For a graphite rod, can a fly reel be too light for the rod? I have seen lots of talk about balancing your reel/rod, some say it's crucial, others say it's not, some say rods cast better with no reel. What do yall look for when you buy a new reel? weight, arbor size, features, etc? Do you just go as light as possible while still having room for your line or make an effort to balance the outfit?

Nearly all modern lightweight rods cast better without a reel on them, a reel is a nessessary inconvenience.

Once you get into 15 foot salmon rod territory, a reel does help bring the balance back to reasonable.

For lightweight and ultralightweight, go as light as posible, ideally base weight without line on it being less than 1.5 times weight of rod.

I go middle of the road on this debate. I definitely do not like a heavy reel, and definitely do not like the feel of any rod without the reel on it, for the reasons Brent mentioned. I think it's less a matter of balance, and more a matter of inertia with a reel, even a light one. It anchors the butt, and without it I think the rod feels all over the place.

So yeah, way less critical with the line out but still needed and I think a reel could be too light but I don't think it's something you're gonna have a problem with. Unless it's made out of titanium, or your rod is solid wood. The other thing is how much time you spend walking with your rod. It's a mild annoyance to have the tip want to dive (and jam into the dirt, rocks, etc) while walking from spot to spot.

Then there's the standard factors of up or downlocking, etc. A downlocking seat (not most graphite) can get away with a lighter reel. But I think this has been discussed somewhere.

Am I right in saying that the original discussion/recommendations around a 'balanced' fly system was intended to ensure that your rod and line weight ratings were consistent? Further, that your line/rod were compatible with the size of flies you intended to cast? And that the reel was of a size that would hold the line of that diameter and any amount of backing that might seem prudent for the type of fishing anticipated?

Tenkara (and related) anglers would say that a reel (for traditional fly fishing) cannot be too light, and I tend to agree with regard to casting, but your reel can be too lightly built to withstand typical fishing wear, tear, and accidents. The widespread use of stronger aluminum alloys, stainless steel, and titanium, as well as milling vs casting, has mitigated these concerns, but it's still something to keep in mind. That said, I rarely consider reels that weigh more than 3 ounces, and most of my reels for 2-4wt lines are closer to 2.5 ounces.

Randy, you're just a beast. Although I have only used my Tenkara rod once, and unsuccessfully at that, I feel traumatized by your statement. I hope I can regain my usual emotional equilibrium, but it's going to be a struggle, and it's all your fault. Such bigotry to be addressed in a public forum!

Larry

Tournament distance casting rods from the 1950's and earlier had no reels. These were typically heavy ( compared to modern rods ) cane rods usually 10 - 12 ft long. The reel was thought of as added unnecessary weight.

There we go, thanks guys. Nothing like a good argument to start the day off right (or left depending on which side you're on).

I'll take two of these .

seriously, though, some of those married red and white goose feather wings are amazing!