# Old School Rods vs new light weight technology



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

A few conclusions:

- A good caster can adjust his swing to most any modern fly rod and fish just fine. Yet, we want the perfect rod.

- Only a handful of rods stand the test of time. For me those are: Scott STS weights #6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12; Sage RPLXi 886-3; Sage TCX 890-4; Loomis GLX Classic 4 piece 8 weight.

- In the past, I did not fish the many of the rods which now I think are great. Example: I bought Sage RPLX's and ignored STS's. Bought the snake oil and market hype at the time.

This is all very personal. But, I would appreciate any thoughts on whether the super light rods today lead to bad casting habits.... 

Best,


----------



## Rick hambric (Jun 24, 2017)

Just my $0.02 here... like the golf industry people have wanted faster and lighter things to help them compensate for lack of practice and bad form. Hence the magnum tapers and rods that no longer match the old standards. Nowadays most 8wts are an 8.5, most 10’s are almost an eleven. These sub4oz rods that are overpowered has made the lines overweighted to compensate for the rods not loading with true weighted lines. So the domino effect has begun and the question is what can we do to stop it? There are the rare few that are fighting the new trends with a passion. T&T for example. Their Exocett is a fast taper rod, but it has flex and loads smoothly without having to haul like crazy or impart muscle and distorted form. There are a few makers with them that feel the same way along with line companies. Cortland and SA both have lines that are as close to standards as your going to get. Example here is Airflo vs. SA bonefish lines. The Airflo 8wt weighs as much as the SA 9wt. As the makers in our hobby have altered their products trying to get that extra 10ft in a cast, we have seen proper form disappear with it. Just like the golfing industry. Why do I need to work hard if this rod and line can make me cast as far as I want??? The mindset has changed and so the industry has followed. Now it’s just a question of how many shoulder surgeries are in the future? Might be a good stock investment


----------



## jmrodandgun (Sep 20, 2013)

Haven't you guys seen Spaceballs? Merchandising. Merchandising. Merchandising

The more crap you can crank out, the more crap you can sell. The only difference between now and 30 years ago is you see more novice casters with more expensive rods. Those Whorevis H3 adds are mighty persuasive. Correlation is not necessarily causation. 

The only people who can truly take advantage of the high speed low drag fly rods are people with more than novice experience.


----------



## Rick hambric (Jun 24, 2017)

Yes it boils down to what will sell, and as long as new fly fishermen keep buying the latest and greatest because they think it can make them bomb a 100ft cast, the trend will continue. Can the new 8wt salt hd with flats pro line cast 80’ easy? Maybe but so can an an older more conventional 9wt set up as they are casting the same weight line.....


----------



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

Rick, so I cast the Exocett against the Zephrus-- they seem like fairly similar rods. Somehow I liked the Zephrus. Hard to justify $700+ for an English design made in Korea.

jmrod&gun - Agree. I am striving not to be a sucker for the snake oil. 

Last week I cast Sandflea, the owner of Holbox Tarpon Club's rod. A 9 weight Helios 2, with some super light, wide arbor Orvis reel (the set up probably weighed 8 ounces). The line was an Airflo 9 weight weight with a clear tip. I hate Airflo lines. I could not believe the power of that set up. No interest in it whatsoever, except maybe the clear tip line (we have to use 15 foot leaders in Holbox, so a clear tip would be nice). But, was surprised to see Sandflea using this rig. He is a master caster and very accomplished angler.


----------



## Rick hambric (Jun 24, 2017)

I understand on the hardy. The Exocett is a made in USA rod. Hell even their carbon is US made. There are other rods equal and maybe better, but the subtle nuances that could determine that is so small 99% of people couldn’t tell it. I’m a firm believer in buy made in the USA and that was one of my many reasons to go T&T.


----------



## Rick hambric (Jun 24, 2017)

@Stevie what line did you cast on the Exocett? Currently I’m running sa bonefish 9wt on my 8. Also have some 8wt grand slam as well. Both performs very well. I’ve been wanting to get my hands on some Cortland flats taper though.


----------



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

I cast a fly shop parking lot Rio Redfish line. Normally I use Rio Permit line as a benchmark to compare rods. Will give the Exocett another look. I have a lot of hats, but have not donned a top hat for fly fishing as yet. 

May have an unused Cortland 8 weight bonefish I’d sell you cheap.


----------



## Rick hambric (Jun 24, 2017)

I am tell you that rod does better with a 38-50’ head. For 8wt, no heavier than 240g @ 30ft. Overly heavy lines really take away from it. Sounds crazy, but it performs better with true affta weighted lines


----------



## permitchaser (Aug 26, 2013)

I have some Sage II rods that I can cast. Also some other rods I purchased from LL Bean that are my favorite.( don't know who made them) I don't have a need or the hots for a new rod


----------



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

permitchaser said:


> I have some Sage II rods that I can cast. Also some other rods I purchased from LL Bean that are my favorite.( don't know who made them) I don't have a need or the hots for a new rod


If there's one slot I want to fill, it's for a 9 weight. I have taken to permit and baby tarpon fishing in MX. Again, I liked the Zephrus #9. Will give the Exocett a shot. What I like about both rods is they are beefy in the butt section and I like the titanium recoil guides. Both of these features make a rod feel like a true fishing rod, not just a show casting rod. 

If I could travel everywhere with 1 piece rods, that would be my choice. Since that's not practical, I prefer 4 piece rods. The Scott STS 3 piece rods have a spigot ferrule system, which to me makes the rod feel like a 1 piece. But, the STS 9 weight is not my favorite and it is a 3 piece. Had to have a custom 3 piece rod carrier made-- they don't exist any more


----------



## jonrconner (May 20, 2015)

This thread has covered quite a bit of territory, but seems to have touched down on what I feel is one of the biggest conundrums of modern lines and rods, namely matching the two where an eight weight line my vary from AFTMA standard weight to easily a couple of line weights heavier. My approach is to settle on a line I like and then find a rod that will cast it comfortably, it seems that most people try the other way and find themselves in a world of shit trying to find the right line for the rod, this is expensive and difficult since the numbers on the box are more or less meaningless unless you find out what the actual grain weight of the head is, (if it’s available?) and for what portion of the head. 
I wanted to get a ten weight a few years ago and spent quite a long time playing around with four different rods casting them in a pond with my chosen line, I picked the rod I liked best, fished it quite a bit and for some reason put a 9wt on it one day, and, holy crap, this rod REALLY felt right, who knew, a couple of others who have this rod are still happy as can be with a heavier line, it it goes to show, it’s difficult to sort this stuff out.
I’d cuncur with Rick, above that an eight weight loaded with a 240gr should be great, but that is AFTMA 9, and the Airflo 9 that Stevie mentions is 460gr for a 51’ head, who knows what the first 30’ weigh. All the Rio lines are way heavy, Wulffs run 1 or 2 weights up, it’s a cluster, as they say.
Good luck everyone,
JC


----------



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

Like and agree. 

But, you better stock up on your favorite lines—line makers change line formulas all the time and they wear out faster than the rods. 

I had a hell of a time when SA stopped making textured lines around 2000. I was so used to the tan Bonefish and Tarpon lines. Somehow I got hooked on Rio lines.


----------



## texasag07 (Nov 11, 2014)

I agree it can be hard to find some lines grain weight. I have found f you can call any of these companies tech department and they will give you what you are looking for.


----------



## el9surf (Dec 23, 2008)

texasag07 said:


> I agree it can be hard to find some lines grain weight. I have found f you can call any of these companies tech department and they will give you what you are looking for.


I have done the same thing. In general they are always happy to help.


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

Stevie, I may have ask you this question before, but....where do you live?


----------



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

Backwater said:


> Stevie, I may have ask you this question before, but....where do you live?


Houston.


----------



## permitchaser (Aug 26, 2013)

My Sage II rods are a tad stiff so generally I use one weight higher line for the stated weight. But my 6-7 isn't casting that great so I may have to go up two weights


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

Stevie, I've owned several of those rods, back in the day, that you posted in your original post. Loved the Classic GLX, the IMX, even the GL3 was ok. Loved the RPLX and the STS's. They were great back then. Today, there are some really good rods as well. I have that same Zephyrus 9wt you have and love it, along with other rods out there.

It seems that we just may have similar taste in rod actions. People by nature tend to get use to a certain action of a rod and then when looking for something new, they tend to run back home to mommy and get back into their comfort zone with what they are use to, instead of changing up their style of casting to bring out the best in a rod.

Jon Conner - normally, I like a lot of your advice and comments. But I never recommend revolving someones world around a particular fly line. There is just too many costly variables that come into play. I was once told by someone well known in the fly fishing world, that your 1st priority is the rod, then the line and lastly, the reel. That is the order of Priority. Today, I see a lot of people new to the sport get their priorities in reverse of that statement. So with fly line, match it up to the rod and fishing situation you'll be using it for. For some rods, that means I may have 2-3 different lines for each rod to cover more fishing situations.

Back to Stevie - You are use to a rod with a little more "weight" out there at the end of the rod and a little more parabolic action than you are use to. These newer "extra fast" rods have lighter swing weight since they have less weight out towards the end of the rod, with all these newer high-tech carbon materials and resins. If you stick with a rod with a "fast" action, as opposed to an "extra fast" action, then it may bring you back to those rods back in the good ole days. Back then, I though nothing could be more faster than a traditional GLX. Today it's so-so fast and others far surpass the speed of that rod back in it's glory days.

So.... those heavier tipped rods ( from 2/3's up from the butt to the rod tip) loaded the line slightly differently and helped to catapult the line out. You loose that action with these light swing weight extra fast rods, like the Method, the Orvis H2 and others. But there are some mfgs that purposely keep that action in the rod. You may find them in the less priced mid range rods each mfg has. For example, you may not me too crazy about the Orvis H2 or H3D. On the lawn of on a fly shop's parking lot (I refuse to throw anything on a parking lot btw) you may love how light in hand it feels and how easy it is to throw 50ft with a piece of fuzz tied on the end of it. But get it out there with a weighted fly with an intermediate line in a brisk head wind and you'll start doubting your judgement with the decision of that rod. Then pick up your buddies Orvis Recon (probably the original blank for the original Helios) and you love how much easier it makes that happen.

Curious about what you found out what you liked about the TCX vs the Method? I'm assuming it's that little bit us weight at the end of the rod and the ever so slightly beefier butt section.

Ok so, your like extra fast rods with that extra punch at the end of the rod. Go try a Douglas Sky! You may just love that rod.

Here's my brief take on the "affta" line weight guidelines. It's old and antiquated and needs a severe overhaul. It was based around bamboo and glass fly rods about 60yrs ago, if that tells you anything. It didn't take into account that there would be much better rod building materials that would make rods faster, stiffer and lighter. Personally, I would love to be on the panel that re-works the guidelines, but wouldn't want to orchestrate the whole ordeal. Maybe that's why no one has changed it.

So it needs to be changed, otherwise, you pin rod mgfs into a corner and then say THIS is all you have to work with! You can do that. So the rod mfgs collaborate with fly line mfgs and vs versa to keeps some checks and balances, while still delivering a better product with lines that can still load them properly. So unfortunately, the variables are quantified. That is why it's good to consult experts who have tested different lines to different rods and see what they recommend, rather than just look up some chart to see what line to get. Today, it just doesn't quite work that way, since the different fishing situations also cause it to be a little more complicated than just someone blurting out what line he thinks he likes.

Ted Haas


----------



## Stevie (Jun 27, 2017)

Stevie said:


> Houston.


Hey Ted

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I gather you are in Tampa. I get there sometimes on business. Will look you up next time. Nice that someone knows about these old rod references. 

I find the TCX more uniform in stiffness through to the tip and a bit more mass. The Method’s tip is too soft. With the Method I found my loop opening up—when I fished. 

Appreciate the recommendations on Orvis Recon and Douglas Sky (never cast a Douglas before). 

I used to over line some of the old rods: 6 SP+ with 7. And 7 RPL+ with 8. It was really necessary to load those rods. 

Thanks again. Appreciate the exchange. 

Best,
Stevie


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

Stevie, don't confuse rod stiffness with being fast or extra fast.

Also, it's very possible to take a softer action or softer rod tip and cause it to throw razor tight loops. Just have to change up your techniques. Also, over time, it's possible to learn different casting techniques to take the full advantage of various rods. Higher end rods can be a crutch for less refined casting techniques. 

If I can take a cheap $100 fly rod and do a pick up and lay down cast further than someone with a $1100 rod with all the false cast they need to feel comfortable to shoot it to their maximum distance, would you say it's the rod or the casting technique?

It's my thoughts that a good season veteran can pick up just about any rod and make it talk with the rightly matched fly line. What you prefer to cast is another story tho. 

The Douglas Sky brings me back to my classic GLX days and also a rod made by Redington back in the Jim Murphy days, called the NTi (Nano Titanium). Only it's faster and has that last bit of "umph" at the end of your casting stroke that cause that last bit of catapult with the loops.

Btw, you may want to try out the Hardy Zenith, which they discontinued about 2yrs ago. It's slightly faster and stiffer than the Zephyrus. Also doesn't have quite the butt section as the Zephyrus does.

On another note, back in the 90's a fly rod designer from New Zealand (they were famous for their blanks) told a guy I knew in the industry that the rod vibrations were less with a 9ft 3pcs fly rod blank over a 4 or 2pcs blank due to the 2 evenly placed points where the furrals are placed, which in turn, dampens the harmonics of the recovery vibrations that run throughout the rod after it's loaded and released. The end results was a quicker recovery. That is why some of the 3pcs rods seem to respond better, tho maybe slightly heavier on the swing than those of today. With that point, I kept 3pcs rods for as long as possible and still own 2 of them, which are still some of my favs. My advise to fly rod builders is to consider going back to a 3pcs blank, using the newer, more advanced materials and tapers of today.

You are always welcome to stop the house for a visit. I'm on the south side of Tampa Bay. Just PM me when you are heading this way.

Ted Haas


----------

