Konnetic vs Konnetic HD

[herman35]

Are these technologies sufficiently differentiated to create rods with distinctive personalities, in your opinion?

I think that all brands of rods should explain as this technology affects them in more detail because rods have high prices and the people must have full details in order to choose better

Sent from my SM-G955F by Tapatalk

 

[toothybugs]

Yes, but how well you can tell and appreciate the difference is an individual thing. The rod tapers themselves have a big effect in how the rod feels as well so it's not just the material.

By 'all brands' you realize you mean Sage and Sage alone, right?

 

[herman35]

Thanks by all brands I'm referring sage, Scott, Winston, Hardy etc
In many places of the world you can not test rod in flyshop only you can buy them because it's so important a detailed explanation

Sent from my SM-G955F by Tapatalk

 

[toothybugs]

In many places of the world you can not test rod in flyshop only you can buy them because it's so important a detailed explanation

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me.

Konnetic, HD or not, is proprietary to Sage. It is not a Winston/ Scott/ Hardy etc technology.

Yes, there is a difference between the two. The first thing you will notice is the HD is noticeably lighter. Both are incredible technologies.

 

[herman35]

First question is about information about technologies konnetic vs konnetic HD and second question is a petition to all brands to add detailed explanation to customers of as reflected in the rods their technology

Sent from my SM-G955F by Tapatalk

 

[brownbass]

I have cast the X but not the One. When discussing the X with a friend who fishes several different Sage rods the One being his main rod he said that after trying the new X he didn't see that much difference between the two rods. At least not enough to warrant an upgrade.

Bill

 

[sweetandsalt]

Material science and fabrication methodology and quality surely impact rod performance. But the "art" of the taper design makes a more significant contribution. This past decade has seen genuine improvements in graphite rod technology notably the more wide spread advent of Nano particulate infused resin systems as employed by Hardy, Loomis NRX, Douglas SKY and recently Winston Air. Sage went their own way with fiber compacting Konnetic and now its even more so HD technology. In all these cases you get more fiber and less plastic resin yielding lighter yet stronger and more responsive fly rods.

These technologies are vehicles for the rod designer to build upon and facilitate taper innovations that were impractical with heavier, less robust earlier construction methods. For example I fish and love a Sage 8 1/2'/#4 Konnetic ONE and also an 8 1/2'/#5 Konnetic HD X. Though a line size heavier the HD X is slightly lighter in physical weight compared to the earlier ONE; this is purely a function of material technology. More interesting is that the X flexes a bit deeper yielding a bit more mass feedback ("feel") yet recovers at least if not more quickly, a function of reduced mass and sophisticated design made feasible by the HD improvements.

While I find fly rod technology fascinating and relevant I remain more intrigued by taper design and am impressed by a very small cadre of creative rod designers notably Jerry Siem at Sage and Steve Rajeff at Loomis. Hardy's Howard Crostin is great as is Scott's Jim Bartschi as well. Their rods differ more due to taper characteristics than they do due to material differences. This is why we always write here; test cast as many rods as you can before selecting. If one lives in a place where cross testing is not feasible there are numerous treads here on the Forum where members express their preferences for one rod or another. Are high end fly rods worth their lofty prices? I think yes but more because of their creative design and quality fabrication than the genuine advances in materials.

 

[trout trekker]

This issue goes way beyond one rod company. I agree that to a large part, companies go out of their way to come up with flashy ads that are written with great flair, but convey little in the way of actual information. They have maybe forty words of info they wish to share, but two hundred words of ad space to fill. Why mess up an ad with something as boring as facts.

Case in point, Las Vegas hasn't a real fly shop. Just in the last couple of weeks I've been trying to get an answer to a question from a reel company who wasn't in a big hurry to share that info and the nearest authorized dealer to me is 167 miles away, that's more of a round trip drive than I want to make, just to be able to see a disassembled reels drag system. This has to do with what I believed to be a part that was common to all of their reels, from mid to near top end price points. Having that info available would allow me to have greater confidence purchaing several of their reels in both price points for use during extended travel ( where a warranty is useless ) and the knowledge that if they ever walk away from these designs, I could cannibalize one reel to keep others going. To me, interchangeable parts among reels of the same manufacturer is a huge selling point, others might care less. But I feel that more porduct info and more in depth explanations have value and can be disregarded if ones not interested.

In the end, I found the info I was after from a completly unrelated source. Another user of these reels made a YT video about servicing these reels and during that video you clearly see the part in question being removed from the guts of both series of reels. Thus they do share this common critical part.

Dave

 

[bwf]

Sage 796-4 RPL 3 3/8 ozs.

Sage 796-4 X 3 1/2 ozs.

Sage 796-4 Z-Axis 4 1/8 ozs.

The RPL (maybe the SP too ?) are some of the lightest (weight) fly rods built.
But, if you casted them side by side the XP/Z-Axis/X would all feel significantly lighter in hand. So when rod companies advertise their new rods are 10-20 percent lighter, what are they actually referring too? Swing weight?

 

[herman35]

Whit internet, the consumer has hungry of information now we are more "sophisticated" and this must be admitted by all brands and repeat in many countries of world you can not test a rod only buy it..... It's a big mistake


Sent from my SM-G955F by Tapatalk

 

[sweetandsalt]

Whit internet, the consumer has hungry of information now we are more "sophisticated" and this must be admitted by all brands and repeat in many countries of world you can not test a rod only buy it..... It's a big mistake


Sent from my SM-G955F by Tapatalk

Marketing hyperbole aside, Sage does a good job of describing what their Konnetic HD technology is, as does Loomis with their Shimano sourced Spiral X construction and Scott has an essay on how design is more important than technology...not that hey don't employ multi-modulus layups. Also do not be mislead that advanced composite technology is all about weight reduction though sometimes it contributes to that. Modulus placement, fiber alignment and density enhancements are achievable now that where undreamed of when seminal RPL was introduced in the 1980's. Today's best rods unquestionably out perform their predecessors which is not to say RPL, GLX and Scott G's of yesteryear are not still fine rods.

 

[mnigro]

I would like to see rod manufacturers list ideal grain weights and line taper recommendations on their specs. This would help many folks, I think.

Fly lines should always list grain weights, which they are finally starting to do.

Otherwise, fly rod tech talk is BS when only discussed in “marketing speak”. Konnetic, Konnetic HD, ARC, ART, Spiral X, etc. what does this tell you?