Question about rod quality

[Surfin the Susquehanna]

Hi everyone,
Now that the long cold winter of Northeast Pennsylvania is nearing it's end I am back into fly fishing mode. I have a quick question. As some of you may have read, I made a recent trip to Cabelas and treated myself to some new toys. One being a Reddington Crosswater 8wt rod for tossing some of the heavier flies I want to use in the Susquehanna river. I had the opportunity to try it in my neighbors back yard last week. We got so much rain that his back yard literally turned into a pond. I couldn't wait to get my new rod out to give it a try. Keep in mind I have not made a cast since November. After about 10 minutes of geting the feel back, I was able to very nicely present a cast of relatively good distance without much effort. I know this was a cheap combo ($99 - Rod/Reel/Line) but it seems to work quite nicely. I have read several posts on here about not buying "cheap gear" but I have to ask the question... why do I need to spend upwards of 3 times that much if $99 works? My other 2 rods are a St Croix Reign 4wt and 6wt and I really like both of those. Is rod quality something you appreciate more over time?

Just an observation, If I drive a Ford Taurus $20K, and then I drive an Audi S4($60K), I will instantly be able to tell the difference in the quality, even if I knew nothing about cars.

BUT, if I buy a $600 MTD lawnmower, it will cut the grass just as effectively as a $3000 John Deere, but at a fraction of the cost.

Get my point?

Where/when will I start to appreciate the higher priced rods and notice the big difference in quality?


I thought of a great additional point to make regarding this question. In addition to the above comparisons.... lets add the comparison of Honda vs a Harley. Many will argue the point that at less than half what you would pay for a Harley, you could actually get a more reliable Honda with equal if not better performance measurments. The downfall is, "It's not a Harley". Could there be similar reference made about fly rods? Where certain name brands are high priced because they have the name on the rod, but are in all actuality no better than a lesser known brand?

 

[MTskibum]

I think the comparison is closer to skis, than to a car.

I am not a great flycaster, so i cant notice much different between rods. However i can tell the littlest subtleties between different pairs of 600 dollar skis. Because i can push them to the limit. My skiing ability is limited by the equipment i am riding.

How far i cast is not determined by the equipment, heh. Hopefully some day though.

 

[shorthaul]

Big question---I'll try--the first considerations would be:
1.)Are there budget considerations?
2.)Who is going to use the rod and how do they cast?
3.)How long and how often have they flyfished?
4.)What will they fish for and where?
and i'll try to answer them:

First look at why a manufacturer has more than 1 line of rods---each product line must satisfy each of the above questions--the engineering, materials, fitments, development and testing on a budget rod will not be the same as thier top of the line rod.

Each rod will behave differently with different casting styles, body size and strength considerations---a rod designated as a 7wt for a soft open loop caster will become a 6wt for a hard tight loop caster and might have suprisingly different qualities.

Any good caster can make adjustments in thier casting to compensate for most of the compromises made by the manufacturer to target a lower price market but when it comes closer to the best of the quality rods, in some cases it becomes the caster that might not be able to extract the best capabilities of the rod (top end rods) .

The rod must fit the casters preferences or application but new casters might not have developed a style or preference.

The longevity of the rod is a consideration as well---a cheaper rod might not have the construction to last a long time. Years ago, we used s-glass rods that we bought blanks for 12 bucks and undelined them 1 line weight and they would get soft in one season. Warranties are generally better on the bigger rod names.

Will the new caster "grow out of the rod" and as he gets more profficient? The quality rod will still be there but the cheaper rods will be passed on to someone thats starting out.

Summary:
Top shelf whiskey and house brands will have the same affect and the best restaurant and the fast food chains will fulfill the hunger pangs but the one might be more enjoyable (during and after). I like riding Harleys rather than Hondas too.

 

[randyflycaster]

I've had similiar experiences casting less expensive rods. I am of the opinion that graphite technology is so good that today's inexpensive rods perform extremely
well.

They're probably a bit heavier, and during a long day of fishing that might affect you. Also, I don't think they look as good as top-of-the-line rods.

Randyflycaster

 

[BlueDun]

I think a lot of the issue regarding cost and quality is just personal preference. My first fly rod was a Cabela's Three Forks - less than $100. I purchased it b/c I did not know if I would like fly fishing, did not want to spend a lot of money, and the price was right. It did its job and did it well. I still have it to loan to people going fly fishing with me and I just purchased a Three Forks for my nephew to get him started in fly fishing.

Now, when I buy a new fly rod, I test as many rods as I can in the weight I want to purchase. Fortunately, the local fly shop has a variety in different price ranges. I take them outside on the lawn and try them for both distance and casting under brush. I also cut the hooks off of several flys (otherwise, catching grass carp gets annoying) for testing how they cast different weight flys. Water isn't available next to the shop, but the method above works for me. Anyway, my hope is always to purchase the most comfortable rod for me at the lowest cost, so I take a variety of rods in different price ranges and have one of the guys change the reel for me. I do not look at the rod for any hints about which model, I just cast them and whittle the selection down to 2 or 3 to try again on a different day (I spend a lot more time casting them the next time b/c I learned after 20 minutes with a rod that I almost purchased that my hand cramps over time with that particular sized grip).

I have done the above for selecting a new rod a number times now. I have always felt that I made the right purchase for me and always end up ruling out the cheaper rods - they never make it to the final cut. The cheaper rods do feel as though they would do the job. Assuming the person has adequate casting skills, I doubt any of the cheaper rods would limit what can be done with them while fishing. I do notice; however, a distinct difference in the ease of casting and comfort (feel in my hand, weight, etc...) between lower and higher cost fly rods - again, just a matter of personal preference.

 

[Joni]

Going to your last comment. I have owned both Honda and Harley, the difference?! Hondas are what we call throw away motors, meaning when they do break down it costs more to fix then to just buy a new one. Harley on the other hand is more a collectors thing. Modifying the motor is common and the parts can be found for less than a new.

If that $99. combo works for you, then there you have it. I think just about everyone started with the less expensive gear, and if they got into it like I did, they up-graded. There is a big difference. Pick up an 8 wt. Redington or a Cabelas of your choice, then pick up a Winston BIIx or a Sage Z-A, then tell me you can't FEEL the difference.
BUT, again, if you don't feel you need that, then don't. There are NO rules in FF (except for calling a ROD a POLE LOL)

Like you mention, here is another more related example:
A MOPED or a HARLEY. Both will get you from point A to point B, but that is about the only comparison.

 

[plland]

My experience has been this:
Higher quality rods are more fun to cast. A very low quality rod can be frustrating to cast. Beginners can't really tell the difference between "medium" quality and "high" quality.

 

[bonefish41]

I drive a Honda but it's an 2002 S2000 that's redlined at 9...if I could afford Carrera Twin Turbo I'd have that but that's why I roll my own...IMHO for me my home rolled 10wt TCR blank is the best casting salt rod I have ever used or seriously casted which includes all high ends and off shore salts and it's significantly better for me than my 9wt TCR blank...but
IMHO red wine is a better comparison...there is a diference between 25 and 300 but it's slight and subtle...what's your budget? Just because I cannot afford a 300 claret from Margaux, Latour, or RothC does not mean I will deny my old heart a 10-25 cabernet from CA...but if I could afford 300 I would drink it willingly every day...moi frois be damned..

 

[FrankB2]

I wiggled a few of the Crosswater rods last weekend, and looked at the
build quality. Seemed like a lot of rod for little $$$. I looked at a St. Croix
Triumph when I was at Dick's Sporting Goods a few weeks ago, and that
looked dandy for $89.

My first fly rod was a $15 fiberglass job: slow, heavy, and nothing to look
at. I don't remember the line I used, but I'm sure it wasn't over $10.
Fast forward to 10 years ago, and I got back onto FF'ing. I bought a Browning
graphte rod from Dick's for $60. What a huge dufference over the old glass
rod! My son and I fished that for a year, and then bought a couple of St. Croix Pro Graphite rods for $90. Made in USA, and we had arrived...LOL!!!!

It wasn't long before I began looking at FF'ing on the internet, and was
led to believe that true happiness was a Winston. Fortunately, there was
a Winston dealer just 15 minutes away. I tried a Winston WT 9' 5wt, and it
felt like my old glass rod, but lighter. The wife (Eyler's Fly Shop in Bryn Mawr,
PA) gave me a Diamondback Aeroflex to try, and I liked it much more than the
Winston, and it was lighter than the St. Croix. She also knocked the price
down to $225! A couple of theoor regular customers came in, and I asked their opinion. One of the guys took both rods outside with me to cast (again),
and asked me how much they wanted for the Diamondback. When I told him,
he smiled and told me to buy the less expensive rod. He did say that all of
his saltwater rods were Diamondbacks, but neither of use felt $400 difference
in the two rods.

My needs in a rod are:
*Lightweight, and a rod that doesn't feel tip heavy.
*Sections that fit together well.
*Decent looks all around, a nice cork grip, and hardware that's decent.
*Something that's at least mod-fast.

I've cast a lot of rods in the past 5 years, and 99.9% can be made to cast
well with proper timing and decent line. My son is home from Dover AFB
today, otherwise I'd be at the fly shop looking at the Winston BIIX or
Sage Z-Axis that everyone's been talking about. Actually, I was at the fly
shop looking at them last weekend, but was afraid to cast one. I'd
probably like it, and feel obligated to buy it.... !

*I was able to take the Redington RS3 I recently bought fishing on the
Delaware River yesterday afternoon. While that rod feel a bit tip heavy while
simply holding it (9' 7wt), it felt great while fishing for an 1 1/2 hours. Some
will say that it might begin to feel heavy after 3 hours of fishing, but I think
it'll be fine. Best of all, Cabelas dropped the price from $199 to $79 on
closeout. Gotta make way the shiney new RS4's...

Don't let the internet make you feel like your rod is inadequate. That's
all I have to say about that .

P.S. If I were going to spend some $$$ on a better rod, I'd probably buy another St. Croix Legend Ultra. I've
owned them before, they balance well, and cast fast enough for me. They are nearly identical in terms of casting to the
Diamondback, but they don't make Aeroflex rods any longer.

 

[bonefish41]

FB-2:
I agree with your Diamondback Aeroflex appraisal and in fact all of diamondback vermont made rods which unfortunately has for the moment ceased operation under cortland....my "bargain" 8wt Stu Apte essentially same blank as Aeroflex outstanding and I built an 8/9 rated aeroflex blank that I got at the factory store 5 years ago...was the only item that has ever "walked away" on andros...surprised you did not get cane on the main line

 

[FrankB2]

FB-2:
...surprised you did not get cane on the main line

LOL!!!!! TCO bought Eylers, and their customers will pay anything to get
the "good" stuff. If that's what keeps the shop in business, cool. I buy my
tying materials there.....

The Aeroflex line of rods were great! I bought a few from the Cortland
Factory Store not long ago: $106 each!!!! 3-pc rods models! At that price,
I should've bought enough for a lifetime.....

 

[Joni]

It wasn't long before I began looking at FF'ing on the internet, and was
led to believe that true happiness was a Winston. Fortunately, there was
a Winston dealer just 15 minutes away. I tried a Winston WT 9' 5wt, and it
felt like my old glass rod, but lighter. The wife (Eyler's Fly Shop in Bryn Mawr,
PA) gave me a Diamondback Aeroflex to try, and I liked it much more than the
Winston, and it was lighter than the St. Croix. She also knocked the price
down to $225! A couple of theoor regular customers came in, and I asked their opinion. One of the guys took both rods outside with me to cast (again),
and asked me how much they wanted for the Diamondback. When I told him,
he smiled and told me to buy the less expensive rod. He did say that all of
his saltwater rods were Diamondbacks, but neither of use felt $400 difference
in the two rods.

WOW! I guess different strokes for different folks. A diamondback over a Winston WT?! That WT should have been a med. to med fast rod.
But by all means go with what suits you. I am foaming at the bit waiting for my Joan Wulff which is a WT basically. ROLL CAST are a breeze.
I do have the BIIx but that is a fast stick.

 

[mojo]

I have a hard time believing that anyone that knows how to cast a fly rod would pick a Diamondback of any model over a Winston WT. But there's a butt for every seat. Diamondback is an ok rod. A WT is one of the smootest casting medium IM6 graphite rods still being built. But they're not for everyone apparently. Flyfishers are like car people. Ford. Dodge, Chev. Then you have Lexus, BMW, Rolls Royce.
But the question is about rod quality. My opinion is and it ain't humble either, if you want a good quality rod eventually, buy a Sage Z-Axis, ZXL, Winston BIIX, or BIIT, or an LT, Scott S4 or G2 blank and build or have someone build a rod for you. There's is a difference between upper end rods and lower end rods. Not all cosmetic. Proprietary tapers, graphite cloth being used, where it's rolled and built (China). You can wiggle the hell out of it in the store, or parking lot cast a rod all day, but when you get it on the water, everything changes. Accuracy, ability to fight the fish, comfortable all day casting is all taken into account. I know some of you will say it's the person behind the rod that makes it all happen. Yes it is- to a certain extent, but it will make things a lot easier. I'm sure Lefty Kregh or Steve Rajeff, or any big name angler can fish with a broomstick and do ok, but I doubt you'll see any of them using one. Your analogy about the Tarus to the Audi is more inline than the lawnmower one. I would liken it to shooting skeet with a Mossberg or a Beretta or Perazzi. (Though not to many rods with a price tag of a Perazzi)
Your last sentence about when will you start to appreciate the higher priced rods and notice the big difference in quality. Go fishing with someone you know with an above mentioned rod and see for yourself. FWIW, you have a great builder/designer in your neck of the woods. Mike McFarland of McFarland Rod Company. http://www.mcfarlandrods.com/
Graphite, glass (one of the living fiberglass builder/designer legends). And all around great guy.

 

[Curtis]

Honestly, I think this is one of those funny subjects.

Take a look at some of the fly fishing greats from the past and see what they were using. The rods they were making great casts with and catching fish on would not even be looked at today by most of the flyfisherman out there.

We can look at the Redington Crosswater and ask if it is quality but let's look at graphite rods from just ten to fifteen years ago. That Redington is a finer rod then the top of the line from that time.

I see this market as sort of like golf. The companies must keep people buying, so they come out with the "latest greatest innovation ever" every single year. If they can shave off a millionth of a gram of weight, they claim it is the most wonderful thing you have ever used and get people having to have one. It is just business.

I like the crosswater. It is a fine tool and it will make great casts and catch fish. It is not vogue or the latest and greatest (unless you see not breaking the bank to catch a fish you could have caught for a lot less as great) but it is a dang good rod.

Enjoy your fine new outfit. The fish could care less. They just wish you had nothing. And anyone out there on the water that could care less what you are using should really just go get a life instead of a Sage.

 

[FlyRichardFly]

I'm going through the same thing you are going through. In a couple weeks, when I find the perfect wt and length for my fishing, I will spend whatever I have to get the outfit I will fish with this year. I hate to "upgrade" every year. Fly fishing is my passion, no Harley's for me, so I buy what I want.
The "top shelf" rods list the weight of each rod. The cheapos don't. IMHO the weight is the most important thing. Rod speed, where it flexes, and how it casts are also important to me. All the "top shelf" rods have beautiful cork and excellent craftsmanship. If made here or overseas, the expensive rods have excellent quality.
I'm also torn with all the rods available today.

- for cheapos, the Redington CPS is as light as the St Croix Legend Elite and lighter than the St Croix Legend Ultra!...... at half the price!

- the Sage Z-Axis is "God Awful" expensive.... $675 and 3.48oz for a 4pc 6wt, while the Orvis Helios is even more at $755...... but only 2 1/2oz for a 4pc 6wt!

I love to flyfish...... so I will purchase what makes me happy. By the way, that $755 is only one month's payment on your gas guzzler. And gas is approaching $4 a gallon...... I would get some neat fly stuff and ride the storm out.

Everything is relative!

 

[FrankB2]

Oh Yeah.... The old "If you don't buy gear as expensive as mine, you must
not know what good gear is." line of stuff. The Winston WT was a noodle,
and the Diamondback Aeroflex was fast and responsive. When you refer to
Diamondbacks like they're all the same, can I assume that the Winston
Ascent and BIIX are in the same league? Have you cast an Aeroflex? My
son needed braces at the same time I bought the first Aeroflex, so can you
see why I didn't mind spending less for the rod that felt better????

A Winston won't cast itself any further than a Diamondback Aeroflex. Both
are graphite rods, and need a caster to bring them to life. I wanted to
buy a Winston that night, I really did. I just found that the Aeroflex cast
further and with less effort. Is that really so hard to believe? Pardon the rant,
but we're talking about a fishing rod. Have you seen Joan Wulff and others
cast a fly line WITHOUT a rod? Actuallly, I can get about 20' of line
going without a rod myself.

So yeah...I use Aeroflex rods, and that means I don't wouldn't know the good stuff if I tripped over it :tongue: .

EDIT: Anyone read A.K. Best's book on FF'ing? Archie says he wouldn't spend morre than $200 on a rod. Is he less of an
angler because of that? I'd bump my budget up higher than A.K's, but that just because I haven't found what I'm looking for at
less than $350 (full retail...something I avoid whenever possible).

 

[FrankB2]

I just wanted to say I agree with Curtis 100%!

Honestly, I think this is one of those funny subjects.

Take a look at some of the fly fishing greats from the past and see what they were using. The rods they were making great casts with and catching fish on would not even be looked at today by most of the flyfisherman out there.

We can look at the Redington Crosswater and ask if it is quality but let's look at graphite rods from just ten to fifteen years ago. That Redington is a finer rod then the top of the line from that time.

I see this market as sort of like golf. The companies must keep people buying, so they come out with the "latest greatest innovation ever" every single year. If they can shave off a millionth of a gram of weight, they claim it is the most wonderful thing you have ever used and get people having to have one. It is just business.

I like the crosswater. It is a fine tool and it will make great casts and catch fish. It is not vogue or the latest and greatest (unless you see not breaking the bank to catch a fish you could have caught for a lot less as great) but it is a dang good rod.

Enjoy your fine new outfit. The fish could care less. They just wish you had nothing. And anyone out there on the water that could care less what you are using should really just go get a life instead of a Sage.

 

[Joni]

Honestly, I think this is one of those funny subjects.

Take a look at some of the fly fishing greats from the past and see what they were using. The rods they were making great casts with and catching fish on would not even be looked at today by most of the flyfisherman out there.




Mind you, I am NOT saying you need a $600 rod to catch fish. But, you mention the old days....you just can't compare that anymore. I can tell you the story about the RICKENBACHER Bass I had. For todays music I needed better (MORE MODERN) pick-ups. When I called the company to ask if they had electronic pick-ups for it, they replied, "If it was good enough for the Beatles, it is good enough for you" COME ON! Times have changed, you even have several choices of strings and gauges.

Same is true with Fly Rods and REELS. The greats ARE using the high end stuff NOW.
You are right, it is a SUPPLY AND DEMAND situation. People are out using there gear which they love, then someone hands them one that is a little light and a new taper.....WOW! this is great, and so on. I do agree the Prices are SCARY. But so is Gas/ milk and anything associated with either.

Redington is not a fly by night name. Feel good about that. Same with Diamondback.
Frank B, you are absolutely right that there are several models of Diamondback out there. You might want to compare the feel of the Aeroflex to a BIIx or maybe an LT. It sounds like the Aeroflex and the WT are Apples to Oranges. It works both ways. There are many models of Winston.
Take care of business and use what you like, and Right Ons for being that person.

 

[GeorgeMcFly]

Ya I am the 1st to agree that cheap isn't always bad. I've said it before and I'd say it again. whatever works for you. I caught lots of fish on a full combo thats costs $20 so $99 will catch um too.

 

[mojo]

Oh Yeah.... The old "If you don't buy gear as expensive as mine, you must
not know what good gear is." line of stuff. The Winston WT was a noodle,
and the Diamondback Aeroflex was fast and responsive. When you refer to
Diamondbacks like they're all the same, can I assume that the Winston
Ascent and BIIX are in the same league? Have you cast an Aeroflex? My
son needed braces at the same time I bought the first Aeroflex, so can you
see why I didn't mind spending less for the rod that felt better????

A Winston won't cast itself any further than a Diamondback Aeroflex. Both
are graphite rods, and need a caster to bring them to life. I wanted to
buy a Winston that night, I really did. I just found that the Aeroflex cast
further and with less effort. Is that really so hard to believe? Pardon the rant,
but we're talking about a fishing rod. Have you seen Joan Wulff and others
cast a fly line WITHOUT a rod? Actuallly, I can get about 20' of line
going without a rod myself.

So yeah...I use Aeroflex rods, and that means I don't wouldn't know the good stuff if I tripped over it :tongue: .

EDIT: Anyone read A.K. Best's book on FF'ing? Archie says he wouldn't spend morre than $200 on a rod. Is he less of an
angler because of that? I'd bump my budget up higher than A.K's, but that just because I haven't found what I'm looking for at
less than $350 (full retail...something I avoid whenever possible).

No need to get all wound up. BTW, I've casted the Americana, Diamondfly, Classic. Actually fairly nice rods.
In all reality, I don't care what you or anyone else fishes with. Really I don't. Tonight- I just like to push buttons. Get's the blood circulating. I've never confessed to that before so don't take me so seriously.
Like Curtis says it's a funny subject. But there are some things you need to think about (you too Curtis) FrankB2 you mentioned A.K. saying he wouldn't spend over $200 on a rod. Since he's become a famous tier and fisherman, how many rods do you think he's really bought and how many have been given to him. The other is, I can get an expensive Winston bamboo, or Sweetgrass and your Diamondback will outcast it too. I know you can cast a line without a rod, I've seen Jack Dennis do it, I've heard Lefty can throw 90' with just his hand, although I'd really like to see that one.
It's not about distance, it's the comfort in your hand. I agree with you there.
I said WT's aren't for everyone.
Curtis, "Take a look at some of the fly fishing greats from the past and see what they were using. The rods they were making great casts with and catching fish on would not even be looked at today by most of the flyfisherman out there."
Curtis, you really think if Lee Wulff was alive today ( or any of the other greats), I think he'd/they'd be saying, "how in the world did I ever throw a line out with that rod". I sincerely doubt Lee or any others would be fishing with an old bamboo, or fiberglass rod from the '40's or 50's, or 60's. They'd be hucking graphite like the rest of us. Talk with some of the oldtimers that are still fishing. They wouldn't go back to cane or glass if they're lives depended on it.