Spey Pages banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
Good question.

I had a 1015-4 explode on me recently while fishing the Kenai June 27. I was launching a snake roll when I heard this awful crack and cast the top 3 sections into the river.

I know what most of you are thinking.... ferrule not seated tightly, no wax, no tape, blah blah blah, rod came apart or broke at the base of the second section. WRONG!

On closer inspection, the butt section had a longitudinal split right where the internal ferrule is glued in. The actual ferrule piece itself was still attached tightly to the second section in its original alignment when I put the rod together.

Is there a Scott guy on this board that can advise me on what to do next?

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
fishNphysician said:
Is there a Scott guy on this board that can advise me on what to do next?
I'm not a Scott guy, (wouldn't mind, I like their rods), but here is what I'd do. Go to their website and click on "Repairs". Click on "Download your repair return authorization form here" and fill it out. Then pack the rod up, put a check for $20 and the return authorization form into the return package and send it to the address listed. I'd post a URL but they are not a sponsor.

As long as you are the original owner it should only cost you $20 and the shipping to get it to Scott.
 

·
Junkyard Spey
Joined
·
7,112 Posts
I'd post a URL but they are not a sponsor.
I believe Scott fly rods is indeed a sponsor on Spey Pages. There are also some Scott experts that visit here on a regular basis. Maybe one will answer if they are not off on a trip somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
MJC said:
I believe Scott fly rods is indeed a sponsor on Spey Pages. There are also some Scott experts that visit here on a regular basis. Maybe one will answer if they are not off on a trip somewhere.
Doh! You're right. I clicked on the sponsors list and didn't see them at the top with the rest of the large manufacturers and assumed they weren't. My apologies to the folks at Scott. Here's the URL:

http://www.scottflyrod.com/services_repairs.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Hi Robert,

I have not heard of any work being done to the ARC rods. I will check with Jimmy (head rod designer at Scott) and find out for sure and get back to you.

Greg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
I guess I should have said that I am NOT the original owner and so never sent in a registration under my own name.

However I am the first user of the rod. It was sold to me by Dec Hogan 3-4 yrs ago as it was part of his "unused collection".... cork grips still sealed in their original shrink wrap. I asked Dec about warranties, and he reassured me that Scott takes care of their goods.... shouldn't be a problem.

But when I clicked the link to their website I saw that the warranty only applies to the original owner. If the rod was just sampled to Dec and never used, am I not indirectly the "original" owner?

I hope one of the Scott reps gets a chance to read this.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Hi Robert,

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. Jimmy's reply to your question about redesigning the ARC series was not this year but maybe sometime in the future.

FishNdoc,

I would just send the rod in and most likely they will take care of you. Even if they charge you a wholesale price to get the rod fixed it will be worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
I thought I should report the very positive outcome of my broken rod. I contacted Scott directly and explained the situation, and they decided to repair the rod under warranty without any additional charge to me beyond $20 S/H. They built me a brand new butt section with a better reel seat and butt cap than my original.

Two thumbs up, way up! That's what I call customer service.

Scott Rod Company... a class act!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
fishNphysician: I'm glad the repair folks at Scott took care of you! [I think there is still a great deal to be said about a company that takes pride in their care of each customer as an individual, and that still proudly builds every rod completely by hand in the US.]

Robert: As far as new ARC rods are concerned there are no immediate plans to work on the ARC range, as it currently complements the existing Scott two-hand series (A2 and LS2) so well...

The LS2's really embodied where I had known Scott Spey rods COULD go, in defining new standards of versatility, power, lightness, feel, and performance with any belly length of line. We spent nearly four years developing the series that turned into the LS2's. I wouldn't plan on seeing any new ARCs in the immediate future, but we are always playing with different concepts...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
Way, Greg and Dana—

I have been fishing ARC1509-4 for the last several years with Delta Long 9/10 and recently WC 9/10/11 when using various sink tips. My typical cast ( rod + head + running line) was 90-110 ft. Do you see any obvious advantage of LS2 15’ wt.9 vs. ARC for cast 110’ or less?
I have yet to try LS2.
Dana have you tried LS2 1509?

Martin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Hi Sazan,

The 1509 LS2 is very, very light in the hand and casts such a wide range of lines so well. If you tried it you would become addicted as I have but it sounds like you don't need to change a thing if you don't want to. the ARC is a fine rod.

Cheers,

Greg
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,241 Posts
"The 1509 LS2 is very, very light in the hand"
Greg--

I do fish ARC1509 ( 9.6oz) and would also like to know how LS2 1509( 8.5oz reported here , however Scott reports 9.6oz for LS2) feels compare to ARC when both rods are equipped with a reel ( 10-11 oz), fly line and backing( another 3-4 oz). Both set-ups weight about 23 oz, so the difference between them is now less then 5%!.

Salmo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,735 Posts
I expect that weight in the hand refers to more than just rod weight but swing weight, etc - how it feels while casting and expect the two rods feel different
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
I have to use a much lighter reel to balance the LS2 then I use on the ARC. Even if they actually had the same weight the LS2 would feel lighter because it has thin sleeve ferrules vs. internals. All I know is if I hold them both side by side at the top of the cork with out the reel on the LS2 "feels" like half the weight. Not that the ARC is a heavy rod it is just that the LS2 is freakishly light.

I will try to put each on a scale and see how much they actually weigh but Rick is correct about it being a feel thing.

GP

PS. The 2006 Scott catalog lists the 1509 ARC at 10.9 oz. and the 1509 LS2 at 9.6 oz.
 

·
chrome-magnon man
Joined
·
5,375 Posts
Greg,

I haven't cast the ARC and LS2 side-by-side but the one I cast at Spey-O-Rama felt really comfortable. Do the LS2 have a different taper than the ARCs? That can make a difference in how heavy a rod feels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Hi Dana,

Yes, they have a very different taper and I am sure that is part of the "feely" stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
Thanks Dana - I'm glad you like the rods! Greg is right on with the LS2's...

The mandrels on which the LS2's are made are quite different from the ARC rods, as are the materials in construction. We were shooting for a different feel, action, and swing weight, as well as a lighter rod in general, but at the same time, offer more power and versatility. nother goal was to maitain an even feel throughout the range, so if you got used to casting the 1307, you wold feel comforatble casting the 1610.

The sleeve ferrules that Scott makes are probably the lowest profile in the industry, and if you actually look at how the rod bends across sleeve ferrules, there is a definite dead spot in rods from most manufacturers. If you bend across a Scott sleeve ferrule, the dead spot is hardly noticeable, and in the single hand rods, like the A2's, there is vertually no dead spot. The advantage of internal ferrules, made of the same material of the blank on either end, is more efficient transfer of energy through the rod, which also translates to a palpable "feel" difference in the rod. Mind you, this doesn't necessarily mean internal ferrule rods are better or cast further, etc., but they ceratinly feel different. In longer double handers, the acutal amount of ferrule per length of rod is less, and we thought that sleeve ferrules, especially low profile ones, wouldn't adversely affect "feel"... hoefully we succeeded.

The LS2's also have thin walls and make use of blank diameter for stiffness (there are two ways of making a tube stiff, one of them is to use thick walls, the other is to make a wider tube). Of course, one of the drawbacks in making a thinner wall high performance rod is that it is less resistant to abuse. However, the thin wall concept was already proven in the A2 series of two handers, which were extremely durable. Even thick wall rods aren't immune to breakage... I think all of us have broken rods from many manufacturers. The nature of the beast - lots of torque and load is being asked of something weighing only a few ounces!

Martin: I'd echo Gre's advice. If you are happy with the 1509 ARC, I wouldn't change a thing. The 1509 LS2 definitiely feels different from the ARC... Personally, I think the LS2 is a more versatile rod, but it all comes down to what you like and are comforatble with. I love my ARC and I love my LS2. I just have tended towards a slightly faster action rod with lower swing weight as my preference, based on the way I like to fish.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top