How Do You Rate a Rod??

[CatskillKid]

I was wondering how you pick a new rod. Obviously, I already know how I do it. But I was wondering how YOU do it?

What goes into your decision? What things do you consider? What do you look for? What makes one rod good and another rod bad? How do you determine which is the best and ultimately, which one one is right for you? Is there a method one should use? This post is for the experts and guides to weigh in heavy. Let's see what they've got in their tanks, shall we? Keep in mind, I'm going to be keeping them in check, so they better be legit. Also, if you're a complete beginner, but you bought a rod already or kind of have your mind made up, spill your guts here with reckless abandon. I want to hear your voice as well because you're just as important to the spirit of this post as well.

Sometimes, I wonder if the difference between an expert and beginner is 13 rods. If that's true, a smart beginner would make a real dummy out of a lot of experts, wouldn't they!

 

[golden beetle]

I was wondering how you pick a new rod. Obviously, I already know how I do it. But I was wondering how YOU do it?

What goes into your decision? What things do you consider? What do you look for? What makes one rod good and another rod bad? How do you determine which is the best and ultimately, which one one is right for you? Is there a method one should use? This post is for the experts and guides to weigh in heavy. Let's see what they've got in their tanks, shall we? Keep in mind, I'm going to be keeping them in check, so they better be legit. Also, if you're a complete beginner, but you bought a rod already or kind of have your mind made up, spill your guts here with reckless abandon. I want to hear your voice as well because you're just as important to the spirit of this post as well.

Sometimes, I wonder if the difference between an expert and beginner is 13 rods. If that's true, a smart beginner would make a real dummy out of a lot of experts, wouldn't they!

I am definitely not a guide, and somewhat past the beginner stage. I have fly fished for perhaps 5 or 6 seasons.

I own 1 graphite rod. An LL Bean Streamlight. For me, the criteria for a graphite rod is simple - can I afford to buy it? Affordability, for a graphite rod, is approximately 100 bucks. The Streamlight is in that price range, and casts like a cannon. It makes all the casts just fine.

I am now the owner of 1 bamboo rod, although that number is about to increase to 2.

My criteria for determining whether to buy a bamboo rod has nothing to do with price. Instead, I ask whether or not the builder makes his wares publicly available for casting, and do I like the rod when I cast it. I also have to like the builder to put down the cash required to buy.

If the builder is at the rodmakers' gathering in the Catskills, that's a plus. That's a fine system of peer review and accountability. In other words, if a builder is willing to put his work side by side with the best makers in the world, you gotta respect that.

 

[trico mike]

I pick my rods soley on how they feel and cast. The name of the rod doesn't matter to me. Personally I like a softer feeling rod that flexes nicley when casting and fighting fish. You would be suprised of the values I have found in stores on discount racks. For some reason people trend towards faster rods and the slower ones sit around and get discounted. Bought a 8 ft 6 5 weight super fine full flex for 180 bucks and love it.

 

[Pete]

Since I was "raised" on fiberglass, medium quality cane, and first-generation graphite, I also prefer slower action rods, and have also found some bargains in the "clearance" piles.

For many years my "everyday" rod was one built from one the original Fenwick HMG rod blanks.
My "good" rods were a Sharpes "Scotty", and one I built from a Phillipson cane blank.

My current "everyday" rod is a lowly Diamondback "Americana" .....

Occasionally, I'll uncase an old Fenwick Feralite, or a Browning Sila-Flex. They don't make me feel the least bit crippled.

A while back I found a Scott V2 in a bargain bin. It felt fine in the parking lot.... cast like an artillery piece...
Although it's not considered fast by todays standards, once I got it on the stream, it was just "too much work" to enjoy.

 

[JeffK]

I like a softer to medium action rod that I can feel bending and feels "light in hand." The feeling light while casting, not necessarily the actual weight is important. For example, maybe good fiberglass rods are exactly heavier than some stiff graphite ones, but feel lighter when casting. Actual weight is of lesser importance, but it feels nice. This fall I was fishing the Salmon R using my Echo Ion with Mike. We were climbing a steep bank and Mike handed me his Sage before he climbed up and it felt like a feather compared to the Echo. But you can go too far. Once a rod is below about 3 oz I don't think actual weight means that much, so it is more an issue with stronger and longer rods. For example, a 7 1/2' fiberglass Phillipson may weigh 3 oz but the weight isn't a big deal compared to a 2 oz graphite rod. However, a 6 oz 9' fiberglass 8 wt can feel like a club compared to an 9' 8 wt Sage.

Tip wobble that throws off your accuracy drives me nuts. Accuracy is more important than distance most places I fish and losing accuracy hurts. It is less important on shorter casts in smaller streams, but when you are trying to reach a fish on the far bank of the Beaverkill or East Branch you need distance and accuracy.

Like a smooth, slow action. I fish to relax and a smooth slow action is relaxing to me, even though it may not hook more fish. The staccato pace of some fast rods just isn't pleasant for me to fish. In poorly designed old rods with metal ferrules (i.e a lot of old wood British rods are clunky) you can feel the stiff spots in the stroke when the ferrules bend. While today's mantra is a fast rod for distance, some softer rods can put out line. But since I am fickle, I do have days where a faster rod feels appropriate.

I am a cost junky. I have been fly fishing almost 45 years and until 3 years ago never spent more than $100 on a rod. Now I have gone up to $300, but have yet to pull the trigger on a new high end rod. I probably don't really save money because I have tons of cheap rods, but I like to try all sorts of rods. For example, on one summer trip to the Farmington I brought 10 old fiberglass rods I restored and caught fish on 9 of them. Probably would have been as well served by one Z-Axis, but I enjoy the experimenting around.

Finally, I like to fish wood and Calcutta rods from about 1890 to WWI and fiberglass rods from the 50's and 60's. Half of this is an irrational love of fly fishing history. The other half is that these two periods were times of great changes in fishing and it is interesting to see how our tackle evolved. The under $100 thing means that I get rods that need work and fix them up. That is a mixture of cheapness, desire to take the rods apart to see how they were made, love of bringing old warriors back to life, and getting rods I am not afraid to use. I really believe by trying older, abandoned techniques you become a better angler. The anglers of long ago were good fishermen and have things to teach. Some things we lost weren't anything special, but sometimes good ideas were swept away too.

 

[coolkyle]

I like rods that fit a type of fishing I do. This is usually classified into 1) tiny creek, 2) medium sized river dry fly/light nymphing, backpacking, 3)medium river streamer/heavy nymph/big river dry fly, sea run cutthroat 4) big nasty nymph rigs, big streamers, light salmon (everything but chinook).

 

[redietz]

I own about 40 rods (less than one per year over the number of years I've been fishing), so I guess I qualified to offer these observations:

1) It has to be suited to the use to which I expect to put it, and I don't care about the uses for which it's not intended. It doesn't matter if a 6 foot 3 weight can cast 40 feet into a stiff wind, but it damned well does matter that it loads with 10 feet of line and can make accurate casts.

2) I don't think you can really rate a rod until you've actually fished with it. A rod may cast wonderfully at a show, but you don't get a feel for how it mends line, how it roll casts, how it handles wind, and (most importantly for me) how it hooks and plays fish until you've spend some time with it on the water.

3) Length - Although it depends somewhat on application, in the general case, I prefer a rod in 7-8 foot range. I fish a lot of bamboo and fiberglass, and they get to be heavy beyond that range. Even light graphite rod bother my casting shoulder if they're 9 feet or longer. Arthritis/bursitis in my shoulder is the main reason for the preference for shorter rods. I realize that I'm sacrificing line handling ability by not having a longer reach, but when the compromise is between having better line handling ability and not needing a shot of cortisone, I'll choose the latter. Some techniques, though, such as European nymphing, require a longer rod, there's not way around it.

3) Line weight: big enough to cast the flies I intend to fish and handle the fish I expect to catch, and no more. I don't cast weighted streamers with a 3 weight, and don't fish dries to brook trout with an 8 weight. (This is pretty obvious.) I do like a rod that will handle several lien weights, though (most cane rods will do so.)

4) I prefer a slow to moderate action in most cases. This is partly because I came up on fiberglass, but they also make a more delicate presentation, are easier to hook fish with, and protect fine tippets better. (I'm thinking trout here.) I also like a more open loop when I'm bass fishing (keep that Clouser away from my head, please) and a moderate action fits the bill here, too. Faster rods have their place, though, in stiff winds, and on casts over 50 feet. I never enjoy them, though.

5) I don't care about life time warranties. I'd rather pay less for a rod in the first place.

6) I do care somewhat about cosmetics. Especially on cane rods, if the maker doesn't finish it well, why should I believe that he did a better job making the blank? I'm not talking about "fancy", just about neatness of wraps, etc.

7) Jack-of-all-trades is master of none. If I were looking to buy my first rod, that I intended to fish under a wide variety of conditions, it would be a rod I'd never fish again by the time I owned 10, since it would be a compromise under almost any specific condition. It's a compromise that has to be made, though, when you're just starting out. In fact, it's a compromise that I still have to make when going on a trip that involves travel by plane. I can only take one or two rods that have to fit a variety of conditions, and I inevitably choose rods that I never fish at home.

 

[skipper3245]

40 rods!!!! I think you got hooked 40 years ago huh. My fly shop doesnt even have 40 rental rods on the rack. I have 5 rods and I thought I had too many. I only use two of them anyway.

 

[redietz]

40 rods!!!! I think you got hooked 40 years ago huh. My fly shop doesnt even have 40 rental rods on the rack. I have 5 rods and I thought I had too many. I only use two of them anyway.

More like 50 years ago.

A few of the rods I only keep as loaners. "Oh, you fly fish? Will you take me [or my kid]?". If I'm taking the kid, I'm probably taking one his buddies, and I may be taking them to a bluegill pond or a tiny stream with wild brook trout, or a medium size river. (Not to mention that I've taught the Fly Fishing Merit badge to several Boy Scout troops.) And, I've gotta keep a few for the niches that my girl friend doesn't have have filled yet.

A few are my son's, more or less. I guess ultimately, they all will be.

Five of them I've won in raffles (when I was really just trying to support a good cause) and would feel ungrateful if I didn't fish them once in a while.

I've been doubling up on a few niches in recent years so that I have four piece rods for when I need to travel by plane. (I really don't want to pay the extra baggage to check them.) I didn't get rid of their two piece equivalents, because a two piece is faster to set up and tear down when I'm traveling by car.

Mostly I have that many because I fish for a variety of fish in a fairly large variety of waters (from streams that I can straddle to the Potomac River), with a variety of techniques, and I enjoy it more if I have the right tool for the right job.

That, and I'm a pack rat.

 

[skipper3245]

Amen. Good for you.

More like 50 years ago.

A few of the rods I only keep as loaners. "Oh, you fly fish? Will you take me [or my kid]?". If I'm taking the kid, I'm probably taking one his buddies, and I may be taking them to a bluegill pond or a tiny stream with wild brook trout, or a medium size river. (Not to mention that I've taught the Fly Fishing Merit badge to several Boy Scout troops.) And, I've gotta keep a few for the niches that my girl friend doesn't have have filled yet.

A few are my son's, more or less. I guess ultimately, they all will be.

Five of them I've won in raffles (when I was really just trying to support a good cause) and would feel ungrateful if I didn't fish them once in a while.

I've been doubling up on a few niches in recent years so that I have four piece rods for when I need to travel by plane. (I really don't want to pay the extra baggage to check them.) I didn't get rid of their two piece equivalents, because a two piece is faster to set up and tear down when I'm traveling by car.

Mostly I have that many because I fish for a variety of fish in a fairly large variety of waters (from streams that I can straddle to the Potomac River), with a variety of techniques, and I enjoy it more if I have the right tool for the right job.

That, and I'm a pack rat.

 

[CatskillKid]

Interesting replies so far! It seems that each person who responded can absolutely live with the rods they chose to purchase. I didn't notice anyone lamenting that they absolutely bought the wrong rod.

For some of the replies, price was Jesus. For others, all purpose attributes are also mentioned (with no mention of how other choices might actually perform just as well, better or even, dare I say...worse) and some chose rods because they intend to relax and enjoy themselves and some give way to emotions at times when they grab a rod for the day.

Some of the most interesting (to me) replies so far touch on things like how the rod actually fishes (a luxury a rod buyer can't have because you have to buy a rod, THEN fish it) and other well stated replies bring to light that certain rods are good for certain purposes. You're all touching on many of the criteria that goes into evaluating a rod.

Obviously, if we're talking about a 9 foot 5 weight, then there would be hundreds of rods to choose from, wouldn't there? Place them all in a line and it would be a staggering assortment. Imagine, 200 of the best 905's standing at attention in a line. Which one is best? Which one is best for you? What criteria do you use to evaluate the rods?

Conversely, if a 7'6" 3 weight was deemed the rod that the fisherman needed to purchase, a set of appropriate criteria would again apply--but there would still be hundreds of choices. How would the choice be made and on what grounds?

Pick a rod that you love most. Think about how you selected it. What went into your decision? How did you discriminate between the rod you bought (and now love) and the others. Did you chose correctly? What makes you feel that you did?

 

[coolkyle]

I find it hard to keep Sage rods straight. All those rod series sound the same... rpl rplxi ll zxl txl tcx sp vps xp ds2 xi2 xi3...wow. Of course they're great, but I don't think I'm smart enough to own one.

 

[CatskillKid]

Good point, the names Sage chose couldn't be worse. They get an F for naming rods. WHAT are they thinking??? My advice however is so what! Get over your confusion by keeping an objective and simple view. Here's what some catalog or guide or fly shop guy won't tell you about them:

First, trust me, you're smart enough to own one my friend. Why? Because you're here thinking about rods and you're interested in which ones are among the best. Sages are pretty hard not to like or appreciate depending on the model and in spite of the crappy names.

As a rule of thumb, rule out most of the lower end offerings like the Vantage or the Launch of the past several years. They use pre-formed grips (instead of custom sanded cork), they are really made with skimpy components (for the price) and they don't really rate highly all things considered (and I'm talking about a lot of technical info which I won't bore you with) and especially when compared to some other less expensive options that are out there. YES, I just wrote that, for all you people who think I have Sage on the brain. I am stating my factually based opinion (as usual), which is by the way quite different than an opinion with no facts to back it up.

Out of the current models, the Flight is decent but it costs around $330. It's a typical faster mid priced modern graphite rod that has most of the attributes that you'd expect of a rod in this class. Guys who fish bigger water and prefer not buy a ton of rods really like these things. No matter what rod you're thinking of buying that's the same price or cheaper, test cast one if that's the kind of fishing you do. They sell well up in the Catskills for a reason.

The VT2 doesn't make much sense at over $400 but it's ok as well, it fares very well against many $500 plus dollar rods and rates highly in even the most advanced performance tests. However, it's now outdated and I personally wouldn't advise paying that much for what it is. You can do better with a little more dough. If you ever find one on clearance however, GRAB AWAY LAD.

The "premium rods" in their lineup are pretty much all astoundingly good rods. Z-Axis and ZXL (slightly slower) are flat out awesome for trout and salmon. You can fish the heck out of them and they pretty darn dependable and worth every penny if you have the means. I'd even save up for one if you have it in you to do so and price is an issue. I say this genuinely believing that everyone deserves a premium rod some day and I don't believe, when the day comes that you pull the trigger, that you'll be disappointed.

When you get out on the river you'll continually appreciate the true versatility the Z's give you and they're pretty awesome in even the most all encompassing technical comparison tests between other rod brands on the market that I or others have done. You just have to pick the right line weight and specific length that suits your needs. Even if you're not the greatest caster, you'll grow into either of these two models. Better casters will continually appreciate the various things they can do and situations they can handle.

For Saltwater, the Xi3 is my favorite rod I own for the big boys. I had 75 fish days this year with electric deceivers off the back of jet ski, chasing birds all day and horsing big blues in one after the next. Absolutely great rod. Under these conditions, my friends routinely snapped many other brands. Of course, there were brands besides Sage that took equal poundings, G. Loomis, Albright, St. Croix among them. But after listening to the sick, popping noises an 18 pound bluefish can create as they just splinter a Scott or a T&T blank, I have to admit I have a new appreciation for dependability. Casting the Xi3 though is really what sets it clearly apart. Not because it necessarily casts any further than some of our correctly lined Loomis' either. They just feel sweet and they're so darn smooth.

The TXC is the super fast rod which is a missile launcher second to no other rod I've every seen if you want to chuck and duck something like a streamer or a bonefish pattern. But really they're a specialty rod and as such, not many people are really in the market for one. I use one for trout with streamers, a 9' 4 with a Teeny 130 in rivers. Awesome way to spank fish in the heat of summer and not only does this rod awe me at what it does well, it also clearly ONLY does one this one thing well. Cast far. In all other test categories it is a dud. Meaning, it is what is.

The rest of the Sage rods are more either more specialty models (small stream or longer nymphing models) which are truly excellent for specific purposes and equally specific reasons (again, head to head against all comperable brands) or outdated rods that from a rod building standpoint, DO NOT measure up to the more current models but, given the technology for the time period they were made in, are pretty well universally respected in the rod building industry. I have some friends that bought one during the time period they were made, fell in love with them and I mean I couldn't pry one out of their hands even if I tried. I even know an Orvis District Manager (in retail) that fishes them all the time for this very reason. I also admit that I have an old SLT rod (the one the Z-XL replaced), it's a 9'4 weight and to this day, I still absolutely love it. Put the thing up agains any rod of it's time period and only the Hardy Superlite Plus comes close.

 

[ajfromnj]

When You see all the new Hardy Greys rods you'll be saying something different. They are going to put a dent into SAGE's rod sales for sure.

Any rod company that goes back to an older rod design after retiring is showing that there isn't anything left in the think tank. The 99's tanked and for good reason, they weren't good rods. I remember telling a sales rep that it wasn't a good idea 3 years before they came out. If anything I told him that they should be 10'foot 1" with a small fighting butt, and call them Nymphing 101 rods. SAGE makes rods with zero consumer input. Their thought is that we are SAGE and you'll buy our stuff just because of that.

 

[Trout Nazi]

Not that I'm a pimp for Sage, but the Z is pretty much perfect. I cast the new NRS for a few hours, and I would still buy another Z over it. The Z had better feel. Don't get me wrong, the Loomis was amazing, but the Z just felt better. As for customer input, most fisherman I've met are full of shit, nature of our breed. Most people buy high-end rods like this based on how they cast, first and foremost. Does anyone here think that they can out-cast Jerry Siem or Steve Rajeff?

 

[Pete]

Interesting replies so far! It seems that each person who responded can absolutely live with the rods they chose to purchase. I didn't notice anyone lamenting that they absolutely bought the wrong rod. .....

I guess you didn't notice my comments about my Scott... (maybe I didn't curse enough). http://www.njflyfishing.com/vBullet...ts/t20047-how-do-you-rate-rod.html#post173033
This was a case when a five minute trial in a parking lot didn't work out. It took some actual fishing to decide it was NOT going to be my favorite rod.

I have two other rods that stay in the closet...

• An 8', 4-weight Orvis Madison "Nymph", it feels tip-heavy, and has an action like a wet noodle. Someone who does nothing but short-line nymphing, might be able to cope.
  
  A 6', 5-weight Hardy Palakona. Nothing really wrong with the rod. I just don't feel I have enough line control when using rods under 7'. Someone who's comfortable with short rods might like it.

Both of these were purchased "mail-order" from a catalog. That was the mistake.

 

[CatskillKid]

When You see all the new Hardy Greys rods you'll be saying something different. They are going to put a dent into SAGE's rod sales for sure.

Any rod company that goes back to an older rod design after retiring is showing that there isn't anything left in the think tank. The 99's tanked and for good reason, they weren't good rods. I remember telling a sales rep that it wasn't a good idea 3 years before they came out. If anything I told him that they should be 10'foot 1" with a small fighting butt, and call them Nymphing 101 rods. SAGE makes rods with zero consumer input. Their thought is that we are SAGE and you'll buy our stuff just because of that.

Interesting points. I do LOVE the Hardy rods. They rock, to me anyway. They always feel awesome in the hand and on the river. Unfortunately, they don't actually compare to the Z's, but they are 100 percent wonderful rods in their own rights. The Greys rods are also really decent casting rods but there are many other options at their price points or below them significantly that deserve equal consideration. This said, I like the Greys too and I can vouch that they are NOT slugs by very technical rod rating standards. If anyone would like detials on this, meaning what exactly is a technical rod rating and how do the Greys, Hardys, Sages, Loomis and Orvis rods of the day rate, by all means ask and I will furnish with speed. I'm however more interested in how you all pick a rod though, so I will focus on your comments ONLY.

As for the If anything I told him that they should be 10'foot 1" with a small fighting butt, and call them Nymphing 101 rods comment, please check out the Sage Z-Axis 10' 4 weight, 5 weight and 6 weight rods, they are exactly what you seem to have descirbed, minus the name of course and the previously noted lack of the fighting butt which I'll get to in a moment, and factor this into your assessment. I own the 10' 4 weight. Awesome rod. I mean, AWESOME! It's the best nymphing rod I've seen for trout. The 10 foot 8 weight Z is on my list to buy and I have already tested it. It the the numeral uno rod in this length I've seen yet. Why then would Sage waste the money on 90 thousand dollar mandrels, not to mention the associated production costs, to create a 1 inch longer rod.

I am guessing on this next point but I'm most likely right. Perhaps the reasons they don't have a fighting butt on the trout models is that it's not a good suggestion. You don't really need a fighting butt to land a trout. I mean, it's not like we're talking about a King Salmon or a 20 lb. Bluefish or a Tarpon or something. It's a trout. Since when does a trout rod need a fighting butt?????? Keep in mind, I have 25 years of guiding experience (though I'm no longer a guide for anyone but myself), I've lived on 5 Star wild trout rivers and fished them 200 plus days a year and I have caught some big trout in my life, as have many of my clients. I own a boat on Long Island Sound, I have fished Montauk and Fishers Island and Little Gull to the Gut to Block all my life as well. I have traveled all over the world and caught every Salmon there is, Bonefish, Tuna, Bonito, Albies, Tarpon, Giant Travalle, Redfish, Snook, Permit, Dorado and I'm sure I'm leaving a bunch of Bluefish and 50+ pound Stripers out. I fish at night for huge Trout as well. A fighting butt??? On a Trout rod???? Bah.

Also, when you add a fighting butt, it changes the swing weight of a fly rod. Sage rates number one almost every time they make a rod, even the lower end rods, in swing weight and they take this very seriously because this is a component of rod manufacturing and design. In fact, Sage takes every single category very seriously. The goal is to make the best rods, a company has to have the rods with the best scores in each of the various categories, swing weight being one of them. Just a thought.

Out of curiosity, you say that the 99's aren't good rods, yet you don't give much in the way of reasons (other than the small fighting butt which is present on the 99 8 weight)??? Would you mind elaborating for our reading audience (and my own personal curiosity of course)? I always find an opinion based on numerous substantiated facts so much more credible than one that isn't.

In your comments case, this is especially relevant given the existance of the 10' Z Axis rods. I for one would love to know why a 9'9" nymphing rod built with carbon fiber allignment technology (to ensure ultra smooth casting feel and control as this techonlogy eliminates vibration by dampening it literally evenly throughout the blank) and modulous positioning technoligy (which eliminates glass that most all companies place in the hoops to reinforce against breakage thereby creating further smoothness and line control which can literally be felt by the caster), fitted with an oversized shooting guide suited for lobbing large amounts of weight and mulitple nymph rigs is so bad, coupled with thier deeper flexing, slower action blanks that make it easier to roll cast with power and throw more easy, open loops associated with nymphing, not to mention their thinner or "finer" tips that detract from distance casting (something nymphing rods DON'T do) but lend to strike sensitivity and hook set capabilty. Due to these innovations in rod design, the blanks are also incredibly light weight which, in a longer taper, is worth it's weight in gold as the caster must operate the rod with one hand in, at most, a single spey or traditional casting method.

I don't see much of a difference in effectiveness between a 9 foot 9 inch blank and a 10 foot 1 inch blank. Given the technology that is now hitting the market, I anticipate an 11 foot rod for nymphing that features the technology I mentioned above and the light weight that would be needed to still maintain a one handed rod platform will be the next great nymphing rods of the day.

---------- Post added at 12:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:09 AM ----------

I guess you didn't notice my comments about my Scott... (maybe I didn't curse enough). http://www.njflyfishing.com/vBullet...ts/t20047-how-do-you-rate-rod.html#post173033
This was a case when a five minute trial in a parking lot didn't work out. It took some actual fishing to decide it was NOT going to be my favorite rod.

I have two other rods that stay in the closet...

• An 8', 4-weight Orvis Madison "Nymph", it feels tip-heavy, and has an action like a wet noodle. Someone who does nothing but short-line nymphing, might be able to cope.
  
  A 6', 5-weight Hardy Palakona. Nothing really wrong with the rod. I just don't feel I have enough line control when using rods under 7'. Someone who's comfortable with short rods might like it.

Both of these were purchased "mail-order" from a catalog. That was the mistake.

Well. You can't win them all, now can you! I have also bought several rods that really didn't work out once I started abusing them daily. Also, what one guy loves, another guy hates. So keep that in mind ok. The only advice I have for you is keep an open mind, ask unbiased profesionals in the industry (meaning, not ones who work for specific companies like Orvis, St. Croix, Sage...etc.) for advice and do some homework before you buy a rod. Consider what you're looking for and try to asertain how the rod SCORES on complex Rod Evaluation Tests. You can also just ask me on that last point. Just saying.

---------- Post added at 12:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 AM ----------

Well said Lad! I applaud you for your beliefs, as unfactual as they may be! "Just felt better" is not going to cut it. We need proof. Just because I 100 percent agree with you doesn't mean I can cut you any slack. We have to be fair to all the Loomis, Winston, Hardy, and whatever other rod lovers are out there.

 

[ajfromnj]

Who ever you are,

Hardy has a rod coming in January that is nicer than the Z AXIS.

You don't think that I've owned Z AXIS rods? I had every one that you mention plus about 7 others. I am very familiar with their line up of rods. There is no need to speak to forum members here like they are first graders. Many of the guys here know what they are talking about. I can promise you that any rod that I make comments on, I have owned it and or have gotten a sales rep's rod and tried it. The Z Axis 10 foot 4 and 5 weights are very nice, but you can get. A rod with almost identical action for nearly half the price.

As for rods better than better than Greys at a lower price point, good luck. That's the place where you lose credibility with me. You would have to absolutely lying to yourself if you truly believe that TFO puts out a product caparable to Greys.

Btw Have you seen all of the rods that are coming out this season in order to make a fair and unbiased assessment? Do all of the reps cone show you what's new? I am just curious to hear how you get all of these rods in hand to test them out.

 

[Simms]

Keep in mind, I have 25 years of guiding experience (though I'm no longer a guide for anyone but myself), I've lived on 5 Star wild trout rivers and fished them 200 plus days a year and I have caught some big trout in my life, as have many of my clients. I own a boat on Long Island Sound, I have fished Montauk and Fishers Island and Little Gull to the Gut to Block all my life as well. I have traveled all over the world and caught every Salmon there is, Bonefish, Tuna, Bonito, Albies, Tarpon, Giant Travalle, Redfish, Snook, Permit, Dorado and I'm sure I'm leaving a bunch of Bluefish and 50+ pound Stripers out. I fish at night for huge Trout as well. A fighting butt??? On a Trout rod???? Bah.

Thanks for the recap on where you have traveled and caught fish, however thats 2 minutes of my life ill never get back, and does nothing to solidy your argument against fighting butts.

I like a fighting butt on a 4 or 5wt as I can position the rod against my forearm when needing to lay into a fish, while the fighting but allows it to be more comfortable(over a NON butt rod), and allows more control(power), as well.

Crosby Beane, the New England Hardy/Greys rep had me demo 2 Marksman, and 2 greys for him this summer. I can tell you, (as I have sage z axis,loomis glx, winston, etc) the Greys rods felt just as good, if not BETTER than rods two and three times their price point. The fast action Greys (tournament edition, g-tec, etc) felt better than a z-axis, and for only around 300 bucks! I can assure you, as I am getting into switch/spey fishing, the next rod delivered by the man in the brown truck is going to be a Greys!

and holy god damn run on sentence CK...

 

[coolkyle]

I absolutely love the Greys x-flite 4wt I just got. I tried it out yesterday, it handled indicator nymphing and small streamers very nicely. And it landed a 16" brookie with ease. Interestingly, the GRXI rod I have is just as nicely finished at around half the price.

 

[Simms]

Kyle,

Just pulled out my Grey's catalogue, and the X flight looks SWEEEEET! Picture doesn't do it much justice, so I wanna ask you, how is the finish of the rod? (looks, cork, wrappings etc)

By the pic, it loooks great, but they only show the handle basically.

I had my eye on the XD Comp Special for spring drop backs....Evem the entry lovel greys look killer.

 

[coolkyle]

The wraps are a nice translucent yellow, and I like the fact that you can see the ends of the metallic highlights tucked under it. The blank looks olive or gray, depending on the light. The cork is average, not as good as my GRXI. I didn't buy it for looks, it was damn cheap and the action is killer. I'd say it's a true medium-fast and the line rating is accurate.

 

[ajfromnj]

Simms,

You're right about the fighting butt on the longer rods. It has nothing to do with fighting the fish. It makes it more comfortable to fish all day. The little weight that the fighting butt adds also helps to balance the longer length of the rod. The new Greys Streamflex rods have a small fighting butt. They are a convertible rod that us 9'6" inches with a piece that stores in the butt section that makes the rod ten feet. This would be a great rod for the trout angler that wants a good streamer rod and a steelhead rod. You can keep the piece out and have a nine and a half foot streamer rod and then break it out and have a ten foot nymphing rod for the Lake Tributaries. Real James Bond stuff!

Hardy will be at the Fly Tying Symposium in two weeks. I hope to see you guys there!

 

[Simms]

AJ,

Are the stream flexes the only Greys rod with extendable butt? I am looking in my catalogue and can't make that distinction..I guess I shall resort to GOOGLE>

 

[coolkyle]

AJ,

Are the stream flexes the only Greys rod with extendable butt? I am looking in my catalogue and can't make that distinction..I guess I shall resort to GOOGLE>

I think Aaron's talking about the new rods they have coming out.

 

[Simms]

I think Aaron's talking about the new rods they have coming out.

BINGO. my bad.


Now look at my previous post, Kyle, directed to you.

 

[ajfromnj]

It's not on the market yet. I saw it a few weeks ago for the first time. It's not an extra butt section. It goes in between the butt section and the lower mid section. The extra piece is stored in the handle. You can leterally make a cast, unscrew the fighting butt cap, pull the piece out and insert it and mend the line Well not really but you get my point. You don't gave to unstring the rod or take the reel off to extend the rod.

Cool stuff and it really pushes the envelope as far as rod design is concerned.

 

[Simms]

It's not on the market yet. I saw it a few weeks ago for the first time. It's not an extra butt section. It goes in between the butt section and the lower mid section. The extra piece is stored in the handle. You can leterally make a cast, unscrew the fighting butt cap, pull the piece out and insert it and mend the line Well not really but you get my point. You don't gave to unstring the rod or take the reel off to extend the rod.

Cool stuff and it really pushes the envelope as far as rod design is concerned.

that explains it!!! I thought you were refering to the unscrewable butt. Not so much. I shall google now.

 

[coolkyle]

I thought you were refering to the unscrewable butt.

I can imagine this would be a popular item in prisons.

 

[CatskillKid]

Who ever you are,

Hardy has a rod coming in January that is nicer than the Z AXIS.

You don't think that I've owned Z AXIS rods? I had every one that you mention plus about 7 others. I am very familiar with their line up of rods. There is no need to speak to forum members here like they are first graders. Many of the guys here know what they are talking about. I can promise you that any rod that I make comments on, I have owned it and or have gotten a sales rep's rod and tried it. The Z Axis 10 foot 4 and 5 weights are very nice, but you can get. A rod with almost identical action for nearly half the price.

As for rods better than better than Greys at a lower price point, good luck. That's the place where you lose credibility with me. You would have to absolutely lying to yourself if you truly believe that TFO puts out a product caparable to Greys.

Btw Have you seen all of the rods that are coming out this season in order to make a fair and unbiased assessment? Do all of the reps cone show you what's new? I am just curious to hear how you get all of these rods in hand to test them out.

The Z Axis 10 foot 4 and 5 weights are very nice, but you can get. A rod with almost identical action for nearly half the price....

I'm sorry but this is very vague and unspecific. What rods are you referring to? And as I've pointed out (not to treat you like you're an elementary school student, obviously as a guide you deserve as much respect as your clients chose to give you and ours as well) "action" just refers to where the rod bends when loaded and (reaching for your benefit) perhaps how fast it takes the rod to go from loaded to unloaded. There are a lot of other things to copare when you wish to make a comparison. I can give you an Eagle Claw $19 fiberglass rod that has a very similar "action" to a Hardy Perfection Glass rod for example. It's about 21 times less in price. "Action" ??

I'd be curious to know how you think a Z-Axis compares to rods made at the time the Z-Axis came out. Also, do you think it's fair to compare a two year old rod to a rod that is "coming out" soon. Ultimately, yes you can compare them and you should if you're helping someone buy a rod or buying one yourself because ultimately you'd like the best rod available at the time you're buying the rod.

But take a 9 foot 5 weight Z-Axis for example. If you're a guide and you own 7 of them, COMPARE it to another 9 foot 5 Weight of your choice. Give some specific reasons/basis for how you actually compare a rod. That's the point of this thread (not to insult each other), so speak objectively and share your wisdom with us. Using "Action" as a term while comparing 200 9' 5 weight rods is helpful to describe whether we're talking about slow, medium, medium-fast or faster. I could give you 10 of the best (what does best mean anyway? Again, a major point of this post that is as yet unrevealed) faster action rods and ask you to tell us which is the best and why. Do you understand my point here? Hopefully you don't find it to be insulting because it isn't intended to be. If you find that I am challenging a Greys rod, keep in mind I have already stated that I find them to be a fair value.

Now to give the rest of your post it's due, on your next point: ....As for rods better than better than Greys at a lower price point, good luck. That's the place where you lose credibility with me. You would have to absolutely lying to yourself if you truly believe that TFO puts out a product caparable to Greys...,

I don't think a 10' TFO Professional is in any way, shape or form in the same class as a Greys Streamflex. If I did, I would give you iterally 10 very specific reasons why. But this is not the case. If I wanted a rod that is made overseas that performs well I would certainly consider a Greys. However, A Winston Passport literally runs rings around a Greys Streamlite rod, and it cost $9 more. For $40 dollars more a St. Croix Avid also compares with Greys rods. Each of these rods, Winston and Croix, are U.S. made, which is very important in a country that has lost as many jobs as the U.S. has.

As for your last point....Btw Have you seen all of the rods that are coming out this season in order to make a fair and unbiased assessment? Do all of the reps cone show you what's new? I am just curious to hear how you get all of these rods in hand to test them out...,

I was hoping to maintain anonymity here, but I sem to have an awful lot of opinions and facts, too many to be accepted by some of you. Here then is the basis for my present level of credibility: Now that my guiding days are over, I work in the Fly-Fishing Industry but not for any one company. I operate a $30 million dollar business, in the Fly-Fishing world this places my business number one in the country, and second place is not even close. I place little to NO weight in what a rep tells me or shows me. Reps sell and support specific products. They want me to buy lots of them and they want to tell me why I should.

My business deals in virtually all brands, save for the ones that do not perform in their categories as compared to others (from a sales perspective). Yes, I do require the reps to make many apprearances per year to train staff members on what is new for this their efforts are both EXPECTED and appreciated. Some companies have better reps than others as well and the companies that don't support their product well are companies that tend to produce products that don't compare well to the ones other companies make.

I evaluate and compare products with a product specific criteria I have developed over the years. Also, one of the best guide staffs in the world works for me and many other guides in my area are given overflow trips regularly. While the guides pound, abuse and truly field test, the sales staff and myself find time to fish fresh and saltwater daily. When we "test" and "evaluate" a rod, we tend to compare it to literally a hundred others. We test given rods from a performance perspective and we also consider many other qualities and attributes. My staff members (most ex-guides themselves) have technical expertise equal to or mostly better than even the best guides I have. The guides come to us to hear the facts and we equip them with whatver they like (pro sheets for purchasing the tools of their trade) Ultimately, my staff needs to sell rods and reels however and to do this they have to know rods and reels. For these reasons, both they and the guide staffs need to be intregally involved in helping me to compare one rod to another rod. But it is the customer who ultimately decides which rod is king. That being said, I am here only as average joe. I own some fly rods, yes. But I fish over 200 days a year I have my own preferences like anyone else.

Would you like me to detail how we go about comparing a rod to other rods? <!-- google_ad_section_end -->

---------- Post added at 12:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 PM ----------

I'm going to stop short of thinking you're a mean spirited cretin and say you sound like a typical guide who has a collection of rods, fishes them a lot, has some connections in the idustry and finds the Greys rods, at pro sheet pricing no doubt, to be pretty impressive overall values. You're also doing some highly specialized fishing and for what it sounds like you're doing, I could see why you would want a fighting butt. However, fighting butts only belong on longer, specialize rods. You don't need them otherwise. I find your insulting tone to be an attempt to show that you disagree with me and that you know better than I do. Yet you avoid adressing the points I've given. This could be due to the fact that you've convinced yourself that you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Why else would you start a post by insulting someone? Those who insult others are conceeded and arrogant. If you are a guide, I don't believe I'd enjoy fishing with you personally and if you are conceeded and arrogant, I def. wouldn't recommend you to others. Perhaps you can explain why you the feel the need to insult someone who disagrees with you? If I were you, I would change the way you treat others you don't know. Obviously, you can whatever you like and say whatever you like too. The internet is a safe place to do that. In real life, that's another story.

I couldn't help but notice you said zilch-o with regard to any of my factual points on fighting butts and why they aren't on traditional trout rods. I have a Loomis Stream Dance GLX 9'6" 6wt. that has one and I would take this rod any day over a Greys rod, factoring in the pro sheet price for both of course. At full retail, my choice would depend upon my budget (so I'd personally take the Loomis of course, but many wouldn't be able to or wish to say that).

I also have a 12'6" Z-Axis 6wt. that is the most impressive Trout rod of substantial length that I've seen yet. It's been a ton of fun to fish and it also performs at the top of the envalope in all comparison categories. When I get out of the drift boat on the Upper Main Stem of the Delaware and cover ground, this rod handles two stones and weight like no other rod I've seen. It is smoother casting and more ideally balanced than I can even believe.