[none]

PM’ed back!

[none]

Thanks for the NRX shots Zach.
Um….. jeez the cosmetics are horrid…

About the Scott F2:
Will they offer rods with cap & ring or even better two reel rings?

[none]

Yeah, the prices of lines have risen too radically.
Price around $30-45 for a good line is what we need.

[none]

Good thing Sage reintroduced the XP series. What I don’t liked with their V-series was that the cosmetics were sub-standard. Not sure how the VXP really looks like from close in, but I hope it’s better than the previous V-series. The price is right at $500.

Tibor are nice reels, their price is ouch though…

The new glass rods from Scott looks great! Hope to cast one soon.

[none]

I’ll take Rise please

Sent PM

[none]

Most rods are 9ft so the leverage will always be enough to balance light reels.
The weight saving is rarely more than marginal.

[none]

Very interesting insight on physique vs casting style Zach.
I also know a guy here who is also like a box and with fore arms as thick as my thighs. 😀

Your last sentence is really striking:

Rajeff school has a particular rod they like to design and that rod is currently represented by many companies’ top, most expensive, rods.

I wonder how many fly fishers (men & women) are built like these powerhouses?
How many people are able (or even LIKE to) to cast like them? Their casting style is pretty hard on the elbow/fore arm muscles as well as wrist (sudden stop). Not very nice to do it all day I guess…

What’s your idea on the way Loomis markets its new top rod series?
How effective is it to use ‘rocket science’ as marketing rather than the more common use of emotions that’s close to fly fishing (mountains streams, friendship, being outdoors, etc.)?

[none]

Here’s the skinny; you take this for what it’s worth and make your own judgment.

Loomis is debuting this rod with a new resin enhancement provided by 3M, called ‘nano silica.’  In many ways this is reminiscent of the “Nano-Titanium” craze of the early 2000s.  
…..
Lighter rods are more responsive when flexed and ultimately become higher-performance casting tools. (This is how Rajeff explained it to me a while back and he would certainly know).

I think it’s the way how Loomis advertised it.
Rather than ‘Hey guys we got a new rod out soon and it’s great‘ Loomis advertised as ‘We have been working on a new rod that took us 16 years to make it‘.

The expectation (or communication) created by the way of advertising is different I think.
The way Loomis did sounds like the best thing since sliced bread.

Hardy is also using this same additive in their new rods.

Here’s the kicker: Sage and Scott both passed.

Hmm… wonder why?..

So when evaluating this rod, what you need to do is weigh the rod subjectively first, against all other rods.  Loomis has always made excellent fly rods.  Then you need to factor in the strength of having Steve Rajeff, uncontestably the world’s best caster, as the designer, against the knowledge that two of the *other* best fly rod companies tested this stuff and passed on it.

I have only seen Rajeff on YouTube and although he is obviously an excellent caster his casting style is not very elegant/smooth/fluid/etc. As far as I can see his style is very powerful and strength-based.

The casting style of Rajeff will probably influence what kind of action the rods he designs will have.

About rod cosmetics:
I think when you pay $600+ for a rod, the cosmetics & hardware used needs to be top notch.
Loomis has never appeared to me as being a very nice looking rod. One Loomis I once owned (IMX) was very neat (rod wasn’t varnished giving a very stealthy look), but the Loomis rods generally look very much like a production rod rather than a more ‘hand made look’ like Winston and maybe Sage.  

[none]

Well maybe the GLX will come down to the mid price rod level.

[none]

Let’s get serious.

If their new rods are so exceptional, why didn’t anybody tell their boss(?) that the color combo is butt ugly? Why not put the best marketing gig on earth to promote it at the very best way?

The owner Shimano surely has some marketing budget for such a high end fly rod company’s high end rods?

Makes me think back about Fenwick’s Ironfeather rod series. Fenwick & Ironfeather went down the drains…

[none]

Why Sage ever dropped the LL series is beyond me.  The graphite II LightLine series were some of the best dry fly rods ever made.  Argue with me if ya will, but the ZXLs, TXLs and whatever their said “equivalents” are, don’t match the LL’s in my opinion.  I’m old I guess.

I agree, the models that replaced the LL never really came close. Looks like they ‘lost’ touch with a nice medium action that the LL had. The TXL feels like a little steel rod. So fast & ‘tight’. Like it’s gonna explode anytime. 😀

As far as Scott innovation goes, I think that it was mentioned here that they have a custom shop, although it costs you, it is a way to get in touch with your customers.  They also have announced that they are expanding their glass line into more rods.  You don’t have to be stuck in the past, a glass snob or old school to appreciate their glass offerings.  Glass still is a fantastic material for fly rods and in many instances can be superior.  That’s a whole nother debate in its own right, and a REAL hijack of this discussion.

I wonder if Scott had the same financial resources as Sage, would they not go the same way as Sage (every 2 years a new rod series, new reels, new sweaters, etc.)?

[none]

Very nice suggestions here.
However what’s a general purpose nymph by the way?

Are we talking general nymphs that suggest a very common insect spices like a mayfly and a caddis? Or a nymph pattern you can toss anywhere no matter what insect spices are or aren’t in the water you’re fishing?

My way of fishing is keeping it simple in terms of numbers of patterns in my fly box. I carry 3-4 nymph patterns in various weights (most being sizes of bead heads). This way I can keep the materials needed for tying limited as well as only needing one box of nymphs.

So, what do you mean by ‘general’ Zach?  ::)

[none]

Yeah, you really need to check (do some research on the internet) about the video format used by the video camera.

But again, that’s step one. Step two is how to use it in your favorite editing program (or system for that matter).

[none]

Hi Tim,

here’s the recipe:
http://www.danica.com/flytier/jlee/blue_sardine.htm

This time I used white EP Fibers for the bottom rather than islandic sheep.
I prefer to mix synthetic and natural hair. Just like to think that the whole moves a lot more natural. 🙂

If you need help, let me know.

[none]

Thanks Tim!
I’d swap for a days fishing together!

[none]

Incidentally, I LOVE CF’s travel vise system that all fits in a box.  But I can’t afford it!

Zach

Zach, how about this vise:

[none]

Man, you guys are picky on these boxes!

For my dries I like the DeWitt boxes. Light as it can be, see through plastic.
8 compartments.

For my nymphs I use the small Myran boxes. 12 compartments.

I don’t use/carry a lot of patterns. Just a few dry fly patterns and a few nymph patterns. Use them everywhere in the world. I guess the basic idea behind my choice for boxes is light weight, cheap and yes: keep it simple.

Works for me for the past 15 years.

Here’s a picture of the DeWitt box:

[none]

The Tantalizer (or a nice deer hair diver)  is a wonderfully looking deer hair bug but a lot of work: stacking and shaping the head.
You sure are looking ahead of lot of mess in the room!  ;D

I just finished a half a dozen Blue Sardines for a friend of mine. Great fun, it’s nothing like the Tantalizer in terms of detailing, but man a lot of work!

[none]

Did some evening (not really deep in the night, but it was after dark) fishing on the Bow river in Calgary with a buddy who lives there. A moon lit night really helps.

It was pretty darn exciting to see those big browns come to the shallows and sip on dry flies. I didn’t to that well (missed a few) because I had no clue where my fly was… 😀

[none]

Zach are you sure this fly won’t scare the living daylights when the fish see ’em coming? 😀

[Author]

Posts