come away with a much better understanding of how your rod or rods bend, where they bend, and how much relative power they have relative to each other. All it takes is 10 pennies, and a sandwich bag, with some tippet tied to the bag so it can be tied to the lilian on your rod or rods. Try it and see what you think and can learn from doing this simple test. I believe you will find that it is worth making the effort to do this test.
here’s an example of what I was talking about – notice the top is called a 5:5 and the bottom a 6:4 – they are under the same load.
Tom Davis’ latest article will sum all of this up very nicely I believe: http://www.tenkara-fisher.com/content.php?240-A-Treatise-on-Static-Testing-and-the-Classification-of-Tenkara-Keiryu-and-Seiryu-Rods