14ft on test t&s

[billytheghillie]

Did you read allan shephards opening comments on the 14ft tests? he says "from a purely practical point of view, i like rods with an even number of sections, as it means i can unship the middle joint,place the two equal halves in the car and move quickly to the next pool. i have then only only to retape one joint and i am back in business" what a load of bull, and this coming from a guy who has AAPGAI after his name, a pro caster and instructor. he works at sportfish game fishing school at reading. Im going to let him into a secret, if he goes into the sportfish shop he could purchase a pair of rod clamps ( he should get some discount) this will enable him to transport his rods without the need to break them down!

[salmoseeker]

clever boy!

[splash]

Another great T&S rod test special designed to confuse the hell out of anyone buying a rod:

Clive Mitchell:

Guideline LPXE: Cost £328, performance 9, value 7
Loop Classic Spey:Cost £415, performance 9, value 8
Hardy Swift: Cost £549, performance 9, value 8
Sage Z Axis: Cost £680, performance 9 value 9

So all the rods score 9 for performance but the cheapest, the Guideline, is the worst value for money despite being less than half the cost of the Sage which scores a full 20% higher on value. Go figure that one out

These T&S tests are a) totally subjective and b) poorly researched and conducted. What sort of message they give out to someone wanting to learn the sport goodness knows?

Read the Fairchild article again for some common sense advice. Try before you buy and don't follow convention; find out what works for you

[robbie]

Splash
I see where you are coming from. However spoke to Clive last weekend about other matters and we did speak about his findings. Interestingly Clive is part of the Hardy Academy, yet was honest enough in his findings not to include a Hardy in his top 3. I may be wrong, but I think the explanation for the scores you talk about is that Clive Mitchellhill personally prefers a more traditional style/rod action. Therefore, if that is also your favored style, then a rod that suits you costing say £500 will be better value for you than a rod that does not suit your style costing £250. The example you give shows, the less expensive LPXE being less value/f/m than some others. I would suggest that this is simply that it is a different animal than traditional style rods and a short stroke,underhand with shooting heads style gets the best out of it ( newish techniques over here). Looking at what the other guy has to say about the lPXe shows this better than I could describe ( He admits to liking tippy,underhand style rods). Incidentally I own an LPXE which I love however I also own some more traditional style rods including a Sage ZAxis, which contrary to some people is not a Tippy V.fast rod, which I also love, but techniques need changing between the 2. Yes I agree that these tests can be confusing, but perhaps the answer is for the magazines allowing greater editorial space for evaluaters to offer more clarity on their findings.

[castlikeaghille]

This response is no reflection on the most recent "test" in T&S, or the people who carried them out. In general on all their tests:

1) It is absolute nonsense that they review so many rods at one time. They should take three of four max (of the same basic action profile and price range) and go and fish, not just cast, with them for a few hours (and more realistically a few days). That test should be based on using various lines and flies and on both banks forcing different casting styles

2) It is even greater nonsense to talk about 'value' far less rate it. Everyone on this site will have a unique, personally relevant and subjective view of value based on all sorts of factors; it is not an objective criteria that should form the basis of reccommendations on which rod you should buy. Tests should stick to information that can be reproted in detail (a sound bite like in T&S is not a review) in a way that is relevant to everyone

To try and put this in context, if you were in the market for one, would you take seriously a review of cabriolets that had 15 cars ranging in price from a Renault Megane to Aston Martins tested by driving them round a track once with a commentary "I liked the paint colour and it went vvvrrrooommm"?

Better out than in

Regards

CLaG

[williegunn]

springer said:

To give these rod and line tests an extra dimension, they should include 'Joe Public' IMO, maybe a beginner and an intermediate caster both under supervision from the likes of Alan and Clive. Most of the people taking notice of these reviews with be at that level I would imagine.

You could also ask a couple of passing blind folk to describe the colour.

[splash]

robbie said:

Splash
I see where you are coming from. However spoke to Clive last weekend about other matters and we did speak about his findings. Interestingly Clive is part of the Hardy Academy, yet was honest enough in his findings not to include a Hardy in his top 3. I may be wrong, but I think the explanation for the scores you talk about is that Clive Mitchellhill personally prefers a more traditional style/rod action. Therefore, if that is also your favored style, then a rod that suits you costing say £500 will be better value for you than a rod that does not suit your style costing £250. The example you give shows, the less expensive LPXE being less value/f/m than some others. I would suggest that this is simply that it is a different animal than traditional style rods and a short stroke,underhand with shooting heads style gets the best out of it ( newish techniques over here). Looking at what the other guy has to say about the lPXe shows this better than I could describe ( He admits to liking tippy,underhand style rods). Incidentally I own an LPXE which I love however I also own some more traditional style rods including a Sage ZAxis, which contrary to some people is not a Tippy V.fast rod, which I also love, but techniques need changing between the 2. Yes I agree that these tests can be confusing, but perhaps the answer is for the magazines allowing greater editorial space for evaluaters to offer more clarity on their findings.

Robbie

Subjectivity and personal preference should not really come into it. The point I as making was simply that the rods in the test were all rated identically at 9/10 for performance. Now assuming that's an objective scale, its completely perverse that the LPXE which costs less than 50% of the Sage is considered to provide 20% less value for money. The real value figure, based upon the performance rating, should be approximately 110% or 2.1 x that of the Sage. My point was really nothing to do with which rod was the best rod but simply that the scoring system would be highly confusing to someone, particularly a beginner, who was trying to apply an objective, value for money based approach to selecting a rod

cheers

Alan

[juniorspey]

i have to say say that over the years i have found that most testers tend to rate a rod or line according to what they want and need, rather than the general quality and useability of the tackle. This is a shame as the majority of the are really good casters, with the skill and timing to use a rod to its full extent, they are great casters but this is perhaps not providing yuour average caster/beginner with the right info to buy what is right for him or her.
Also i have only ever seen one magazine include a lady angler in a review.

[juniorspey]

It's already started, it was good while it lasted!

[rpsalmon]

A fishing rod isn't just a tool for casting, it is a tool for "playing" fish as well as fishing a fly. When you don't have comprehensive testing of products over time, such a test as is shown in Trout & Salmon can only be a general guide. In that respect alone, it is interesting to see a number of rods rated against each other. My issue is with the value for money rating, this subjective rating should be scrapped. I'm only interested in these experts objective views of the various rods technical performances... but with different fly lines! There should be a standard fly line...or shouldn't anyone dig up the spectre of line ratings?!

[williegunn]

Why does value for money have to have anything to do with price?

If two rods cost the same and one had cheap fittings and cast like a dog it would score less value for money wise, would it not?

[rpsalmon]

Surely money and price are connected. Cheap fittings or a "cast like a dog rod" are technical matters, if they effect the technical performance of the rod then they are relevant, if they don't then those aspects are up to the individual buyer.

While I would class myself as a "more than competent caster" and unimpressed with many contributors on the subject of casting, and while casting competitions aren't my cup of tea, I have a great deal of respect for those who compete and succeed in casting competitions. I do value their technical opinion on rods, even they are just production models and not likely to be the ones they use themselves!

[juniorspey]

what is wrong with people who compete?
Ian Gordon, Gordon Armstrong, James Chalmers and Way Yin are just a few (there are too many to mention).but they are all great guys, great anglers and most of all.great craic!!
i see no reason to disrespect them.

[Sloggi]

Completely agree with Spalsh's post about this being another confusing T&S Test

To judge such a diverse group of rods whose only commonality was the length is a difficult start in attempting to judge their abilities. To use only two pointers to form an opinion with one being VFM is just nuts.

Why not test rods in their own price bracket and based on styles. So, for example, a test including rods between £200-£400 primarily suited to casting shooting head lines.

Plus they should also be tested by anglers with a range of casting abilities

[rpsalmon]

Dear juniorspey
As far as I am aware, the only person who has even implied disrespect to those people is yourself.

As a further thought. There are many casting experts who have launched their a range of rods through a particular manufacturer. The rod may well have been specifically designed with the aim of giving casters of average ability and experience a rod that allows them to get the best out of the fishing they do, and are not aimed at top level casters. T & S magazine could probably help a lot more anglers if they did a review of rods that would help the average angler rather than the experts, who invariably use customised rods. It is often the case, or so casting instructors tell me, that someone turns up with a top of the range Sage and yet it has to be taken off them because such a rod hinders their ability to learn and improve sufficiently.

[juniorspey]

sorry rps, had a late one last night and mis-read your post, thought it said no respact!
splash, i agree!
vfm should be judged on the quality and fittings you get for the price

[castlikeaghille]

springer said:

As to point 1)

I don't think there is really a need to fish with a rod for days to make a sound valuation, remember guy like these are very sound casters with great technical understanding. They and others are able to quickly tune in to what a rod needs to get the best out of it, they don't require the time to get used to it that most average casters require. Standing on one bank with a bit of room you can carry out all casts both right and left hand up wind permitting. The rod doesn't react any different whether you are up to your balls or on a fancy casting platform, only you do. It also doesn't respond differently to left of right hand up, again only the caster does.

I agree with you in respect of an expert being able to tell in half an hour how a rod will basically cast. However, how a rod casts and what it is like to fish with are very different things, and we are buying a rod to fish with. No matter how expert a caster is, they will not know what it is like to fish with until they spend at least a day with it. Consider these factors:

- In half an hour chances are you will have the same weather. Some rods handle gales well; some don't although (I fully accept your points on the importance of opperator ability or error) - how does the rod handle and grip become affected by being soaked by driving rain? etc etc

- Any review, as T&S ones often do, that have statements like "We didn't try xyand z type of lines on it but we're sure it will handle them fine" should be thrown into the trash can - the only way you know is to do it. Having posted a few rod reviews on here I can assure you I'd never make that assumption about any rod becuase I've found it to be wrong so many times. At least if they tried a variety of lines they could feedback on what suited the rod and what might not.

- Same with flies - how can they review an "All-round" rod if the test doesn't include a three inch brass tube on a wet two or multi-tip and various other permutations.

- In a catch and release world how quickly a rod can control a fish is an increasingly important factor - albeit the hardest thing to test to order

Finally, I can't believe I am the only poster on here whose view of a salmon rod hasn't changed after using it for a full day, both for better and worse, but rarely no change.

I'm my mind poor quality tackle reviews, or worse, advertorials, is one of the biggest weaknesses of the angling press.

Regards

CLaG

[jock]

castlikeaghille said:

I agree with you in respect of an expert being able to tell in half an hour how a rod will basically cast. However, how a rod casts and what it is like to fish with are very different things, and we are buying a rod to fish with. No matter how expert a caster is, they will not know what it is like to fish with until they spend at least a day with it.

I agree with CLaG. While I can tell quite quickly if I like a rod and it "suits" me and can adapt reasonably well to casting anything, it is only when you put a rod through its paces in various fishing situations that you come to fully appreciate its strengths and weaknesses.

Not many people can do that before they buy a rod. Perhaps the focus of such reviews should not be a comparison in terms of value for money etc. rather stating what an individual rod rod can do well, where it is OK and where it has difficulty.

For those new to salmon fishing maybe we should have a forum guide to the type of rod/s someone should buy based on fishing situations etc. and save them having all the numerous? rods the rest of us possess

Cheers,

Jock

[castlikeaghille]

springer said:

In essence I think we agree that these tests are far from perfect and even if they had the rods for weeks Alan Shepherd would still have gone for the Sage as favoritism and commercial gain will be a factor with some testers.

If this forum was ran in a slightly different format and the membership was to grown significantly we could do our own tests covering a wide range of abilities. Food for thought.

I don't know Alan Shepherd so can't comment, but otherwise agree. I have posted a number of reviews on here, and often suggested people post a review of the rods they fish with particularly if they are current list items; it would be great if more people did.

Incidentally, I've now tried the 14' 3" Z-Axis on three occassions. IMO it is a significant improvement on the 14' 1" Euro. I've not had the opportunity to try it in combat, but if it performs as well in the field as it does on a casting pool it will certainly be one awesome rod if this style is your cup of tea.

[jock]

castlikeaghille said:

springer said:

In essence I think we agree that these tests are far from perfect and even if they had the rods for weeks Alan Shepherd would still have gone for the Sage as favoritism and commercial gain will be a factor with some testers.

If this forum was ran in a slightly different format and the membership was to grown significantly we could do our own tests covering a wide range of abilities. Food for thought.

I don't know Alan Shepherd so can't comment, but otherwise agree. I have posted a number of reviews on here, and often suggested people post a review of the rods they fish with particularly if they are current list items; it would be great if more people did.

Incidentally, I've now tried the 14' 3" Z-Axis on three occasions. IMO it is a significant improvement on the 14' 1" Euro. I've not had the opportunity to try it in combat, but if it performs as well in the field as it does on a casting pool it will certainly be one awesome rod if this style is your cup of tea.

Yes it would be good if there were more reviews on rods by forum members. I think, however we would require a common format of report that allowed for comparison between current rods or whatever. As a 20 a year man ( that's 20 opportunities(days) to go fishing) while I know what I want/need from a rod and am happy with my lot I'm not up on all this underhand etc technology. Rod speed/ action totally confuses me, rather the makers descriptions totally confuse me. I have two rods from the same manufacturer which apparently have the same MF action......not to me they don't. So bugger the manufactures descriptions, if we are going to describe rods to others we have to come up with a format that allows us guys to say it our way. this might prove to be mission impossible.

Even if a common format cannot be found we should still pass on our opinions to others about equipment we have used. On that basis if I were to be restricted to one rod for all my salmon situations it would be, based on limited experience of current rods out there, remembering I'm fishing med. to big rivers it would be Le Cie 15' 9". I gave a short report on this rod before I actually fished it for earnest. I've now fished it for earnest in windy, can only wade from the bank a couple of feet, with high banks and trees behind conditions where I needed 25+ yds without the luxury of a D loop behind me and overhanging branches some 10' above me...it did the job for an old git who don't/ can't fish a "heavy" rod all day. OK it will be a bit of overkill for the 5lb grilse, but if that is the only way I can cover them?