|
|
Question fly rod evolution
Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to
IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. |
Question fly rod evolution
"mdk77" wrote in message ups.com... Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. Is that like a version of Yahoo Instant Messenger? john |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 14, 10:03 pm, mdk77 wrote:
Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. well, for certain applications, like delicate, short line casting on small or tight waters, im6 is still the best material for effective delivery of a dry fly. wayno |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 4:03 am, mdk77 wrote:
Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. Basically, yes. Rods with carbon fibre of ever increasing modulus were built, This has a downside, in that the thinner and lighter the blank walls are, the less robust the blank. Also, very light rods are bad windcutters, and have more or less zero intrinsic loading, so are useless at short range. The older rods with lower modulus fibre were better at this, the old fibre glass rods are still better, and cane ( bamboo) is usually better still. With a good cane rod, one can cast only the leader, as the rod has sufficient intrinsic weight to load itself. The older IM6 rods were usually pretty robust as well. many new rods with very high modulus fibre are prone to easy breakage. Very fast light rods (fast = stiff, in this context) will not load very well with only a small amount of line out, and this makes them less useful for short range. Also, it should be noted, that the finished blank depends not only on the modulus of the fibres used, but the type and thickness of pre-preg (Impregnated carbon fibre cloth), mandrel design, epoxy resin, and manufacturing process. It is possible to make rods with very soft actions, or very stiff (fast) actions, form the same carbon fibre. Usually however, rods using very high modulus carbon fibre are built lighter ( as that is the main reason for using such a high modulus fibre), but wont stand any rough usage. -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Question fly rod evolution
Sorry, I have problems editing with this crappy software.
The trend for quite a while has been towards lighter stiffer more powerful rods, most especially for long casting, but of course this too has a downside. If you get a "cannon", it will be useless at short range, unless you use heavy heads or similar, which will also preclude any delicate presentation. For general fishing, a rod with im6/Im7 carbon fiber may "generally" be assumed to be a better tool. Some of the "high end" rods are only realyl suitable for very verfy good casters, who are also looking for distance. For very much fishing, this is however rather pointless. For a long time now, many have been obsessed with distance, and this can only be achieved with very fast powerful rods. Quite a few of these things are awful fishing tools though.Quite apart from which, most people are quite unable to load them with the rated lines. I have used quite a few, but I certainly would not buy one, nor advise anybody else to. -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Question fly rod evolution
They are also more expensive of course.
This has also had the effect of "moving" some "standards". At one time if you asked more or less any group of fly-anglers what rod they used most, they would have told you, without much hesitation, a #6 weight. Now, many people would say a #5 weight, or even a #4 weight, which have become increasingly popular, as indeed have even lower weight rated rods. Not long ago, it was impossible to obtain a #3 weight rod at all. Now, things like #2 weights, #1 weights etc, are available. If you were able to handle some of the older im6 #6 weights, and a few of the newer #4 weights you would discover that some #4 weights are now as "powerful" as the old #6 weights used to be, although they can not handle the same total weight of course.Nor will they cast as far. The distance one can achieve is a result of line momentum which is mass * velocity, so the lesser the mass the lesser the momentum, and the less distance can be achieved. The achievable momentum with any given combination is mainly dependent on the skill of the caster, but it also depends on the weight and configuration of the line. This why beginners, and many others, find it easier to cast a rather heavier line. ( or better still, a head! :) ) The head works because the mass is concentrated in the head. The rod loads much sooner, even with a small amount of line outside the tip, because of course it is heavier per foot. The toatl weight however is less than the total weight of a full line at the rod rating. Some of this starts to get very complex very quickly, as it is largely subjective as well. Contrary to what was recently stated here, there are no standards for fly rods. The only tackle subject to a standard is fly line. The rods are built , and quite arbitrarily given a "weight rating" by the manufacturer, or one of his testers. With some rods, a very good caster might rate the rod as a #5 weight, another caster might rate it as a #6 weight, and a not too good caster might even rate it as a #7. This is because only very good casters can cast very light lines properly. It requires perfect timing and skill to load a fast stiff rod using a light line. But of course, those who can do it, rate the rod for the line they are using. Which is another reason why many anglers, and not only beginners, often have considerable trouble loading thei rods properly when they use the line rating recommended by the maker. Enough for now, before someone throws a fit........................:) -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Question fly rod evolution
By the way, rods are not high modulus, the fibre used in their
construction is! see here; http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-on...c_modulus.html TL MC |
Question fly rod evolution
mdk77 wrote in news:1187143425.516939.209290
@q4g2000prc.googlegroups.com: Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. To some extent, I like to think that recent "improvements" in graphite are nothing more than a way for the industry to get you to buy something you already own. Then I try the Winston Borons, and think those are a huge improvement. Do I "need" it? That's another story. -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
Question fly rod evolution
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:03:45 -0000, mdk77
wrote: Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. Quit worrying about what the sales department writes on or about rods. Depending on your usage, "IMfiberglass" or "IMbamboo" are sometimes the best things a rod can say, and IAC, "IMwhatevernumber" is not an infallible measure of rods. If you really wish the whole story, Google up either or both of "Hercules graphite" and/or "Hexcel graphite" with the term "fishing rod" and bore yourself to tears. Basically, "IM(number)" started as a name, admittedly related to a physical property, for a specific manufacturer's product line/series (Hercules) of raw material, which IIRC _they_ no longer even make. Buying a rod based solely on "IMwhatever" is much like buying a car based solely on which of many alloy/classification/property descriptor numbers the fenders are made. The main difference being is that rod "makers" have managed to turn it into a reason to cause people to upgrade to the "NEW AND IMPROVED!!" model whereas carmakers haven't (yet), although some have tried a similar scheme overall - Lincoln Mark-whatever, Datsun/Nissan 240, 260, 280, 300, whateverZ, etc. TC, R |
Question fly rod evolution
To directly answer your question, there was a time when IM6 was the -Only-graphite available. Now it's kind of like Starbucks- each fancy word will cost you. -- stumpy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ stumpy's Profile: http://www.njflyfishing.com/vBulleti...hp?userid=1915 View this thread: http://www.njflyfishing.com/vBulleti...ad.php?t=12232 ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 2:14 pm, Scott Seidman wrote:
mdk77 wrote in news:1187143425.516939.209290 @q4g2000prc.googlegroups.com: Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Just curious. To some extent, I like to think that recent "improvements" in graphite are nothing more than a way for the industry to get you to buy something you already own. Then I try the Winston Borons, and think those are a huge improvement. Do I "need" it? That's another story. -- Scott Reverse name to reply That is a very interesting and germane observation.Many anglers, probably most, donīt "need" the gear they have, and virtually none of them needs a new rod every year. Most especially so if they only do one particular type of fishing. Although it often upsets people to hear it, most would be perfectly fine with "mid range" rods, or even cheaper Korean and Chinese rods, ( which are also mainly mid range), than paying top dollar for the top rods. The reasons are also exactly the same as in the car analogy which is often used. There is no point buying a Maserati or a Lamborghini if you only drive a few miles to work in heavy traffic every day, and are not even a very good driver, but people still do it. You will still get to work, and possibly more reliably and in a more robust fashion, and of course a lot cheaper if you buy a Ford. escort ( or whatever the American or other equivalent may be). For top performance, you are obliged to sacrifice other things, and you may well not even be able to use that performance, so you sacrifice the other things for no good reason, and end up worse off than you were. An expensive rod might under certain circumstances, catch you a couple of fish you might not otherwise have caught, but ONLY if you can use it to its full potential. It might also cause you to catch fewer fish because you canīt use it properly anyway. In which case you would be much better served with a cheaper but more robust and generally suitable rod. The main ( sensible) reason for buying a new rod, if if you have improved your casting to the extent that the rod you have no longer allows you to extend your abilities ( assuming you desire to do so). Much the same now applies to expensive and specialty lines. At one time the standard advice was to "buy the best line you can afford", but what is the best? The most expensive? At one time there was not really much choice, and buying the most expensive one more less ensured that you did indeed get the best available. That will not work now. Also the standard advice to beginners is no linger quite so easy. I tell my pupils to use a cheap line for the first season, when they are learning,n and then to throw it away and buy a good one, once they actually know what they want. The lines may not cast as well as some more expensive models, although even most cheapies cast well enough if cast properly, but they will likely be ruined in a first season anyway, also from practising on grass, catching up in trees and bushes, being stooden on, etc all things that beginners do a lot! Why waste money on an expensive line for that? Long before you can use it properly anyway? -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Question fly rod evolution
Mike wrote in news:1187184135.504014.121350
@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: Although it often upsets people to hear it, most would be perfectly fine with "mid range" rods, or even cheaper Korean and Chinese rods, ( which are also mainly mid range), than paying top dollar for the top rods. The reasons are also exactly the same as in the car analogy which is often used. There is no point buying a Maserati or a Lamborghini if you only drive a few miles to work in heavy traffic every day, and are not even a very good driver, but people still do it. Keep in mind that the top rods come with top warrantys these days, and you do pay for that. One thing the constant upgrades in graphites and rod models do, is it creates situations where dealers need to unload last year's model. This can create some amazing deals for the wary shopper. I got my Sage SP like this, not quite for a song, but for way less than the some odd $600 retail, which I would never even consider. -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
Question fly rod evolution
Thanks for all of the information. I was just curious due to the fact
that I looked at rod blanks and found it interesting that there was such a wide gap in prices, even with the same "brands", going from the IM6 blanks all the way up to the super high-end blanks. There is one heck of an array of blanks out there and a guy could get one for a very reasonable cost from a reputable manufacturer, or you could mortgage the farm to buy the latest-and-greatest zillion-modulus blank. Also, I was just wondering (in my original post) if the IM6 was "the bees knees" at one time too (and consequently an expensive investment at THAT time). Sounds like there ARE incremental improvements that have occurred with each new generation of graphite, but manufacturers are always pushing this to get us to buy the latest-and-greatest rods. They make a lot of money, and we have an incrementally better rod, that may not be THAT much of an improvement, and for a newbie like me it probably wouldn't be money well-spent right now. |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 14, 10:03 pm, mdk77 wrote:
Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Before there was the IM6 generation of graphite there were other generations, some of those rods are considered classic todays. It is not the graphite that determines the rod's action it is the taper of the rod. At one point in History the G. Loomis company rolled the blanks for themselves, RL Winston, and LL Bean all of IM6 graphite but there was no way anyone was going to confuse the action of the Loomis IMX rods series with the Winston IM6 rod series. Winston had to stop using the IM6 graphite when they could no longer get it but the rod series is still available under a different name at a different price tho the graphite is no longer "it". At the same time there are those selling rods made of whatever the latest graphite composite is for significantly less than Sage sells its Xi2 for. What is happening in the marketplace now is most of the sub-$300 rods are rolled and finished somewhere overseas, typically Asia whereas those above that price point are made in the USA (from the USA makers anyway). Even the venerable House of Hardy in England has moved some production to Asia. This is important to some people, not so to others. The same thing is happening with fly reels. The cynics here would have one believe that there is no appreciable difference between a $100 import and a top of the line whatever or anywhere in between. The truth being that all of them will deliver a fly and fight a fish, just some do it better than others and different anglers have different timing and strokes. What BobS did in the Rio thread should be part of the ROFF faq for all newbies, get thee to the local shop and get them to help you. Sure you can mail order something less expensive from Cabela's but it may not be worth it to you in the long run. Before you assume anything about your skill level or even the price point, it could be worth it for you to visit some places that have shops and try some things out. |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 8:14 am, Scott Seidman wrote:
. Then I try the Winston Borons, and think those are a huge improvement. Do I "need" it? That's another story. Of course you need it. Not only because you like it but because some single mother in Twin Bridges MT needs you to buy it so she can make another and keep getting a paycheck. |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 6:45 pm, Wayne Knight wrote:
On Aug 14, 10:03 pm, mdk77 wrote: Another newbie question. Did the graphite rods progress from IM6 to IM7 to the super-high modulus rods that are high-end models today? In other words, was there a time when IM6 was the best graphite available? Before there was the IM6 generation of graphite there were other generations, some of those rods are considered classic todays. It is not the graphite that determines the rod's action it is the taper of the rod. At one point in History the G. Loomis company rolled the blanks for themselves, RL Winston, and LL Bean all of IM6 graphite but there was no way anyone was going to confuse the action of the Loomis IMX rods series with the Winston IM6 rod series. Winston had to stop using the IM6 graphite when they could no longer get it but the rod series is still available under a different name at a different price tho the graphite is no longer "it". At the same time there are those selling rods made of whatever the latest graphite composite is for significantly less than Sage sells its Xi2 for. What is happening in the marketplace now is most of the sub-$300 rods are rolled and finished somewhere overseas, typically Asia whereas those above that price point are made in the USA (from the USA makers anyway). Even the venerable House of Hardy in England has moved some production to Asia. This is important to some people, not so to others. The same thing is happening with fly reels. The cynics here would have one believe that there is no appreciable difference between a $100 import and a top of the line whatever or anywhere in between. The truth being that all of them will deliver a fly and fight a fish, just some do it better than others and different anglers have different timing and strokes. What BobS did in the Rio thread should be part of the ROFF faq for all newbies, get thee to the local shop and get them to help you. Sure you can mail order something less expensive from Cabela's but it may not be worth it to you in the long run. Before you assume anything about your skill level or even the price point, it could be worth it for you to visit some places that have shops and try some things out. That is also a very fair analysis. In order to prevent any misunderstandings, if it were possible, I would advise everybody, including beginners, to go along to a shop and seek out the best rod suited to you, regardless of price. But it is not possible, and the price is not the problem either, even the most expensive rod you can find is still cheap in terms of what other tackle costs, and your use of it. I once worked out how much an expensive rod cost an average angler, and it was only pennies per outing! Tippet material and other stuff costs more than a rod, over time. The problem is that beginners donīt know what suits them, because they canīt do anything much. They usually donīt even really know what type of fishing they are going to do. Also, choosing a rod first, is a bad way to go. One should choose one īs quarry first, decide how one is going to pursue it, with what flies, under what circumatnces, and that determines the line required, that in turn determines the rod required. hardly anybody does this. Further, many anglers use various rods for various things, some just collect them because they like to have a good range. Also, many people īs tastes change in time. They may always like a certain soft rod, but that does not stop them hankering after a fast one! There are also people who use the same rod all their lives, catch plenty of fish and enjoy themselves. Finally, as Mr Knight pointed out, even in the high end rods, there are massive differences. Unless you take lessons with a good pro before you even buy a rod, you wont even have an inkling of what to look for. The lessons might also cost as much as a good rod, and very few people go this route. If you canīt or donīt want to go that route, then itt is better to go for a cheapie at first. As your skill and knowledge improves, and you are able to handle more rods, learn more about them, so will your ability to appreciate a good rod, and know whether it is for you. Then, at the very latest, you will doubtless buy one. TL MC |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 11:45 am, Wayne Knight wrote:
What BobS did in the Rio thread should be part of the ROFF faq for all newbies, get thee to the local shop and get them to help you. Sure you can mail order something less expensive from Cabela's but it may not be worth it to you in the long run. It's frustrating when you live in a place (like I live) where there are no "local shops" for fly fishing. I can go to my "local shop" and find out about hogging catfish in the Mackinaw River, or what stink bait the catfish are biting on, or even talk with the guys with the zillion-horsepower bass boats who fish rods with actions like pool cues. But fly fishing? I tried that with the "local shop" owner and he said "Oh. Are you one of those 'wand-wavers'? and looked at me like I had dog poop on my shoe :-) That's a true story. Wanna "try out a few fly rods"? Ain't any. Not one. Not anywhere. No way, no how. This is Central Illinois. I finally (and I mean finally) over the winter found an older gentleman who put on local fly fishing and fly tying classes at the library at a tiny town South of here. I found this guy, by pure chance, as he doesn't to my knowledge, advertise anywhere. He was GREAT, and took us fishing, and I learned a lot from him. But I get kindof torqued off when folks say "just go down to the local shop and try out a few fly rods" It would be comical if it weren't so sad. I have to do the mail-order for everything, especially fly materials. Yes, I could drive to a bigger midwest city like Chicago, but I'm not that close, and it's not something I can do as easy as others who just drop by the "local shop" to try out fly rods. I just thank the Good Lord I stumbled upon the local gentleman. He's been a godsend. You folks with the "local shops" and other fly fishermen are truly blessed. Hey, when I fly fish around here (seriously) they look at me like I just landed from planet Mars. Folks will watch me for awhile, and sometimes will approach me in awe and ask "why are you fishing with plastic line?". One African- American gentleman asked just what the heck I was doing, and when I told him I was fly fishing he said "I thought so" and then yelled over to his buddies "hey he really is fly fishing"!!! But usually I catch a lot of fish, even when the locals are not catching squat. And that REALLY gets them going. One day I had a bit of a crowd that just gathered round as I was catching a lot of fish -- one little girl would gleefully run to the crowd each time I pulled in a fish and shout "He's got another one!!!!". That part's fun. But no "local shop's" around here :-( |
Question fly rod evolution
mdk77 wrote:
On Aug 15, 11:45 am, Wayne Knight wrote: What BobS did in the Rio thread should be part of the ROFF faq for all newbies, get thee to the local shop and get them to help you. Sure you can mail order something less expensive from Cabela's but it may not be worth it to you in the long run. It's frustrating when you live in a place (like I live) where there are no "local shops" for fly fishing. I can go to my "local shop" and find out about hogging catfish in the Mackinaw River, or what stink bait the catfish are biting on, or even talk with the guys with the zillion-horsepower bass boats who fish rods with actions like pool cues. But fly fishing? I tried that with the "local shop" owner and he said "Oh. Are you one of those 'wand-wavers'? and looked at me like I had dog poop on my shoe :-) That's a true story. Wanna "try out a few fly rods"? Ain't any. Not one. Not anywhere. No way, no how. This is Central Illinois. ... I feel your pain. There is a fly shop in Springfield, I've never been there but I have met the two guys who run it at our little Outdoor Expo here at the National Guard Armory in Urbana one winter. They seem knowledgable enough but never having been there I don't know about inventory etc. Fly Fishers Outfit 300 W. Allen Springfield, IL 217.544.7218 I'm originally from E. St. Louis and my family still lives in the St. Louis area so when I need to visit a fly shop I go to Feather Craft in St. Louis. I recommend them highly, especially for being able to go out back and cast as many different rods as you care to cast. -- Ken Fortenberry |
Question fly rod evolution
On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:51:56 -0000, mdk77
wrote: But no "local shop's" around here :-( That, of course, makes it tough to test a rod. Fortunately we have two great fly shop owners who haunt these pages: Bill Kiene and Walt Winter. I've already given you Walt's web page and it contains his phone number. He is a gentle man always willing to help a newbie with just about any question you can think of. As far as trying different rods, well, I am sure there is a fly fishing show near you in the wintertime. They come around this area in January. Fortenberry can probably tell you where the closest one is to you. Go to it. You will find most of the major rod companies represented, with fly rods you may try at the show's casting "pond". It was at such a show that I discovered Winston rods. However, you need not go the high road on rods; you should be able to find something that suits your "style" of casting and at a reasonable price. I look forward to the winter shows. Sort of helps with the cabin fever. Dave |
Question fly rod evolution
Ken & Dave, thanks for the info. I probably will take a road trip to
St. Louis this Fall and check out Feather Craft. Dave, I didn't think about going to a winter show. That's a great idea, and something to look forward to when the snows flying around here. I can probably "Google" and find out when and where these shows will be. Thanks. |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 4:07 pm, Scott Seidman wrote:
Mike wrote in news:1187184135.504014.121350 @r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: Although it often upsets people to hear it, most would be perfectly fine with "mid range" rods, or even cheaper Korean and Chinese rods, ( which are also mainly mid range), than paying top dollar for the top rods. The reasons are also exactly the same as in the car analogy which is often used. There is no point buying a Maserati or a Lamborghini if you only drive a few miles to work in heavy traffic every day, and are not even a very good driver, but people still do it. Keep in mind that the top rods come with top warrantys these days, and you do pay for that. One thing the constant upgrades in graphites and rod models do, is it creates situations where dealers need to unload last year's model. This can create some amazing deals for the wary shopper. I got my Sage SP like this, not quite for a song, but for way less than the some odd $600 retail, which I would never even consider. -- Scott Reverse name to reply That is also a good point to note. I have a couple of Sages, and a nice Loomis rod, among other things, which I think are very very nice rods. I got them pretty cheap at "angling flea markets" which are held in the winter here in various places. I would never have paid the full price for such rods, because I donīt think they are so much better than my own blanks, or indeed some other factory rods, to warrant the hefty price tag. But they are very nice nevertheless. Of course there is no warranty on such rods, but I donīt care about that anyway. There is none on mine either, and up to now, nobody has ever reported breaking one! It seems quite a lot of people now also use e-bay. I have used e-bay only for a couple of things up to now, and I am not really very impressed. Of course it is pointless bidding on a lot of American stuff anyway. I have got some really good bargains on fly-dressing materials though, some of which are unobtainable here. If I was buying blanks and fittings, I would prefer to go with a reputable dealer such as hook and hackle etc. But for second hand factory rods. that might be an option for you. Building your own is still probably the best bet though. I noted with interest that another poster also eschews the use of epoxy on whippings etc. So do I, and I only produced matt finished blanks and rods as well. ( Although those I made for demos were finished with epoxy) Also, on my own rods I use Fuji reel seats. No flash and bling! -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Question fly rod evolution
"mdk77" wrote I tried that with the "local shop" owner and he said "Oh. Are you one of those 'wand-wavers'? and looked at me like I had dog poop on my shoe :-) That's a true story. Back when I started fly fishing it was very hard to find equipment or advice and very common to be scoffed at for fishing with fly equipment. In some ways I miss the side effects of that difficulty ... i.e. people that fly fished back then had to really want to fly fish, not just want to do something trendy. Stick with it, I admire your more genuine interest in the sport as opposed to interest in just doing an 'in' thing. More to the point of rod evolution ... most of what's been said here is true .... don't be suckered into "latest and greatest" adman hype. I've been FFing about 40 years and, being retired, do so 90 - 110 days/year. But I am still the big limitation most times not my rod. Each year I spend some time searching for a rod that will "improve me" and I've never found one. But, as I have improved I have found my tastes changing slightly. However, I still fish rods purchased 25+ years ago BECAUSE they are still the best for a given function I've found. I Have found an assortment that suits my fishing and my stroke but that assortment contains rods from nearly the cheapest to very high end sticks .... example, for me ( and remember I've tried a lot, usually in actual fishing) the best rod I've found for stillwater trouting is a $89.00 TFO and the best for the spring creeks I mostly fish is a 8 1/2 foot 4wt Sage XP that until recently was 'latest and greatest' and pricey. If I find a $700 rod that improves my ability to pick up a ton of line and toss it again quickly in a differnt direction on Hebgen that TFO will be history as will the XP if I find a rod of any reasonable ticket price that out performs it for very short to mid range accuracy ... in MY hands. About all I can suggest is buy online from someplace with a liberal return policy ( Cabela's come to mind, but they support bad politics and I hate to support them G ) and be prepared to return a rod if you don't like it and try a different one. As for what to start with .... depends on what you want to cast ... #4 bass bugs and # 22 trico spinners will bring out the best in entirely different rods. Pick the prey, that determines the fly types which determines line size ... buy a good quality appropriate line and decent reel ( way easy to overspend here ... unless you are big game fishing ) ... now find a rod that casts that line to your satisfaction .... hell, as I think about it, I'd be tempted to order 4 or 5 different sticks for the same line at once KNOWING that all bu one were going back to whereever.com ... see you're as close as UPS to a shop that will let you try rods ;-) |
Question fly rod evolution
On Aug 15, 2:51 pm, mdk77
It's frustrating when you live in a place (like I live) where there are no "local shops" for fly fishing. I can go to my "local shop" and find out about hogging catfish in the Mackinaw River, or what stink bait the catfish are biting on, or even talk with the guys with the zillion-horsepower bass boats who fish rods with actions like pool cues. But fly fishing? [snip] But no "local shop's" around here :-( Oh heck try living in SW Kansas and wanting a fly shop. I know where you live hence my statement "visit some places." Mr. Fortenberry has otherwise extremely good taste, but for some reason he likes the sterile place known as feathercraft. The fly shop in St. Louis is a mile or so west of there. T. Hargroves Fly Fishing inc. |
Question fly rod evolution
All this talk has got my blood running. I have gotten into all the IM
this and that, and hi-modulus, etc. When I had the wrist for it (and my wrists have always been wimpy -- blame it on genetics), I could heave a 9wt with a #2 Skycomish Sunrise to the steelhead or a "egg fly" to the salmon. But my most fun fishing has been inside 30 ft or so, for everything from brookies to pike (and barracuda, but that is another story). In that regard, the best rod I have owned was one of the cheapest. It was a 6ft. two-piece H-I, which stands for (spelling will suck) Horrocks-Ibettson. It was glass and was sooooooo soft. My best rods have always been soft. Some years back, I drove off with it leaning against my truck. So, if you find it near Illinois Creek in the Snowy's west of Laramie, use it with my blessing. I guess I will start looking for light glass blanks that flex into the grip. It should give me something to do between Xmas and seed catalogs. cheers oz |
Question fly rod evolution
Wayne Knight wrote:
On Aug 15, 8:14 am, Scott Seidman wrote: . Then I try the Winston Borons, and think those are a huge improvement. Do I "need" it? That's another story. Of course you need it. Not only because you like it but because some single mother in Twin Bridges MT needs you to buy it so she can make another and keep getting a paycheck. ....um...do you have a picture of her? jeff |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Đ2004 - 2006 FishingBanter