Spliced in Quiver tip

Is there any advantage to having a spliced in quiver tip compared to push in tips?

The advantage with push in tips is that you can change the tip.

On a personal note, i like the spliced in tip, but with the rod's as they are now it's hard to tell if someone is using a spliced tip or not.

I don't know of any advantage of a spliced in tip, other than you know it's not going to come out of the end section.

I can blank just as easy with either!

Ray Daywalker Clarke said:

The advantage with push in tips is that you can change the tip.

Click to expand...

That's true Ray but how many times do you do this rather than just reach for your favourite one because experience tells you that its the best all round compromise ? That's exactly what I do despite carrying a variety of tips I nearly always use the same one...exception being when there is a bit of extra water on,then [and only then] do I go heavier.

And I always fish a tip...never a straight top.Dunno why...I just do.

I use my Seer 1lb-06oz 'Rover' rod most of the time which has three push over tips and a push on tip ring fitted onto a carbon sleeve to make the rod a normal Avon type, just the same design as the early Graham Philips Avon/Barbel rods
S-kippy is right though, 95% of the time I use the same tip.

john m h said:

S-kippy is right though, 95% of the time I use the same tip.

Click to expand...

Perhaps that's because 95% of the time the river is in a condition that suits that tip. Always handy having weaker and stronger ones though, just in case.

To be honest Jeff, the one tip is the only one that suites the rod/blank. The other two were a total waste of money.

mol said:

Is there any advantage to having a spliced in quiver tip compared to push in tips?

Click to expand...

IMO no advantage at all, in fact all the advantages are with having a multiple choice of tip.
As said by a few already, the majority of the time there is a tendancy to select the same tip but without having the option of changing, it would be impossible fish at maximum efficiency with only one tip.
As if fishing only one river and your tip is perfect for normal level, it will be bent double if carrying extra water.
And if using a perfect tip for flood water, it'll prove to stiff in normal conditions.

Add then fishing on various rivers, I (normally) use a 1oz tip on the river Cherwell, 2oz on the Windrush and in deeper areas of the Thames a 4oz tip is required.

Spliced tips are just to big a compromise too offer the most effective means of bite indication, I guess they can't fall out when casting, though this has never happened to me, yet....

I must admit that of all the tip rods I have, it does tend to be the case (in my opinion, of course) that one particular tip will suit the blank better than others. I have never felt that carbon and glass tips interchange well with a particular carrier section. Almost all my tip fishing takes place on the Trent, so I usually opt for a carbon tip. In heavy water conditions, I will use my Daiwa Porky Pig with the hollow tip section; for 'normal' conditions, I will use the heavy carbon push-in tip (about 4oz TC) on the Porky (I have an extra 'carrier' section) or 11/13. For lighter work, I have an old Tri Cast Trophy with a home made carbon push-over tip (home made because the glass ones provided didn't really suit the blank). Anyway, I digress...I think the answer would be to have say 3 carbon tips, made from an identical section of tapered carbon (chosen carefully to suit the blank), but cut at different lengths, say 26", 24" and 22" - so that the shorter the tip, the stiffer the action. The only 'problem' for some people would be the variation in length of the quivertips. As for glass tips, I simply don't need or use them; on a still water I'd rather use a swingtip for short/medium range (again, home made) - far more sensitive! If going a long chuck on a lake, I would use a carbon tip and tighten up as much as I could, and look for big drop-backs.

I prefer a spliced in tip every time. As others have said, only one tip will ever really suit the blank (in some cases none of them do!) so if it's real efficiency you're after, you should carry three or four rods with different blanks, each suited to a different strength of quivertip. If that sounds absurd, I'm not surprised; it is!

There's always a compromise somewhere along the line, unless we create a water of even depth everywhere, holding just one species of fish, each of identical weight, fighting abilities and feeding habits.

Well I don't have a quiver rod anymore.

I made one from an old 13ft Carbon rod. The Butt section got crushed, so I made a push in handle that fitted into the second section of the rod. I then took about an inch and a half off the top section. Took off all the line guides and re made the whole rod to what I wanted.

The rod was great to use, (I am going back some 30 years now), had Barbel, Chub Roach, Perch, hooked a carp but didn't land it. Then for some unknown reason, one day I went and sold most of my gear, just so I could buy some new gear, and the rod went with it.

A mate of mine bought the gear, and loved using that rod, he had his gear stolen and the rod was never seen again. So now I use a float rod as a quiver, the tip shows the bites just fine, again I have taken a bit off the tip.

I know you all think i am MAD, but it works a treat, and I know the tip is fine as it was made for the rod. One thing i haven't done is make the rod shorter, something I just haven't had time to do.

Ray Daywalker Clarke said:

I know you all think i am MAD, but it works a treat, and I know the tip is fine as it was made for the rod. One thing i haven't done is make the rod shorter, something I just haven't had time to do.

Click to expand...

Well Ray someones got to say it,YOU ARE MAD,lol,really mate whatever suits.

Why is that mad? A float rod has a soft tip and will detect most bites, certainly on rivers. It will cope with the same fish, whether hooked on float or leger tackle. The only thing it won't do quite as well as a dedicated quiver rod is cast a heavy feeder, but for normal legering with swanshot links or bombs up to an ounce it will be fine.

I've often done the same thing. Rather than lug two rods about with me when roving around on a river, I decide which method is most likely to work, and pick one rod best suited to that method. Some days it'll be mostly legering - particularly if I'm on the Wey or Rother after chub, so I use an early John Wilson avon with the quiver top fitted; you can still floatfish with it if needed - I'm not aware of any law that says otherwise. Other days (grayling on the Itchen or Test for instance) it'll mostly be trotting, so I use a float rod and, should I find a swim where I want to hold the bait in one place, I'll leger with it.

There's too much attention paid to using dedicated tackle these days. We're losing sight of the original reason we went fishing (to catch fish) in favour of a mechanical process involving the use of specific rods, reels etc. The fish should come first, not the tackle.

Fred Blake said:

Why is that mad? A float rod has a soft tip and will detect most bites, certainly on rivers. It will cope with the same fish, whether hooked on float or leger tackle. The only thing it won't do quite as well as a dedicated quiver rod is cast a heavy feeder, but for normal legering with swanshot links or bombs up to an ounce it will be fine.

I've often done the same thing. Rather than lug two rods about with me when roving around on a river, I decide which method is most likely to work, and pick one rod best suited to that method. Some days it'll be mostly legering - particularly if I'm on the Wey or Rother after chub, so I use an early John Wilson avon with the quiver top fitted; you can still floatfish with it if needed - I'm not aware of any law that says otherwise. Other days (grayling on the Itchen or Test for instance) it'll mostly be trotting, so I use a float rod and, should I find a swim where I want to hold the bait in one place, I'll leger with it.

There's too much attention paid to using dedicated tackle these days. We're losing sight of the original reason we went fishing (to catch fish) in favour of a mechanical process involving the use of specific rods, reels etc. The fish should come first, not the tackle.

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. There is a lot of 'hot air talked about tackle - Its better to spend the time finding fish and catching them. Rather than lining the pockets of the tackle manufacturers.

Mark

Have a look at the Shimano Aerocast feeder rods, there is 3 tip sections which all have built in tips, very nice breaming rods and light river work.

Fred Blake said:

Why is that mad? A float rod has a soft tip and will detect most bites, certainly on rivers. It will cope with the same fish, whether hooked on float or leger tackle. The only thing it won't do quite as well as a dedicated quiver rod is cast a heavy feeder, but for normal legering with swanshot links or bombs up to an ounce it will be fine.

Click to expand...

Fred,

I fish with feeders with the float rod also, no I can't cast them that far, but who cares, i fish the margins, thats why some might think it's mad.

To many anglers never test their rods to the full, and you will be surprised what you can do with some rods.

I sometime use a quiver tip rod to float fish when I rovering and only take one rod - I find that I can float fish reasonsbly ok with this

Ray Daywalker Clarke said:

Fred,

I fish with feeders with the float rod also, no I can't cast them that far, but who cares, i fish the margins, thats why some might think it's mad.

To many anglers never test their rods to the full, and you will be surprised what you can do with some rods.

Click to expand...

Some might be surprised; I wouldn't! I've always maintained that if you cut a foot off the end of a thirteen foot float rod you get a twelve foot rod capable of casting a fair bit of weight and landing pretty big fish. Cut another foot off and you have a whopper stopper. Why should the presence of the extra foot (or two) stop the rod dealing with big fish? It doesn't make any odds when playing them, as it points down the line. You may as well argue that a quivertip rod shouldn't be used for anything bigger than minows.

The only drawback is the cushioning effect it has on the cast and the strike. For this reason alone, a rod with a stiffer tip is needed to control the cast with heavy leads and feeders, and to set a large hook properly. For example, you could leger for barbel with a normal float rod, 10lb line and a size 4 hook; the rod would play the fish fine, but it will cast poorly if the lead is more than about an ounce (it makes it all bouncy and weird - which I accept is not terribly technical, but it's the best description I can think of) and you'll struggle to strike the big hook home when you get a bite.

That's an extreme case. For normal legering a float rod with a reasonable amount of resiliance in the tip is quite capable. Drennan's original Tench Float fits the bill nicely. I used to use an old 12' Hardy Matchmaker for float fishing, and I found it ideal for general legering too. It could handle double figure carp and barbel on lines up to 8lb as well.

Before anyone jumps on me for suggesting we cut our rods down, I'm not! Most rods are designed to work at a given length and should be left alone. I'm simply drawing attention to the principles involved. A rod is essentially a tapering tube. Given a one piece thirteen foot blank, with no rings or handle, you could cut out eleven feet of it, either at the fat end, or somewhere in the middle. Put some suitable rings and a handle on, cut it in half or thirds and insert some spigots and you can use it as whatever you want. Most anglers wouldn't know it started life as a much longer blank.

Fred,i dont know if you ever saw the Mal Storey Severn feeder rods of yesteryear,but they were a float rod blank and used to cast 'coke can' feeders across the Severn and Trent and play barbel out for the match angler.As to Ray's comment on some anglers not using a rods power to the full,i couldnt agree more,for you can stop a good barbel on a 1.25lb t.c.,if your not frightened of it(you can on my normark Bob James and insight ones anyway),but obviously not in heavy water.

Fred,

I haven't cut a foot off the rod, just over an inch. What I am going to do is make a cork handle that fits in the end of the second section, like i did with my other rod.

This makes a nice small ledger rod, and is good enough for the fish i am after, if the big fish get hooked, i will just have to play them as i always do..........with fingers crossed.............