sweetandsalt
Well-known member
Many of us favor a set of specialized as opposed to generally versatile all-rounder fly rods. Some fishers spend a major portion of their angling time on a home stream and others with similar habitats. Some, I'm one, travel seasonally and fish a spectrum of trout streams form petite to gigunda. Then there are techniques and methods that are served by particular rod taper traits. Whether Trout LL moderate or Method fast my dry fly style requires very stable and quick Tip Recovery...nothing to do with speed of casting stroke but the reaction of the rod to casting input for line control. A soft, deep flexing tip that deflects pre-recovery ruins my presentation on a 25' or 75' cast. I do not rely upon my rods' tip for tippet protection, that is my fingers job.
Also there is where a rod bends and the taper transitions from section to section. Language; this is the only easy one. Progressive Taper - it bends more in the tip, less in the mid section and least in the lower taper. This is the most popular design and a very smart one when well executed. Common examples would be G-Loomis NRX, faster progressive, Hardy Zenith, faster medium fast progressive, Orvis H tip-flex-D, medium fast progressive, Winston BIIIx slower medium fast progressive and so on. Crucial features of this design are smoothness of taper transition and the relative amount of lower taper power reserves to support the upper taper points.
Then there is what is sometimes referred to as Mid-Flex, a term and design that does not appeal to me. This style of taper involves a stiffer tip and butt with a more flexible mid section. This slows the casting tempo down permitting the caster to take his time on accurately aiming but also induces a sense of hinging in the rod's middle; a disconcerting un-smooth sensation.
Its opposite is Tip-Flex in which a medium fast to fast rod has a tip section that is disproportionally more bendy, almost as if a somewhat softer tip where grafted onto a faster lower and mid taper rod. I fished a 5-weight of this ilk for several years, Sage's Z-Axis. It cast like a faster #5 but its tip responded with a more gentle, less demanding sensation...not really soft, just more touch. The best current example of this design is Scott's Radian.
Full-Flex is self descriptive. If Progressive is one half of a parabellum, full-flex is a half of a semi-circle. Essentially a continuous curve deviating only due to the tip being thinner and the butt thicker but no compounding of the taper in between. This design is favored by some who feel the mass flex more and casting tempo is most relaxed and there is a perception of deliberate, delicate unfurling of the fly line. Such rods are most typically employed on smaller streams for shorter casts as there is a near absence of lower taper power to reach out with or support upper taper line speed generation. Full-Flex rods tend to have more loop shape anomalies due to the lack of lower taper support and handicap in-air and on-water mending as ample flex is called upon to move the line. A quality example of this style was Sage's Circa and some older light line Winstons, not to mention a good number of glass and cane rods of yesteryear.
The taper design I find most linguistically perplexing is the one typified by Sage's ONE and Method. These rods have a very steep taper with quick power emanating from every inch from a fast tip to a reserve rich lower taper. If a Progressive rod's flexural profile is like a half a parabola, ONE's profile is like half a sword's blade, or a narrow parabola with a pointed apex. Some refer to such a taper as stiff but really it is fast with super communicative liveliness of line acceleration feel minus much mass flex feel. I call these rods Technical Presentation rods but that is too subjective and non-descriptive. I appreciate such rods can be a little demanding and some try to slow them down by over lining, not me, but here is a style I need Memberships input on forming a descriptive name for.
All the above can have a place in one's kit, habitat and technique being the principle but not necessarily only deterring factor, and do in mine (except for the hingey mid-flex). In each taper style there are splendidly and poorly executed examples and they may span the range of price-points. I hope this sheds a little more light on the subject of rod selection than mere slow, medium or fast.
Also there is where a rod bends and the taper transitions from section to section. Language; this is the only easy one. Progressive Taper - it bends more in the tip, less in the mid section and least in the lower taper. This is the most popular design and a very smart one when well executed. Common examples would be G-Loomis NRX, faster progressive, Hardy Zenith, faster medium fast progressive, Orvis H tip-flex-D, medium fast progressive, Winston BIIIx slower medium fast progressive and so on. Crucial features of this design are smoothness of taper transition and the relative amount of lower taper power reserves to support the upper taper points.
Then there is what is sometimes referred to as Mid-Flex, a term and design that does not appeal to me. This style of taper involves a stiffer tip and butt with a more flexible mid section. This slows the casting tempo down permitting the caster to take his time on accurately aiming but also induces a sense of hinging in the rod's middle; a disconcerting un-smooth sensation.
Its opposite is Tip-Flex in which a medium fast to fast rod has a tip section that is disproportionally more bendy, almost as if a somewhat softer tip where grafted onto a faster lower and mid taper rod. I fished a 5-weight of this ilk for several years, Sage's Z-Axis. It cast like a faster #5 but its tip responded with a more gentle, less demanding sensation...not really soft, just more touch. The best current example of this design is Scott's Radian.
Full-Flex is self descriptive. If Progressive is one half of a parabellum, full-flex is a half of a semi-circle. Essentially a continuous curve deviating only due to the tip being thinner and the butt thicker but no compounding of the taper in between. This design is favored by some who feel the mass flex more and casting tempo is most relaxed and there is a perception of deliberate, delicate unfurling of the fly line. Such rods are most typically employed on smaller streams for shorter casts as there is a near absence of lower taper power to reach out with or support upper taper line speed generation. Full-Flex rods tend to have more loop shape anomalies due to the lack of lower taper support and handicap in-air and on-water mending as ample flex is called upon to move the line. A quality example of this style was Sage's Circa and some older light line Winstons, not to mention a good number of glass and cane rods of yesteryear.
The taper design I find most linguistically perplexing is the one typified by Sage's ONE and Method. These rods have a very steep taper with quick power emanating from every inch from a fast tip to a reserve rich lower taper. If a Progressive rod's flexural profile is like a half a parabola, ONE's profile is like half a sword's blade, or a narrow parabola with a pointed apex. Some refer to such a taper as stiff but really it is fast with super communicative liveliness of line acceleration feel minus much mass flex feel. I call these rods Technical Presentation rods but that is too subjective and non-descriptive. I appreciate such rods can be a little demanding and some try to slow them down by over lining, not me, but here is a style I need Memberships input on forming a descriptive name for.
All the above can have a place in one's kit, habitat and technique being the principle but not necessarily only deterring factor, and do in mine (except for the hingey mid-flex). In each taper style there are splendidly and poorly executed examples and they may span the range of price-points. I hope this sheds a little more light on the subject of rod selection than mere slow, medium or fast.
