MickD

The problem is that the subjective descripters power and action are often inconsistent. What is called "fast" may not be "fast." One line of blanks, highly regarded, has about 6 light and ultra light blanks that they call "X-fast," but the action angles (that's CCS number for action, usually people would consider a rod with an AA of 55 a "slow" action, an AA of 80 a "X-fast.") vary from 55 to 80. Clearly, not all X-fast. Same variation with power. However, CCS is about solid numbers. All rods with the same numbers will have close to the same power and action but not necessarily the same dynamic characteristics like recovery speed.

A 7-6 extra fast rod is a 6-6 moderate action rod on a stick. The point is that long extra fast rods are more forgiving than short extra fast rods.

But how do you define where the tip begins? It is not a definite thing, like a mark on the blank. It is where you want it to be. Purely subjective. Instead, define the action by CCS.

Extra fast refers to where the rod initially bends. Yes , it is not the stiffness. In fact Xfast rods of the same power as other actions will have the softest, less stiff, tips. I don't even know what a "longer tip" is. Where does the tip start and end?

This isn't golf. When you get a bad score in golf it's your fault. When you get skunked fishing, it's the fish's fault. Jokingly stated, but there is a lot of truth in the statement. Sometimes fish are just "off."

It is my opinion that the Legend is more sensitive than the Vicotory. Enough to justify the price? Up to you to decide, but if the goal is highest sensitivity, with rods of similar power and action, I believe the Legend will be more sensitive.

If it's just surface deterioration another good solution is to wrap all grips with Winn tape.

Switch the system over to LED's. Very trouble free long term. You will not regret it. You will still need a good ground, but once you have that and the system properly wired, you'll have no more light troubles for years.

Got a photo of the rod in question? I would be a lot more confident in commenting if I could see the problem. I'm not sure what you mean by "wearing out."

I understood what? I don't understand this comment.

It's a crap shoot without numbers. If you can do CCS to measure the power and action, and can buy from a source that allows return, then you can measure the new rod, compare, and make a better decision.

Where can one get a Calcutta for $154?

Not many can cast with that precision.

What is being missed here is that all braids are not the same. If one uses 8 carrier premium braids (or more with some Hitena braids) one can go higher in pound test than with 4 carrier braids. I personally won't use anything over about 20 pounds regardless of what braid it is. But handling problems with 40 pound braid on a spinning outfit is hardly surprising. My Hitena Pureline 19 pound test handles about like most 10-15 pound braids. Pricey, but the best braid I've used. It doesn't need any break-in time.

Got it. Seems like you are doing very well considering all. Keep it up!

You only go around once. Best fishing investment I've ever made. At the time I bought I thought it extravagant. I now think it is a necessity. I can understand the concern. But I have caught smallies in less than 4 feet of water right under the boat while spotlock was working. I know at times they are very wary, but I have many times been successful in shallow water with spotlock cranking away. No, I don't fully understand. But what I do understand is that not having to climb up to the bow to deploy and stow is very very nice. And safer in rough water.

Invest in Spotlock. It is a game changer. When you do this get the motor that has remote deploy and stow. That too is a game changer. Being able to control the motor, deploy and stow, from anywhere in the boat is really nice. Especially as we age.

There are two possible explanations for this. 1. It's not really Xfast action 2. It has a soft/weak spot in the middle of the rod. The latter is not very likely.

I think the point the woman in the video makes in recommending inspection is that if the degradation has started it will be visible. I believe humidity/time is the issue. I don't know if it's the white or the yellow, but she mentions that it will be apparent if it's been degraded. If it loses its integrity the pfd will inflate.

You can do locking loops over the ring without doing blocking wraps. I really doubt if the blocking wraps do anything more than the "blocking" that you get with the epoxy. But as is almost everything on these forums, it's just an opinion without data. I do have experience, though, and have never had a micro pull out using 3 locking loops and no blocking wraps.

What is "fair" is what buyers are willing to pay. All this discussion of markups/labor/etc is irrelevant. If what they are willing to pay is too low for you to justify your total efforts/costs, there is your answer.

This video does not advocate annual replacement of either the bobbin or the cylinder. If one were planning to replace annually then the right way to test it would be to expose it to water and watch it inflate, then inspect to make sure it didn't deflate. That is not what she is saying. I had an auto inflatable pfd that was many years old in a compartment of my boat that got flooded by rain getting through a leaky cover and it inflated properly and stayed inflated until I picked up the boat days later. I think her advice to replace only if there is doubt about the condition makes good sense. As someone else said, CO2 cartridges are very reliable and unlikely to lose their charge. I've never heard of it happening. I used to have them on my bike and they never failed. The old adage of "if it isn't broken don't fix it" is good advice, tempered with good judgment and annual inspection as advocated in the video. When you tamper with the system there is the possibility that you'll screw it up.

Shaking and tip jiggling don't tell anything on modern graphite bass rods. I believe that most retail stores will take a return of an "unused" rod in the same condition as it was when purchased. Check before buying. Therefore one can buy it, take it home, and conduct the CCS process on it which will in no way harm the rod. It will give objective numbers on the rod for power and action. It will not measure sensitivity, but one can also run TNF on it to check its True Natural Frequency, and the higher it is, the more sensitive the rod probably is. PM me for instructions on TNF. CCS info is here: https://www.common-cents.info/caq.htm Do not be fooled by the focus of the CCS process on fly rods. It was developed for fly rods but works for any rod or blank. 1. Run the tests on rods you currently own to develop data for rods you like, rods you don't, rods that work for this technique, etc. 2. Run the tests on the purchased rod. See how it compares and fits with what you are looking for. 3. Keep it or take it back. For those who want to do CCS and don't want to invest in the 4 x 8 sheet of particle board and the space it takes, there is a way that works without all that. I can help.

I usually don't do the blocking wraps, just the locking loops over the ring. They are locked from being pulled out but less locked from being rotated into alignment. Try that. Or just a couple blocking wraps. And a little less tension?

I get them as straight as possible when wrapping, then sight down the blank against a light background, with good light, and adjust. Then apply CP, and after it's dry, I sight again and adjust one final time. A good way of getting them aligned right after wrapping is to sort of pinch the blank at a guide between my thumb and first finger, then slide my hand down the blank to the other guides and feel for an even touch on both finger/thumb. Sounds sort of crude, but it strangely does a pretty good job. I don't think there are any gimmicks like laser that work better than the human eye.