+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Wonderod line weight help!

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    The vast majority of 8 1/2' Shakespeare glass rods were designed to cast 7 or 8 weight lines.
    If it is indeed heavy with a stout butt section I would think it's going to prefer an eight weight.
    Useful for casting big bass bugs and streamers. Unfortunate that whoever cleaned it up used
    something that removed all the markings. If it loads well with an eight you're good to go. If it doesn't,
    the best thing to do is try one line weight up and down.
    Last edited by bobbyg; 07-27-2014 at 04:53 PM.
    When you can arrange your affairs to go fishing, forget all the signs, homilies, advice and folklore. JUST GO.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Shallotte, NC - USA
    Posts
    778

    Default

    I have my Dad's old Shakespare Wonder Rod. Best I can remember he bought it new around 1950. Dad passed on in 1999 and has been in my collection since; and one thing he did for sure was take care of his gear - the rod was in pristine condition. No markings on the rod base other then the name decal, but Dad always used a 5wt DT line. The original length called it an 8' rod but do believe it was a tad shorter then eight, more like 7'10" - of course, one of the first things I did with the rod (love the way it casts) was walk into a tree with it (that took care of the very tip and so now it's about 7' 8" +). Now, I know how to walk with a fly rod, but do you think I'll ever learn ...? Show me a river that has only one tree on the bank in the middle of 500 yards and I'll end up with some flies in the top of it. Like wise, hardly any trees around yet I'll manage to walk into one with the fly rod tip!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    cheyenne OK
    Posts
    133

    Default

    I grew up fishing Wonderods and still have several in the shed. From what you're describing it should handle a WF8F Bass Bug Taper great. I even used a 9wt. on mine with big bugs and short casts. Would power them out without false casting at all. Shakespeare did make some lighter rods but most of their stuff was for 7wt. and up in the 8'6" rods. I have a nice 8' that is great with a 6wt. but 5wt. just doesn't load it enough. Loved those old rods and have given several away to various charity groups but still have a few of them and Fenwick Ferrulites in the shed.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    449

    Default

    The older rods used a alphabetic system of line and rod weight. IE HCH which denotes a double taper line, front and rear tapered to size H and body is C. A GBF is a weight fwd bass taper. A level line would be a single letter.
    An "A" line would be heaviest. As near as I can remender, a "C" was about a 6 wt. The rod should be marked with a single letter for the line weight.
    The only problem with this system was that there was no standard for what a letter meant. It was up to the manafacturer. The American Fishing Tackle Manafacturing Association (AFTMA) adopted the present labeling system which is based on the weight of the first 30 ft of the line, thereby standardizing the labeling. Unfortunatly, some manafactures are playing games with the standard now. I owned two Wonder rods. A 9' "B" and a 7'"C" Presidential which thought was the ultimate! I'd guess that your rod is a "B" which should be on the label, a 7 or 8 wt.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Woodbine, MD
    Posts
    703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oldster View Post
    As near as I can remender, a "C" was about a 6 wt. ...
    The only problem with this system was that there was no standard for what a letter meant. It was up to the manafacturer.
    C was about a 7.

    The problem wasn't that there was no standard; there was. The problem was that it referred to the diameter of the line, not it's weight. ("C" was .050 inches; "D" was .045, "E" was .040, etc) This worked fine when all lines were made of silk; one line of a given diameter weighed pretty much the same as any other line of the same diameter. When manufacturers started making line out of various plastic, with some lines designed to float and others to sink, diameter no longer meant much about how a line would work with a given rod. The modern standard is based on weight, rather than diameter, which gets you a lot closer, although it's not ideal either (read the thread about multi-weight rods.)
    Bob

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    449

    Default

    Thanks for the correction, redietz. I didn't know it was based on diameter. Now, if we could get the line makers to just post the weight of the first 30 ft instead of "slightlier heavier to load faster rods better" etc we could
    make better judgements as to what we are buying.

  7. #7

    Default

    For detailed information, check out the Shakespeare page in the Fiberglass Fly Rodders wiki site. http://fiberglassflyrodders.com/wiki/Shakespeare

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Rod and line weight question???
    By terry13111 in forum Fly Anglers Online
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-24-2009, 11:50 AM
  2. Fly line weight
    By Terry Campbel in forum A Learning Experience, Pass it On.
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-25-2008, 07:55 PM
  3. line weight
    By bamafan in forum Warm water Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-24-2007, 05:59 PM
  4. What weight line?
    By Ct Don in forum Fly Anglers Online
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-25-2006, 10:36 PM
  5. Advice on line weight
    By kgilroy in forum Fly Anglers Online
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-09-2005, 01:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts