A 7/8 reel on a 6wt rod?

[brookfieldangler]

I am having a custom 6wt built and looking at reels for it. I will be using this for smallies and carp primarily. As anyone who has ever caught one knows, a carp could really peel some line in a very short amount time so I want a reel with some good capacity for backing.

Most of the 5/6 reels out there seem to be pretty standard at 100yards backing/6wt wf line. In slower moving water this probably sufficient, but I tend to fish where the carp have easy access to some pretty fast current and would really like a bit more than that.

As a result, I am wondering if I can throw a bigger reel on there and load up on backing. As an example, the Ross Evolution LT comes in a size 3 and 4. Size 3 is a WF6+100 reel and the size 4 is a WF8+150 - imagine how much backing I can put on 6wt line! 200?

The weight difference is only .3 oz (4.8 vs 4.5) and I assume the extra backing will add a bit as well.

Is there any reason why I shouldnt do this?

 

[evan_aff]

Is there any reason why I shouldnt do this?

Not a single reason in the world. I do it all the time!

 

[bigjim5589]

I have an 11/12 size reel on a 10 wt, and it works well for me. It's also slightly heavier than the 9/10 size reel, but has not been an issue for me. I didn't really need the larger capacity, but got the reel at a really good price. It is nice to have the extra backing, and I'm using 30 lb dacron. The same could be done with using Gel Spun backing, but at a much higher cost. For me the economics made sense, & with the type of fishing I do, primarily LM Bass & Striped Bass, it made more sense to go with the larger reel since the price I paid was less than I could have got the smaller reel at the time.

So, I see no reason why what you're proposing won't work, particularly for such a slight difference in weight & the intended application. :thumbsup:

 

[Ard]

I went to using larger reels when I discovered that they often offer a better balance to 9' rods. Without getting too far into the balance issue I'll put it this way; I used a Marquis #7 on my 9' 5 weight PM - 10 for years before picking up a Viscount Mk. III 7/8 for the same rod. Both of those reels are large; 3 5/8" I believe and both are rated for 7/8/9 lines or smaller of course. They hold plenty of back line which essentially makes them pseudo large arbor reels. When you have a little more reel it is never a bad thing, with an extra spool you will have an 8 weight reel if you were ever to buy a heavier rod. Not true if you buy a reel rated for 5/6 line at 3 1/4 inch or under.

Big reels are cool,

Ard

 

[sweetandsalt]

I agree with all the above and will add this; ignor mfg. line ratings for reels all the time. Always go with a reel that will balance your outfit and provide the backing/line capacity you desire. I am using a Hardy MLA 350 intended for #8 line on my #6 rod and it is a perfect match.

 

[brookfieldangler]

Thanks for the responses!! I didn't think there would be much of a problem

 

[sandfly]

could always use some gell spun instead of dacron, usaully adds 30% more backing.

 

[fredaevans]

Not a single reason in the world. I do it all the time!

+1 here.:thumbsup:

fae

 

[Liphookedau]

Like the others these days I mainly use The Larger size Reels on my #6 Rods,as Ard has said they still balance OK,as most of the Modern Reels are Turned,Milled which Skeletonises them subsequently making them much Lighter than the the Cast ones.
The great Thing about The Modern Larger Size Large Arbor Reels is Line can Spooled quickly,especially when you have Hooked Large Fish.
Brian

 

[caseywise]

agreed as well. i line my reels to make my rods perform the way i want them to feel.


casey

 

[sweetandsalt]

I like Islander's naming system in which an LA 3.8 is a large arbor, 3.8" diameter reel. You determin the type and amount of backing you want to have and what weight will balance your rod. They provide a capacity chart for guidence but do not dictate a designated line assignment.

 

[brookfieldangler]

Since we all are in agreement on putting any size reel on there, let's talk about weight differences....

Let's say that I have two reels that both weigh the same amount but are made by different companies - would they both balance the rod the same way or are there other variables that could make them differ?

 

[sweetandsalt]

If identicale in weight, balance should be the same. The variables might include capacity volume, drag performance, saltwater compatability and ease of use. Not to mention all important aesthetics.

Holding any given rod with loaded reel mounted as if you were getting ready to cast with your forefinger under your thumb on the grip, the rod/reel assembly should feel in balace. If, with your finger as the fulcarum point the rod tip tends to dip downward the reel is too light and makes the rod feel tip heavy and tiresome just to hold as you wade about. I prefer to err on the side of a just slightly too heavy reel rather than too lite as it makes the rod feel lighter.

 

[BigCliff]

I own a Size 4 Evo LT and I can't think of a better 7/8 reel to put on a 6wt rod. I've fished mine with a 7wt line on two different stout 6wt's in fact, and neither is over 8'!

It might be too heavy if your 6wt is super light, but I'd be kinda surprised.

 

[addni]

Like pretty much everyone mentions, so long as it feels right do it. I use the same Waterworks Force reel for everything from 5-9, since it weighs only half of the avarage 7-8 reel, it not only works for me, but makes sense. I have 2 reels and 5 spools

 

[FrankB2]

I can't stand little reels, and regularly use 3.5" reels on a 4wt rod. I've even used the same size on 4wts. Sweet and Salt is right about disregarding manufacturers' reel size ratings, and use what works for you. I've seen reels that are rated for 5wt rods, and they barely hold a 5wt line! I have Evolution LT and Rhythm reels, and the weight difference among the various sizes is very small. You don't have to fill the reel to max capacity with backing (I don't), and the LT doesn't hold as much backing as the old Evo and Rhythm. Just one more reason to buy the next size up.

 

[fisher46]

The only thing that rig is missing is a #8,wooly bugger tied clouser style.
So the hook rides up. I call it the carp bugger. Olive for clear water dark colors for darker water. BLAMO!!!:wiggle:

---------- Post added at 04:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:19 AM ----------

Aspen makes a really nice reel. Not fancy but built well. Im slowly changing all my spools to Aspen. Check'em out.

 

[brookfieldangler]

Thanks for all the feedback.

I ended up settling on the TFO BVK II reel. It's light and holds a ton of backing. I have it all spooled up and I am just waiting for the rod to be finished.

I'll get some pics, reviews, etc...when it's all done and has been put through the paces

 

[silver creek]

I am having a custom 6wt built and looking at reels for it. I will be using this for smallies and carp primarily. As anyone who has ever caught one knows, a carp could really peel some line in a very short amount time so I want a reel with some good capacity for backing.

Most of the 5/6 reels out there seem to be pretty standard at 100yards backing/6wt wf line. In slower moving water this probably sufficient, but I tend to fish where the carp have easy access to some pretty fast current and would really like a bit more than that.

As a result, I am wondering if I can throw a bigger reel on there and load up on backing. As an example, the Ross Evolution LT comes in a size 3 and 4. Size 3 is a WF6+100 reel and the size 4 is a WF8+150 - imagine how much backing I can put on 6wt line! 200?

The weight difference is only .3 oz (4.8 vs 4.5) and I assume the extra backing will add a bit as well.

Is there any reason why I shouldnt do this?

I agree with the others that you can put lighter line on a larger reel.

But I will say there are reasons a reel is matched to a line and that is matched to a fly rod. Although the larger reel itself is may not weigh a lot more than the smaller reel, you need to load the larger reel with the extra backing and that adds some weight also.

I think you should really ask yourself why you think you need all that extra backing? What I am getting at is that if you think you are going to hook a fish that will take you 90 feet plus another 450 feet into the backing, maybe the amount of backing is not the problem. The problem is a rod without the backbone to keep that fish from running away with all that line.

Maybe you need to go up a line size to a stronger 7 or 8 weight that will keep that fish closer to you. Consider that a fly line is not like mono that has very little resistance in the water. Once 90 feet of fly line is out and in the water, it creates drag that the fish can use to break the leader.

 

[sweetandsalt]

If a river dwelling trout has your line and hundreds of feet of backing off your reel, it is improbable he is ever going to see the inside of your net. However, even if it takes 150+ yards of backing to fill a larger-than-rated reel, the (loaded) reel still must balance with your rod. It is difficult to aquire a reel to match a rod you do not yet have, of course. Optimaly, you try the reel on the rod at your fly shop. I recently purchased a new light-weight reel direct from its mfg. that I was postive was going to be perfect with my Sage ONE. It is designated a 5/6 and is dissapointingly too light. I am switching lines on it today and, instead, is going to be the perfect reel on my new 4-weight.