fiberglass rods?

"rw" wrote in message
. ...

BTW, I never realized that a preference for faster action rods means
that someone "cannot learn or do[es] not want to learn how to cast a fly
properly."


Never said a preference for fast action graphite them meant that someone
cannot learn or does not want to learn to cast a fly properly.

I have stated before and the rodmakers' propaganda on their fast action
rods often mentions longer casts, bigger flies in the wind etc.....people
were doing that with greenhart rods long before graphite, boron, glass, and
split cane.

Face it, you just ain't the sentimental type. g

Wayne Knight wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
. ...

BTW, I never realized that a preference for faster action rods means
that someone "cannot learn or do[es] not want to learn how to cast a fly
properly."



Never said a preference for fast action graphite them meant that someone
cannot learn or does not want to learn to cast a fly properly.

You wrote:

"How many times do you have to be reminded? there is nothing a graphite
can do better than a cane rod except they are easier to make, adapt
better to a 3 or greater piece configuration, and have a faster action
for those folks who cannot learn or do not want to learn how to cast a
fly properly."

In oter words, you wrote (paraphrasing) "IF you cannot learn or want to
learn how to cast a fly properly THEN you prefer a faster action rod."

That does not imply "IF you prefer a faster action rod THEN you cannot
learn or want to learn how to cast a fly properly." That would be a
backward modes ponens, and obviously unsound.

So, you're right. I apologize. Now let's debate the meaning of "is." :-)

I have stated before and the rodmakers' propaganda on their fast action
rods often mentions longer casts, bigger flies in the wind etc.....

That's all true, Wayne. It's not just propaganda. That's the main reason
I prefer faster action rods. In calm conditions casting light-weight
and/or windcutting terminal rigs, a slow action rod is a pleasure.
Fortunately, I often find myself casting big stonefly and hopper
patterns and heavily weighted nymphs in windy conditions. Since I only
carry one rod, and I often don't know what the conditions will be, I
carry the rod that is the most versatile.

people
were doing that with greenhart rods long before graphite, boron, glass, and
split cane.

So why isn't everyone fishing with greenhart rods today? Might it have
something to do with the fact that they weigh several pounds?

Face it, you just ain't the sentimental type. g

You are dead-on right. I'm in one tail of the bell curve, and the people
who are sentimental about fiberglass rods are in the other. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"Wayne Knight" wrote in message y.com...

"rw" wrote in message
m...

A fishing rod is a tool -- nothing more and nothing less

I've got a set of planes and an old set of lathe tools which are fairly old
and nothing more than tools. But they are better than any similar tools I've
ever used and they were given to me by a now long dead relative and
craftsman. In his hands they helped create some beautiful woodwork, they may
be tools but they are special tools. A rod may or may not be any different.

I was hesitant to join in this thread, but rw's words struck a
nerve, and now that you've raised the issue of woodworking tools, I
have to jump in. I woodwork almost exclusively with handtools, a lot
of them old. If tools are just tools, then I shouldn't even bother
using these things, as there are plenty of electric tools that "do the
job" just fine.

But, I woodwork for a hobby, and as such, I choose the
methods/tools/whatever that bring me the most pleasure. So why would
we question if someone gets more pleasure out of throwing a silk line
on a bamboo rod rather than the latest "wonderline" on a high-tech
graphite rod?

If fishing is all about using the tool that is most effective, then
why aren't we all discussing bassboats and baitcasting, or even
better, dynamite?


Chuck Vance (yeah, I know that's extreme, but it's all a matter
of degree, no?)

"rw" wrote in message
. ..

So, you're right. I apologize. Now let's debate the meaning of "is." :-)


no need for apologies, and there's enough dick swinging lately around here
over what is and what isn't so I'll pass for now. Apologies if my initial
response was a little strongly worded.


That's all true, Wayne. It's not just propaganda. That's the main reason
I prefer faster action rods. In calm conditions casting light-weight
and/or windcutting terminal rigs, a slow action rod is a pleasure.
Fortunately, I often find myself casting big stonefly and hopper
patterns and heavily weighted nymphs in windy conditions. Since I only
carry one rod, and I often don't know what the conditions will be, I
carry the rod that is the most versatile.

If that's what you're comfortable with and it works for you than that's all
that matters. A friend likes to say something corny like "everyone's
different thats' why they make menus." But to some of us, and at least me
personally, I find some of the older materials more fun to work with. And
that's what floats my boat.


So why isn't everyone fishing with greenhart rods today? Might it have
something to do with the fact that they weigh several pounds?


Modern fly fishers are such sissies, that's the one thing that I never
understand, seems to me a few ounces just ain't that important. I think a
little extra weight helps me keep the casting/mending/playing process in
synch just a little better. I've got an arthritic shoulder which rejoices in
reminding me when I do things wrong.


You are dead-on right. I'm in one tail of the bell curve, and the people
who are sentimental about fiberglass rods are in the other. :-)


Well I guess that makes us in the 1% of something, even if on opposite ends.
g

"Conan the Librarian" wrote in message
m...

I was hesitant to join in this thread, but rw's words struck a
nerve,

Steve mentions this pov almost everytime a cane or glass conversation
develops. He was smart and or lucky enough to retire relatively young and
fishes almost as many days as some of us spend in an office making a
paycheck. He has a style but I don't think he usually means anything hostile
towards, he's just straightforward in his viewpoint.


But, I woodwork for a hobby, and as such, I choose the
methods/tools/whatever that bring me the most pleasure. So why would
we question if someone gets more pleasure out of throwing a silk line
on a bamboo rod rather than the latest "wonderline" on a high-tech
graphite rod?


Some of us feel the same way, others don't. Then again we're probably both a
little hypocritical in that we might admire and enjoy the "old fashioned"
way, that doesn't mean on a coast to coast flight we wouldn't rather fly in
a 767 vis a vis an old DC3.

If fishing is all about using the tool that is most effective, then
why aren't we all discussing bassboats and baitcasting, or even
better, dynamite?


We're all a little different, which makes this place interesting.

Wayne
hoping to finally get his shop unpacked and back into use soon.

that doesn't mean on a coast to coast flight we wouldn't rather fly in a
767 vis a vis an old DC3.

After my last overbooked commercial flight, I'd take the DC3. As long as it
didn't fly through a rainstorm.

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar
Save a cow, eat a PETA

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/i...age92kword.htm

Wayne Knight wrote:

Steve mentions this pov almost everytime a cane or glass conversation
develops. He was smart and or lucky enough to retire relatively young and
fishes almost as many days as some of us spend in an office making a
paycheck. He has a style but I don't think he usually means anything hostile
towards, he's just straightforward in his viewpoint.

Once again, Wayne, you've nailed it. I have my opinions and others have
theirs. Ain't diversity great? One of the strange and often amusing
things about Usenet in general, and ROFF in particular, are the
blowhards who have die-hard opinions on things as trivial as the merits
of fiberglass rods, and act like anyone with a different opinion must
have his head up his ass. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"Wayne Knight" wrote in message y.com...

Steve mentions this pov almost everytime a cane or glass conversation
develops. He was smart and or lucky enough to retire relatively young and
fishes almost as many days as some of us spend in an office making a
paycheck. He has a style but I don't think he usually means anything hostile
towards, he's just straightforward in his viewpoint.

I've got no problem with that. Heck, that's what Usenet's all
about, no? :-) I just have to react when someone makes blanket
statements about someone else's motivations for pursuing their
hobbies.


But, I woodwork for a hobby, and as such, I choose the
methods/tools/whatever that bring me the most pleasure. So why would
we question if someone gets more pleasure out of throwing a silk line
on a bamboo rod rather than the latest "wonderline" on a high-tech
graphite rod?

Some of us feel the same way, others don't. Then again we're probably both a
little hypocritical in that we might admire and enjoy the "old fashioned"
way, that doesn't mean on a coast to coast flight we wouldn't rather fly in
a 767 vis a vis an old DC3.

Yes, and I use electric lights in my shop, too. And then there's
the fact that we're "talking" to each other via the Internet. :-)

As I stated in my previous post, it's a matter of degree. I choose
to woodwork with handtools, not because I've got an aversion to
electricity, but because I get enjoyment from planing and sawing and
chopping mortises by hand, etc. Some of the tools I use also have a
history to them, and I like the idea that I am using them (hopefully)
as they were intended to be used before they got stuck away in
someone's garage for years.

I could get power tools to do the same thing, but it wouldn't give
me the same level of relaxation and pleasure I get from creating with
non-'lectrical tools. I don't pretend that my way is the right
way for anyone else, and I certainly don't do it hoping to feel some
sense of superiority.

If fishing is all about using the tool that is most effective, then
why aren't we all discussing bassboats and baitcasting, or even
better, dynamite?


We're all a little different, which makes this place interesting.

Absolutely. That's what threw me off when Steve was assigning some
other motives to folks who choose to choose to use bamboo or
fiberglass. Especially since I think of flyfishermen as being kindred
spirits to folks who woodwork with their hands. I.e., there are other
ways to do it that might be more efficient, but we choose our methods
because we enjoy the "journey" as well as the "destination".

Wayne
hoping to finally get his shop unpacked and back into use soon.

Go for it. It's still my favorite way to unwind after work.


Chuck Vance

rw wrote in message ...

Once again, Wayne, you've nailed it. I have my opinions and others have
theirs. Ain't diversity great? One of the strange and often amusing
things about Usenet in general, and ROFF in particular, are the
blowhards who have die-hard opinions on things as trivial as the merits
of fiberglass rods, and act like anyone with a different opinion must
have his head up his ass. :-)

I'm assuming the same holds true for those who thinks that graphite
is the only way to go? :-)


Chuck Vance (who hasn't even fished a fiberglass fly rod,
although my ca. 1980-vintage Fenwick HMG might come close :-)

"Conan the Librarian" wrote

Go for it. It's still my favorite way to unwind after work.


Chuck Vance

wow. apparently you've never tried consuming two or three
"see-throughs".

yfitons
wayno (after all, that's the source of the famous phrase, "hailfar, i just
come unwound...")