Author |
Message |
armyflyfisher
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:00 am • # 1 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 11/20/08 Posts: 594
|
You know what would be cool....
A contrast and comparison of the available light fly reels readily avalable today. I'd love to see a side by side comparison of the Bass Pro Shop Classic ultralight....the J Austin Forbes Avon or Magnesium....the Sage clicker....the Dennison......and even a few "classic" reels like the Pflueger 1834 or Redington CT.
There's a wide price range between the Dennison and the Sage....I wonder about the performance differences?
David
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:06 am • # 2 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
Hmm...the Sage might be pretty smooth, but on an UL rod, I find it hard to justify the cost between the Dennison and the Sage. In fact, if I need a reel lighter than my BBS I, I will probably grab a Dennison just for that setup.
|
|
Top |
|
jkurtz7
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:12 am • # 3 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 4828
|
I'd certainly like to do a review like that, but I couldn't afford all those reels. HA. I will do an in depth review of the Dennison in the spring though. I'll put it through some hell since I fish so much.
J.
|
|
Top |
|
armyflyfisher
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:16 am • # 4 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 11/20/08 Posts: 594
|
My thoughts exactly Andy. I've even shown the "Home General" the J A Forbes reels on ebay for less than $100 and she asks about the necessity for a reel of that price when the Dennison is out there for less.
Still.....if there was a huge and noticeable performance difference........I could probably get away with spending some money.
David
|
|
Top |
|
keebranch
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:17 am • # 5 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 5497
|
Wow, David at least she's showing interest in your hobby-that's great!
|
|
Top |
|
Zenkoanhead
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:38 pm • # 6 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 2056
|
The biggest difference is in the spool diameter and general appearance. I have a Sage 3100 and it is much bigger than the Dennison or 2" and 2 1/2" Avons. It is very high tech in appearance and so I reserve it for long graphite rods. The Bass Pro is a bit larger too, and has a weak click although the champagne version was quite attractive. The Forbes Magnesium is a sleeper, a great reel with good line capacity. It is not particularly stylish though and dents if dropped. I have either a Dennison or Avon [2 or 2 1/2 inch] on nearly every ultralight rod because of the light weight, although the Avon is much more handsome. The Avon represents the cadillac of the bunch. Hope this helps. Don
|
|
Top |
|
jdub
|
Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:34 pm • # 7 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 3185 Location: Texas
|
I have the BPS Classic Ultralight and was able to compare it to the Dennison that I sold to J, and the Orvis BBS 1 that I still have. The Classic Ultralight and Dennison were very close to the same size and weight, and I wouldn't be surprised if the spool capacity was similar. The Classic is machined, has a very nice finish, and is slightly narrower. As Don mentioned the clicker on the Classic is very weak, and is probably comparable to the friction on the Dennison. At 2.2 oz, both of these reels are a full ounce lighter than the Orvis BBS 1 (3.2 oz). The Classic Ultralight is perfect for my 6' 1" 0 wt. (I have a Sage Quiet Taper 0 wt line on the reel. The line is very small in diameter.) Orvis BBS 1 & Dennison And the BBS 1 balances my Orvis 7' 6" 1wt. perfectly.
Last edited by jdub on Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
keebranch
|
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:12 pm • # 8 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 5497
|
Mine is the Ross Colorado zero. At 3.3 ounces it works just fine on the majority of UL rods I own, And with the extra spools, I keep it busy at work on my 1-2 wrt rods. Les
|
|
Top |
|
long ago
|
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:44 pm • # 9 |
|
|
Jr. Member |
Joined: 12/07/08 Posts: 88
|
Just purchased the Orvis BB1 at 3.2 oz for my zero weight. I haven't really had the chance to break it in but I'll report back when it gets a proper break in.
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 5:46 pm • # 10 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
I like my BBS I, thanks Jerry...and I cannot wait to break it in on some of our stream fish.
|
|
Top |
|
armyflyfisher
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:04 am • # 11 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 11/20/08 Posts: 594
|
I've doscovered 2 versions of the Forbes Avon. I've seen them with the standard type spool release and with a "fixed" spool.
Aside from the weight difference.....any performance or use differences?
David
|
|
Top |
|
Zenkoanhead
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:42 am • # 12 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 2056
|
There are 3 versions of the Avon, 2, 2/1/2, 3" at 1.6, 2.6, and 3.4 ounces respectively. They are all pretty similiar, but as I recall the larger models have a simple drag adjustment. It allows you to put more pressure on the clicker with a leaf spring. I don't find such adjustments generally useful and leave it alone. Only the 3" takes a full length DT in the heavier line weights. The 3" Avon is best suited for 9 foot rods due to its size. In addition to the Avons, there are a couple of other JAF models that are quite nice, including the Aerial, which is an English free spool reel. Rare over on this side of the pond. Don
|
|
Top |
|
Rockthief
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 11:49 am • # 13 |
|
|
Sr. Member |
Joined: 11/27/08 Posts: 453 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
|
My Dutch Fly Reel 0 is out of a good dream. Pictures when I feel better.
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:41 pm • # 14 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
Paul, get to feeling better man...it is going around here as well.
|
|
Top |
|
Rockthief
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:27 pm • # 15 |
|
|
Sr. Member |
Joined: 11/27/08 Posts: 453 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
|
thanks Andy. Guess I will play with my reels.
|
|
Top |
|
Panfisher1
|
Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 6:57 am • # 16 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 11/22/08 Posts: 2233 Location: Oregon/Florida
|
Got a couple of little Ultra light reels that I like, and that I dont see around much anymore, The favorite is the Hardy flyweight. Others are a small Cortland Embassy 40 and a Teton #3 they all are used with 2 and 3 weight lines. I quit buying new reels every time I wanted a new line and started to buy spare spools. I can still get spools for older reels, but in some cases the spools cost as much as the reel did initially ..Paul
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 7:06 am • # 17 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
That Hardy will bring a mint if you ever want to sell it. Those sell used for what the new ones sell for new.
|
|
Top |
|
Panfisher1
|
Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:48 am • # 18 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 11/22/08 Posts: 2233 Location: Oregon/Florida
|
Andy, I was at the Metolius Bamboo rod gathering this past summer in Oregon & there were quite a few older Hardy reels for sale. Could not believe the prices on the Hardy reels made in England. Some were in very poor condition with nicks and scratches all over the reel and they still were asking $300-$400. The Hardy reel that I really want is owned by my brother, He has a Hardy Multiplier, it is about the same size as the LRH. I cant get him to part with it.Tried to trade him many things of interest, but the asking price is too high at this time. Ive got for this English Seagul outboard motor he wants, but I wont part with it, We saw the Multiplier on some dealers page for $695, there arent many of them around. Now that they are made overseas they will become even more valuable ..Paul
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 10:30 am • # 19 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
Those prices for a non-adjustable click/pawl reel...LOL
|
|
Top |
|
keebranch
|
Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 3:01 pm • # 20 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 5497
|
It's all about mystique and image.
|
|
Top |
|