Sensas XL poles and long sections

[TF_paulD]

I had a go with one of the Sensas XL poles at the weekend. the butt sections look over 2m long ! , even longer than G10 sections. They wont fit in a normal holdall and will even be a tight fit in a small car ! Is this going to be a future trend on poles ?
What do people think of this idea ? whats the advantages ?

[TF_wildinguk]

having tested an xl before going with my power match normal, can’t see it being the future yet. Yes the xl74 was stiff, but boy was it heavy, and the diameter of the butt sections was huge. I could never have seen me fishing with either of the extensions on, but especially at full length with both on. Longer yeh, but felt like it weighed a ton. And with the section diameter, it was just uncomfy for me.

And like you say, they are soooo long. It’s hard enough fitting the current normal sized poles in anything other than a big car….i can;t have a front seat passenger in my astra with a rod holdall in.

[TF_joffmiester]

one of the idea’s of the extra length is you can store your tops in it and saves extra tubes i’m not sure but i think you can store 3 top 5s in it and the other is for extra strength through the pole
i think the storage idea is bril ~clap ~clap

[TF_p2hl_p2hl]

yes it is the future… last year was the first XL year, look how many of their poles have become XL for his year.

many other companies have also changed their poles into XL.

it might not be very important in the uk, however in europe with strict 13 meter limit, reaching those 13 meters with out the use of a dollybut is very very important.
The use of a dollybut adds approx 850g down force required to hold the pole at 13 meters (with normal holding tecnique, pole held level, over your thigh). compared with and XL pole…

ps most of the long sections are 185-190 cm long. and most companies supply special holdalls.

the top 5 havent been changed the change is in sections 6,7,8,& 9

[TF_paulD]

@joffmiester wrote:

one of the idea’s of the extra length is you can store your tops in it and saves extra tubes i’m not sure but i think you can store 3 top 5s in it and the other is for extra strength through the pole
i think the storage idea is bril ~clap ~clap

Cant believe they designed it specially to do this, sounds like salesmans bull to me. the cross wrap on the butts looked nice though. Think p2hl is right though which is bad news for the uk.

[TF_joffmiester]

sorry paul mate it was only the idea when we tryed them last year at packington we found you could store 3 top 5s 4 number 4 6 no 2s p2hl is right on the nail ~clap

[Anonymous]

joffy mate,sorry to hijack this thread but have any of your lads tried the silver fish bolo rod yet.ta in advance.andy.

[TF_paulD]

The butts are so long i bet you could get the top 4s in without breaking them down (((-:

p2hl is right but it means that when they add a couple of extentions to make them 16m for the uk we end up holding something as thick as a drainpipe. Same prob on a lot of continental poles, theyre designed at 13m then they just shove a couple of extra sections on for us. Maybe we should have 13m limits too.

[TF_joffmiester]

@loda wrote:

joffy mate,sorry to hijack this thread but have any of your lads tried the silver fish bolo rod yet.ta in advance.andy.

no mate not yet i would think we will sooner or later

[TF_joffmiester]

i’d love to see a 13metre limit in this country you’d perhaps see more rod and line tackle being used

[Anonymous]

‘one of the idea’s of the extra length is you can store your tops in it and saves extra tubes i’m not sure but i think you can store 3 top 5s in it and the other is for extra strength through the pole
i think the storage idea is bril’ – but that’s been going on for years and years. It’s nothing new or innovative.

‘in europe with strict 13 meter limit, reaching those 13 meters with out the use of a dollybut is very very important.
The use of a dollybut adds approx 850g down force required to hold the pole at 13 meters (with normal holding tecnique, pole held level, over your thigh). compared with and XL pole…’ – so they should make full length 13m poles then. The other thing is that 13m of carbon is 13m of carbon whether it has a dolly butt fitted or not.

I played with an 86XL and boy was it HEAVY. Good at 13m, just OK at 14.5m but way too soft at 16m and weighed an absolute tonne.

[TF_wightangler]

the main reason- and simular to when pole section lengths were a few years back lengthened from 10 to 9 for a 13m pole(REGLASS first to do this?) is stiffness/rigidity over a longer section length- Tri-cast apparently debated this. A joint adds weight and works against rigidity.
A proper designed 16 m pole of course will invariably have wider dia. butt sections – a 13m pole with 2 parallel exts. will certainly be slimmer but not nearly as rigid -thats because of weight distribution / balance at full length and the stresses of working with carbon fibre as a material at this length.
We must have nearly reached whats possible- so lengthening the sections is a rational means of pushing the rigidity/lightness benefits of carbon given the limited design parameters and manufacturing processes and resins currently available.
Hope this helps.

[TF_The Roach]

Daiwa were first to introduce longer section poles (i.e. 9 sections at 13 metre length) with the Team Daiwa 412 model.

[Anonymous]

There were poles out way before the Daiwa 412 which had 8 sections at 13m !!

[TF_The Roach]

For example?????

[TF_mickyd]

Drennan polemaster 890

[Author]

Posts