Spey Pages banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
what kind of performance and feel would you want from such a rod? What lines should it cast? how far? what should the optimal range be? just ingeneral what would you want or expect from a 11 ft 7wt???
 

·
Pullin' Thread
Joined
·
4,694 Posts
I'd expect it to be able to cast a 6 wt salmon/steelhead line, any of the standard single=hand WF7 lines, 70+ ft, or an 8 wt single-hand shooting head 100+ ft with overhead casting. I would also expect it to be able to make 70 ft single-hand spey casts (or regular spey cast if a short spey grip is on the bottom instead of a fighting butt) when using salmon/steelhead, DT, or single-hand Windcutter lines. It should have an optimum range of 60-80 ft for the average caster and allow good casters to cast 100 ft if they desire. And it should be a fast recovering, somewhat stiff rod with good power throughout the blank.

I'd use it for trout, smallmouth, largemouth, steelhead on any river if I didn't wish to use my longer, heavier 2-handers for steelhead; but I'd primarily use it for large trout, smallmouth, largemouth, or pickerel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
939 Posts
Flytyer,

I know it may differ depending upon the rod, but when spey casting -- not overhead casting -- are you suggesting that one should use a 6-weight salmon/steelhead taper with a 7-weight spey rod? What about an 8-weight salmon/steelhead taper? (It would have been too easy to ask about a 7-weight salmon/steelhead taper.)

Thanks,

CK
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
103 Posts
I hope I'm not incorrect in the assumption that the rod in question is a meant to fish single-hand lines?

I'm about to build this very rod, and I can tell you what I expect out of it:

• Spey and overhead cast using steelhead taper lines with roughly the same ease and effectiveness to free me from the limits of casting obstructions on the river's edge
• Be light and responsive enough to be comfortably cast as a single-hand rod when necessary
• Cast streamers and steelhead patterns up to size 1 with relative ease
• Be able to handle large trout, medium steelheads and landlocked salmon, smallmouth bass, and pike with enough backbone to make the fight enjoyable but with a swift end
 

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

Like Flyfisha1, I made the assumption it would be a single hand rod, designed for casting single hand lines. I thought this was clear is my previous post. The reason I view an 11' or even an 11'6" rod as a single hand rod or switch rod and not a 2-hand (or spey) rod is because of the very short lower spey grip such a rod requires and because rods shorter than 12' are very easy to cast single handed, and there is not the fulcrum the longer 2-hand rods utilize to help with spey casting the spey lines.

That said, I view an 11' 7 wt as a single hand rod that will cast any of the WF 7 lines that have a belly/backtaper of between 30 ft and 50 ft with ease. Such a rod would be overloaded by me with the short, powerful casting stroke I use with a 7 wt salmon/steelhead lines that have a belly/backtaper length of 60 ft to 68 ft or with a DT 7 line when casting beyond 50 ft. Therefore, I would use and expect such a rod to cast the 6 wt salmon/steelhead and DT lines either overhead or with a spey cast.

I personally would not use an 8 wt salmon/steelhead or DT line on an 11' 7 wt rod because me casting stroke would grossly overload the rod with these lines. I am very aware that there are many folks who like a slower, more mid-flexing rod than I and when they use one of the stiff, fast-recovering, less flexible rods that I prefer and like, they will many times overload the rod to get it to bend more and slow down a bit when casting with the more relaxed casting stroke the slower, more flexible rods require. If someone wants to use the 8 wt salmon/stelhead line on a stiff, fast-recovering, less flexible rod to slow it down a bit and make it bend furthur down the blank with less casting force, go for it. I would not do so because I have a short, powerful casting stroke that will load the blank down to the cork with the 6 wt salmon/steelhead line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Fly tyer,

I must assume that your lack of belief in TWO HANDED rods under 12' is a product of your misguided love for long belly lines. There are in fact many
11'-12' two handers that speycast beautifully-just not with a grandspey.

Brian
 

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

Yep, my love of long-belly lines is one of the reasons, the other is I prefer to use rods 13' and longer. That is why I still have a wish/desire to see a rod manufacturer put a fast-recovering, stiff, powerful, without being tip heavy 17' to 17'6" 4 or 5 piece 12 wt on the market so I could use the 10/11 GrandSpey without the rod feeling overloaded with its 1500 grains. And also why I have a desire to see a fast-recovery, stiff, with a moderately powerfu butt 15' 8 wt put on the market for summer/fall low-water fishing on the medium to large rivers.

By the way, I really like the way my older single-hand G.Loomis 11' 8/9 IMX spey and overhead casts with an 8 wt salmon/steelhead taper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Flytyer, you are right, there isn't much out there that can properly deal with that 10/11 grandspey. Personally I think it is a great line--for making heads with. I wouldn't hold much hope for any manufacturer to come out with the fast action 17+ footer you are looking for. This is a very small niche market and the rod would end up being very $$$$$ as well. Furthermore I think most folks are coming to their senses and realizing that the super long rod/long belly combo doesn't make much sense aside from being really fun to cast with. From a fishing standpoint 14' and less is a lot better and 11'-13' even more so. I think this is the way of the future and in the meantime you ought to pick up,while they are still avaliable, a Loop grey 16' or a CND Thompson as your best bet for your 10/11 grandspey(though heavy on both) should you still insist on fishing it. As for a a fast action 15' there are many to choose from though most are 10 weights. 11'-13'6" ussually makes for a much nicer casting and fishing 8 weight rod.
BN
 

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

I have cast the Loop Grey 16 ft and the CND Thompson Specialist with the 10/11 GrandSpey and both felt overloaded with it. Also, neither one is the stiff, fast-recovering rod I like and prefer. I own the T&T 1611, which I got some 7 or 8 years ago, and it feels overloaded with the 10/11 GrandSpey as well. The T&T 1611 along with the 16 ft Loop Grey and CND Thompson Specialist all feel very good with the 9/10 GrandSpey though, and that is the line I use exculsively on my T&T 1611 anymore.

I have cast a few 15 ft rods and one 15'6" rod that cast the 9/10 GrandSpey well (my favorite one was the T&T 1511 with the GLX 15'6" 11/12 a close second along with the new fast- recovering and stiff Mesier 15 ft 10/11, and the Loop Green 15' 10/11 just behind them). I still wnat a fast-recovery, stiff, non-tip heavy 17' 12 wt that will toss the 10/11 GrandSpey.

I have a 13' 8/9 GLX that I line with either the 7/8 GrandSpey (my favorite line on it) or one of the 8/9 mid-bel;ly lines. I'd love it if a rod maker put a 15' 8/9 rod on the market that had a similarly stiff, fast-recovering, moderately powerful action. Alas, there is none on the market at this time with this type of action.

I know you are right about the popularity of the shorter, lighter sticks; however, I still much prefer the longer ones. Even in single-hand rods for trout, I prefer and use a 10' 6 wt or my 11' 8/9 IMX unless fishing a small creek of less than 30 ft in width, when I get out my 7'6" 4 wt. I also know that I am in the minority in this as well with most folks I fished for trout with prefering a 9' 5 wt for most of their fishing. I simply prefer and like to cast the longer rods because of their better line mending and line handling ability compared to the shorter rods.

Once upon a time (back in the 60's and 70's) I fell prey to the shorter rod is as good as and possibly better than a longer rod and got myself a 7' 6 wt and a 6'6" 4 wt for trout fishing, and a 7'6" 8 wt for bass and pickerel. All of them were high end glass rods and all did OK; however, after graphite hit the market in the mid-to late 70's, I switched to rods of over 9' and have been much happier. This doesn't mean that everyone should go out and do so, not does it mean that I should switch to shorter rods, it simply means different folks prefer casting and fishing different length rods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
Brian,

I just can't let this go:

"Furthermore I think most folks are coming to their senses and realizing that the super long rod/long belly combo doesn't make much sense aside from being really fun to cast with. From a fishing standpoint 14' and less is a lot better and 11'-13' even more so."

From YOUR fishing viewpoint it works. Judging from your remarks about this subject, both past and present, kinda makes me wonder how much time you have spent with the long rod and an extended/long belly line WITH AN OPEN MIND. They are fun to cast. They also have their place. THE TOP rods on my home river have fished big sticks for years. And for years I thumbed my nose at them wondering why in the hell they needed something that big. And for years I plugged away with short sticks and shooting heads. With the new long belly lines hitting the market a short while ago I decided to give them a chance. Now that I have played on both sides of the fence I must admit that the long rod and long belly line is truly a better way for ME to fish the BIG rivers. The efficiency for 80+ foot casts, line control, added lever length in the fishes favor, and finally the ability to handle the nasty 'W' is much easier to accomplish when over 15'. Does that make me 'senseless'? I think not.

William
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
William,

what are these home rivers that you speak of? they must be very large to warrant the use of such big rods. With the right line on it 80+ foot casts are very fishable with rods measuring shorter than 14'. Truthfully such long casts are rarely necessarry on even the largest of rivers. My experience with big rivers and big rods is limited to the Thompson and Skeena. In both cases there were places where the big rod sometimes came in handy. MY experience taught me that a shorter rod was a much more comfortable and versatile fishing tool. I would love to be able to carry multiple rod/line systems with me on the river but have had trouble finding a suitable caddy. I know that sometimes the long rod/big line combos make sense. In fact that has nothing to do with how this thread started. I did throw a snide comment in my reply to see if any of you long rod guys are still out there. I certainly didn't intend for you to assume that I thought you were without sense. In fact I had no idea that you would think that a long rod and thick line would prove to be an advantage in the wind.

Flytyer maybe Sage will include a 16 footer in their upcoming line of TCR Speys.
I still think what you are looking for (especially ultrafast 15 foot 8 weight) is a little strange but good luck and I'm sure it will be a lot of fun to cast when you find it. Please let me know when you do,

BN
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
184 Posts
Careful Brian, devoted long liners are somewhat sensitive. I got into this debate some time ago, trying to make similar posts.Maybe I went about it wrong, but I got made out to be the bad guy. ( Who am I in comparison to the web masters). Everyone eventually comes around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Hate to lead this conversation off track. But, Flytyer, maybe one of my fellow Scandinavian or European cohorts could chime in.
While I haven't tried one, Vision (a Danish company) has a fast 17' rod that is rated for a 12/13 line. It's in their Extreme series and only weighs 9.25oz! Maybe this rod could handle a 10/11 GS. I've never really seen this rod reviewed anywhere and would be interesting to see if anyone has tried it out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
Brian,

"With the right line on it 80+ foot casts are very fishable with rods measuring shorter than 14'"

And so are casts well in excess of 100'. I am not arguing that the shorter rods don't have their place. I still spend 75% of my time fishing them with various line configurations.

"MY experience taught me that a shorter rod was a much more comfortable and versatile fishing tool."

They are more versatile.

Have you recently given the long rod and long belly line a real fighting chance? If you have, and still don't like them- Great! I'm not trying to 'convince' anybody to fish the way I do.

My truck is the caddy! I regularly switch back and forth depending on mood, the 'W', wading depth, and distance required for that particular run. Whether it's a Meizer Switch rod and shooting head, Cane/Greenheart two handers with a greased Silk DT, or Thompson Specialist and XLT/Grandspey. I like them all and they all have their place!!!

William
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Rob,

The rod should be capable of doing all the things listed above and I'm sure Kerry will see to it that it does if his other sweet sticks are any indication!

BFR
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top