Zach Matthews
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I have been using GunDogSupply.com as a source for everything I need for my dog for a couple years. They are seriously awesome; low low prices on very high quality gear. I don’t have a brand recommendation but I have seen several boots on their site.
Just by way of example, I got Mae and Lauren’s dad’s Airedale Molly these really nice, thick, high-end saddle-leather collars, with brass name plates, all totally top-end stuff, for $7 shipped and engraved! And then, they screwed up and threw in a free extra one for Mae and wouldn’t take it back! I was so happy with them I immediately put in another order. I think they are out of Alabama, I just wanted to throw them a bone. One of the best customer experiences I’ve had in years; this has been like 9 months and I still remember it every time I see her collar (which has held up like a champ).
Here’s that collar; I had to go back and check to see if the price was still the same and it was.
http://gundogsupply.com/1-in–leather-collar-by-k-9-komfort.html
There are even nicer collars on there but really, this one was pure leather and even darker/more polished than the one on the site, and it still looks great.
Here’s the dog boots menu:
http://www.gundogsupply.com/dog-boots.html
Zach
Roy –
If you removed 8-9 million gallons from the headwaters of the Nantahala it would be a more significant impact than down in the designated harvest area. The DH is a much, much bigger stream than the areas which are being hydro-fractured (not on the Nantahala per se, but using your example).
But that’s not really the main concern; the primary issue is the use of proprietary chemical blends which are mixed with that water and then injected into the earth (near the water table) in order to fracture the gas-containing shale deposits.
That liquid slurry is then recovered to a degree (the rest goes into groundwater), where the gas companies assert that it is “treated” and returned to the same streams it came from.
All well and good if true; we need gas and if the water is only being borrowed and then cleaned, not that big a deal. The trouble is, the chemical blends in question are protected trade secrets. The regulatory agency in charge of inland mining (the Mine Safety and Health Administration) is not allowed access to the contents of the blends and therefore doesn’t know what to test for.
Moreover, this is the same MSHA which is tasked with regulating companies like Massey Energy, who have the audacity in the wake of mining disaster after mining disaster to claim (pardon my french) this bullshit.
According to Scott, the “F2 825/4 and 774/3 get the uplocks, while everything else will be fitted with a single slide band.”
Zach
September is just a bit early but if you’re going to be there in the later part of the month it’ll be worth your while to check the Little River around Metcalf Bottoms for pre-spawn staging brown trout.
Well, all of those guys are also top fishermen, of course. But I do think you see the influence of the casting competitions the most with the high end, flagship rods.
This is kind of analogous to flagship cameras. Nikon’s most expensive cameras have every conceivable bell and whistle, but they are also heavy and large, because they’re offered only in the most robust, pro-required bodies. You can’t get the exact performance specifications of a D3 in a light, compact body. There’s no market for that – people who want lighter built cameras just get a consumer model and lose a few features (but save many dollars).
With rods, every bell and whistle goes into the flagship rod, which naturally needs to exceed all the other rods in casting potential in order to justify the extreme expense. If you’re not looking to use the rod for a maxed out purpose, you’d be wise to just buy an older, less expensive rod that will do fine as a fishing stick.
Much of this is about restraint on the part of the angler, and restraint comes from honesty. You show me a fisherman who tells me he can honestly wring every performance capability out of any $700+ rod and I will show you a liar… or Steve Rajeff (etc.).
Zach
Jay –
The truth is, a science angle is more accurate for the level of design expertise and the process that goes into making these rods than any attempt to harken back to the nostalgia of hand-built wood fly rods. I’ve recently written for Fly Rod & Reel about how rods are made (not yet published). It’s a very engineer-driven, sciency thing these days. So I have no problem with Loomis’ angle.
You raise another good point regarding the physique of rod designers. It seems to me that being physically large is an advantage in casting as in many sports. Large people also seem to be disproportionately represented among rod designers.
Loomis = Steve Rajeff
Echo = Tim Rajeff
Sage = Jerry SiemThose three gentlemen are large individuals, physically strong people.
Scott Rods = Jim Bartschi
Winston = formerly Sam Drukman, currently Annette McLean (the only lady rod designer right now)
Orvis = Jim LePageNot to cast aspersions on anyone’s physicality, but those three are noticeably more lightly built in stature and/or upper body strength. LePage and Bartschi are both athletic but on the shorter side compared to the top three.
What does this mean? Maybe nothing. But it seems to me that the casting characteristics of those companies’ products in many ways match up with the build of their designers. The top three companies tend to make stiff, tip-flex rods. The bottom three somewhat tend to make more flexible, mid-flex rods.
There are caveats, of course: Orvis offers a rod for about everyone with their flex index system. The Scott S4 and STS rods are notably stiff and tippy (as opposed to the old HeliPly, which is a mid-flex rod). Winston’s BIIMX is one of the stiffest they’ve ever made (but still kinda-sorta mid-flex). TFO’s owner is Rick Pope, a large individual, but its rods are mostly designed by Lefty, who is smaller of stature. Lefty apparently pushed Rick to make the very tip-flex TiCr series, which goes against my theory.
So my analogy may not hold up across the board, but I do think there’s a grain of truth to it.
Zach
PS I’ll ask some of my rod designer friends what they think about this and add it in later.
Jay –
The man is built like a brick shithouse. Most of the best distance casters have a fireplug physique: Brian O’Keefe, Rick Hartman, both Rajeffs, Jerry Siem, several of the Europeans — all of them clearly either spend time in the gym or are genetically gifted. I would seriously expect Steve to bench around 300 lbs.; he is a very big guy.
And you’re right; their casting styles take advantage of those physical abilities. Steve, Brian, etc., all cast straight over their shoulders, facing square to the target. That’s a really difficult style to get great at because you have a very limited arc of travel for your rod tip in the back cast. To generate lots of linespeed without throwing a tailing loop, you must seriously accelerate and then radically stop within only a few inches in the air behind your head. That’s tough.
As a much more lightly built guy myself (I weigh 165 lbs.), I have to generate my linespeed over a lot longer arc of travel; thus I cast sidearmed like other lightly built distance casters (i.e. Lefty Kreh, Joan Wulff, etc.) Mechanically if you attach sensors to the rod, it bends and unbends in the same way, though not in the same plane, whether Steve Rajeff or Joan Wulff is casting. But if you plug in the front-to-back distance the tip of the rod travels you will see serious differences: smaller casters move the tip much further. I would guesstimate my rod tip’s total distance of travel on a 110′ cast at about 18-22′ (which on a nine foot rod is close to full extension of the arm in both directions plus the nine foot length of the rod itself and some distance gained from pivoting at the hips). Rajeff’s is probably like 12-14 feet, because it doesn’t come back as far in his backcast primarily and there’s no hip pivoting (all distance casters tend to jab forward in the final forward cast to full extension). Watch on YouTube and I bet you’ll pick this up.
So with respect to how this affects rod design, I think Rajeff-style casters prefer much stiffer, tip-flex rods, sometimes to a real extreme. People who cast like Lefty (me) oftentimes like a more flexible rod that may not be quite as high performance when it comes to recovery (i.e. “snap back”) speeds especially.
This is how I see it; other casters probably vary, but bottom line I do think you’re right that the Rajeff school has a particular rod they like to design and that rod is currently represented by many companies’ top, most expensive, rods.
Zach
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. Basically, the idea is you put an additional component in the resin which holds the graphite (the longitudinal fibers) and the scrim (the lateral fibers, sometimes graphite, sometimes fiberglass) in the rod together.
I just bought a Canon 70-200 F4 IS lens for my Rebel XTi and I love it… super fast and works great for this camera dummy. Eventually I want to get a Canon 400-500 mm lens, if I can find a really good deal on a used one.
The modern day version of Zach’s recommendation would be a 055prob tripod and a 494 ball head with RC2 plate. Solid stuff that is not to heavy, will not break the bank and is rugged enough to be abused.
Thanks!
Just use Google Shopping; this is a very popular tripod and there are a zillion around.
http://www.tactical-store.com/ts-bn-tr-3011bn.html
Other brands would also be fine; basically you’re looking for an aluminum set of legs and a decent ball head with detachable plates.
Zach
Manfrotto 3011BN and a 486 RC2 ball head has been extremely rugged for me in the field for several years. It’s not brutally heavy but it is heavy enough to take being ground down into river bottoms over and over.
Zach
Zach, thanks!
Adorama -> “We`re sorry, this item is no longer available.”
It looks like that specific model is discontinued, but I get the idea.
