marquis salmon #3
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Joined
·
886 Posts
Yes far to big I will swap you a 2 for it at no charge. Send me your address. :devil:
Joined
·
167 Posts
Hardy Marquis Salmon #3
It is big, but not that different from the #2. Same diameter, #2 has only narrower spool and thus less line capacity.
The weight of #2 Salmon is 273g and #3 Salmon weights 294g...
I would keep the #3, as then you have the line capacity for the XL-lines, if needed. I have three of them, and use them in all my rods, from 13 ft to 16 ft B&W:s.
It is big, but not that different from the #2. Same diameter, #2 has only narrower spool and thus less line capacity.
The weight of #2 Salmon is 273g and #3 Salmon weights 294g...
I would keep the #3, as then you have the line capacity for the XL-lines, if needed. I have three of them, and use them in all my rods, from 13 ft to 16 ft B&W:s.
Joined
·
465 Posts
You don't need a Salmon #2 for a 9141, but it would be preferable to the #3 model. The #2 is a wonderful reel and would match well with that rod. The #3 is also great but is a monster and better suited to 10+ weights and 15'+ rods. I fish both these reels and the extra size and weight is significant. It may only weigh another 3/4 oz. but all that wet backing adds significant weight too.
Marquis salmom #3
I have Marquis #2, #3 and have fished with them on a few different spey rods. #3 has much more line capacity than #2 and #2 may fit 100 ft #30 lb backing with 9/10 SA midspey, it may work with short head spey line or micronite backing line. Both reels may be light for 9141. I always love the perfect balance between the rod and reel, which means the rod should be leveled even or slight butt heavy when it is balanced at the top end of handle with the reel lined with only backing line. If you think about spey casting, the rod tip never goes below the reel, that is why the unbalanced reel and rod fatigues your muscles and won't help casting. However if you fish a few hours once a week, the unbalanced rod will not affect you. Having said the above, #2 Marquis will not be balanced with 9141. Even #3 may be light for the rod although I am not 100% sure. The Sage spey rods are tip heavy and the reel seat is uplocking which require heavier reels, compared with T&T or G.Loomis. I know #3 is light for 9150 Sage traditional, but I still fish with 9150 and #3 lined with XLT, wishing #3 was heavier. #2 is best balanced with spey rods with a down locking reel seat which are less than 7.5oz in physical weight.
I have Marquis #2, #3 and have fished with them on a few different spey rods. #3 has much more line capacity than #2 and #2 may fit 100 ft #30 lb backing with 9/10 SA midspey, it may work with short head spey line or micronite backing line. Both reels may be light for 9141. I always love the perfect balance between the rod and reel, which means the rod should be leveled even or slight butt heavy when it is balanced at the top end of handle with the reel lined with only backing line. If you think about spey casting, the rod tip never goes below the reel, that is why the unbalanced reel and rod fatigues your muscles and won't help casting. However if you fish a few hours once a week, the unbalanced rod will not affect you. Having said the above, #2 Marquis will not be balanced with 9141. Even #3 may be light for the rod although I am not 100% sure. The Sage spey rods are tip heavy and the reel seat is uplocking which require heavier reels, compared with T&T or G.Loomis. I know #3 is light for 9150 Sage traditional, but I still fish with 9150 and #3 lined with XLT, wishing #3 was heavier. #2 is best balanced with spey rods with a down locking reel seat which are less than 7.5oz in physical weight.
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!