7.5' 4wt glass vs. bamboo showdown

RSS
Email

0 Points

Author	Comment
tiptop.clarksclassicfl...	7.5' 4wt glass vs. bamboo showdown	Lead	[-]
Sport Posts: 22 (10/18/09 16:12:55) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, maybe not a showdown . . . but a comparison out on the lawn. A couple months ago I traded a graphite rod I wasn't using anymore for a new Hardy "Test" from Anglers Habitat in Idaho. Today I thought I'd pull out a couple classic bamboo rods of the same length and line wt. and a Scott Fibertouch 7.5' 4wt and cast them all side by side using the same line -- a DT4 Classic peach from Cortland. I started with the two glass rods. I have 2 reels with this line and I was able to line both rods and cast them one after the other at all distances, switching back and forth. Cosmetically, the Hardy and Scott are quite different. The Scott is larger diameter and black unsanded while the Hardy is smooth and a really nice dark olive green. Both grips are quite comfortable and have all cork real seats although the Scott is cap and ring and the Hardy has that quirky hood screwed into the rear of the seat. Although the Scott is a 3 pc. and the Hardy is a 2 pc. I found the action remarkably similar -- a medium to medium fast that flexed progressively into the mid and butt sections. Slower than most modern graphite but quite a bit faster than the noodly Lami rods. The bamboo I had to use for comparison were two classic vintage rods that are considered among the best of the trade rods in this length and weight. One was a Heddon 7.5' 2/2 4 wt. Featherweight and the other a WM Granger 7633 3/2 4 wt.. I found the Heddon, which has a swelled butt, a bit crisper than the Granger and it didn't flex quite a deeply into the butt. The Granger was most similar to the glass rods in its action. This may have been due in part to being a three pc. rod. The bamboo rods weigh a bit more than the glass but in this length, it's not really an issue. All four rods required similar effort to cast out to normal fishing distance -- 20 to 40 ft. and if pushed all could deliver casts out to 60 ft.. I really don't think any one rod was standout superior to the rest in castability. The cosmetics were all quite different and I think it just boils down to personal taste. The bamboo rods definitely cost more but classic rods like these will hold their value well and may even increase with time. But for fishability these glass rods would be every bit as good, IMO. Not really new news, but for what it's worth. tiptop
david.clarksclassicfl...		#1	[-]
Sport Posts: 30 (10/18/09 22:38:41) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tiptop, I enjoyed your comparison! Did you notice if any of the rods loaded at shorter distance than the others? Which of them do you think would be more accurate at shorter distances, for example if you had maybe ten feet of line past the tip with a 9 foot leader? In general do you think any of them would be more accurate (for yourself) overall? Also, in general did you find one or two of the rods which you just preferred the feel? Did they all feel about the same? Thanks, David
tiptop.clarksclassicfl...		#2	[-]
Sport Posts: 23 (10/19/09 05:48:16) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	David -- All four rods loaded very well at short distance. The Cortland classic peach DT line has a short taper and seems to be heavier than average in the first 15 ft. or so of line so it tends to be able to load at short distance better than a lot of lines -- that's one of the main reasons I like it. The older vintage bamboo rods like these tend to have very small stripper guides meant for silk line and they don't shoot line as easily at short distance as modern rods with larger strippers. But when you get out past 15 or 20 ft. they shoot line fine because the weight of the line in the air pulls the line through the guides with more force. You're not usually shooting line at short distance anyway so it's not much of an issue, IMO. As fas as accuracy at short distance is concerned, I really believe that it's more a function of the caster than the rod. The timing of your cast with the Heddon would be slightly different because it's a little more crisp but all three of the others were very close. Just a note about accuracy and "feel". I find that I'm more consistant with bamboo than with fast graphite because the stroke is slower and the rod is a heavier and I can feel the rod load better. The casting stroke on these two glass rods is so similar to good bamboo that they feel great to me -- since I'm used to bamboo. They are lighter than bamboo but heavier than graphite so the weight doesn't make much difference. When I go to a 8.5' glass vs. bamboo though, the difference in weight becomes very noticeable. I think if you use the same graphite rod all the time and fish a lot, you could become very accurate with graphite too. I've been fishing bamboo mostly for the last 5 years and I find that when I go back to graphite occasionally I find it hard to control the power. I'm not as accurate and I sometimes overshoot the line. But for sheer power and distance without much effort, graphite wins IMO. The feel of the action of the Granger bamboo and the two glass rods to me is extremely close but the Granger is heavier so it feels more "solid" maybe. The Heddon is close in weight to the Granger so it also has the solid feel but the taper is more crisp and just slightly faster although still a true 4wt.. Of the two bamboo, I prefer the action of the Heddon but not by much. I prefer the 3 pc. of the Granger to the 2 pc. Heddon because I can travel with it on airplanes. In the same way I like the 3 pc Scott for it's flyability. The actions of the 2 glass rods are so close that to me they're a toss-up. Cosmetically, though they're quite different. The Hardy is more refined looking and it's tube, tube bag, and rod bag are the fanciest I've seen on any rod at any price -- bamboo, glass, or graphite. I really like the Scott's looks though -- that odd grip shape, unsanded blank, larger diameter, obvious hand-built quality, and 3 pc. portability give it the edge for me between the two. I don't know that I'd pay full price for the Scott -- I bought it used for $250 I think and it's a great rod for that price. The Heddon is in original condition and was built in the 1930's and I paid about $500 for it. The Granger is from the 1940's and it had been restored and cost about $650. Last Edited By: tiptop 10/19/09 06:42:26. Edited 1 times.
frogmorton		#3	[-]
Master Guide Posts: 322 (10/19/09 06:13:53) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Very enjoyable post. I've never had the opportunity to fish bamboo which is probably fortunate, I can't afford another jones. The medium to medium fast action of the Scott and some of the other contemporary glass rods like Steffen and Quiet Loop (and the Hardy which I haven't tried) is perfect for small-medium streams. Nimble enough for accuracy and quick mends with enough power to fish the far bank. I paid retail for my Scott when they sold for $425 and I couldn't find one used, now it seems they're all over ebay for less than $300. Still, I feel like I've gotten my $$$ worth from the rod.
david.clarksclassicfl...		#4	[-]
Sport Posts: 31 (10/19/09 11:16:22) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Thanks Tiptop. Great post!
onemoredeer.clarksclassicfl...		#5	[-]
Master Guide Posts: 372 (10/19/09 15:33:27) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	TipTop, Excellent post! A very interesting and informative heads up comparison of some very nice rods. I agree with you conclusion,"it all boils down to your personal taste". I might also add "mood" to that statement. Thanks for sharing. Doug
bulldog1935		#6	[-]
Posts: 5302 (10/19/09 17:00:29) Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	of course, IMO, you're right at the break-even point. Longer than 7-1/2' I prefer cane over glass; shorter, I prefer glass. But thank you - enjoyed it. Now we need 8' and 6'6" comparisons. the rods are never obsolete - the marketing is.
tiptop.clarksclassicfl...		#7	[-]
Sport Posts: 24 (10/20/09 05:18:32) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ron -- If a comparison of short rods is going to be done, you should do it! I don't own anything under 7 ft in bamboo, glass, or graphite. I have a couple seven foot bamboo rods that only get used a couple times a year because most of the time I fish water that is fairly open. Why do you prefer bamboo in the longer lengths and glass in the shorter?
david.clarksclassicfl...		#8	[-]
Sport Posts: 32 (10/20/09 09:47:48) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tiptop, I wonder if you could also address the issue of line speed. A recent glass vs bamboo comparison I read suggests that glass is not as capable as bamboo when it comes to being able to generate high line speed, while bamboo can at the same time slow things down comparable to glass and make open loops. I'm not yet there in terms of my own skill and have not cast bamboo, so I can only pass along what I've read. Also, a few weeks ago I saw an advertisement for a modern 7.5' 4wt bamboo rod made by a respected (perhaps considered still up and coming, but well-respected) builder, Chris McDowell. The seller stated the rod loaded well and fished comfortably at distances of 5' to 50' (did not have to push it for that distance). I checked with the seller on that, and he was not exaggerating. Is there glass that will do that? Also while I understand that for the purposes of your comparison you had the rods available to you that you have, to get at Bulldog's statement that 7.5' is the gray area it seems to me that for a fair comparison with the Hardy we would need to use a modern top line bamboo rod such as that McDowell. Thanks
tiptop.clarksclassicfl...		#9	[-]
Sport Posts: 25 (10/20/09 11:23:35) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	David -- IMO, line speed for glass and bamboo is about equal and graphite and boron are capable of generating higher line speeds. However, you have to compare apples to apples. A fast action glass rod will generate more line speed than a slow action glass or bamboo rod in the same line weight and rod length. And a fast action bamboo rod will generate more line speed than a slow action bamboo or glass rod in the same line weight and rod length. Absolutely there is glass that will fish equally well as bamboo at 5' - 50'. (5' is awfully close seeing as your rod is 7' - 9' without line or leader!) It all depends on the speed of the rod whether bamboo or glass. With bamboo the speed of the rod is controlled by which taper is used. With glass, the diameter, thickness of glass, and type of glass will determine how fast a rod is. Some powerful rods are best at longer distances but not great up close. Others may excel up close because they are very flexible and load easily- Lamiglass for example. And then there are middle of the road rods that try to do both reasonably well. I own two 7.5' McDowell rods by the way -- one is a slower 4wt. rod with the taper taken from an older Payne 198 rod and the other is considerably faster 5wt. with a Dickerson 7613 taper. The slower of the two is considerably slower than any of the four rods I reviewed. Many modern bamboo rods use tapers that are either direct copies or derived from the best of the older tapers. The performance of the Granger and the Heddon are right up there with the best of modern rods. I'd go as far as to say that there are a lot of modern bamboo rods out there with tapers that aren't as good. Bulldog's statement about the gray area is his opinion and reflects his own personal taste and casting style -- some may agree with him and some may not. Time to go fishing! tiptop
mvinsel	5' cast?	#10	[-]
Master Guide Posts: 341 (10/20/09 13:50:16) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm trying to visualize a five foot cast with a 7.5 foot rod. -Vinnie in Juneau
whrlpool		#11	[-]
Master Guide Posts: 1051 (10/20/09 16:48:22) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, I think the idea of "line speed" is an overrated one brought in from tournament distance casting, there being very few freshwater fishing situations where it matters at all. It became widespread in fly-fishing vocabulary about the time graphite rods came along and as their promotion picked up--a puffed up advertising claim. Yes, it was and is a characteristic of these rods, and from that it became a marketed virtue of them, and now years later it is presumed desirable trait of any rod. Any decently designed fly rod is capable of adequate line speed for any reasonable fishing distance, and for a useful range of loop sizes (that and line speed being linked so often) as well. Only at extremes of distance or wind are these traits critical--at least as a capability of the rod itself. In normal fishing, they are much more readily dealt with by the line weight, the casting style, and the leader. As for short casts, I can't think of a rod I have that won't "cast" out the line and leader with only a foot or two of line extended. If it won't do that--which you can tell in an instant--I wouldn't have the rod, but I don't have to be very picky to get that--almost any rod will do it. The ability to shoot line might be a better separating point, as it can be influenced by guide size, number, and placement. But that, too, is much more a product of the line and the caster than the tool being used.
Andymanyankee		#12	[-]
Master Guide Posts: 1180 (10/21/09 06:59:29) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hello It all boils down to one thing in the end regardless of Rod Material, Length,Number Of Sections,Line Weight,Type Of Guide,Size,Amount Of Guides or where they are hung Etc Etc you name it. What works best for the individual ! In many cases it's a look, a market trend or advertisement that dictate the rod being purchased,seldom do the buyers even know what really works for them. When you ask them what type of rod they want you would be surprised how many look at you like you're a dummy and answer a fly rod of course. Another good one is "you just make me the best rod you can" Most are more worried about thread color and reel seat insert than Taper, Action and even Line Weight at times let alone Length or Material. Or the New Trend is 10' or more and a 5 weight or less. Just in this thread we got one guy that fishes Bamboo over a certain length when most people tend to Fish Bamboo in shorter lengths and Go to Glass or Graphite for longer rods. If that's what he likes more power to him and so on. Rod comparisons are great and I do allot of it ,the time I spend comparing rods is never wasted . 2 Years ago I was invited to a rod demonstration/introduction they had all the rods lined up and people casting talking about how nice the rods looked the reel seat, the thread color,blank color and on and on. It was apparent the marketing team had done their homework no doubt the look had been achieved . So it gets around to me and I get to cast the rod I am handed the 9' 5 weight I cast it, it loaded quickly and delivered some decent casts. I noticed however the rod would not pick the line up without stripping back to15 feet or so. So I asked to try another length and line weight a 7'6" 4 weight well same thing cast really well but when it came time to pick up the line I had to strip line in to pick it up at 20 feet. So I hand the rod back and start walking away. I am not going to say a word so the pro says hey "Andy so what do you think" my answer was nice looking rods. Now there is a crowd of people many of them I know so I am remembering what my mother used to tell me if you don't have something good to say say nothing. I turn and am heading for the porch the pro says no you're not getting away that easy we really want to know what you think of the rods performance. So reluctantly I tell him that in my opinion the rod looks great ,nice work and color choices etc.It cast really well nice loading ,dampens well etc. I would need to fish it before I could say more. I am trying to get away as clean as I can, So next the pro says then I assume we have your endorsement you would recommend the rod. After a long pause and looking at all those faces looking back at me awaiting my answer I had to say no that's a bit premature. That's not the answer he was looking for now he's on me like a tick. So he keeps it up what is there not to like hada hada. With my left hand in my pocket pinching my nut. I tell him that I had trouble picking up the line with both rods I cast over 20 feet and that I needed to strip line in to 15 feet to get it to pick up properly. That also while simulating a mend the rod performed poorly in my hands. So now the pro a master caster says I am totally wrong and sets out to show everyone how well the rod picks up line. He booms one out to 45 feet and try's to pick it up guess what not happening ,then he blames the wind and try's again same thing nope not happening. So he changes rods again same thing so next he try's a striped pick up like you would when double hauling and gets the line up. It turned into a demonstration of how poorly the rod picked up line! The pro should have just let me go away quietly and I assure you one thing if he ever see's me again the conversation will be about the weather. Oddly or not so oddly the rods in this demonstration are very popular and a new trend of sorts. I would rather fish an old Monty. So to my point cast lots of rods do allot of comparisons and fish the rod or rods that work best for you period. Tight Lines and Comparison Glass VS Infinity Loops Andy M Last Edited By: Andymanyankee 10/21/09 07:30:44. Edited 4 times.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>


logo by Silver Doctor		Featured Topic History of Fiberglass at Winston

Yuku free message boards

7.5' 4wt glass vs. bamboo showdown

7.5' 4wt glass vs. bamboo showdown