Spey Pages banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,027 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ran into an old fellow on the upper river yesterday who was using a Scott SAS 9wt spey rod (I've got a 10wt ARC). First one I've seen.

Looking the two rods up on Mark B's site I note he carries both rods, and the write-up's don't appear to be all that different .... EXCEPT one rod costs 50%, or more, than the other. The ARC is a winter/spring salmon cannon, Board's thoughts on the SAS?
fae
 

·
Indicators Anonymous
Joined
·
846 Posts
IMHO...the SAS's are strictly shooting heads rods...they faily thinned walled (which makes them very very light) but I blew up a 1308 SAS on a cast way to easy with a long belly line...the litteraly collapsed, pretty amazing to see.
 

·
JD
Joined
·
3,609 Posts
Scott SAS rods

Are not these the rods of choice for "Last Cast Steve" Choate?
And if I am not mistaken, he does occasionally blow one up. But then he is a very powerful caster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
As I have told previously, I have been testing the SAS 13' - 8 this autumn extensively, and made daily comparisons with the Loomis GLX 13 - 8, maybe the light twohanded rod getting the most all-over topratings here in scandinavia. (Maybe toghether with the similar T&T, which I have never tried). I have casted them both with shooting heads (as we do here in Scandinavia), both 8-9s and 9-10s, floating and sink tips. Both works well.

The SAS is a fabulous rod in my opinion, very similar to the GLX both in practical work and when you compare their flex pattern on a spreadsheet. If you like faster rod actions, casting shooting heads "scandinavian style", it is really something!! It should be added that few here really likes the ARCs, except for their look. The action is for most models considered too slow for the casting style and lines used here.

The model hasnt got too much attention here, mostly because it hasnt been easily available in shops. It is said that the Norwegian representative, "Jarle and Bjornar flyshop" are working on a redesigned SAS model for 2003 together with Scott, trying to ease the way in on the market here from spring.

No one here has any bad experiences with collapses or breakage.

Good luck with your SAS!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
Most of my favorite rods are T&T: I have them in 7, 9 and 10 wts. I had the Scott ARC 1509 and 1510 rods at the same time and sold them because I rarely used them.
Recently I purchase the SAS 1308 to fill in my gap. I love it!! The rod is remarkably light, and maybe this will be a problem in the
future. So far the largest fish I have landed on it was
about 10 #. Of course, the biggest problem I had was getting it in the net! It is light, and fast enough to handle tips easily. Considering the comments made here, I'll continue to take precautions for that last 15'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,027 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Old fellow on the river with the 14' 9wt SAS.

peter-s-c said:
Just out of curiosity, how long and how heavy were the tips handled on the 1308 and how deeply were they run? In what sort of water?
"He" was using a RIO tri-tip line on the rod (Said that Simon had 'picked out the rod/line combo for him.' That said, Simon, you may know the older Gentleman).

He had noooo problem lifting the sink tip plus a heavily wted fly out of the water with just a flick of his wrist. You could tell by the way the line 'rippled' in the air that the rod was easily handling the tip/fly combo. Reserve power to spare.
fae
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
SAS vs ARC

I have tried both rods. The SAS was a 14' 9wt and the ARC a 15' 9wt. The SAS is a fast action and the ARC a slow aciton. With the SAS I casted with two different lines, a Windcutter 8/9/10 and a Mid Spey 9/10. With the Windcutter the head had to be postioned in just the right place out of the rod tip to get the rod to load properly, if you missed getting the head in the correct postion, the rod was very unforgiving. The Mid Spey 9/10 on the other hand, was a pleasure to cast, and seem to load the rod more to my liking. There is no doubt in my mine, if I was to purchase the SAS, the Mid Spey 9/10 would be my line choice. The ARC felt alot like my old Sage brown blank GFL 9143. You could feel the load right into the handle. I like the way the ARC handled several line choices. everything from a 7/8 Mid Spey to a Windcutter 8/9/10. The ARC 15' 9wt is a beautiful casting instrument and I believe at one time was one of Derek Browns favorite rods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Peter s-c,

The shooting heads I have used for this trial during autumn, has been typical scandinavian shooting heads, floating and sink tips. They have been of the brand "Guideline Power taper", a pretty heavy and aggressive shooting head. I dont know the exact weight, but guess between 35 and 40 grammes (1000 g on 1 kg).

They range from 12,5 - 13,5 meters in lenght (1 meter compares to somewhat more than 1 yard, or a bit more than 3 feet, huh?).
The sinktip I used had about 2 meters of slow sinking tip (as part of the 13,5 meters in total, not in addition - it was a built- in sinktip, not a separate sinking tip).

I have tested the rod in non-fishing situations, both on a lake, and in running water on a big river.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,027 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Pete, the fellow had the 1409 SAS

peter-s-c said:
Did the gentleman in question accomplish this effortless wrist flicking with the 1308 or the 1409?
As noted above the rod was easily handling the RIO tri tip sinking line and a large (dumb belled wted) fly off the end. Don't know which of the two sink tips was on the end.
fae
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
SAS vs. ARC Spey Rods

Fred,
It's interesting to read the various members' comments on these two line of Scott rods. I can't figure out if it's just a matter of individual preference and perception, or perhaps the type and weight of lines that were used with the rods created the perception that they had a slower or faster action.

I think you and the other members will find it interesting that if you check out Scott's website, they describe the action of both their ARC and the SAS series of rods as medium-fast. And, it appears the higher cost of the ARC series is due to their more costly rod components and the internal ferrule design, whereas I suspect the SAS has less costly components and a sleeve over ferrule design.

I can't speak about the action of the SAS series rods but in casting both the ARC 1287 and the 1509, I found these rod to be pretty quick and very powerful with both the delta spey and midspey lines. I'm looking forward to casting one of these SASs to see if I can perceive the difference that everyone's mentioning.

JB :smokin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,027 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Would be great fun to try these two (or should I say three?)

rods side by side.
fae

What the hell; it's 2003 and the JoanMeister hasn't bugged me about what I've spent so far this year. Get my "licks" in early?
:devil:
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top