Home Register Today's Posts Members User CP Calendar FAQ

Go Back   Little River Outfitters Forum > Fly Fishing Board > Smoky Mountain Fishing

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-16-2013, 01:29 PM
Float On's Avatar
Float On Float On is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryville, TN
Posts: 64
Default

I use a TFO rod. Definitely not an expensive. It fishes well and if I do break it, I'm looking at 25$ to get it fixed. I've heard that some of the more expensive rods can cost more to get fixed if something happens. Just something else to think about. It played a part in the rod I chose, mainly for my fishing locations and style. I'm not an very experienced fly fisherman but I did test fire a few rods and I thought it cast just as well as some of the more expensive rods. Looks nice with my green TFO reel to boot.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-16-2013, 01:33 PM
Float On's Avatar
Float On Float On is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryville, TN
Posts: 64
Default

Just saw the post on testing rods. Byron at LRO let me slip out back in the field and let me get a few casts on them.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-16-2013, 06:55 PM
billyspey billyspey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 312
Default

Only a few can cast well enough to be able tell much difference between low end rods and higher quality rods. Choose what works best for you and your budget. I prefer med to fast action rods with a tip to protect 6X Tippett.some good fast action rods does this well. Their are plenty yesterday's high end rods for about the same price as today's low end rods. You need to check around for good options on what they would be.all rods were slow action until Gary Loomis came out with G Loomis GLX which started the growth to faster action rods. Most rods company are still playing catch up today.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-16-2013, 09:59 PM
waterwolf waterwolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,202
Default

I have been in the fortunate or unfortunate position over the years to try almost everything available at one time or another. From the cheapest Clearwater Orvis, to the most expensive Winstons and Sages on the market at any given time.

I feel there is a tremendous difference in rods and IMO performance drastically improves as the price goes up. The problem is what used to be high priced is now twice as much, and now low end rods of the past cost as much as high end rods used to cost.

One of the best all around rods of all time the Sage SP was considered extremely expensive at around $400. Now the top end sage rods run around $800.

I have fished all of the TFO, Orvis, St. Croix etc etc etc, and not any of them compare to the higher end rods that Winston, Sage, and Loomis offer each year. With Sage clearly being the best of all in terms of on stream performance.

The issue becomes that to fully realize the abilities a rod provides, the caster must be competent to cast the rod the way it was designed to be cast. And in my opinion the worst thing for newbies is low end rods which are far too slow and use outdated materials which make casting challenging.

Money is tight for everyone these days, but I would advise saving a little longer and spending the money for higher end rods. They absolutely cast better than lower end equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-16-2013, 10:06 PM
The-Sasquatch's Avatar
The-Sasquatch The-Sasquatch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 51
Default

I do agree about faster rods for noobs. I fish w/ glass, but I would never give a Fenwick or something to a newbie to cast. For a good budget rod, I often recommend the Reddington Crosswater rod. The reel is crap, but the rod cast well. The action is fit for a newbie to the sport.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-16-2013, 10:49 PM
NDuncan's Avatar
NDuncan NDuncan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Knoxville, Tn
Posts: 641
Default

Personally, I think it depends on what kind of fishing you are planning to do. Tailwater big water and tight mountain streams have their own issues. I can fish tight conditions with a $25 crystal river 7 piece rod and it works fine, and I use it because the conditions don't require long casts, but there is a good chance of losing/breaking a rod and packing down small is a huge advantage in terms of creek access and what not. But I'd never try to make a long accurate cast with it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-17-2013, 06:26 AM
waterwolf waterwolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDuncan View Post
Personally, I think it depends on what kind of fishing you are planning to do. Tailwater big water and tight mountain streams have their own issues. I can fish tight conditions with a $25 crystal river 7 piece rod and it works fine, and I use it because the conditions don't require long casts, but there is a good chance of losing/breaking a rod and packing down small is a huge advantage in terms of creek access and what not. But I'd never try to make a long accurate cast with it.
I found that for me a faster rod actually made fishing small streams much easier. I could quickly deliver a fly ten to twenty feet rather than having to wait for a slower rod to load. Many times I found that a full backcast was not happening and a fast rod allowed me to do a half or quarter backcast and still present the fly properly. However, I'm unusual in that I prefer a 9' rod even in the tiny creeks for line control
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-17-2013, 09:09 AM
The-Sasquatch's Avatar
The-Sasquatch The-Sasquatch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 51
Default

Preference is huge. On small streams, I use a 6'6" fiberglass 5wt. Short and stout. I have a friend who goes light on small streams. I've seen him go down to a 5' 1wt (that seemed silly to me, but it was more about the challenge and fun to him, and it WAS fun to see!). Another friend who I fish a lot of tight small streams with prefers his 9' 5wt (the Pennsylvania Standard!), and almost always outfishes me. After you've been FFing for several years, you start to get a feel for your casting style and which rods fit your style. I think rods are just an extension of our limbs, so to speak, so finding a rod that feels like a natural extension of yourself when you're on the stream is what's most important.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-17-2013, 09:12 AM
NDuncan's Avatar
NDuncan NDuncan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Knoxville, Tn
Posts: 641
Default

Agree 100% on the longer rod length. I can see your point about the faster rods and line loading. I was just saying when you have 9+ feet of leader out and a 15' foot roll cast is about the furthest you are going to do all day in really tight conditions, and the hike in and out is going to be really rough going, I to take something that I can fit into my day pack.

But you make some excellent points


I'm really enjoying all the opinions in this thread!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-17-2013, 10:00 AM
flyred06's Avatar
flyred06 flyred06 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Gadsden, Alabama
Posts: 896
Default

I totally agree with waterwolf with his explanation of the rods. Also I fish with every kind of rod you can imagine. I prefer the longer rods also. I have several short rods for particular alabama areas but for boat and mountain streams I like 8'6" to 9' rods. For spots like jakes ceek i will use a 7'7" rod. But as a rule I like long rods. The odd thing is I like glass and bamboo, and most all of them are 8' and less. Go fiqure.
__________________
Romans 10:9-10 KJV
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:07 AM.



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.