Author |
Message |
Kaiser
|
Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:11 pm • # 1 |
|
|
Newbie |
Joined: 04/25/17 Posts: 40
|
Hey guys, does anyone have any experience with Proof fly rod blanks? Namely the 7' 3wt and the 6' 2wt. I'm curious to as how the action is. I've heard that it's faster than your standard fiberglass rod blank, but is it comparable to anything?
|
|
Top |
|
Canoeman1947
|
Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:06 pm • # 2 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 01/26/09 Posts: 617 Location: Oklahoma
|
In case he doesn't notice this post and respond quickly, check with preast. He has built rods on these blanks.
Larry
|
|
Top |
|
preast
|
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2018 5:06 pm • # 3 |
|
|
Sr. Member |
Joined: 09/03/10 Posts: 266 Location: Austin, TX
|
This was my post on the other board: Quote: I've built the 2wt in the original spigot config and the current tip over butt. Nice little blank. I fish it as a 3wt, so it's a bit underrated line designation as I understand most glass blanks go.
The original had quite a fast taper. This new one has a more stable tip and mellower bottom end so not as progressive. I like it better overall. Also links here to those 2 builds: /viewtopic.php?f=71&t=11595/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=12211
Last edited by preast on Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
strummer
|
Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2018 7:17 am • # 4 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 06/13/16 Posts: 936 Location: Southwest Florida
|
I have the olive 2wt.. It's feels moderate fast. It seems to cast better (for me) with a 3 weight line.
|
|
Top |
|
Hobie1dog
|
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:15 pm • # 5 |
|
|
Full Member |
Joined: 06/28/18 Posts: 121 Location: Cornelius, NC
|
Almost every post that's made states that all rods cast best with the next size line on it.
|
|
Top |
|
Canoeman1947
|
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 2:12 pm • # 6 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 01/26/09 Posts: 617 Location: Oklahoma
|
Many years ago, most rods did not even list line weight. It was essentially up to the builder or the owner to determine which line worked best for that particular rod. During the 1950's, manufacturers began listing recommended line weights; for some rods there were as many as three recommended line weights, depending on whether double taper, weight forward, or sinking line. When I first started flyfishing in the late 80's quite a few rods had two line weights listed. Then the more expensive rods were listed with only one line weight, and eventually most rods were listed with only one line weight. When two line weights were listed, it was usually meant to recommend a double taper line as the lower weight listed and weight forward as the higher weight listed. And most rods with a single weight listed were listed for a DT line. As far as I know only Orvis listed their line weight recommendation for a WF line. By now most line weight recommendations are somewhat blurred. Also, it is not all that easy now to find a DT line. I have cast rods that took a lot of experimentation with several lines to find a line that worked with that particular rod.
Larry
|
|
Top |
|
preast
|
Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:58 am • # 7 |
|
|
Sr. Member |
Joined: 09/03/10 Posts: 266 Location: Austin, TX
|
It seems that so many UL rods aren't rated accurately and need uplining. Add to that that it's already a different feel on a light rod, and you're generally casting fairly close in. So an extra line weight or two gives the rod some action. I look for rods that are weighted accurately but they're hard to find. The onshore designed glass rods seem to be the most likely to be accurate or even underlined for guys like me that like a bit crisper action. That's generally ok if the taper is medium but doesn't work for me if it's a progressive taper.
|
|
Top |
|