Deephaven

Phones don't need them if you apply any sense in your behavior.

The beauty of lithiums is that good ones will include a BMS resolving most of the charger concerns you are referring to. The Sears platinum were made by Odyssey btw. Killer batteries at the time, but the time for AGM has long since sailed. If you have them run them, but spending money on them today isn't logical.

At that distance, faster to do it yourself. Personally I would never pay anyone to do this...but that is because I don't trust others to do it right and I want to make sure when anything happens on the water I know exactly how to deal with it.

Foam cannon with soap and degreaser, wheel woolie to reach areas that are harder to scrub, tire brushes, and a high pressure rinse. If you can foam/scrub with hot water it will be even easier. Regrettably hot water pressure washers are spendy. I would personaly di-electric all your electric connections and clean up any wiring first....but this you should do upon buying any boat right away IMO.

Thanks for making the rest of us feel human too. Sorry for you plight. Sucks to lose a day, but at least you will never have that problem again

When you say for top water I assume you mean motion baits like the spook, chug baits and the like. For that the SC MXF is killer. If you mean buzzbaits and other classical moving baits where the reel does the work I would choose something less fast.

Only two choices IMO, ultra cheapo $100 replace whenever batteries or lithium for $500. AGM at $300 is a terrible value. Perhaps someone has had luck with cheaper AGMs but my experience with them has been that cheap EverStarts last just as long. Even if they did last their 3* as long they are 3* the price when for 5* the price you get something that lasts way more than 5* as long.

Same experience here. Just bought 600 yards of Invisx to try and prove previous findings wrong.

My tackle box in general keeps shrinking. I used to buy everything new thing that caught my eye. Now I only buy things I "know" will work and have purged my tackle to match. It is still a ridiculous amount. At the same time, my rod collection has done the opposite. I'd rather have a dedicated rod for every presentation than to have too many baits to choose what to put on a rod.

Need the ground to unfreeze first otherwise the rain will be all run off.

Had a couple baits that had no rods to live on all the time, so I had Lonnie make me a couple more. Was short a reel as well so I resolved both.

I personally have a mix of SC3 and SC5 blanks from St. Croix (and IMX/GLX from Loomis) and wouldn't recommend sticking to one series of rods. Instead focus more on where the extra money buys you sensitivity where it matters and spend more on those rods and less on the others.

Ah, I am referring to the force causing the reaction on the rod. The doink in this case is one of three things (great simplified of course): the fish accelerating the bait from a velocity of 0 to something, the fish changing the motion the angler is imparting into another direction, or the fish stopping the motion. This fish applies an acceleration or deacceleration to the bait. What happens next depends on the length of the lever and it's material make up along with the line characteristics. The fishes force on the bait is what causes the change of motion in the tip that we then end up feeling.

My question was more straightforward than the rest of our discussion. If the premise is that the angler feels the fish due to tip deflection then that deflection has to occur. As it deflects it is then felt, this is a motion which is driven by a force and therefore is most easily described by acceleration. As with the rest, the approximation has to be that the static is assumed to be ignored because without change there is nothing to feel. It was answered, albeit not in a way that provides any clarity. Functionally speaking longer is more sensitive with all things equal, but never being equal rod make up is just as important.

Do you feel the tip deflection as it is happening or after it is fully deflected? Does it stay fully deflected? I would ask the question in return. How do you have tip deflection without acceleration?

Sensitivity to weight at the end of your rod is just weight. I am interested in dynamic sensitivity. I want to feel when a fish breathes on my bait. And no, no way in hell I can feel that...want to.

How can you have displacement without acceleration? How can you have weight without force? If nothing moves then you feel nothing as there is nothing to feel. Indeed.

Yes

Nope, don't believe it at all. Sucks when it happens though.

Don't think of either as vibration or as displacement but as acceleration. By default you need acceleration to have any force so it is more direct. Of course you visible see this acceleration as displacement, but the displacement is not instantaneous. Vibration is inclusive of frequency content which can occur in either displacement or acceleration. So yes, the complex math applies to the tap tap tap.

The St. Alban's bay bridge has been open for nearly a month. Water is ripping down my driveway today and warming the lake further. It won't be long.

I substituted C = 3*E*I, I should have stated that though. Being C is a constant, 3*C is still a constant. Too many variables indeed. Exactly why I tried to simplify the answer. Based on length alone, the longer is more sensitive. In practice there are a ton of other things that can screw that up. Instead of displacements I would call them acceleration. Makes the force analogy easier, but they definitely are not done at a constant speed so displacement isn't a perfect representation. Of course it is a dynamic acceleration. This dynamic portion of course will play even further in the material properties and damping as it will have a frequency component since it is dynamic and not static. Once you state it as an acceleration then the force equation complies. Displacement is too simple, but that displacement of course defines sensitivity once my ridiculous assumption that all things are the same is removed. The only reason I used it is to make this discussable. You have clearly demonstrated exactly why my assumption isn't valid in the real world, but for answering only the quesiton of is a longer rod more sensitive it works with that assumption. Considering no two rods can be identical and different lengths it means that the sensitivity is determined both by length and rod makeup...which amusingly neither of us needed to go so far into the discussion to come to the summary.

This is true and I foul some casts, but I use straight 20lb braid. I find the number of fouled casts isn't enough to frustrate me as compared to the lack of feel/control that a flexier line imparts. Whenever possible I try to not use a leader and outside of the occasional wrap up on the cast there is no reason to here in my opinion.

Same boat here...almost. I am 6'7" and for my jerkbait, popping, walking I use a much shorter rod than the rest of mine. Still a 6'9" rod, but this is the one where if I were shorter I would shorten it. The rest depend solely on the bait and cover I am fishing.

I will just quote this portion. Think your analogy is great in particular when it comes to discussing the differences in rods. You state: The thing you aren't stating here is that you are now ignoring the force on the end of the cantilever and only looking at tip deflection. I don't see how we can ignore the forcing function on the end of the rod. In a fishing rod scenario, the fish applies this force and that is the answer to the length question and what is more sensitive. The material and rod design is of course important and the second portion of the topic. For the rest of the forum I will go into more detail to explain what I mean. To visualize this better, a fixed cantilever and end points for variable discussion is shown here: The tip deflection is defined as: δ = (FB*L^3)/(3*E*I) Being we are making the assumption that E, I are the same to make this simpler we can substitute a constant, C. δB = (FB*L3(AB))/C which you nicely showed we can re-arrange to find which we can re-arrange and solve for the Force at B or FB FB = δ*C/ L3(AB) You also shared the smoking gun in the length argument. The moment at point A is defined MA = FB*L(AB) By default this states that no matter the force applied at point B that the moment will be stronger the longer the rod is. Your conclusion stated differently when we substitute FB from above, the question of course is why? This is more easily seen for those not wanting to do math without the extra E & I. Sole reason I retyped most of this. MA = δB*C/ L2(AB) Here you can see that the moment at A is indeed inversely proportional to the length squared, but the equation MA = FB*L(AB) shows that it is directly proportional. The question is how can you have two completely different conclusions from the same set of equations? The answer is in the stated equation though. The MA that was solved only includes the deflection at point B as it's forcing function and not the force. In other words, if the rods are identical (in E & I) the longer rod will put more force on the fisherman; however, the force felt by the fisherman based on tip deflection is more on a shorter rod and significantly. Of course, when we go back to the original tip deflection equation: δB = (FB*L3(AB))/C We can see that the deflection is directly proportional to the cubed length of the rod. Being the moment felt is to the 2nd power based on deflection, but the deflection occuring is to the third power this reinforces the longer rod is more sensitive theory as well....but imagine that, it was conveniently described earlier with a simple equation MA = FB*L(AB) Of course the final portion of the sensitivity discussion in relation to length is also hidden in fissure's response. δ = (FB*L^3)/(3*E*I) We have already nailed down tip deflection, δ, Force & Length,FB*L, but the other key parameters in a sensitivity discussion are E the modulus of elasticity and I the moment of inertia. These cover the shape and materials in the rod. Obviously they have a major effect on tip deflection which we saw above has a cubed relation to length.