wrote:
I know, I know, this is a stupid comparison, and a stupid post. The
Boron is twice as expensive. Their actions - while both med-fast -
are
entirely different, and of course every fisherman will have his own
personal preference in any case. Finally, I'll be surprised if even
a
few of you have actually had a chance to even lawn cast both, much
less
fish them both. But for all that:

Anyone have any opinions on the 9' 5-wt Winston Boron IIx versus the
same-sized St. Croix Legend Ultra?

I have my own initial opinion. I'd just like to hear what anyone
else
has to say. (Other than: "Idiot!")


Tis not a stupid question, and not a stupid post and I like your style.
g. If you *listen* to the talk on the Winston Forum, one could get
the impression the BIIx is the greatest fly fishing invention since the
tapered leader. Then you have Jim's response saying he with the Orvis
rod instead.

There is no way I would classify the BIIx as med-fast. I have one and
have only yard cast it and even I can boom the line with it. I've not
cast the St. Croix model for some time but I don't remember it being as
fast as the BIIx, nor as flexible. I tried several different fly lines
with it before deciding I liked the Wulff long belly fly line. With
that line I had no issue loading with 10' of line or 40'. I did with
some other WF courtland and sa lines that I have which tends to
replicate Jim's experience.

My two cents is the BIIx is a nice rod and I will enjoy it but I am
partial to medium action rods and prefer the IM6/WT models. I admit to
being Winston loyal and would choose it over something like the Legend
if the price difference would not impact other family responsibilities.