The North American Fly Fishing Forum


Go Back   The North American Fly Fishing Forum > Tackle Talk > Fly Rods

Fly Rods Post any comments or questions regarding fly rods...

Like Tree35Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 02:07 PM
petee's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Central Coast of Calif
Posts: 292
petee is a splendid one to beholdpetee is a splendid one to beholdpetee is a splendid one to beholdpetee is a splendid one to beholdpetee is a splendid one to beholdpetee is a splendid one to beholdpetee is a splendid one to behold
Default Re: "Classic" models better than "New" models?

Everything below is just my personal opinion. I think it all depends on the material used to make the blank.

Bamboo: With the advent of computer design programs the tapers have made designing much better casting characteristics than in the days of yore. Remember way back when rods were just meant to get the fly, usually a wet, in the water. Modern = better

Fiberglass: Same basic material as the "classics", with much better technology. For example the new Epic Fast Glass rods use a unidirectional method to align the fiber in the same direction. This makes a better casting, fishing and lifting rod. McFarland & Steffen Bros. glass also falls into the newer is better catagory. Old glass rods cast and fished much like old Bamboo..... engine hoist comes to mind when fishing those rods. Modern = better

Graphite: This is one case where I personally think technology surpassed the material and has created a beast with no feel. It is evident when you see a guy waving the rod back and forth as fast as he can. Plus with the extremely high modulus they tend to break as soon as they get a nick or bruise on them. High speed rods have their place example: windy conditions. The graphites of the 80's had a more delicate touch and could handle a couple nicks or bruises and keep on ticking. Favorite graphite I ever had was an older Sage RPL 490. Classic = better

Notice how many manufactures are touting the new rods that are a bit slower or moderate in action. In other words it appears that they have seen that technology has passed the materials capabilities.

Remember.... JMHO ,
Pete
imxer likes this.
__________________
"Blessed is the fly fisher who's quiver contains grass, glass & graphite custom rods." Book of Rods 3:16
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 03:05 PM
Jackster's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,641
Jackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant futureJackster has a brilliant future
Default Re: "Classic" models better than "New" models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by petee View Post
Everything below is just my personal opinion. Graphite: This is one case where I personally think technology surpassed the material and has created a beast with no feel. It is evident when you see a guy waving the rod back and forth as fast as he can.
Remember.... JMHO ,
Pete
and my personal opinion is that we have never had it better when chosing rods and materials. I sometimes think about getting a 'glass rod for small streams but then come to reason and realize I do quite well with my old Orvis Superfines, Scott G's and Winston IM-6 and BIIIx rods.
These rods all work with grace and aplmob in tight streams and close encounters of the trouty kind but also have a bit of starch when needed to do things they aren't really expected to.
As for feel, graphite is a fantastic conductor of any tick or tap created under the water and telegraphs everything the rod is doing during the cast. Each head shake of a fish is transmitted right down the blank to your hands and is crisp unlike the deadened feel that other materials can give.
I'm not saying there are no dead and lifeless graphite rods but with todays materials and manufacturing capabilities and because of wise and verbal consumers they are getting harder and harder to find. One can find beasts with no feel in fly rods made of any material so stop picking on graphite, okay?

Oh, and again this calls for an ad-lib of Steve Rajeffs quote... "I can make a rod that will not break, the problem is... no one will buy it...
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 05:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,971
silver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond reputesilver creek has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: "Classic" models better than "New" models?

My opinion is that the "best" of the new rods are better than the "best" of the older rods.

But that is not really the decision process a fly fisher goes through when deciding to buy a new high end fly rod.

The real life decision is, "Do I pay $$$ to replace the fly rod that I already have? In the real world, the question is whether the extra performance is worth what it will cost to upgrade.

I still fish with the GLX classics because the $2400 it would cost me to replace the 3 GLX's I already own is not worth the difference in performance to me. It is important to others, so they are willing to pay for the new fly rods.

In honesty, if someone were to offer me a one to one trade for my GLX for any fly rod from any company, I would take them up. So far, no one has. So with every new "greatest" fly rod, I reassess whether the difference in performance is worth it to me. This is a personal decision and this decision is not unique to fly rods. Everyone makes it every time they replace any piece of equipment that still works.
imxer likes this.
__________________
Regards,

Silver



"Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought"..........Szent-Gyorgy
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 04-14-2013, 10:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Boston, Mass.
Posts: 990
moucheur2003 is a jewel in the roughmoucheur2003 is a jewel in the roughmoucheur2003 is a jewel in the roughmoucheur2003 is a jewel in the rough
Default Re: "Classic" models better than "New" models?

Quote:
Originally Posted by silver creek View Post
My opinion is that the "best" of the new rods are better than the "best" of the older rods.

But that is not really the decision process a fly fisher goes through when deciding to buy a new high end fly rod.

The real life decision is, "Do I pay $$$ to replace the fly rod that I already have? In the real world, the question is whether the extra performance is worth what it will cost to upgrade.

I still fish with the GLX classics because the $2400 it would cost me to replace the 3 GLX's I already own is not worth the difference in performance to me. It is important to others, so they are willing to pay for the new fly rods.

In honesty, if someone were to offer me a one to one trade for my GLX for any fly rod from any company, I would take them up. So far, no one has. So with every new "greatest" fly rod, I reassess whether the difference in performance is worth it to me. This is a personal decision and this decision is not unique to fly rods. Everyone makes it every time they replace any piece of equipment that still works.
Those GLX's are darn fine rods. I remember a shootout in Fish & Fly magazine a few years ago where the GLX 9x5 beat out all the current models from Loomis, Winston, Scott and Sage as well as several less well-known makers. Which current models do you think are better?

On the other hand, I was out in my back yard today testing the Targus Borger LT 8'6" 5 wt that I recently bought (on your recommendation, and because it was selling at a clearance price) against my venerable older Winston WT 8'6" 5 wt, and it was awfully tough to tell the difference. If anything, the Borger was a tiny bit more forgiving of casting errors, and it has the convenience of being a 4 piece.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"SOUTH BEND" #24 - 8 1/2' "HCH or C" SPLIT BAMBOO FLY FISHING ROD "RASG" XLNT Ebay USA Fly Rods for sale 0 03-04-2012 09:50 AM
"split bamboo fly fishing rod" 8' 6" (3/2) "excellent++" "south bend # 55" Ebay USA Fly Rods for sale 0 03-03-2012 02:50 PM
"split bamboo fly fishing rod" 8' 6" (3/2) "excellent++" "south bend # 55" Ebay USA Fly Rods for sale 0 02-25-2012 03:11 PM
"split bamboo fly fishing rod" 8' 6" (3/2) "excellent++" "south bend # 55" ?? Ebay USA Fly Rods for sale 0 02-18-2012 01:20 PM
One shop specializes in the "classic" rods, which are standard models, and the other Fish Bones The Daily Papers 0 10-28-2008 04:00 PM













All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
2005-2014 The North American Fly Fishing Forum. All rights reserved.