Advocacy for Lighter Gear

[ncflyboy]

Yes, we live in an age of aluminum reels and graphite rods. I believe we can produce lighter gear...except we are happy with what's available.

Wood is heavy. How many flyrods, even the high dollar ones, are still assembled with a wooden reelseat for a reel to ride on? Sage has the TXL rods...very light, but replacing the wooden seat would lighten the rod even more. Cork reelseats and sliding bands will decrease the weight even further, for example. Instead of scrapping the wooden reel seat, they work at reducing the weight of the graphite blank to reduce the weight.

Reels. The larger the flyreel, the heavier it weighs...generally speaking. Large arbor reels are generally heavier than mid and standard reels. We have composite materials that are far lighter and far stronger than aluminum.

Ross's F1 reel is cutting edge, but still uses aluminum. Sage's newest and greatest offering has a wooden reel seat.

Yes, we have made huge steps in producing lighter gear in the last 25 yrs...but we have the materials and technology to produce much lighter equipment.

Some folks may say "modern gear is very light compared to metal fuerled fiberglass rods of yesterday." I'm thinking about older anglers that once enjoyed casting an 8wt for bass, but cannot due to heavy gear. Sometimes older people are not in a position to afford the lighter, more expensive gear.

I could imagine a 9' 4wt rod/reel weighing 2 oz, or a 8' 10wt rod/reel weighing 4 oz.

Orvis has a rod called a "1 oz." How old is that rod anyways? What's the lenght?

I do believe the technology/materials are available. The kicker is that, like computers, the manufacturers release a product just a little better than the last product to keep us wanting more and happily spending the money to get it.

Wood, graphite, and aluminum are archaic in terms of materials. If the demand called for lighter products, I believe the manufacturers would produce them.

I suppose some people would rather have a pretty rod and reel instead of a truly light rod and reel...if the manufacturers would produce it.

Cheers,

Robert

 

[wjc]

Robert,

Here is an excerpt from an interview of Joan Wulff by Ally Gowans that is fairly recent:

Question: Ally

Tackle has changed a lot in recent times what changes do you think have had the greatest impact or improvement on your sport?

Answer: Joan

I started as I said in 1937 and bamboo rods were heavy and this is the reason why so few women of my generation got involved, the rods were too heavy, the grips were too big. Then we went to glass which they said would be lighter but it wasn’t then we come to graphite which was initially lighter, now you still have heavy graphite rods that are being developed as I speak but we now have women coming into the sport in large, large numbers so they need to know and we need to convince men to tell them that we need lighter rods because we don’t have the same strength.......

My 9 wt Sage RPLX of late 1980's or early '90's vintage is slightly lighter than my 7 wt Sage TCX.

However, I think much of the difference is in the manufacturers' "rod weight" ratings. I think there is ample evidence of this by just looking at how many people "overline" their rods.

Cheers,
Jim

 

[Rip Tide]

I use vintage rods a lot of the time. The extra weight is not usually a big deal. Not that it isn't noticeable, it's all what you're used to. My "regular" trout rod has to be twice as heavy as it's modern back-up and one glass 8wt that I fish weighs in at 7 1/2 oz. That rod can cast big hair bugs like a rocker launcher however. It may be too heavy for all day use, but often it's the right tool for the job.

When I build rods for myself I use the graphite spinning reel seats. They're around 5 bucks and light weight. Granted, they don't look "cool" but that's not my objective. If I needed my rod to look like everyone else's, I'd buy a sage

 

[russellb]

Robert,

Here is an excerpt from an interview of Joan Wulff by Ally Gowans that is fairly recent:



My 9 wt Sage RPLX of late 1980's or early '90's vintage is slightly lighter than my 7 wt Sage TCX.

However, I think much of the difference is in the manufacturers' "rod weight" ratings. I think there is ample evidence of this by just looking at how many people "overline" their rods.

Cheers,
Jim

I'll add a few figures to this-

Sage ONE 790 3 7/16
Sage TCX 790 3 5/16
Sage Xi3 790 3 3/4

!992 Sage RPL 790 3 1/8th ounces- that's 3/16th of an ounce lighter than the 780 dollar TCX- granted my RPL is a two piece but like the OP is saying- in the past 20 some odd years we have not moved the weight bar much.

In my former world of cycling I frequently exceeded 45-50 mph on a 15 pound carbon fiber road race bicycle that remained as steady as if I was out for an afternoon leisure ride. Further- if a Formula One car can handle the extremes of it's sport on a carbon fiber frame then certainly rod makers can make a modern 4 piece rod that is at least the same weight as a 20 year old 2 piece rod.

One thing though- reel manufactures would certainly have to up their game as it seems that with few exceptions the weights are fairly constant. As an example look at reels for 3 or 4 weight rods, from shopping around the common weight for these is in the 3.85 to 4.2 ounce range. Sure there are some exceptions such as the Sage Click series or some of the Lamsons but if you want a more traditional looking reel it's going to be closer to the 4 ounces with some being very heavy especially for a shorter rod such as a 7' 6. The Allen Trout 3/4 is a perfect example at 4.8 ounces-

 

[wjc]

Russell,

Check your 7wt tcx again and see if there is a "1" in front of the "5".

Could be that the saltwater TCX weighs more. However, the 9wt RPLX was billed as "salt water" also.

According to Sage, my 7 wt weighs nearly 1/4 oz more than my 9 weight of 20 something years ago.

Joan Wulff was not just talking through her hat.

Cheers,
Jim

 

[russellb]

Russell,

Check your 7wt tcx again and see if there is a "1" in front of the "5".

Could be that the saltwater TCX weighs more. However, the 9wt RPLX was billed as "salt water" also.

According to Sage, my 7 wt weighs nearly 1/4 oz more than my 9 weight of 20 something years ago.

Joan Wulff was not just talking through her hat.

Cheers,
Jim

Jim-

I got the info directly from Sage-

TCX :: All Water :: Rods :: TCX All Water :: TCX :: All Water :: Rods :: Home

I'm pretty much old school in my rod action preference- the RPLs and LL are still my favorites!

Russell

 

[wjc]

Jim-

I got the info directly from Sage

Ha! As you can see, I did too!

I'd think that a typo error would be easier to make than an error by a guy meticulously writing 15/16ths instead of 5/16ths. Epecially since it would take longer to write the former.

PS: I also certainly hope that quality control of Sage's actual rods exceeds that of their website.

Cheers,
Jim

 

[russellb]

Ha! As you can see, I did too!

I'd think that a typo error would be easier to make than an error by a guy meticulously writing 15/16ths instead of 5/16ths. Epecially since it would take longer to write the former.

PS: I also certainly hope that quality control of Sage's actual rods exceeds that of their website.

Cheers,
Jim

Excellent! I did not know if perhaps the TCX rods had changed since they were introduced, but certainly 15/16 is worse and makes even more a point than the 5/16. Three quarters of an ounce more than than the old timer, pardon me while I pat myself on the back for picking up my 790 RPL when I saw it on the "gently used" rack earlier this spring!

---------- Post added at 08:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:36 AM ----------

As far as quality control- maybe they outsourced their website overseas like they did their reels.... Hello, my name is Peggy

 

[cappy]

Only in the sport of fly fishing will ya find outdoorsmen discussing the merrits of fractions of an ounce of weight seriously.

 

[russellb]

Only in the sport of fly fishing will ya find outdoorsmen discussing the merrits of fractions of an ounce of weight seriously.:lol2:

Have a look at cycling....... Shaving GRAMS becomes an obsession, just ask my wife about my 750gram 3500 dollar bicycle frame.

 

[Rip Tide]

......backpacking too. it's an obsession

 

[swirlchaser]

Here's the real question. Does it really matter as much as we think it does? In some cases we're talking about 1/4 of an ounce. Does anyone take their wedding ring off before they cast? Maybe remove the buttons from the sleeve of your shirt on your casting arm? Should I shave my casting arm to reduce drag?
I can honestly say that anytime my rod felt heavy of my arm got sore it happened because I spent way too much time false casting and thrashing the water and not enough time actually fishing.

 

[brobar]

Only in the sport of fly fishing will ya find outdoorsmen discussing the merrits of fractions of an ounce of weight seriously.:lol2:

Fly fishing and cycling. Those hardcore cyclists spend thousands of dollars trying to save an ounce here or a fraction of an ounce there. I'm thinking a laxative would probably save them more weight AND money for their next ride.

 

[mikel]

Hmmm...I guess I don't get it. Certainly a fly rod/reel/line combo shouldn't weigh much, but isn't the real question how the outfit feels in your hand, rather than the reading on a scale?

 

[Frank Whiton]

Bass fisherman who compete in tournaments also try to shave off every ounce than can. Light Bass rods, spinning and casting, are very popular. The rod manufactures have follow fly rod design in building conventional rods lighter.

Even conventional bass reels are down to the 6/7 ounce range. Just a few years ago they were in the 8 to 10 ounce range.

Frank

 

[Jackster]

I like a rod combo to feel like an extension of my arm. Ounces may not seem like much but a few days of high-stick nymphing extra weight can be painful.
I can't afford a Ferrari and even if I could I would never get close to seeing its full potential. I can (make that, could) afford the cream-of-the-crop in fly rods and reels and like to think that I've tapped the upper limits of their range.
All I know is I get the same feeling with my favorite fly fishing rigs that I did when I road raced bikes, the bikes I rode were the best of their time and seemed to become an extension of myself. That, my friends, is one cool feeling that doesn't come easily.
I can get by swinging a few extra ounces off of the tip of a 9' lever but why when the better options for me are out there and obtainable?

Again, this just all boils down to a 'to each their own' situation. If fly fishing with your rig makes you grin, I would say you won.

 

[bigjim5589]

Only in the sport of fly fishing will ya find outdoorsmen discussing the merrits of fractions of an ounce of weight seriously.

Actually this comes up in discussions of bass rods, and even surf rods for conventional tackle too!

I'm not convinced lighter is always better. It really depends on the person using the rod. To me balance is more important than lightness.

At this point in my life, if fractions of ounces made that much of a difference, then I would give up fishing altogether! :shades:

 

[Guest1]

I think light has become overly emphasized. In fact it has become somewhat of a pain in the rear end for some of us. Try and find a reel that is heavy enough to balance a spey rod. Especially a big spey rod. They have gone all porting happy on reels to the point I don't know if it's a reel or a small bicycle wheel. Well, maybe not that bad yet but they are aimed there. I also like the wood in my rods. I like it a lot. In fact I put it in them myself. I'm not going to stop doing it either.

Now for my light rod horror story. I made a rod for a friend of mine. It was my favorite 'copy right violation' rod I ever made. I weaved the Minnesota Wild logo on it because he was a big hockey fan. It was beautiful and light as a feather. He used it in a Pike tounament we have every year here. Before weigh in time he put the rod down on the bench along the side in the boat, tip pointing to the bow. He hit the throttle and started heading for the weigh in. The rod was so light the wind picked it up and it cartwheeled right on out of the boat. It now resides on the bottom of Zipple Bay on Lake of the Woods. The moral of the story is if your rod is to light it can blow away.

If you think your rod is to heavy, eat more meat.

 

[Ard]

Hi Dan,

I hear you, I think my Cascapedia reel with line, backing, and lead head wound on the spool weigh about 17 or 18 ounces. It gives perfect balance to the Spey rod. I also use an old Orvis 9' 5 weight PM-10 with the amboina wood reel seat, on it I mount a Hardy Marquis #7 just because I like the weight. For those not familiar with the #7 it will hold up to a WF 9 line and backing.

I don't mind weight and compared to the rods of old my rods are light. I gotta go now, I'm cooking a Burger

 

[wjc]

Ounces may not seem like much but a few days of high-stick nymphing extra weight can be painful.

And the older you get the more difference it makes. But the bigger the rod, the more difference it makes too.

Probably not many guys on this forum have ever thrown a 12 wt - but, if you haven't, you should try it some time and compare it to a 10 wt.

I just got back weights two weeks ago from SA tech and Cortland tech on the weights of the ENTIRE heads of three specific lines in 10 - 12 wts, not just the irrelavent first 30 feet.

So the Sci Anglers entire head on their tarpon taper 10 WFF weighs 350 grains. The entire head on their 12 WFF tarpon taper weighs 425 grains. How many can come close to the same distance with a 12wt as a 10 wt or cast for the same length of time with a 12wt line as a 10wt line?

The difference in the two total head weights is 17/100 of an oz., very close to 1/6 oz. So if we assume an 11 wt to be halfway between, then 1/12th an oz difference = one line wt. Fractions of ounces and fractions of grams are what fly fishing gear is all about.

They matter for men too, just as Joan Wulff says they do for women.

Incidentally, I do think that Sage does indeed have much better quality control on their production line than their website.

Cheers,
Jim