# Fly Rod Suggestions?



## mjschijf

I'm thinking about investing in a fly rod. For all of you knowledgable fly-fishermen out there, what kind of rod would you suggest? I would let to invest in a good quality rod, but don't really want to spend TOO much, although I realize that a good rod won't be cheap. I've never fly-fished before, but my brother has a fly rod and has taught himself how to cast so I'm hoping he'll be able to teach me a thing or two. 
Any advice would be helpful (rod size, brand, etc.). Also, if anyone has any advice on a reel, that would be great too. Thanks!


----------



## BootWarmer

Scierra is a good fast action rod and doesn’t break the bank. Cabela’s had them but closed out the IC3 model (normally $150, on sale for $99 but they are sold out). The rod also comes with an aluminum tube.

The Scierra reel is also pretty good. It comes with 4 spools so that is nice if you have extra lines, a case is included.

That is an economical package. Some of the Cabela’s combo deals are okay. I would not get a click drag reel but get one with some type of disk where you can adjust the drag.

I went to a demo day testing different fly rods. It’s all personal opinion but what I can tell a more significant difference in is the quality of the fly lines. A lot are coming with welded loops on the ends, so I would recommend those.

As far as size of rods, I would recommend a 9 foot 5 weight rod for trout. It will make it easier to cast putting a 6 weight line on it and you will probably enjoy that more.


----------



## threshershark

Fly rods come in a wide variety of lengths, weights, and action types. The best way to narrow it down a bit is to determine which kind of fly fishing you plan on doing the most.

Small, medium, and large rivers would be best suited to certain rod types, while stillwater rods for lakes and larger flies will have different requirements. Some rod lengths/weights are considered all-around fits, but you still want to pick a piece of equipment that works best for what you do the most often.

Fill us in on where you plan to whip the water and I'll put in my 2¢.


----------



## Hounddog

+1 on the 9' 5 wt. It will cover the most of all fishing conditions including rivers and lakes. Plus you can always line up to a 6wt line or line down to a 4wt. If you get a chance to you should try casting with a few different types to see how each one feels. Each person has a preference on what they like. If you want to I have a couple rods you can come by and cast if you like. I even have an old fiberglass rod that is a real blast to fish with. My advise on a first rod would be to spend around 100-150 but dont break the bank. You will probably want more rods later and will end up buying a couple more or get like me and make some. Good luck.

Hounddog


----------



## flyguy7

My advice would to be go cast some and see what feels best for you. Fly rods are a big part personal preference. Also, i would suggest not underlining a newer graphite rod, it will only hurt your casting.


----------



## orvis1

Spend the money on a good quality name brand rod and skimp on the reel to start. Go to a few shops and cast some in the parking lot. If you get into fly fishing you likely will own a couple of lenghts and size rods. Better yet hook up with some guys on the forum and go out and fish with some stuff before you plunk down the cash...


----------



## icthys

You've received good advice. I suggest the same but a few little changes.

First, I suggest a medium to medium-fast action rod. They are easier for beginners to learn on and will still handle windy conditions and stillwater. I fish my medium action rod all the time in wind and on stillwater and never have any problems.

I then suggest a 4 wt. rod. Once again that's what I fish with and if I could only choose one rod it would be the 4wt 9' rod.

From there go cast a few. Since you are new and don't know what you are doing get the one that is easiest for you to cast and buy that one regardless of what it says on the rod.

You could always have one built also


----------



## threshershark

Everyone is suggesting their favorite rod, but that is still only helpful if mjfchijf fishes the same style and locations.

It's like asking what kind of vehicle I should get, and people start responding "Camry" or "Accord." Sure they would be good cars unless my requirements are 0-60 in under 4 seconds or payload of at least 10,000 pounds.

I think Icthys gives a good tip for a stream-only rod. My favorite rod for Utah rivers is a 9-foot 4-weight, medium action. This will give good precision and forgiveness while being plucky enough to toss streamers or occasionally fish bigger water like the Green. Still depending on which waters you fish, a rod between 7'10" and 8'6" could actually be better.

The 9' 5-weight is a good all-around choice if you fish 90% rivers and 10% stillwater or less. It will do the job on flatwater, but it's still a stream rod that can play up in a pinch.

If you fish stillwater frequently, and rivers here and there, the 9' 6-weight is about the minimum. You'd want medium-fast or fast action to cast big flies (usually against the wind). Better to have unused power on a stream than to need power and not have it on a lake.

For stillwater only, 9'6" 6-weight or 7-weight, medium-fast or fast action.


----------



## orvis1

If you only want to throw dries than I love my 8ft 1wt line makes a delicate presentation.


----------



## cheech

orvis1 said:


> If you only want to throw dries than I love my 8ft 1wt line makes a delicate presentation.


I know this is just my opinion, but a 1 wt is fun to throw as long as you make sure the wind doesn't blow at all. Any wind whatsoever, and you are in for a hell of a time If you like the light feel of a rod, a 3 wt will scratch that itch just fine. For a beginning fisher, I think I'd recommend just what Icthys said too. A 9' 4 wt. In Utah it is a very versatile rod. There really isn't much need to go with a big fancy name brand rod either. I have rods ranging from $50 to $700 and the $50 is one of my favorites. Talk to Icthys about making you a 9' 4 wt in a Dan Craft blank. You won't want to fish anything else.


----------



## threshershark

cheech said:


> If you like the light feel of a rod, a 3 wt will scratch that itch just fine.


Plus 8" trout will give you some nice rod bend for YouTube videos. :mrgreen:


----------



## cheech

threshershark said:


> cheech said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you like the light feel of a rod, a 3 wt will scratch that itch just fine.
> 
> 
> 
> Plus 8" trout will give you some nice rod bend for YouTube videos. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

yep! just depends on which one you are talking about....


----------



## threshershark

The one I saw rocked to Tom Petty, it was cool.

Are you going to do a bass video?


----------



## cheech

threshershark said:


> The one I saw rocked to Tom Petty, it was cool.
> 
> Are you going to do a bass video?


That would be cool, but it takes a lot of time and Gas. It has been nice to just be able to get out and fish this year.

BTW, some of those fish pushed 19"


----------



## icthys

cheech said:


> a 9' 4 wt in a Dan Craft blank. You won't want to fish anything else.


Only a handful of anglers have one of these rods in Utah, and the only way to get one is to build one. This rod will rival any top name rod out there.

This rod just went up $50 for the blank due to high popularity. Going price for this rod custom built with handmade handle and reel seat...$340. Compare that with a Sage, Winston, Loomis, Scott, or any of the other over priced rods.


----------



## mjschijf

Thanks for all the advice guys!

Threshershark, you asked about what kind of fly-fishing I will be doing. Well, I will probably be fishing mostly still-water (if I had to guess, I'd say maybe 75 percent of the time) but that isn't to say I won't ever fish rivers. The rivers I would fish are actually more like streams and are quite small. My brother really enjoys fishing in rivers so when I go fishing with him, that's probably where I'd go. However, when I go fishing without my brother (which will be most of the time) I probably will go out on my float tube on lakes. Is there a versatile rod that is perhaps best for stillwater, but also gets the job done on smaller rivers?

Thanks again for the info!


----------



## RnF

Very sound advise has been given so far. I would probably recommend a 6wt fast action rod based off what you will be doing most. It will allow you to cast big flies for that stillwater action but it isn't too much rod for the rivers. I wouldn't worry too much about fishing it on a smaller streams either. It will do fine. 

Get something that will work for what you will be doing the most. As far as what brand... well as you can see, everyone has a favorite. Which is good thing, there is a great selection out there. 

Go to a Fish Tech, or Cabela's (or your local fly shop) and tell them how much you want to spend and tell them what you will be doing most and they will get you geared up.

Before you buy, cast the rod and go with what feels good to you. Oh, get something with a lifetime warranty so if you break your rod you can get a new one (usually costs around 50 bucks to get replaced even with the warranty.) Most rods around $200 and above have one.

If you want a really nice cheaper rod for small streams, American Tackle Company makes a rod called the Matrix. I have their 4wt and love it. It has a medium/fast action that fits my casting style perfectly. It isn't a Dan Craft by any means (the Crafts are unbelievable rods), but for the price it's hard to beat. It will most likely have to be built as well, the blanks are around 50-60 bucks depending on what you get. They make great second rods (or primary rod in my case)

Good Luck and what ever you decide, let us know.


----------



## SFWG

Buy something cheap then learn how to cast. If you like it you will buy many more. If I was you I would buy a Cabela's brand rod, cheap and best warranty on the planet. I own everything from a 3 to a 12 and if I could only have one it would be a 8'6" 5 weight. I would also buy a Cabela's or Okuma reel, pretty good reels for the money.


----------



## threshershark

mjschijf said:


> Well, I will probably be fishing mostly still-water (if I had to guess, I'd say maybe 75 percent of the time) but that isn't to say I won't ever fish rivers.


That's a recipe for a 9-foot 6-weight for sure. Once you are settled into your technique, you will want to be able to cast at least 60 feet from the seated position of your float tube. Stillwater is almost always breezy or windy. These requirements make 4 and 5-weight rods too light for regular lake duty.

I prefer a fast action for stillwater, mainly due to the better distance and wind-cutting ability. It's not always the right answer though, because there is a trade off. Medium-fast rods are a little easier on the casting arm because they are not quite as stiff. You sacrifice distance and wind-cutting, but they are more relaxing to cast all day. This is where personal preference will kick in. I do think that medium and slow action rods will be too soft for your purposes.

The Dan Craft offer from Icthys is nice! I'm not sure of your price range but Redington and Temple Fork make respectable entry-level rods. In the mid-range that Dan Craft would be sweet, or take a look at the Sage FLi ($275).

Trout reels don't need to be high end affairs because you don't deal with the kind of extended runs that stress a drag system. Check out the Redington CD or Pfleuger President series. One thing to consider for stillwater is that you really do need multiple lines (eventually). An economical reel will allow you to buy cheap interchangeable spools as you acquire more lines.

Start with a #3 uniform sink line as your all-around. Scientific Anglers makes a very good uniform sink. If you have the funds right off the bat, also choose a slow-sink (#1) in something like the Airflo Freshwater Delta Intermediate or Scientific Anglers Mastery Stillwater, a #5 uniform sink, and a floating line for midge fishing. Get weight-forward (WF) lines.

If you have any questions lmk. Good luck!


----------



## madonafly

icthys said:


> cheech said:
> 
> 
> 
> a 9' 4 wt in a Dan Craft blank. You won't want to fish anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> This rod just went up $50 for the blank due to high popularity. Going price for this rod custom built with handmade handle and reel seat...$340. *Compare that with a Sage, Winston, Loomis, Scott, *or any of the other over priced rods.
Click to expand...

It is a nice rod, but seriously....No Comparison :roll:


----------



## cheech

madonafly said:


> icthys said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cheech said:
> 
> 
> 
> a 9' 4 wt in a Dan Craft blank. You won't want to fish anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> This rod just went up $50 for the blank due to high popularity. Going price for this rod custom built with handmade handle and reel seat...$340. *Compare that with a Sage, Winston, Loomis, Scott, *or any of the other over priced rods.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is a nice rod, but seriously....No Comparison :roll:
Click to expand...

Have you fished it side by side with any of them? Just curious. I have a $60 rod that fishes just like a $600 Winston IM6. It's a pretty easy comparison. It has a similar action to my Scott G2s just a bit heavier.


----------



## madonafly

Yes. To me it is like comparing a HUMMER to the one Chevy made. Heck they looked the same, had four tires, and they got you to where you where going, but that is where it ended.

The fact that the upper end rods and companies are USA, is one big plus.

I did not say they were bad, they are not. But there is a reason the upper ends cost more (maybe not as much as they are asking now, but that is progress)

Your $60. rod probably does FISH as well as an IM6...to you and even others, but it is NOT equal in all around quality.

Why don't you just say it is a great rod for a good price and leave it at that. Or, here is a quality rod for those that can't budget the $600+ rods, that I think you will really like.

There is some of us out there that prefer the UPPER end Winstons, Sage, Scott, and even Orvis for a reason.


----------



## cheech

madonafly said:


> Yes. To me it is like comparing a HUMMER to the one Chevy made. Heck they looked the same, had four tires, and they got you to where you where going, but that is where it ended.
> 
> The fact that the upper end rods and companies are USA, is one big plus.
> 
> I did not say they were bad, they are not. But there is a reason the upper ends cost more (maybe not as much as they are asking now, but that is progress)
> 
> Your $60. rod probably does FISH as well as an IM6...to you and even others, but it is NOT equal in all around quality.
> 
> Why don't you just say it is a great rod for a good price and leave it at that. Or, here is a quality rod for those that can't budget the $600+ rods, that I think you will really like.
> 
> There is some of us out there that prefer the UPPER end Winstons, Sage, Scott, and even Orvis for a reason.


I can't say that I agree with you. SOME of the upper end rods warrant to high price and are unmatched in quality and engineering, but SOME of them are nothing more than a name on a blank. I can also build a custom rod that is much more esthetically pleasing than the top of the line manufactured rods. Alan is a good example of pure craftsmanship. He can take a blank and turn it into a piece of art that no mass produced rod can match. Also, I have fished many top end blanks, and when I say that my $60 blank can fish right beside them, I stand by that.

I think it's funny how we as fly fishers get so caught up in spending $700 for a rod. If you went to the spin/baitcast world and asked $700 for a rod you'd get laughed off the stage. The rods on that end of the spectrum are just as technologically advanced (if not more) than fly rods, yet you rarely see a price tag of more than $350. Marketing??? YES. Companies know that we are suckers, and we'll pay the price. I've gone the rounds with several of the high end rod elitists, and I'm not saying that they aren't nice (I have 3 scotts that are worth a pretty penny) but they don't make you any better of a fisherman. Period.

I think the debate of quality vs not so great quality should be geared toward flies and hooks. Those are the things that the fish eat. Not many times have I had to hold my Scott G2 843-4 and my Waterworks Purist under the water column so the fish can see it.


----------



## madonafly

I was saying that. You don't NEED the 600+ to catch fish, agreed, absolutely!
But there is a difference, that was all I am saying. My BIIx and my JWF....ain't no $60 blank out there to come close. Just my choice that is all.
I caught a bunch on my $14. Eagle Claw...yes you can catch fish with anything.
But to enjoy this sport and in some aspects income, I DO like the finer things. Just like my Music, don't need the high priced gear, but it makes life much more enjoyable.
Use what you can afford, and pick the best for the buck....even I do that.
Cheech, I have proven the difference in the upper end rods and the not, over and over again....blindfolded as you say.


----------



## Mojo

Brother Cheech. If you can find a $60 blank that casts like or matches my 6w BIIX, I'll build you one. And if you find a blank that throws like my McFarland Parabolic glass for cheap, I'll do the same.  
Maybe not in the same year, but I'll still build you one.
And I'll say with all honestly, that a great rod will make you a better caster. Maybe not a better fisherperson, but a better caster.
I think it's not the question that a high end rod will make you a better fisherman/woman, but it's more enjoyable fishing. Winston, Sage, Scott, Loomis, T&Tf go to all the work to design specific tapers out. Asian companies copy/rip off the tapers, build the blanks and sell them for cheap. It might be close, but it's not the same thing.
I agree having a custom built rod is a lot nicer than a factory rod. I also agree with Jess about the Dan Craft. Don't forget CTS, Burkheimer, R.B. Meiser for custom blanks too.
Now here's a couple pics of some custom fly rods  These are two you or Jess hasn't see yet.
5W McFarland Para
























4W Lamiglas


----------



## mjschijf

threshershark said:


> mjschijf said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I will probably be fishing mostly still-water (if I had to guess, I'd say maybe 75 percent of the time) but that isn't to say I won't ever fish rivers.
> 
> 
> 
> That's a recipe for a 9-foot 6-weight for sure. Once you are settled into your technique, you will want to be able to cast at least 60 feet from the seated position of your float tube. Stillwater is almost always breezy or windy. These requirements make 4 and 5-weight rods too light for regular lake duty.
> 
> I prefer a fast action for stillwater, mainly due to the better distance and wind-cutting ability. It's not always the right answer though, because there is a trade off. Medium-fast rods are a little easier on the casting arm because they are not quite as stiff. You sacrifice distance and wind-cutting, but they are more relaxing to cast all day. This is where personal preference will kick in. I do think that medium and slow action rods will be too soft for your purposes.
> 
> The Dan Craft offer from Icthys is nice! I'm not sure of your price range but Redington and Temple Fork make respectable entry-level rods. In the mid-range that Dan Craft would be sweet, or take a look at the Sage FLi ($275).
> 
> Trout reels don't need to be high end affairs because you don't deal with the kind of extended runs that stress a drag system. Check out the Redington CD or Pfleuger President series. One thing to consider for stillwater is that you really do need multiple lines (eventually). An economical reel will allow you to buy cheap interchangeable spools as you acquire more lines.
> 
> Start with a #3 uniform sink line as your all-around. Scientific Anglers makes a very good uniform sink. If you have the funds right off the bat, also choose a slow-sink (#1) in something like the Airflo Freshwater Delta Intermediate or Scientific Anglers Mastery Stillwater, a #5 uniform sink, and a floating line for midge fishing. Get weight-forward (WF) lines.
> 
> If you have any questions lmk. Good luck!
Click to expand...

Alright! 9 foot 6 weight it is then. I will start looking around. Do you know anything about the fly rods at Sportsman's Warehouse? I live in St. George and that is the only good fishing/outdoors store here that I know of. Maybe I will try shopping around online and see if I find. Are there any specific brand names with a good reputation that I should keep my eye open for? 
I will refer back to your advice about the lines and reels after I have a rod picked out. I'm new to this fly-fishing terminology so I'm a little confused about the different lines. Haha I'm sure I can figure it out though. I really appreciate your advice. Everyone on here has been really helpful!


----------



## cheech

Ok Madona-Mojo, maybe I just suck at casting. I'm not talking about the BIIx, but rather the IM6. BTW, the BIIx felt extra gnarley in my hand. I don't think I could get used to casting it. I guess I'll focus on catching fish with sub par gear... and some G2s. 

Joni, I'm not saying that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two rods, but they fish very much the same. I had an IM6 aficionado want to fish my rod all day, and I was stuck with a POS LT5 all day. 

On the other hand, I wrapped some quality danvilles 70 denier, some whiting feathers and some Rainy's Evazote foam on a tiemco hook. I hope that a fish will eat it upon further inspection.


Great looking rods Alan. Too bad I can't feel how they cast.


----------



## scott_rn

mjschijf - I guess you better finance a $700 dollar rod :wink:. 

My most recent flyrod was a redington 8 wt. combo for salmon/steelhead/big browns in New York and I spent $100 on the combo. I was living on student loans so I literally paid for the thing by recycling bottles and cans I scrounged up. I caught a couple of browns over 10 lbs on it , and the cheap reel even held up.

I disagree with the mentality that an expensive rod is a big deal. Campfire was going to by a sage in the neighborhood of $600 and just for the heck of it he tried a Cabela's model. Long story short he tried casting both rods with the same reel/line setup and was able to cast better with the $175 rod - it saved him $425.

Just go cast all the 6 weights at the St. George Sportsmans in your price range and pick out the one that feels the best to you.


----------



## madonafly

I never said you HAD to buy one of those $600. + rods. I do have several, but to be honest, if I had to flip for the MARKED price tag, I would be looking at these same rods mentioned. Nothing beats a custom. I was only saying, there is a difference. The upper end rods are a good EXAMPLE spot to start from. You hear it all the time as in this thread. "This rod cast just like a Z-Axis, or an IM6, but I never hear, this cast like a TFO Pro. The big boys are the sot after tapers. 

I too have found rods that are "similar". Dennis Brakke at "The Fly Desk" has a new line that is very similar to the faster action Sage. A very nice stick for under $200.

Speaking of the TFO, I wanted a 10' 5 wt. I looked at the SAGE, and even the St. Croix. But the TFO was the action I wanted. The fact it was way under $200. was an added bonus.
The cork on it is terrible, but nothing that cant be fixed, and the warranty is every bit as good as the Big Boys.

I hear people all the time say they want to get into Bamboo. I have to ask, WHY? To just say they own one. If so then the Montys, the H&I's or sorry even the Elk Horn. They are very heavy and not a good representative of the Bamboo world.
BUT, there are less expensive bamboo that are fantastic. That is where custom really shines. As far as trying and feeling a good representative of bamboo in the blue collar price range, I say check out Highland Mills. There 7' 4 wt. is...."SIMILAR" to the Orvis Battenkill at 3 X the price.

In short, TRY the rod and find what works for you and that you can enjoy, REGARDLESS of the price. I moped floors for the sticks I wanted! :shock:


----------



## threshershark

scott_rn said:


> I disagree with the mentality that an expensive rod is a big deal.


This is like almost any kind of gear. If you are a novice snowboarder, you don't want the type of board of the pros use right off the bat. It would be tuned for performance not forgiveness, and a beginner's skills could not bring out the potential of the equipment.

Someone starting out in target shooting would likewise not be able to shoot a sub 1" group at 300 yards even with a high end custom rifle.

As the skills develop, so does the need and appreciation for precision equipment. With stillwater fishing, this need is honestly not very prominent because it's uncommon to really NEED high performance. If you can't cast far enough, you can always kick away from your line wad. I will say that every so often it makes a huge difference though. Not too long ago I fished a lake in a 30 MPH crosswind, and the fish were stacked along a steep rocky bank. They would only take a fly dropped, quite literally, within one inch of the bank. They were also spooky enough that I needed to maintain about a 40-foot distance. I lack the skills to make a cast like that every time, but still managed maybe 6 out of 10. I'm positive that without good equipment a situation like that would have been all but unfishable.

Still, overall I'm with Cheech. My brother has caught unreal numbers of fish on a $45 Kunan 6-weight rod.



mjschijf said:


> Are there any specific brand names with a good reputation that I should keep my eye open for?


Sportsman's is a great place to go for a good outfit. There are those on the forum that have fished more types of rods than me, like the Cheech himself. I have been impressed with Redington (really liked the 6-weight Crosswater that sells for the mid $100 range), Temple Fork (the TiCr and TiCrX are the fast action), and the Sage FLi. Scott and GLoomis are also excellent. You should have a good selection at Sportsman's.


----------



## madonafly

What is the need for a fast action?


----------



## threshershark

madonafly said:


> What is the need for a fast action?


mjschijf mentioned this will primarily be a stillwater rod, used on rivers here and there.

The name of the game on lakes is casting from the sitting position in breezy or flat out windy conditions. Fast action, or medium-fast action rods are best suited to getting the kind of distance and wind-cutting ability needed for this purpose.


----------



## cheech

I am not a rod expert, but I know what works for me. I too prefer a fast action for stillwater fishing. I'm not saying that it's not fun to fish lakes with a moderate rod, but my shoulder and elbow sure appreciate it when I don't overwork them. I fish stillwaters primarily with a Sage Fli 590-4. I fish it because I got a good deal on it. I just adjusted my casting style to make it work. It's a pretty fast rod, and I can cast for distance with it. I'd recommend that you go to a shop with a price range in mind. Tell them "I have X dollars to spend on a 6 wt that I want to fish on lakes." They should be able to point you in the right direction. For about $200 you can get a pretty SWEET rod. A couple of brands you might want to check out are: TFO, Sage (Launch is only $200), Redington, ECHO (strongly recommend this one), St. Croix. Chances are you will find something that works for your casting style.


----------



## flyguy7

Another would be the Scott A2. I think hands down outperforms most all other rod manufacturers offerings in that price point and I have thrown almost all of them.


----------



## madonafly

threshershark said:


> madonafly said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the need for a fast action?
> 
> 
> 
> mjschijf mentioned this will primarily be a stillwater rod, used on rivers here and there.
> 
> The name of the game on lakes is casting from the sitting position in breezy or flat out windy conditions. Fast action, or medium-fast action rods are best suited to getting the kind of distance and wind-cutting ability needed for this purpose.
Click to expand...

I understand the promotion of faster rods for distance and wind. But I think the line is much more important. If I can cast 60' with wind and my Fiberglass, I have to think the Windcutter II is the reason it is easy.

Let me ask you this, don't you think FAST action rods also cover up imperfections in casting abilities? 
Just my opinion, but a medium or even slower action helps to feel the load up better and forces the caster to slow down.
I do have fast action rods, but have never considered them advantages over medium, but again, I think the LINE has more to do with it.
Just talking here guys, not trying to stir any pots.


----------



## cheech

madonafly said:


> threshershark said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> madonafly said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is the need for a fast action?
> 
> 
> 
> mjschijf mentioned this will primarily be a stillwater rod, used on rivers here and there.
> 
> The name of the game on lakes is casting from the sitting position in breezy or flat out windy conditions. Fast action, or medium-fast action rods are best suited to getting the kind of distance and wind-cutting ability needed for this purpose.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I understand the promotion of faster rods for distance and wind. But I think the line is much more important. If I can cast 60' with wind and my Fiberglass, I have to think the Windcutter II is the reason it is easy.
> 
> Let me ask you this, don't you think FAST action rods also cover up imperfections in casting abilities?
> Just my opinion, but a medium or even slower action helps to feel the load up better and forces the caster to slow down.
> I do have fast action rods, but have never considered them advantages over medium, but again, I think the LINE has more to do with it.
> Just talking here guys, not trying to stir any pots.
Click to expand...

Valid points. I think a fast rod is essential for throwing into the wind without much effort. Sure a moderate rod will work, but so will your arm.


----------



## madonafly

You HAVE seen my arms right? :shock: :lol:


----------



## cheech

madonafly said:


> You HAVE seen my arms right? :shock: :lol:


you have seen mine right?


----------



## threshershark

madonafly said:


> Let me ask you this, don't you think FAST action rods also cover up imperfections in casting abilities?


I get what you are saying here, except I think the principal is that excellent technique with a medium action rod can produce a good distance cast. Good technique AND a fast action rod will generate more power and line speed than a medium action can produce.

Medium action rods are enjoyable to cast in good conditions, I think it's important that beginners learn the difference and find their personal style and preference. Medium tapers are designed for feel, accuracy, and presentation. They are are also easier on the arm to cast all day because loading the rod requires less effort. Fast action tapers are designed for power, distance, big flies, and wind cutting. Since those things are what I most commonly need on stillwater, I fish fast action on lakes about 90% of the time.


----------



## campfire

"Let me ask you this, don't you think FAST action rods also cover up imperfections in casting abilities? "


I think the opposite is true. Fast action rods accentuate casting imperfections. 
A fast action rod in the hand of an exert can do what a slower rod cannot (generate Line speed) but slower action rods are more forgiving of less than perfect timing. A beginner may not have the skills to even appreciate the advantages of a fast action rod and may in fact cast better with a slower rod.


----------



## madonafly

My opinion only, but I have seen the opposite. A beginner will pick up a fast rod and start swatting away. Anyone that has been fishing for awhile, you hand them a GLASS or a WOODEN rod and if they are not use to a slow rod, they are going to have trouble with timing.
Timing is everything!
Anyone can cast a fast action.
As put, it is for distance along with big flies and wind. I have a T3 tip-flex 6wt and of course the BIIx. I love the rods because of there lack of weight, but I do have to muscle them more to get them to do what a mid-flex does automatically.
As the saying goes, let the ROD do the work. That means the flex and everything else. You are less likely to break off with a medium to full action also. Which means lighter tippet.

My go to is a 6wt 9' mid-flex Zero. Light as heck and the flex hurls the line out. Beautiful in roll casts. Second choice is my McFarland glass.

I can maybe see the fast action if shore fishing, but stillwater from a pontoon, tube or boat.....that I don't get. Again, less break offs with a rod that gives. But I have also never needed to cast much over 60' from my boat. Even with the Gulpers.

All I can say is I teach my students with a slower action and they seem to get it better.

But, I am not saying I know everything so, keep the post coming. I don't know about you all, but I do find if I listen, I can learn something new every day. Kinda Cool.


----------



## campfire

madonafly,
I am not sure we are communicating well. Are you saying that a faster action rod is easier for a beginner to cast than a slower action rod (because a faster action covers up casting imperfections)? If so, why do you start your students on slower action rods. I believe you are doing exactly the right thing by starting students on slower action rods BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE FORGIVING OF LESS THAN PERFECT TIMMING. I think as a caster developes better skills (better timming) he/she can appreciate and use the advantages of a faster rod better.


----------



## cheech

campfire said:


> madonafly,
> I am not sure we are communicating well. Are you saying that a faster action rod is easier for a beginner to cast than a slower action rod (because a faster action covers up casting imperfections)? If so, why do you start your students on slower action rods. I believe you are doing exactly the right thing by starting students on slower action rods BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE FORGIVING OF LESS THAN PERFECT TIMMING. I think as a caster developes better skills (better timming) he/she can appreciate and use the advantages of a faster rod better.


Here's the way I see it.

If your first rod is a fast rod, you will adapt to casting it. Moderate rods will be more difficult to cast.

If your first rod is a moderate rod, you will adapt to casting it. Fast rods will be more difficult to cast.

For the love of pete people they are all just fly rods. The fish don't fricking care what you prefer. Adapt and move on.

Now let me tell you about my new Carrot Stick.......


----------



## madonafly

campfire said:


> madonafly,
> I am not sure we are communicating well. Are you saying that a faster action rod is easier for a beginner to cast than a slower action rod (because a faster action covers up casting imperfections)? If so, *why do you start your students on slower action rods*. I believe you are doing exactly the right thing by starting students on slower action rods BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE FORGIVING OF LESS THAN PERFECT TIMMING. I think as a caster developes better skills (better timming) he/she can appreciate and use the advantages of a faster rod better.


To teach them the CORRECT way. When I worked in the industry, newbies would grab the fast action and shake it a few times and say this is the one. I would take them outside with it, and looked to be a windshield wiper. But take that same newbie, put a slow action rod in their hand, maybe even have them stand sideways and watch how much more control they have and tighter loops.
In answer to your question....yes a faster rod is easier for a newbie to cast, BUT not correctly, and they miss out on the learning curve.


----------



## Mojo

Interesting topic that this has sort of turned to.
My opinion- and not my wife's (we seldom share the same opinion  )
It's harder to _learn_ to throw a slow or medium action rod than a fast one. But it teaches you better casting skills. You have to watch and think about what you do at first to get your timing down. Fast rods, you can't really feel the rod load up properly. Slow rods you feel it and notice it right away. That's were the timing comes in and soon muscle memory takes over.
4 or 5 years ago after fishing with med fast to fast rods for years, I started to fish with bamboo. Slow and it's a bit(h to get your timing at first. After fishing with it and fiberglass for a year I picked up my graphite rods. I was amazed how much farther I could cast (and with less effort) with the graphite. I also notice I was waiting a little longer on the backcast before starting the forward cast. Tighter loops, longer casts (although casting 70'+ doesn't help much when most of the river/streams here are less then half that.)
Here's a challange for all. Get a cheap wally world fiberglass rod -Chinese built Eagle Claw yellow rod for $16- and fish with it for a month or two. Go back to your plastic rod and see the difference. I have a hunch you'll then agree.


----------



## Yahtahay

Since you are going to go to Sportsmans Warehouse I would recommend you try a St. Croix Legend Ultra 9', 6 wt. with a Lamson Konic 2 reel. It's a fairly fast rod and it rivals my Sage TCR series that cost me oodles more! Both the St. Croix rod and Lamson reel are lifetime warranty and will suit any fly fishing your going to do in the Rocky Mountains. Also for the combo your going to be set back about $450 or so but you won't be disappointed. The St. Croix is a fast action rod and I would recommend a 4 piece unit that you can pack and take with you on a hike if you like fishing back country Uinta lakes that rarely see fisherman. There are plenty of suggestions on here, just don't waste your money on a cheap rod and reel or quite simply it's going to be "Money Wasted".


----------



## bushrat311

Yahtahay said:


> for the combo your going to be set back about $450 or so but you won't be disappointed - just don't waste your money on a cheap rod and reel or quite simply it's going to be "Money Wasted".


I guess by your reasoning every rod and reel I own was "money wasted" cause nothing I've ever owned cost over $150. I've fly fished for my entire life, have cast and fished many brand name high dollar rods, and I'm just fine using the sticks I own (and catch plenty of fish with). Like cheech has stated it's more about what feels good to you. How realistic is it to assume that a novice will appreciate the qualities a high end Sage, Gloomis, T&T, Scott, Winston, TFO or even the St. Croix you mentioned? It's kind of like handing a 15 year old kid with a learners permit keys to a Rolls-Royce or Lamborghini before he even knows how to drive.

Like has been said before in this thread as a caster develops better skills and timing he can appreciate and use the advantages of a faster rod more. The fish don't care if your waving a $450 rod over their head or not.


----------



## icthys

Mojo said:


> Don't forget CTS, Burkheimer, R.B. Meiser for custom blanks too.
> Now here's a couple pics of some custom fly rods  These are two you or Jess hasn't see yet.
> 5W McFarland Para


Holy smokes! I love that color on that rod. I need to promptly get me one and get it built so I can fish it this year.

I also need to get a CTS rod.

Forget factory rods.


----------



## SFWG

Legend Ultra and the TCR the same??? I have now heard it all. I own both and the are in no way similar. I was in SW and they do have some Avids and Ultras on clearance, pretty good deal. I would stay far away from the TCR unless you are very experienced.


----------



## Yahtahay

Keyword "Rivals" Matt....It definitely is not as good as my TCR but my St. Croix is a **** good rod for the price.


----------



## flyguy7

IMHO, most of you are wrong. A slower action rod is easier to cast for a beginner to cast than a faster action rod. It is a matter of physics. A slow action rod distributes the load of the rod acroos the entire spine of the rod down near the cork. A fast action rod is loaded up in the upper third to half of the rod. Because the slow action rod is loaded across a broader area, the rod will stay loaded for a longer period of time, therefore being more forgiving to timing errors of beginning casters. To put it simple, a soft action rod will still make decent casts with slight timing flaws where a faster action will not.

Also, a fast action rod is really designed to be cast with a double haul to get the maximum efficiency of the rod. How many beginners learn to double haul right from the blocks. I don't know of any.

Comparing a TCR to a St croix Legend Ultra? Like comparing a Nissan Maxima to a Porsche Carrera! Try carrying 80-90 feet of line _before_ shooting your final cast and let me know how that legend ultra matches up to the TCR. I have a legend ultra and thrown the TCR extensively. No comparison. The TCR sucks as a FISHING rod but there is no rival as a pure DISTANCE CASTING tool.


----------



## SFWG

The only rival of the TCR is the Cross Current GLX. I agree they are not fishable, unless you use a heavier line.


----------



## Yahtahay

> The TCR sucks as a FISHING rod but there is no rival as a pure DISTANCE CASTING tool.


Now that is the truth...My TCR will flat out, outcast my Legend Ultra every time, but when I'm fishing the Provo, Weber, Blacksmith, Logan, or any smaller river my TCR is no better than my Legend Ultra. When I'm up on the Green or in the Uintas where I need (at times) a longer cast or I'm fighting wind...The TCR flat out owns my Ultra Legend. But within 35 feet they are **** near the same rod! And back to the original poster, he wanted fly rod suggestions...Since you both own a St. Croix Legend Ultra, would you recommend it as a great rod that you can grow into rather than purchasing a Eagle Claw/Cortland/Fenwick that they will surely grow out of once they really get into flyfishing?! I'd rather buy once, not twice if I was beginning all over again.


----------



## flyguy7

honestly im not a fan of it in the 5 weight. Mine is a 7 weight. Not a bad rod through. As I stated in my earlier post, I think the Scott is a FAR better rod.


----------



## Improv

Good dialog – I started with the St. Croix Legend 6 weight ($75.00) and a Pflueger Medalist ($45 or so) and that combo fit my needs for a while. 

For me, wanting “nicer” equipment happened when I realized that my current equipment wasn’t doing what I wanted it to do. Investments in lifetime warranty rods just make economical sense – I don’t care how careful you are at some point in your life you will break a rod. 

As for the argument of fast action vs. medium to slow action let me say that I agree and disagree with both sides of this argument. Generally a person picking up a fly rod for the first time will have much more success throwing a medium or soft action rod – given that he/she is throwing a non-weighted fly and there is no wind. However, put a size 4-weighted streamer on that same medium action rod and have them throw it into a 15 mph head wind, without having the general fundamentals of casting down, that person will not having nearly the success they otherwise would have and they been throwing a fast action rod – regardless of their casting abilities. 

Joni I know you mentioned line type as being more important then fast/medium action rods, but how does this argument work for full sinking lines? Not trying to be antagonistic, but just curious because the person who started this thread said they would be mostly stillwater fishing. 

The only thing I could find was this:

“Density Compensated tapered sinking fly lines are easier to cast than traditional level sinking lines. RIO's manufacturing process enables smoother casting and consistent sink rates. With density compensation, the sink rate of the tip equals the sink rate of the midsection, allowing the tip to sink first and put the fly in the strike zone. The DC Type 3 and the DC Type 6 sinking lines together with the AquaLux® line are the mainstay for lake fly fishers. Type 6 sinking lines are made of a Powerflex core. Type 6 4WT and 5WT lines are made only by RIO.”


But even this has more to do with the mechanics of how the line is going to sink – not why or if it will help you cast further. 

I’ll tell you what, I’m so glad that I have my 9.5 foot/6 weight Sage XP when fishing Strawberry with my type 7 full sink and a size 6-weighted streamer. 

Oh… and not to mention that 15 mph head wind on any given day.


----------



## madonafly

Your point about casting a #4 fly into a 15 mile wind is a strong selling feature of a fast action rod, and lord knows...that is Utah.
ONE ROD for all conditions....hummmm that is a tuffy. 
Again, I am not talking GLASS or BAMBOO (however, I can cast weighted line with both), but a MEDIUM ACTION or in Orvis terms a Mid-Flex 7.5 or a Winston LT or even the JWF...I will admit, I can not comment on St. Croix or Loomis as I don't have either.
I also mention a NEWBIE. A newbie is going to have a tuff time to say the least trying to cast a #4 into a 15, no matter what they have in their hand 8) 

Sinking lines...definitely density compensated with a couple of wet cells. As I said I can cast them with my glass and bamboo....fun, NO. But with my TFO Pro, TL mid 7.5, JWF, LT, ST, Zero mid 7.5, etc. I find it actually casts easier, and I do use TYPE VII and Depth Charge 300. I can cast 50 to 60 feet with both, but in a float tube or Pontoon, it really isn't required....I CAN MOVE.

I just got back from a weekend on a lake in which the banks were covered with veggie. I broke out the BIIx and proceeded to cast a #4 Chub imitation. The good old Windcutter line was the right choice, but I do feel that the fast action rod was the only choice in this situation. Back bone to pull the big fly, weeds and fish out, but not my favorite in roll casting at all.

The question gets even harder to answer with just ONE choice. Mid-Flex and Fast action both have their time and place. There is allot of Asian made rods that are nice made with warranties that one could get both and be totally happy.
AND, if you do and someone offers to let you cast one of the upper end rods, just tell them "no thanks" and you will continue to be a happy camper :lol: :lol: 

In closing, you DON'T need a $600. rod to catch fish! It is a definite life choice is all.


----------

