[Carl]

I've got the Steelhead Specialist, and it's perfect for my needs, but that came from out west (thanks again MJC). I haven't seen the Skagit SP (have read the threads), and am curious about the differences between the two rods.

Can anyone who has cast both describe the differences in blank action? I think the Steelhead SP was made for mid-length and long belly lines (but handles short), and that the Skagit was made for short and mid-length lines (does it handle long?). How similar or different are they (same blank material and only 8" length difference, so the difference is in the taper)?

Carl

P.S.> Juro, I hope you bring your bag of toys to the Great Lakes Clave in May on the Muskegon. Our local shop sometimes has one CND rod, so it hasn't been worth looking locally. I'd sure like to cast that Custom Tracker, along with the Skagit and the two big siblings Sally and Tommy.

 

[highlander2]

Carl

The difference is I think in the taper. The stelhead is a scaled down salar. The Skagit to me has a separate action that is very unique that I can only describe as very progressive, it is extremely smooth casting. It will cast long lines just fine, in fact a guy I was fishing with this afternoon handed me his with a 8/9 traditional and asked what I thought and after about five minutes of re-adjusting from the salar I was using I was having no problem at all throwing most of the long line. I think the skagit will be a great low water grease line rod as well as a serious sink tip rod with heads.

 

[juro]

Thanks Brian - you hit the nail on the head!

The difference is most definitely in the taper. The Skagit Specialist has an interesting history tied to the Skagit lines that Marlow and Ed Ward have been working, as you might recall there has been some buzz about these lines being made generally available. As Ed mentioned in his recent post, theses line samples were made available to Nobuo-san and behold out comes this new rod based on the math, materials and a bit of finesse that he knows will accomodate that style of casting. I couldn't agree more, in fact Marlow and Ed's response to the rod should speak for itself. The rod seems to have beat the line to market, but that's good because the rod has many other dimensions to it that people are discovering... including it's comfort with longer belly lines. Mid-length are no problem in fact with a few practice casts the tightness of the loop with no effort stands right out. I've cast the Wulff spey lines on it, piece of cake. Brian's Airflo 8/9 trad comments confirm 85 ft heads are a go. Shorter heads are rockets, I also like the Mach I as does Sean our webmaster.

Per the long reponse times - I've been sporadically finding web access here and there but will be back in the US mid-week.