It is currently Fri Apr 19, 2024 6:22 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




  Page 1 of 1   [ 7 posts ] New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Aug 02, 2020 3:54 pm • # 1 
User avatar
Newbie

Joined: 09/30/18
Posts: 8
I was using my TFO Finesse 1wt 6ft 9inch rod today, and while labelled as a 1wt, I do wonder if it is. It was able to cast and throw around a 2wt DT line (Cortland) with real authority, albeit at fairly short range (30 ft), and did not flinch with an 8-10 inch Brookie. I have caught good sized Rainbows on this rod in the past. I suspect that the short length helps, but I do wonder if this rod should really be labelled as a 2wt or even a 3wt.

I actually like the rod quite a bit, but still wanted to get the impression of the the forum denizens, if you do own or have used this rod.

Thanks.


Top
  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 9:42 am • # 2 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 01/26/09
Posts: 617
Location: Oklahoma
This is just my opinion, but is shared by many others. I feel that most graphite ultralight rods are better served with a line rated at least one weight heavier than recommended. Although I am a glass rod afficionado I find that even some of the glass ultralight rods are underrated.

Larry


Top
  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 1:31 pm • # 3 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 12/29/12
Posts: 1839
Location: Rusagonis, New Brunswick, Canada
Larry: Interesting to hear your input! I've found my 1wt and 3 wt graphites actually perform best with a line wt higher. But more to the point, I built a 6' Fenwick fiberglass rod on one of their '5 wt' blanks over 30 years ago, and slavishly used a 5 wt line on it, with ok, but not stellar results. After applying the Common Cents process two years ago, it came out at about 3.5 wt, so I put a 3 and then a 4 on it, and what a difference! Well, my neighbour was cleaning out his father in law's flyshop following his death, and among the stuff, found one of those old Fenwick 6'5wt glass blanks and asked me to build a rod on it for a mutual friend, so I did. Once complete, it too works best with a 4 wt line, and is passably good with a 3, as well. Interesting stuff!
brent


Top
  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 6:48 pm • # 4 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 04/04/18
Posts: 211
Location: Idaho
I nearly always overline my 0wt and 1wt rods, usually by +1 weight though for convenience I frequently use a 2wt line on 0wt rods. Are the rods truly underweighted? Maybe, but mostly overlining works better for my style of fishing. Options for commercially available lines are also much better at 2wt vs 1wt or 0wt.


Top
  
PostPosted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 11:56 pm • # 5 
User avatar
Sr. Member

Joined: 09/03/10
Posts: 266
Location: Austin, TX
I've used both a 1 and a 2 on mine but for versatility (for example, backcountry/hiking where I may encounter differing situations), I use a standard weight Orvis Silver Label WF1. It actually doesn't seem to act a whole lot different than the SA Ultra 3 WF2 until you get out about 12-15', and then I prefer the WF1 on it anyway because the 2wt will start to bog it down IMO.

I agree that most sub-3wt rods (not just graphite) are pretty grossly underrated in weight designation, but I don't think the Finesse is one of them. Your experience makes me wonder if somehow it's a different blank. I can't imagine it seeming like a 3wt. Seems pretty close to an actual 1wt but a glass lover may think otherwise. So usually I'd agree you might as well go up a weight, but since there seems to be so little difference in weight in those lower line weights, the difference in-close is almost nothing. Since I see the Finesse as "on the line", I prefer to have a 1wt on it for longer casts. Most other sub-3wt rods truly need the heavier line all the time.


Top
  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:17 pm • # 6 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 01/26/09
Posts: 617
Location: Oklahoma
Brent,
I have found that glass rods, especially some of the vintage rods, can be all over the place regarding line weight. Some work best with rated line weight, some work well with 3 or 4 line weights. I have a Horrocks-Ibbotson Model 1200 rod, made in 1953, that I have used to good effect with a WF3 line, though there weren't any 3 weight lines on the market at that time. In the early days of fiberglass, many manufacturers did not list a recommended line weight. A friend of mine has a St. Croix Imperial Ultralight rod that is rated, I believe, a 6 weight, but it will quite handily cast a WF4. Some of the Phillipsons were actually better underlining by one line weight. The earlier Fenwick FF535 and FF605, though rated for 5 weight, would handle a 3 to 4 weight line. The later Fenwicks of those same model numbers were stiffer and cast better with the recommended line weight. It would appear the best option with any rod is to try several lines to see which one is best for that rod.

Larry


Top
  
PostPosted: Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:41 pm • # 7 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 12/29/12
Posts: 1839
Location: Rusagonis, New Brunswick, Canada
Thanks, Larry. Makes sense.
brent


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

  Page 1 of 1   [ 7 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


- OurBoard Support -