[Mr.Bigslinger]

Hello all, I am new to the forum. I have been spey fishing for a few years now and really enjoy it. I have been fishing a 12,6 Amundsen Wind Warrior 7/8. I now feel it is time to upgrade but I want a rod for life and feel from my research a Burkheimer is the way to go.

I cannot afford to have a huge arsenal of different rods so I am looking for advice on which Burkie I should choose. I know I want a 8wt between 13-14.5', 3 or 4 piece doesn't matter to me.

My home water is the Vedder River, but I want something that is versatile enough to do the Thompson, Bulkley, and Skeena as I fish them every year also. I know the latter 3 rivers are much bigger and produce larger fish then the Vedder, so I dont mind fishing the vedder with a slightly stronger rod to accommodate the other 3. 100% of my fishing will be Steelhead with it. Thank you in advance and am really enjoying my reading on the forum.

 

[TheWhiteman]

8139 would be pretty ideal. There's one for sale on here now too

 

[mdogs444]

7127 and 8134 are some of the most popular models around for BC.

 

[speynewbie]

Burkheimer 8139-4, or 8142-4

Which of these rods would you buy for the Skeena, Thompson, or Snake Rivers?

 

[athabascae]

Go big for the Thompson and Skeena.

12'6" 7/8 sounds perfect for the Bulkley though, which is much gentler river than the Thompson or Skeena.

 

[roballen]

for the rivers mentioned i would pick the 8142-4, the 8139-3 or the 8134-4

I would not recommend the 8139-4 as it is a 7 3/4 wt instead of a true 8 great rod no doubt but better suited to slightly lighter weight tasks

 

[James C]

Rustybee has a beautiful 8139-3 for sale right now. Do a search for Burkheimer 8139. Looks immaculate. I would have bought it, if I had the cash. PERFECT choice. This is a do anything, do everything steelhead rod.

PS Always take roballen's advice when it comes to Burkheimer rods.

 

[wrke]

I agree, if an 8 wt, I'd choose the 8139-3. If you want a 7wt, I'd choose the 7134-4.

 

[japple]

If I was going to choose a rod to cover all of those rivers, it would be the 8142. Some of the rivers you mentioned are quite large, the 8142 will have plenty of power to cover those river really well. Of the 8134, 8139, and the 8142, the 8142 is also the most pleasurable for me to cast as well. Have fun picking a new rod. Burkheimers are the best!

 

[hoover308]

Which rod

Call Carrie

 

[Rookiespey]

Call Michael & Youngs.
They sell Burkies and can answer questions for you.
Also check with them as they have casting days where you can test cast them.
They may also have demos you can try.
Cheers.

 

[Mr.Bigslinger]

Thank you all for the replies and advice, sounds like I am going to go with either the 8142-4 or 8139-3 thanks again.

 

[CFC]

Which one

Keep in mind that you can't always do everything with one rod. Case in point the Thompson vs. the Bulkley, big rods for the T and light switch rods for the B.
Decide based on what you do the most of and then fill in the blanks.

 

[roballen]

Keep in mind that you can't always do everything with one rod. Case in point the Thompson vs. the Bulkley, big rods for the T and light switch rods for the B.
Decide based on what you do the most of and then fill in the blanks.

and Burkheimer does NOT!!!!! make switch rods that said based on my visit to the Bulkley i'd say the 8142 is perfect and would be serviceable on the Thompson. something to keep in mind with all these rivers they were fished successfully for decades with rods under 10 foot...

 

[Pesqa]

The suggestion to use a light switch for the Bulkley is incorrect, there are many reasons a long rod is advantageous.

I am like you in that I choose to fish with a single setup, all be it a very good one, I enjoy the simplicity and i never impacts on my enjoyment of the day.

The 8134 its is totally unbelievable all rounder, and would work on any of the rivers you mentioned. Distance is not that big a deal, its less important that most people think. The classic mistake most of us make is to believe the fish are in the middle, in reality they are by your feet as much as anywhere.

I actually choose a 7134 but its just because I like the extra feeling, it would be too light for most guys, but thats how I like it. I also fish the Bulkley more than any other and the 7134 would be a little light on the T for instance.

Most clients I guided settle on the 8134 and a hatch as the perfect bulkley setup. Kerry has great line recommendations on his site, IMO airflow skagit is the best line for tips, I choose the intermediate skagit, but a standard is an awesome option.

Oh and a 4 piece is the way to go without doubt, 3 piece is a PIA and there is no benefit over the 4.

Hope this helps
Sam Franklin
www.pesqa.com

 

[Mr.Bigslinger]

Thanks for all the advice I ended up going with the 8134-4, I paired it with a older marquis salmon 2. Went out for a couple hours with it and felt awesome. Can't wait to feel some iron on the other end.

 

[sazan]

for the rivers mentioned i would pick the 8142-4, the 8139-3 or the 8134-4

I would not recommend the 8139-4 as it is a 7 3/4 wt instead of a true 8 great rod no doubt but better suited to slightly lighter weight tasks

Rob was absolutely right.

But now the redesigned 8139-4 is out ( I am just looking at it ) :Eyecrazy::smile2: , the rod is firmer an and stronger the the original 4 pc 8139, more of a 8 1/2 wt.

 

[laskier]

Rob was absolutely right.

But now the redesigned 8139-4 is out ( I am just looking at it ) :Eyecrazy::smile2: , the rod is firmer an and stronger the the original 4 pc 8139, more of a 8 1/2 wt.

How would you compare the new redesigned 8139-4 to the 8142-4.

I have fallen in love with the 8142-4 with a Nextcast Zone F1 575

Pete

 

[sazan]

The 8142-4 is one of the CFB I never had a chance to play with. In ballpark only, the stronger 8139-4 ( wt. 8.5) feels like the original 8139-4 ( more of a wt. 7.8 ). The new one feels/is firmer in the lower half or so and has more material and is a stronger rod.

I have spent probably a total 8 hours casting the final prototype, where the lower 20" of the butt was inserted into tube on which corks and reel seat were mounted. Consequently, the prototype felt slightly stiffer then the final rod, as there was less bending under the cork; great feel with underhand cast. The final rod, which arrived a week ago feel smoother and had not been cast, but I suspect will like a few grain less then prototype.

On the prototype, STF 45 ( 6/7, 510 [email protected]') with 10', wt.8, 85 gr tip or 15', wt.8, 110 gr) felt great with underhand cast, on a light side of the load. The heavier Steelhead Finder 45 ( wt.7; [email protected]') with the same tips was great too. I suspect the finished rod will like better STF 45 ( 6/7, 510 [email protected]') with 10', wt.8, 85 gr tip or 15', wt.8, 110 gr by Rio; and I do not like too overload any rod.

On the prototype, both Zone 550 and 575 gr with the aforementioned tips or 12' of T-10 were the right match and by design felt heavier with single spey or snake roll cast.

Rob hinted a while ago that the stronger 8139-4 likes either old Delta ( 50-55' had) in 8/9 or 9/10, depending how you like to feel it, and Skagit head 575-600 gr.

Form power point of view, the stronger 8139-4 fits approximately in between 8134-4 and 9135-4.