Spey Pages banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi

yesterday i was tetsing upp the new Loomis Stinger GLX 15´ #10-11 (scandinavian action) and it is the very best spey rod i ever tested. It feels like the Original GLX 15´ #10-11 but it has more power (butt it isent stiffer) and you is casting longer whit the same power...It handels the same lines as the GLX 15´ - Shootingheads in 36grams...

Håkan Norling says thaht the GLX 15´ (original) is still the best rod. I dont agree... the Stinger GLX 15´ is so nice thaht i almost cried....

I WHANT ONE NOW!!!
 

·
#&%*@^# Caster
Joined
·
3,058 Posts
I figured the stingers were going to be glx retreads and be the same stiff unforgiving rods. I was way off. I am happy to see all of Loomis' new rods actually have some wiggle to them and launch line. I would say these rods are a tad slower than the T&Ts but provide better feel.

Was at kaufmans yesterday and took a few casts with the 12'6 7/8 stinger. What an incredibly light rod and casts beautifully. Maybe the best feeling rod under 13' I have cast. Was only on pavement but this is stick I am going to have to add to the inventory. The whole stinger series is quite impressive in balance and weight. So good in fact I may be able to get used to that ugly greeninsh reel seat. :chuckle:

Only got to wiggle the grease liners, felt good but will have to get some time to cast them on the water.

Really good job on the rods Loomis. Mine was only a brief introduction but enough to know I want one or better yet five! Very impressive and looking forward to fishing them this year :smokin:

-sean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
Sean,

What line did you have on the stinger ? I have been eyeing them wondering if they would be a good rod with a WC. I know they call the Scand rods but I've been looking for a fast rod to cast WC with tips. I like T+T and I've heard these are fairly similair action.

Gillie
 

·
#&%*@^# Caster
Joined
·
3,058 Posts
We had an SA short head on it so it should work great with a windcutter. The rod did not feel to me like it should be limited to scando work.

-sean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I dont no about the Stinger GLX 12,6´ but the Original GLX 12,6´ #9-11 and #8-9 are stiff and powerfull, mushc like the Distance 14,6´ #10-11 and 11-14... i dont like them thaht much... but i DO like the GLX 12,6´ #7-8 its a sweeet rod...
 

·
BULL DOG!!!!
Gaelforce
Joined
·
1,923 Posts
Hey Brian, still drooling HUH???????
LOL
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
161 Posts
12'6" 7/8

I kind of figured the 12'6" 7/8 would be some good competition for the Loop 8124.

Brian, as a fan of the 8124, what are your thoughts on the 7/8?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Quality

I am curious about something. When you all are testing these rods does anyone actually look at the quality? Do you look at the wall thickness on the female end of the ferrel and see if it is consistent? Do you check the finish on the rod to see how it wears? Does anyone even look at the cork on the handle, the reel seat, or the butt of the handle. All I ever hear is vague references to the action and possible line choices. It seems to me there is more to a rod than the action.
 

·
#&%*@^# Caster
Joined
·
3,058 Posts
Well I mentioned as not being fond of the reel seat but a lot of folks seem to like them. There are using REC recoil guides which is kinda cool and new to the spey world.

Cork is pretty nice. Comparable to T&Ts but a little slimmer. For a factory rod it is well made.

Not seeing why I should be concerned about ferrule thickness. Cannot really see how the finish will wear until you own it and fish it a bunch.

For $900 a pop build quality is something I take for granted. Afterall, we are not talking cabela sticks here. When it comes down to it for me action is king. Who cares if it is built great with super high end components but still casts like a wet noodle.

All the top shops build decent quality rods with good components so for me that is a non issue.

-sean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
JGS I am a big Loop fan-especcially of the yellow 8124 and 9132 green 9116 and blue 8116. Loop makes many good shorter speys but these are my favourite. The 12'6" GLX Stinger 7/8 is an amazing rod. In a straight comparison to the 8124 yellow I would take the Loop which is half the price. That said I have fished countless hours with the 8124 but have only cast the GLX on the pond.I sure did like that Stinger #9-felt like a great Chinook rod. As mentioned if I had the cash for a new $1000 rod it would be a tough choice with the edge probably going to the TCR.

Brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Quality Cont..

Sean, it isn't the ferrule wall thickness it is constant thickness. If it isn't constant, and if you look at a lot of rods you will see some that are not, then the quality of the blank is in question and it is more likely to break. I don't get how people can pay 900-1000 for a rod that isn't of the highest quality or how the factories have the nerve to charge so much. The other thing I don't get is how these discussions about rods are helpful when there isn't a standard to refer to for the flex pattern. There is a line standard so why isn't there a standard for the flex pattern. I use a 2or3oz weight hooked to the tip top. Quick and dirty and really irks some people in the shops, but it gives a constant to compare. Just hearing someone say "fast" doesn't mean anything to me.
 

·
Pullin' Thread
Joined
·
4,694 Posts
Roguespeycaster,

Usuing the static weight test you describe only provides one measurement of the rod's action, that of how much it flexes with the amount of static (non-moving) weight you are applying to the blank. It does not measure recovery rate of the rod after it has been bent under load and released from that load. Nor does it measure how the blank responds to an active load (i.e. casting and changing line loads due to increases or decrease of belly length being cast) applied to the blank. Also, it does not tell anything about whether the rod has noticeable sine nodes or multiple bounces of the rod tip after the load is applied and then released. Likewise, it tells one nothing of how the rod responds to the load generated by the various stops (from very abrupt to extended or drifted stop) at the end of the power stroke.

The static test also tells you very little about how the rod flexes etc. with the line size (line weight in grains) the rod was designed to cast. For instance, if I take a 3oz weight and see how it flexes my 16' 11 wt rod and then use the same 3oz. weight to see how it flexes my 15' 10 wt rod there will be noticeable differences in how far each rod flexes down the blank with that weight. Then if I take the same 3oz weight and see how it flexes my 13' 8 wt there will be even more of the rod flexed with that weight. But what does this really tell me about the rods? Only that they bend (or flex) differently from the same weight, something I would expect when comparing an 11 wt with an 8 wt. And I submit that because of this, the static test provides very little of the information on how the rod performs and that it is also not very accurate way to compare rods unless all are the same length and designed for the same line.

All of the other aspects I mentioned are very important parts of a rod's design, even if they are not detected at all through the use of your static test.

You are correct, there is no standard by which rod action can be objectively compared. I would submit that it would take a measurement of static load deflection (your flex profile to a given weight), a recovery rate measure, a measure of rod tip defection past rest position after the casting load is released and the rod moves through rest position, how many oscilations it takes for the rod tip to completely return to rest, and how the rod flex changes under dynamic load in order to be able to objectively compare one rod with another of the same line designation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Standard

Flytyer,
I agree with your opinion ALMOST completely. You can at least get some kind of idea how the rod flexes. For example, when I did this test on a 1509 scott and my 9143 Burkheimer it was clearly noticable that the Burk. had a tip that I would like a lot better. Same happened comparing a 1308 Scott and my Gary Anderson 13'3" 7; in both cases the scott tips where just too soft for me. Also, I only compare rods in the same length/wt to each other. I was hoping to get the kind of reply you gave me because just talking about flex in general terms doesn't help me much. I was hoping to get even more opinions on how people determine the quality of rods instead of just assuming a $900 rod is good. Maybe I will have to start another thread.
 

·
Pullin' Thread
Joined
·
4,694 Posts
Roguespeycaster,

I agree, just because a rod is $900.00, it doesn't mean it is the right rod for a person, not that it is a good rod either. I remember very well a person in PA when I was in high school who was building rods on Fenwick and St. Croix fiberglass blanks and charging his customers nearly three times the list price of a factory rod all the while advertising his rods as "better casting and fishing tools than the factory rod". The only thing that was different was he used a wood spacer reel seat and allowed the customer to choose thread color and had much better cosmetics, eventhough he used a Fenwick style, pre-made rod grip. His rods looked nicer, but they didn't cast any better, despite the folks who thought they did because they paid more
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
New Loomis Stinger GLX

Hi Brian
All the best in the new year !
Have you tried the G.Loomis Alta Series, these are awesome rods at $550-650 range. While doing the line testing, one of my favourite's was the 9/10 14'. it cast like a dream. Also it was hard to put down the 12'6" 8/9. I remember you and I had casted a number of different G.Loomis RoaringRiver rods in Denver, I wasn't sure if you had a chance to play with these. I'll be at the Calgary and Vancouver show, stop by the G.Loomis booth and test drive these babies.
Rick Whorwood
G.Loomis pro-staff
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
161 Posts
Stinger Alta 12'6" 8/9

Just got off of the river after fishing with the Loomis Stinger Alta 12'6" 8/9. What a great rod. I fished with the SA Scan 8/9 with a 10' intermediate tip and various flies all the way up to a 3" conehead bunny leech. No problem out to 70+' (as much as required by the river).

I then switched over to an SA Short Head 7/8. Again, no problem to 80+' (wider part of the river). A very light rod with plenty of reserve power. Does not feel as fast as I would have thought (which is a good thing a I prefer medium to medium-fast rods).

I am sure the GLX is a bit nicer, but for $400 the 12'6" 8/9 is an awesome rod.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
161 Posts
Stinger 14'0" 9/10 Question

After fishing, and really liking, the 12'6" 8/9, I am forced to ask about the 14' 9/10. Any experience with this rod? What lines are appropriate?

I have been fishing both a Sage 9140-3 and Scott A2 1409, but neither rod really 'moves'. For a second this morning I thought a Stinger 14' 9/10 might be my answer. Any opinions from folks who have experience with the Sage and/or Scott?

Thanks, John
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top