How many times have we seen posts of rods broken just a few inches from the tip and the suggestions pour in to forget it, not salvageable.  In many cases the rod can be made very fishable, even if not exactly equivalent to a new rod.  If the two pieces are available, the sleeve method of Ralp O'Quinn works very well in most cases.  I've done it to well over a dozen rods that are still in service and in most cases, I don't think a person could pass a blindfold test in separating them from new rods.  https://www.rodbuilding.org/library/repair-oquinn.html

But what about if a couple inches of the tip is broken off and the end piece is missing?  There still is a chance to salvage it so it will fish well for most uses.  It won’t be as robust as a new rod, but it most likely will work well.

Find a sleeve (old scrap rods are a good source) that fits well over the existing rod end and cut it with a diamond cut-off tool in a Dremel to approximately match the original length of the rod when about 1 ½ inches of engagement of the sleeve to the blank is acheived.   Glue it with epoxy adhesive.

For the tiptop use a single foot guide of appropriate ring size, foot width about the same as the ID of the sleeve, fit it into the hollow end of the sleeve, and glue it into the sleeve, aligning it with the rest of the guides on the rod. 

Now wrap reinforcing wraps of about ½ inch in length at each end of the sleeve.  Coat with epoxy wrap finish.

That’s it, give it a try before giving up on that rod.

Not great photos, and not my best wraps, but you get the idea.

Gonna be honest with ya here.

 

A broken rod is like a girlfriend who cheated on you. Its never the same again so breakup is inevitable.

 

I'd like to see a poll done on how many members here would want pieced together rods. I surely don't. This is a big deal to me. Rods are one of the most important enjoyment factors to fishing. I won't even use a 2 piece rod. Must be one piece and solid. No exceptions. And most importantly, NOT broken!

 

When the rod is broken, the spirit to use it can be broken too. And that is where I am with this.

 

I have been repairing things my whole life. But a broken rod is one of those items that I will never piece a broken rod back together, but that is just me.

 

The only thing I will do is examine what is left of the rod and if it is fishable then maybe repair what is left of the solid blank. But it depends on how much is broken off too.

 

After 40 plus years in used tackle biz I will not buy broken rods and I will not piece together broken rods. Once broken, most are usually done. A few can be somewhat repaired and used again, but its never the same and I gotta go elsewhere to find what I lost. Just how it goes. Buy a new girlfriend! Ha!  (girlfriend = rod)

 

Can we do polls here? I'll check. This would be a good one to see if there are any serious fishermen out there who are willing to use pieced together rods.

 

I worked in a rod and reel repair shop for years and I don't recall any customers coming in paying the shop to do something like this. They have asked. And the shop probably would not agree to do it either because if it went out that door and broke again who gets blamed?

 

The whole reason I loved that rod is because it was whole. Once broken the love is forever gone. Can't fix that. And I can't fix a cheating girlfriend any more than I can make a broken rod whole again. I am one who won't even try because I know it is futile for me, maybe not so for others, but I know once pieced back together I can never love it or enjoy it again. I gotta move on. Hope ya understand where I am coming from with this.

 

I know you are a mechanical engineer so I get it you have the knowledge and skills to do a good job, but its still a broken rod forever. Most of us out here aren't gonna go through this kind of trouble to "fix" them like this.

 

Another issue is many who might try it might not have the necessary skills so they think its fixed and go out and hook into a fish and find out real fast a different point of view.

I agree that a broken rod for me is just 2 pieces of what used to be.  That’s why some good companies have the “don’t ask don’t tell “ warranty for a nominal fee like Gloomis and others have a lifetime warranty like Fenwick HMGs.

I have a broken rod (in the tip area, a few inches down, similar to what @MickD posted) that is otherwise in excellent condition - and I am going to give his/O'Quinn's method a go - I just went on to the Mud Hole Custom Tackle site and ordered up some epoxy/brushes/ect.... - I have a spare broken rod (a St. Croix Victory rod that broke and was replaced by St. Croix under warranty, they require you to cut the rod in half, yet I might be able to take a piece of that broken rod and make the "sleeve" piece for the rod I will attempt to repair) - I am looking at it as a fun challenge/project - I have never done anything like this before - If it works, then I will have a spare/back-up rod that could be used (taking novice fishing friends out, loaning it to a local school for "Take a Kid Fishing" day, going out in rough conditions, ect...)  - 95% of that rod is in excellent working order - Even if the fix has it working at 75% or better capacity it could serve a purpose - I agree that I might not want to rely on it to land my PB or be in my regular rotation, but I won't know until I give it a go

13 minutes ago, WaskaCrank12 said:

a St. Croix Victory rod that broke and was replaced by St. Croix under warranty, they require you to cut the rod in half,

I had one replaced/upgraded (from Mojo Bass to Victory) and they didn’t require anything from me. @MickD and I have talked about this very issue. Mine broke about 4” from the tip (just the tip - IYKYK). I still haven’t done anything with that broken rod yet ONLY because I don’t have a reel for it. I have a couple of blanks here already that I know will have a section that I can use. I don’t have a problem with a 2 pc rod either. My BFS rod is a 2 pc and once I “assemble” it, it’s pretty rock solid. I too used to shy away from a 2 pc rod from my experiences back in the 80s/90s. This is the first 2 pc I have owned since then. I don’t have a problem with it. 

My issue with 2 piece rods is lack of performance and most are whippier and often don't have the backbone a single rod does.

 

I have to find a 2 piece rod that can live up to some of my 1 piece rods.

 

So for me its not the 2 piece situation. It is just that I don't find 2 piece rods that I like.

 

Only one in decades. Just 1. I still have it. But I don't go looking for more. I figure if I am gonna buy a rod I'm going to buy a whole one.

4 hours ago, MickD said:

  

How many times have we seen posts of rods broken just a few inches from the tip and the suggestions pour in to forget it, not salvageable.  In many cases the rod can be made very fishable, even if not exactly equivalent to a new rod.  If the two pieces are available, the sleeve method of Ralp O'Quinn works very well in most cases.  I've done it to well over a dozen rods that are still in service and in most cases, I don't think a person could pass a blindfold test in separating them from new rods.  https://www.rodbuilding.org/library/repair-oquinn.html

But what about if a couple inches of the tip is broken off and the end piece is missing?  There still is a chance to salvage it so it will fish well for most uses.  It won’t be as robust as a new rod, but it most likely will work well.

Find a sleeve (old scrap rods are a good source) that fits well over the existing rod end and cut it with a diamond cut-off tool in a Dremel to approximately match the original length of the rod when about 1 ½ inches of engagement of the sleeve to the blank is acheived.   Glue it with epoxy adhesive.

For the tiptop use a single foot guide of appropriate ring size, foot width about the same as the ID of the sleeve, fit it into the hollow end of the sleeve, and glue it into the sleeve, aligning it with the rest of the guides on the rod. 

Now wrap reinforcing wraps of about ½ inch in length at each end of the sleeve.  Coat with epoxy wrap finish.

That’s it, give it a try before giving up on that rod.

Not great photos, and not my best wraps, but you get the idea.

That’s a great solution for some people, in fact there was a member here not long ago that broke a twenty year old IMX rod that he dearly loved. He wanted it repaired and sent it in to DVT .. 

I once dropped a 2x4 from a rafter in the garage and it broke my pitchin' rod ( 18" from the tip) and my grass rake (12" from the tip).

It was much easier to just repair these instead of new builds. I've made probably about a dozen repairs like this over the years. I will use the internal and external stints like Ralph outlines in the article @MickD suggested.

That being said, I have also had a couple inches of the tip broke off a few rods that pretty much ruined the rod. These were typically faster tipped, shorter rods. The I.D. was too narrow for an internal stint.

 

2 hours ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

My issue with 2 piece rods is lack of performance and most are whippier and often don't have the backbone a single rod does.

 

I have to find a 2 piece rod that can live up to some of my 1 piece rods.

 

So for me its not the 2 piece situation. It is just that I don't find 2 piece rods that I like.

 

Only one in decades. Just 1. I still have it. But I don't go looking for more. I figure if I am gonna buy a rod I'm going to buy a whole one.

This is not about 2 piece vs 1 piece; it's about salvaging a broken rod.  

 

I think a lot of builders, with the blanks available to them, will challenge that 2 piece rods are whippier and lacking in backbone.  I know I do.  There are many different lengths, powers, and actions available in two and three piece blanks, and they perform right there with the one piece.  They didn't a long time ago, but they do now.

I was thinking more so in commercially available 2 piece rods.

 

I am sure in custom rod building that better 2 piece rods can be found. Just not for me.

Don’t confuse me with facts my mind is made up!

Fly rods have multiple sections and Gary Loomis considered the expert on graphite rod construction learned his trade making fly rods with ferrules.

I am not in the camp a bass rod looses sensitivity being 2 pieces built properly .

My 1st crank bait rod was a 7’ Fenwick salt water popping 2 piece rod blank I made a crank bait rod from . Fenwick ferrules design dates back into the 60’s on their fly rods so wasn’t concerned about strength. I caught fish all over the world using this rod including Musky.

Japanese have several high end 2 piece bass rods that are popular do to traveling to fishing areas.

Mick thank you for posting the repair technique.

Tom

&

4 minutes ago, WRB-2.0 said:

Japanese have several high end 2 piece bass rods that are popular do to traveling to fishing areas.

I recently repaired one broken about 6 inches down from the tiptop, and the angler was very pleased with how it fished after the repair.   That was done with the O'Quinn method.

I’ve used 2 piece for most of my life, and still use a Fenwick and a St Croix 2-piece.  Both are excellent rods, and I’ve caught some mountable fish on both.  Neither have ever hinted at performing less capably than my 1-piece rods.  

Its all a matter of personal opinion of likes or dislikes. But even doing an online search shows there are engineering reasons that give solid rods a slight edge, and it revolves around the joint and its ability to transmit vibrations across it:

 

So taking my opinion out of it, this is what comes up in a search on side by side comparisons:

 

Generally, a one-piece rod is considered to have a slight performance advantage over a two-piece rod, particularly in terms of sensitivity and casting accuracy, due to the absence of a joint. However, two-piece rods offer significant convenience for transportation and storage. Ultimately, the "better" choice depends on individual needs and fishing style. 

 

One-Piece Rods: 

 

Pros:

Improved sensitivity: The continuous blank of a one-piece rod transmits vibrations more effectively, potentially leading to better bite detection.

Enhanced casting accuracy: The seamless design eliminates potential weak points, resulting in smoother and more precise casts.

Greater durability: One-piece rods are generally perceived as more durable and less prone to breakage at the joint, especially under stress.

 

Cons:

Difficult to transport and store: Their length makes them more challenging to transport and store, especially for anglers with limited space or those using larger rods. 

 

Two-Piece Rods:

 

Pros:

Convenient for transport and storage: The ability to separate into two pieces makes them much easier to transport and store, particularly for travel or anglers with limited space. 

 

Cons:

Slightly reduced sensitivity: The joint can slightly dampen vibrations, potentially impacting sensitivity compared to one-piece rods. 

Potential for joint failure: While modern two-piece rods are generally reliable, there's a potential for the joint to weaken or fail if not properly cared for or if the connection is not snug. 

 

In Conclusion:

For anglers prioritizing sensitivity and casting accuracy, and who have the means to transport and store longer one-piece rods, the one-piece rod is often preferred. However, for anglers needing the convenience of portability or fishing from smaller boats, the two-piece rod offers a suitable and increasingly high-performing alternative. The choice ultimately depends on individual needs and preferences. 

 

----------------------------------

 

Putting my opinion back into it, I prefer the slight performance edge of 1 piece over 2 piece. And that is what this boils down to- personal opinions.

 

The above search results suggest anglers buy 2 piece rods for convenience, not performance. And I notice the only "pro" thing mentioned for 2 piece rods is convenience.

 

But as shown above it is not just me who thinks 2 piece rods are not there yet. I like how the search points out that performance of 2 piece rods is increasing because they are making better rods now.

 

I think in a forum like this its the best approach to offer all sides and let readers decide. Sometimes I play devil's advocate, but hopefully it all shakes out to improved fishing in the end for all of us.

 

I would like to see objective data on the 1 vs 2 piece sensitivity and vibration transmission argument.  I'll bet you cannot find any.  Trika advertises that they have it but they don't tell you what the competitive rods are and whether they are of similar prices and characteristics.  I believe it's all subjective opinion.  We expect one piece to be better, and thus believe it is. 

 

And there are those who argue that sensitivity is all about feeling a pull on the line and that rod length is a big factor.  They argue that fish bites are not at all about vibration. 

 

It's a very complicated subject with lots of opinions and little if any objective data.  Even if there is a difference that's somehow measurable, is it detectable to the fisherman under fishing conditions? 

 

A lot has to do with expectations.  If I pay a lot for a rod I expect it to be very sensitive, and therefore think it is.  Extensive experiments in customer perceptions on golf clubs show that this is sometimes the biggest factor in customer satisfaction and which product is "best." 

 

Finally, if one is not using braid, most everything argued about rod sensitivity means nothing.  That's my subjective opinion.

3 minutes ago, MickD said:

Finally, if one is not using braid, most everything argued about rod sensitivity means nothing.  That's my subjective opinion.

 

Now that is a great point! I only use straight braid.

Cool advice here @MickD! I'll keep that in mind going forward.

 

I have an old Cabela's Tourney Trail IM7 spinning rod that is one of my favorites. It was originally a 7' rod...but always seemed a little to "whispy" or "buggy-whip" for my taste.

 

Unfortunately (or fortunately), the tip got broken. So I added a new tip...the rod is now 6'-8", and is a really great rod for drop-shot and a lead-head and gulp minnow. Just the right amount of flex...and enough backbone to horse in a nice LMB when needed.

 

The rod is 30 years old, and a two piece (I purchased a lot of two piece rods back then)...but it's still a go-to and one of my favorites.

34 minutes ago, DaubsNU1 said:

Cool advice here @MickD! I'll keep that in mind going forward.

 

I have an old Cabela's Tourney Trail IM7 spinning rod that is one of my favorites. It was originally a 7' rod...but always seemed a little to "whispy" or "buggy-whip" for my taste.

 

Unfortunately (or fortunately), the tip got broken. So I added a new tip...the rod is now 6'-8", and is a really great rod for drop-shot and a lead-head and gulp minnow. Just the right amount of flex...and enough backbone to horse in a nice LMB when needed.

 

The rod is 30 years old, and a two piece (I purchased a lot of two piece rods back then)...but it's still a go-to and one of my favorites.

When a rod is shortened from the tip its power goes up and the action gets slower.  You've proven that 4 inches on that rod is significant. 

29 minutes ago, MickD said:

When a rod is shortened from the tip its power goes up and the action gets slower.  You've proven that 4 inches on that rod is significant. 

 

Why would the action slow? How can it change at all I wonder. Its the same rod just shorter. My mind is telling me shorter lever means faster side to side swing ability and longer lever means longer side to side swings that take slightly longer time. I thought longer was slower and shorter was faster?

 

I thought removing mass meant less weight means faster response.

 

Removing 4 inches would move the area of the rod that bends closer to the tip, not the butt end of a rod. Isn't that how action gets faster? How would it slow down? I'm not getting it. Scratching my head here.

 

I can see where putting a tip now 4" down on thicker blank can maybe increase rods ability to lift a slightly heavier object or fish, so I am with ya on "power goes up" ever so slightly, but still wondering about the other.

 

I agree with @FloridaFishinFool...the rod cant get slower.
A fast rod bends in the top third.
A moderate (medium) rod bends in the half(ish).

A slow rod bends in the lower third.

 

Take some tip off a slow rod and it becomes more medium...not the other way around.

@Smirak - this is the St. Croix warranty process I followed - 

 

Service and Warranty

 

-not sure if it is specific to the Victory line or how recently they went to this process - as per the instructions I attached the required pictures (one required picture being the rod cut in half) - my hope is to find a section of that rod that can serve as the "sleeve" to repair my other damaged/broken rod - this is something I have never done and, as I mentioned, I ordered up some materials to attempt the fix - We have long winters here in MN so I figured this will be a good project to take on when the lakes freeze over - and there really is no downside to giving it a try (a good challenge to take on something I have never done, learning new skills, taking a currently broken rod and potentially turning it back into a serviceable rod, ect...)   

 

 

Yeah, I’m not sure. I did take pics of the broken tip and sent those in and then they processed it. What diameter sleeve would you need? I may have something that would fit for you. Lemme know.

2 hours ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

 

Now that is a great point! I only use straight braid.

Well Mick and Florida,

     Since we're chucking opinions around. I'll toss mine into the ring.  Today's multi piece rods are amazingly better then they used to be. Not just two piece either. I have several 3, 4 and 5 piece travel rods (semi - high end).  Legit Design, Mega Bass Trizia, Fenwick, Diawa and Shimano are some of the brands. Most of the rods are from Japan.  The Japanese ride lots of trains and need rods that either need to be telescoping or can be broken down to fit into a back pack.  Honestly they perform (IMHO) as well or almost as well as a single piece rod. They might be a little heavier but not by much.

   The only time braid is sensitive is when it is taut or tight. If it's slack ya got nothing, hooey, bupkiss. It's limp. Both Fluorocarbon and Mono will transmit back to the angler better when there is slack because they are stiffer allowing that tick, tap or that "somethings going on down there feeling".

   Braid, Mono and Fluorocarbon all have a place in my fishing line up.  They all have pro's and cons.

They all serve a purpose. 

    Now regarding the origin of the thread.  Again opinion. Yes, they are repairable. I have replaced many a broken tip top.  Buy that three pack of Fuji tip tops from Wally world and a stick of hot melt glue and glue one on the stub and the rod will still work and fish fine.  It will do fine for bait fishing, giving to little Jimmy next door or making it into a cat fishing or bait fishing rod.

 

My two cent's,

FM 

2 hours ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

I thought removing mass meant less weight means faster response.

Yes, it should give a faster response if the mass is taken off the right area of the rod.  Whether the added mass of a single tip over butt ferrule is enough and in the right place to make a significant difference is debatable.  But yes, usually the higher the power to weight ratio, the higher the TNF and the faster the recovery from deflection. 

 

But whether that is the same as sensitivity is another question that has been hotly debated the last few years.  I think they move together; what helps recovery time helps sensitivity.  It would be more difficult to argue it the other way, that they move opposite, than it is to argue they move together. 

 

But so many things might affect how one feels about a rod.  Ergonomics for one.  Balance, reel weight , guide mass, action, construction methods, materials, etc.   

 

I don't argue with your "liking" one piece better than two.  If it's in your head that way, you will be pleased only with one piece.  And nothing is likely to change your preference.   My only point is that without having the preference already solid in your mind, could you tell the difference?  Before micro guides I thoroughly disliked spiral casting rods.  In my mind they looked funny.  I  thought of that often when fishing one.  Now that I build with micros, I have a few spirals and it no longer enters my mind that they look funny.  I don't even notice the guides.  The mind is a powerful influence. 

1 hour ago, WaskaCrank12 said:

my hope is to find a section of that rod that can serve as the "sleeve" to repair my other damaged/broken rod -

Look for scrap rods at sporting goods outlets  where they take returns and might be collecting broken rods.  Pawn shops are another source, but while the rods there are usually junk to fish with, they can provide sleeves.  But I find them usually grossly overpriced.  If the rod is broken at a large enough diameter, Amazon offers repair kits that come with internal spigots.  I have ZERO experience with them.  Note that for the O'Quinn method, lower modulus (maybe "junk") is better than high, but I've never noticed an issue with using high modulus.  It's thinner walled and less obvious visually.  

 

One thing to consider on rods is the faster the action, the less the last couple inches of the rod bends, so theoretically modulus of the sleeve would have less importance. What you are restoring is mostly the length.

I’ve repaired 4 rods just this week using OQuinns method. Properly employed, you get a rod with no perceptible negative affect on performance. I’ve done dozens over the years. There are hacks online advising “half fast” versions of this technique that just won’t work long term.