Looking for a small stream rod
- This topic has 34 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated Mar 7, 2012 at 5:22 am by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello all,
The all familiar what should I get post! I am looking to get a small stream rod that can double as a small rod back up.If I were looking for a small stream rod for the Smokies, I would go with a 7’6″ 3wt. with a med-fast action. I am a big Scott fan, so my first recommendation would be a Scott A4. That is the most I would pay for that type rod. One worth a look is the Echo Carbon. It is a nice little rod that runs about $170. There are a number of other rods under $250, but I have not cast any of them.
The TFO Bug Launcher rod is great for small streams. Its a kids rod but a short 3wt and at $75 you can’t go wrong.
Plenty of good opinions here, but let me throw in my 2 cents…
I second the suggestion of a slower action rod. Fast action rods are for casting, not fishing. I built a 9′ 3wt on a GLX blank years ago. Great casting rod- light in the hand and can throw the whole line. No problem in the wind. But do I fish it? Not in a long time. It’s just no fun once you hook into a fish. Besides being more fun to fish and cast, slower action rods are also better at some of the casts that will dominate on those small streams- bow and arrow casts, roll casts, etc.
For length, I’d go 7.5-8′. You want some length to reach over rocks, etc. – but too long can become a pain to maneuver through tight rhodo thickets.
For material, I’d strongly consider fiberglass. It’s relatively inexpensive, has a great slower to moderate action, very durable, and doesn’t require the care that cane rods do.
Scott makes a rod that fits these criteria, Cabela’s CGR rods in 3 and 4wts are a bit short, but the price is right. See the links at Cameron’s site for more fiberglass makers.
FWIW, I’ve fished an Orvis Superfine 7’11” 1wt in these situations for years. It’s a slow, graphite rod and it just great for this type of fishing. I also use it on bigger water if the wind is not too strong and I’m fishing dries (or at least not heavy/bulky flies). I plan to trade out for a 2-3 weight fiberglass rod in the future (but there are other arrows in the quiver that are more in need of replacement).
Jason
I’ve got a couple different rods I really enjoy fishing on small streams…
Orvis Superfine Touch 8′ 4wt…a little big, but maybe a great second rod.
Orvis Superfine Touch 6’6″ 3wt…probably my favorite for tighter streams.
Bamboo 6’6″ 3wt…very slow and if I had to get rid of one this would be it.
Old Orvis 7’9″ 5wt…I fish it with a four wt and it’s one of my favorites.
Redington CT 7’6″ 3wt…a great all around rod…I have it for clients but use it quite a bit myself.I would really look at the Redington CT (Classic Trout) Rods.
I bought a Vantage 376 (3wt 7’6″) and I like it quite well. I could imagine wanting a softer rod, the Scott glass rod is on my list of things to try, but overall it has a great feel and has enough backbone when I need it.
In addition to the Bug launcher already mentioned from TFO, the Finesse series has a 7′ 9″ 3 wt and 4 wt.
I would go with a 7′ 4wt bamboo rod. These don’t have to be too slow, a hollowbuilt one with a medium fast taper would be ideal.
Orvis Superfine
Sage SLT
Both of these rods have an amazing progressive taper and a slower action. Something under 9 feet would do nicely in tight quarters.
I fish the Smokies about 95% of the time and I would definately consider one of the modern, faster S-glass fiberglass rods available today.
I’ve got a 3pc. Steffen Bros. 7’9″ 3-4wt fiberglass rod that is just about the perfect Smokies rod. Mark will charge about $370 for a custom built rod or he will sell you one of his 3 piece blanks for about $175 shipped, but you’ll have to wait a few months for either one.
My next favorite Smokies rod, which is nearly as good as the Steffen, is a Diamondglass 7′ 4wt (not the current version, the old black blank version) that I fish with a 3wt line, as do most people who own this rod. They’ll pop up on ebay from time to time in near new condition and go for about $170, but are steadily increasing in value with time.
A couple of thoughts. First, shorter is better. I prefer 6′ but one of the 7′ should do if you’re not trying to fish under too much mountain laurel. Second, I like a 4 wt. I think it casts better in the shorter, tighter situations. I would think one of the new fiberglass rods might be just the thing.
I have a couple older 7′ Winstons that work well, but my preference and prize is a 6′ 4wt cane rod built for me buy the late George Mauer (Sweetwater Rods) specifically for this use. It’s a Paul Young taper so it’s soft enough to enjoy those six inch brookies!
There are lots of great rods out there but seeing how you have already suggested the Vantage vs the A4 it would appear that you are looking for a mid price point rod and have done some homework.
Either rod will be fine for what you want to do. For my part I’d rather the A4 merely because it’s a Scott and their entry rod is a good one that they aren’t likely to render obsolete next year. Both rods are similar but I think the A rods are a tad faster. Both will work nice close in. The A4 might have a distance advantage but that’s up to you.
I have fished the A3 but not the A4 in a fishing situation but I am sure they are similar. Have cast the Vantage and A4 but not fished them.
You also said that you wanted it for larger rivers with small flies as well as small streams.
Since that is the case then you are right in choosing the 8’6″ at a minimum but more likely the 9′. It will allow better handling of the line and better roll casting and more distance.
Another option is the St.Croix Avid 9′ 4wt. Nice rod not too expensive with a great action and pretty, may be a tad cheaper as well.
Yes ideally you want to have a golf bag full of rods at every length and every weight but a 9ft 4 weight is as meat and potatoes as a 9ft 6wt.
Use the 6 for streamers but you will find it collecting dust after you start banging fish with that 4wt.
Neither rod will be a mistake but my vote for the A4 9ft 4wt.
Good luck.Don’t tell my wife, but I have 1/2 dozen or so small stream rods. I fish all of them, depending on the stream and my mood. They include a 2 wt, 3 wt, 4 wt and a couple 5 wts. Lengths range from 5’6″ to 8′. Materials include glass, graphite and bamboo.
If I had to give them all away except one, I would keep the better of the two 7 foot 5 wt bamboo rods. (If you go this route, consider a gently used bamboo rod from a reputable maker.) Personally, I like the slow to medium action for small steams. The length is long enough (and short enough) to be versatile on remote wild streams of various sizes. And the 5 wt will cast a bushy EHC or tandem rig with authority.
In terms of advice for you, I would also look around for something like a used Winston LT 7’9″ 5 piece (maybe a 4 wt) or maybe one of the excellent fiberglass offerings out there.
Best of luck in your search. And you are right – you can’t have enough rods so don’t fret too much about the decision.
If you are looking for a short rod, my vote is for a med-fast or fast 7’6″ 4wt. Having a little backbone helps you zip casts under branches, backcast in that 3 foot hole behind you, and, importantly, put a couple of split-shot on the line and hit that really narrow deep run. Also, really helps control double-rigs and large streamers (though, I’m sure some disagree with this).
My primary short small stream rod is a now discontinued 7’6″ Orvis Superfine Tip-flex 4 wt, a great rod.All that said, I have been using a 9′ 5wt for small stream stuff more and more. It helps me reach and place the fly, get a longer drift and tight-line nymph a lot better than the shorter rod. Also allows me to stay out of the water and hidden behind brush. I regularly use it on smaller N. GA streams – the only case where I wouldn’t use and would instead use a shorter rod is if the stream is about 6′ wide or less or really really overhung.
Thus, I’d consider a 9′ 4 wt or 5 wt if the streams you are targeting are not super small or overhung with rhoda or what have you.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.