Hi All,
I don’t write this because I think I already have something but I am tinkering a lot and I wonder where the line is between a modified legacy taper and something you can call your own. I’m currently working on a rod that is a modified Payne 100. It will be five sided 3 piece with carbon ferrules and hallowed.
I’ve used the rod lab to adjust the taper to match the action of the Payne 100 with all those modifications. But I’m hoping to get the same feel. We will see how it turns out.
I didn’t want to be the guy who ties a clouser minnow with different colors and pretends he came up with a new pattern. I realize there is a certain amount of “nothing new under the sun” with rod tapers already.
Cheers,
Stephen
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
Moderator: pvansch1
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#2If I start with someone else's numbers and modify I now don't bother calling it anything other than what it is: eg 7'6" 3pce 3wt. If I start with my own idea and go from there then I give it a name, mainly so I can keep a record of style and profile. ( if it is good, great; if not - matchsticks and chopsticks)
I think if you have kept the number progression and style (action type) don't believe it is yours.
Cheers,
Mark
I think if you have kept the number progression and style (action type) don't believe it is yours.
Cheers,
Mark
He who shall not be able to make a trout fly, after studying these diagrams and directions, must be deficient either in brains or in manual dexterity. : Edward Fitzgibbon 1853
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#3Modified tapers, that has always interested me. This is my take on it. If I make a Dickerson 8013 taper and you make the same taper. You use your glue and I use my glue (the glue used will differ in the stiffness). You space your nodes your way, me mine. You use standard metal forms and I use the Morgan Hand Mill (the flex in the taper bar will be different). Well then, it's still an 8013 but the rods action is going to be different. If you use the Dickerson 8013 taper numbers and add a swell to the butt or hollow the butt, then you have something really different, even though the rest of the rod is Dickerson 8013. What do you call it? I call it a modified taper. I call it a D8013S (S for swell butt), or D8013HS for hollow butt with a swell in the butt. I like to start with recognised and proven tapers, I then manipulate them to fit my needs. I have some proprietary tapers in my quiver, some were derived from the proven standards. It’s tough to reinvent the wheel or to surpass the past masters. Don't be afraid to call published tapers your own if you have made siginficent changes to the rods geometry.
Last edited by kermit on 06/29/22 13:19, edited 1 time in total.
Zia Rods Brochure
www.ziarods.com
www.ziarods.com
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#4There is really not too much you can do with a single hand taper that hasn't already been done, so if it no longer resembles the action of the original, I'd say it's a different taper. Like all things in rod making, it's subjective.
When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#5I’ve been keeping track of tapers with similar tags e.g. Payne100PHC (Payne 100 Penta Hollow Carbon Ferrule).kermit wrote:Modified tapers, that has always interested me. This is my take on it. If I make a Dickerson 8013 taper and you make the same taper. You use your glue and I use my glue (the glue used will differ in the stiffness). You space your nodes your way, me mine. You use standard metal forms and I use the Morgan Hand Mill (the flex in the taper bar will be different). Well then, it's still an 8013 but the rods action is going to be different. If you use the Dickerson 8013 taper numbers and add a swell to the butt or hollow the butt, then you have something really different, even though the rest of the rod is Dickerson 8013. What do you call it? I call it a modified taper. I call it a D8013S (S for swell butt), or D8013HS for hollow butt with a swell in the butt. I like to start with recognised and proven tapers, I then manipulate them to fit my needs. I have some proprietary tapers in my quiver, some were derived from the proven standards. It’s tough to reinvent the wheel or to surpass the past masters. Don't be afraid to call published tapers your own if you have made siginficent changes to the rods geometry.
When I am ready to start selling rods is that a better way to help people know what they are getting/attributing the proper credit? Or does it not really matter as long as the buyer likes how rod fishes? (This obviously only counts for legacy tapers, I would be leaving living maker tapers alone)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#6You could simply say "influenced by", "based on" or "derived from" the following taper with modifications as follows.
Zia Rods Brochure
www.ziarods.com
www.ziarods.com
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#7I think as Kermit puts it is the most appropriate; "influenced" etc. as a disclaimer to the taper in question. It also lets others know what to expect from the action of the rod if that helps.
Cheers,
Mark
Cheers,
Mark
He who shall not be able to make a trout fly, after studying these diagrams and directions, must be deficient either in brains or in manual dexterity. : Edward Fitzgibbon 1853
- Tom Smithwick
- Master Guide
- Posts: 755
- Joined: 10/27/03 19:00
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#8An example, I hope, of how these things might be handled. Many years ago I refinished an F E Thomas 8 foot 3 piece fly rod for someone. It had a very slow action, and I thought it would be nice for small wet fly fishing. Here's the taper chart:
It was a few years before I built one for myself, and I left the taper alone, but built it as a two piece rod. That speeded it up a bit, but I still called it a Thomas taper. Over several later iterations, I gradually eliminated most of the zig zags in the rod shaft, figuring they were the result of manufacturing tolerances anyway. I still called it a Thomas taper. The changes did not do much to the overall feel of the rod. The big change came when I modified the tip to a smooth convex shape:
At that point, the feel of the rod did significantly change, and I seriously doubt that anyone casting the original and the new version would see a relationship. I then felt it was OK to call it my own taper, but if anyone asked me about it, I do say it evolved out of a Thomas rod. The last little change was the slight rise in taper at the 50" mark. That was added when I made a rod for a friend who has a habit of putting an extra little thumb thrust at the end of his casting stroke. I figured it would help keep the ferrule from bouncing around when he applied the extra force. I then decided I liked it too, and left it in. Most of what I do now is designed from scratch, but this one is staying in the lineup. Being a hobby builder, all this happens at a glacial pace, of course, but still fun.
It was a few years before I built one for myself, and I left the taper alone, but built it as a two piece rod. That speeded it up a bit, but I still called it a Thomas taper. Over several later iterations, I gradually eliminated most of the zig zags in the rod shaft, figuring they were the result of manufacturing tolerances anyway. I still called it a Thomas taper. The changes did not do much to the overall feel of the rod. The big change came when I modified the tip to a smooth convex shape:
At that point, the feel of the rod did significantly change, and I seriously doubt that anyone casting the original and the new version would see a relationship. I then felt it was OK to call it my own taper, but if anyone asked me about it, I do say it evolved out of a Thomas rod. The last little change was the slight rise in taper at the 50" mark. That was added when I made a rod for a friend who has a habit of putting an extra little thumb thrust at the end of his casting stroke. I figured it would help keep the ferrule from bouncing around when he applied the extra force. I then decided I liked it too, and left it in. Most of what I do now is designed from scratch, but this one is staying in the lineup. Being a hobby builder, all this happens at a glacial pace, of course, but still fun.
-
- Bamboo Fanatic
- Posts: 3244
- Joined: 12/23/10 19:00
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: When have you modified a taper enough to call it your own
#9Great explanation and accompanying chart, Tom! I'll bet a lot of casters would benefit from your thoughtful last (?) modification of the taper.