'Species specific rods'????

Fishing Warm water Forum
1

I finally had a chance to play around with one of the ‘new’ Sage ‘Smallmouth Bass Rods’.

Nice rods, for their intended purpose, but I do have a ‘problem’ if you will, with them.

First, I think we all need to understand why they were made and their ‘intended’ use.

They are 7’ 10" long. Odd size, right? Is this the ‘perfect’ length for a ‘smallmouth bass fly rod’? Nope. It does, however, make it just under the B.A.S.S. tournament length limit, and it will fit into the rod lockers on most of the newer bass boats. They designed these rods to those specs so that the tournament trail types could use them ‘legally’ in competition.

That’s not a bad thing, in and of itself. It’s about time that fly tackle gets some attention from the mainstream bass guys. There are things that fly gear can do better than conventional tackle can.

These are ‘heavy’ rods. Not in thier actual ‘weight’, they are very light and responsive, but they are rated for ‘heavy’ lines. The smallmouth one is a stout 10 wt. They give you a line with the rod, though, and it doesn’t ‘say’ it’s a 10 wt. (It is a 290 grain line which is the equivalent of a 10 wt. -AFTMA says 280 grains is the target for 10 wts)… The largemouth one takes a heavier line than that ( The LM is a 330 grain which is AFTMAs accepted weight for 11 wts). Why so ‘heavy’? These rods are designed for big topwater flies fished in heavy cover. Big frogs and rats, poppers, etc, fished over grass or in thick stuff. They need the muscle to horse a big fish out of there, and the weight of line to throw those big flies.

They excell at this purpose. For tournament fishing in heavy cover, where the fight of the fish is not an issue, where you want to ensure that you will land them all, where the ability to yank a fish through the grass, or horse it over some tules, or drag the fish and twenty pounds of grass to the boat, these are state of the art.

Would a longer rod work better? Maybe, but it has to be under 8’ to fit the rules, besides, for this application, the length is pretty close to perfect.

Does it have to be as heavy, line weight wise, as it is? Probably not. For most of us that fly fish for bass, even in heavy cover, an 8 or 9 is considered ‘big’, but some folks use a 10. These rods weren’t built for fly fishermen who happen to like to fly fish for bass. They were built for tournament fishing. For those one or two specific techniques where a fly rod will out fish the ‘regular’ gear. They are strong, stiff, powerful tools for taking big fish in heavy cover, landing them as quickly and with as little risk of losing the fish as possible.

No problem with the rod(s) for it’s intended purpose.

My problem is that they are calling it a ‘smallmouth’ rod, or a ‘largemouth’ rod, not a tournament legal heavy cover big flies specific rod.

I saw someplace where a man asked what kind of rod he needed to fish for smallies in a small clear river, a place where he’ll be fishing small subsurface stuff, and four or five fellows told him to ‘check out’ the new ‘Smallmouth’ rod from Sage…Such a rod would overpower almost all the fish he is likely to hook.

The guy needed a 9 foot 5 or maybe a 6 wt. rod. Longer so he can mend easier, lighter so he can actually feel the fish fight.

But, Sage built a ‘Smallmouth’ rod, so now, regardless of the situation, folks out there think that this is ‘the’ rod for that purpose. How many of us can, in good conscience, recommend a 10 wt. rod for smallmouth bass fishing anywhere? Heck, a 10 wt. is a big rod for largemouth most places, and you can find guys in the salt taking sailfish and tuna on 9s!!! An 11 wt is a Tarpon rod. Big tarpon.

After casting one, playing with it a while, I’d not pay for one (if they gave me one, I’d find someone to trade it to). They are nice rods, but are way too heavy for me. I fish for fun, and these are ‘money’ rods, not ‘sport’ rods.

There is no ‘one rod’ for bass fishing, just like there is no one rod for trout fishing. Rods are tools. They have certain charateristics that make them suitable for certain flies, waters, and/or techniques. What these are, what things they are ‘best’ for, leaves lots of room for individualism among us. What I like for one type of water or for one particular species or technique can and will be different from what each of you might perfer. There is no wrong or right here, it’s all pretty subjective.

I do applaud Sage for finally recoginzing that bass anglers are a a legitimate source of revenue for their rods. I just wish that they had explained more fully the role they envisioned for these particular rods…

I have a picture in my mind of some guy with one of these down on the black river in Arizona, a small, clear, rocky river full of smallies to around four pounds, setting the hook on a little smallie and launching it over his head like a three inch brook trout…

Okay, rant over.

Thanks for reading it.

Buddy

2

You are welcome, Buddy, thanks for writing it.

I wonder if a magazine would ever print such a column?:rolleyes:

3

Your post hits the nail on the head and I must admit I did not make the connection.

4

I doubt they would want to offend the almighty Sage Rod Company, and risk losing the advertising revenue. I think the Internet is where you’ll find more objective real-world evaluations of equipment. Thanks for the critique, Buddy. I fish river smallies with 5 or 6wt., and know fellas using lighter tackle still. Of course, they’re not doing it for the buckos.

Joe

5

I own the Smallmouth rod because I won it through FAOL’s monthly drawing and I happen to really enjoy using it and I am not a “tournament” bass fisherman. You stated you finally got to handle one of these rods. Does that mean that you handled it in a fly shop, casting range or did you fish with it? All three would give you a different “feel” for the rod. I am not trying to upset anyone. I have fished with this rod and I agree that the line that comes with it is a little “over kill”, but, I have used it with 8 and 9 wt line and it handles those very well. It is “light in the hand” and could be used all day without any undo strain on the fisherman. You do make the rod sound like it is very stiff, like a broomstick, and it is not. It is 7’ 11" long (not 7’ 10") so that it will fit in the rod locker of a bass boat plus be under the length limits of B.A.S.S tournament rules which states no rod used can be longer than 8’. It is made to fit in the rod locker of a bass boat because it is also a rod that is perfect for a boat fly rod. This discussion would not be happening if Sage had left the word “bass” out of it. I can think of a lot of situations where this rod would shine. Fly fishing for carp, muskie, northern pike, stripers, cat fish, salmon and even steelheads. Yes, your 6 and 7 weights will work for those fish, but, so will this one. Just like a 7 foot spinning rod will work for the same fish that a 7 foot casting rod will work.

Please understand that I am not trying to upset anyone. I just feel Sage has a good product here and it would have been better if they had just left “smallmouth” and “largemouth” off the rods. The rod was built as a boat fly rod and built so it would fit in a boat rod locker. What you, the fly fisherman, use it for is up to you.

I’m sorry for posting this, but, I feel your review may keep some fly fisherman from trying this rod and that is not fair to the rod. I was the person who recommeded on one post to try this rod because the person stated that they used large heavy bass flies and surface poppers for smallmouth. I do not remember if they posted the size of the body of water they fished in. If they stated small streams, I would not have made the recommendation.

I will shut up now and I will apologize now to anyone that may feel offended by this post because it was not meant to offend anyone. I just would like this new rod to get a fair trial by all.

6

Sounds like a lot of rods . . . Good for some things, not so good for others. Maybe that’s why I have more than 1 rod . . :slight_smile:

-wayne

7

I kind of wonder if the names applied to rods were intended to market them to a new customer base.

I have been telling anyone who would listen that I would like 7 to 7.5 foot rods in the 7 - 9 wt range because of advantage they offer over longer rods when fighting fish in tight quarters. The longer the rod, the greater the fish’s leverage advantage. There are also some advantages in bringing fish to hand when fishing from yaks and tubes. There are casting advantages to shorter rods that help generating tight loops necessary to fire flies under overhanging cover since shorter rods are easier to stop.

TFO already has a 6 and 8wt rods in 7.5 foot lengths.

So these new rods, and similar ones from Scott that cost about twice as much as Sage’s offerings have appeal to anglers for many types of situations. The Sage rods saw extensive testing in saltwater environments too for tarpon, snook, and other species.

I will be ordering the “Largemouth” model soon, and while it will be used for bass fishing, it will be used extensively for fishing the local kelp beds where short precise casts to holes in the kelp canopy are often necessary and the shorter length will help with levering fish out or through thick cover.

8

Warren,

Didn’t mean to upset you at all.

I did fish with the rod. I did state that the rod was light and responsive. But, it is a heavy rod. A powerful, strong, ‘big’ rod. You could cast it all day, but if you are used to the lighter tackle usually used for bass fishing, you would notice that it’s NOT a 6 weight by the end of the first hour.

As I stated, for it’s intended purpose it’s a great rod. I just don’t see it as an all around ‘smallmouth’ rod.

My ‘problem’ is in the marketing of it. They conveniently left the line weight off of the rod and just sell it with a line. They don’t tell you the rod is a 10 wt… I know it will cast with lighter lines. It will cast with heavier ones too. All rods can do that. I’d just assume logically that Sage would include what they consider to be the ‘best’ weight line for the rod. Which, in the case of the ‘smallmouth’ rod, is a 10 wt. line.

The ‘average’ smallmouth caught in this country runs about one pound. It generally inhabits a river or clear lake environment and prefers rocky habitat. The flies most use to target them run from size 12 up to around size 2. Some 1/0 stuff at the odd times, but most smallmouth flies are not huge nor are they usually heavily weighted. A #2 Clouser is about the upper end of ‘weight’ as far as that goes, and most of us can throw one of those with a 6 wt.

How much fun will a one pound smallie be on a ten weight rod?

THAT is the core of the issue for me. Sage is a large company with lots of adherents to it’s products. It holds lots of sway with the fly fishing public. If Sage says it has a ‘smallmouth’ rod, many of these folks will believe that it is, in fact, a a rod built specifically for, and ideally suited to, the catching of smallmouth bass.

Not a bad rod, but in no way does it even remotely resemble a rod designed for fishing for smallmouth bass.

I wonder if Sage made a 10 weight rod and called it the ‘Brook Trout’ rod if many folks would find it as odd?

Buddy

9

Don’t think you upset anyone Buddy.

I too think the marketing is kind of funny since the rods do really have a wide range of application, though they are still a niche product. What is different is that they build a rod and special line to go together, though of course. the rod works with standard lines. I can see where someone who does not really understand how rods/lines/flies work together might make a poor purchase choice based on the names assigned to the rods.

Scott calls their rods the “Warmwater” series and they come in 6, 8 and 10 wts at a length of 7’11.5" and a price of $625. Of course they are not limited to panfish, bass, and pike either.

TFO doesn’t give any special name to their two short models - they are just part of the TiCr-X series.

10

Buddy,

Hopefully, there are no hard feelings on what I posted because none were meant. In reality, what I said was pretty much what you were saying and that is if Sage had left the “Smallmouth/Largemouth” wording off these rods, it would have described the rods better. I think it would be better described as a boat rod built for larger fish and of a length that would fit in the normal rod boxes that are found on boats. My friend who fishes the salt a lot said that for the past couple years, there has been a lot of talk from the saltwater fishermen wanting a shorter fly rod for the mangroves and other saltwater applications and he thought the “Largemouth” rod would prove to be an excellent rod for that. It is just a shame that the “label” is going to be misleading as far as what the rods can do in many other fly fishing situations.

Oh, well, as long as there are no hard feelings, all is well that ends well. Now lets just go fishing.

11

Warren,

As an aside, I’ve been building my own fly rods for years. My personal rod for throwing big topwaters is a 6 1/2 foot 8 wt. built on a spinning blank. I agree with you that there is a need for shorter fly rods in some of the heavier weights for niche applications.

I bass fish from a boat, and find that a longer rod is not always the best for such angling. Not just from the storage aspect, but for the presentation and fish fighting attributes as well.

Buddy

12

This thread strikes home to me on many different issues.

My first word of caution is when you read things on the internet, keep in mind we all live in different parts of the country and our fishing situations are very different. For example, I live in Florida and fish large lakes: if you aren’t armed with a stick that can fish heavy weed beds, you won’t catch much most of the year.

The other issue is this: I am an avid fly fisher for bass and before I hit the lake, I decide if I am going “bass fishing” or “warmwater fishing”. “Bass fishing” to me means I don’t want to catch bluegill, specs, or dink bass; I am going after fish 3lbs and up. “Warmwater fishing” to me means I am going to use small flies and catch a bunch of fish and if catch a decent sized bass, that’s just icing on the cake.

For bass fishing, my rod of choice for a few years now has been a Sage 8wt loaded with 10wt intermediate sink line. It quickly loads and I can throw large flies in the worst conditions. My last outing I was throwing a 3/0 deceiver into the grass beds and quickly caught 5 bass that were suitable for a tournament weigh-in. I was fishing open water, winds were out of the east 10-15 mph, and I was in a kayak. No way I am I doing that with a 6wt. I have not used the new Sage rod, but I have a hunch it is an 8wt with a 10wt line. Over-lining rods puts stress on the tip, so why not cut the tip off and call it a bass stick? Revolutionary? No way, Tom Nixon did it years ago to his 8wt wonderod.

I still want to try one of the new Sage rods and if I like it, I will buy it. Just wish it was fiberglass. :wink:

13

BassYakker,

I do not have the type of fishing you have and was wondering why you wish the rod was fiberglass? Is it because it would be more forgiving during a hard fight? Just trying to further my education and nothing more. If companies would survey their customers on what they want and why before they create a new product, it would be a win-win situation.

14

Nothing that complicated. :smiley: Although I have seen a graphite flyrods break (not me ;)) while saltwater kayak fishing. Something about an oar in one hand and rod in the other…even a small jack crevalle can quickly bend an 8wt in half if he goes under the kayak.

To paraphrase Tom Nixon: fiberglass will take our abuse and neglect and in return will reward us with years of faithfull service. Fiberglass is inexpensive and makes for a good fishing stick.

Don’t get me wrong, I love my graphite rods and compared to others, I have not broken them at an unusually high rate (I think I can count on one hand how many rods I have broke over the last 15 yrs). But graphite is a “space age” material, heavily engineered (read $$$), makes for extremely light (actual weight: not line wt) rods, and makes for very sensitive rod tips. But good graphite is expensive and even the best graphite with abuse will break.

With a modern fiberglass rod, on those days where the oar bangs the rod I wouldn’t feel the need to inspect the rod when I get home, I would just silently thank whoever invented the stuff as I left it fully rigged up, in the rod holder on the boat, in the garage…ready for next time (i.e. not in the rod tube).

I should note that I do own an old 8wt Wonderrod, but it is more of a whippy 6wt rod to me.

15

Thanks for getting back on this…I kinda figured it was a durability thing.

16

I wonder if they would ever print it in the letters section!!

Great thought Buddy! Man, I would love to get out with you for a few days of fishing. Gotta figure out how to make that happen some day. . . .

17

Hello Buddy, I’ve been thinking the same thing about these rods. They appear to be designed for “tourament style” bass fishing with large flies, and they look perfect for that use. But the assorted message board’s comments give the impression that most folks think these are general purpose smallmouth and largemouth rods. I was glad to read your post and see that someone else seems to have the same impression of these rods.

Rex

18

I think we will see a lot more of these “niche” rods in the future. The number of newcomers to the sport in recent years has been declining. In order to keep sales going, rod makers have to figure out a way to sell another rod to guys with 3,6,9,12 (etc) fly rods. So they design rods with a specific purpose in mind so that we will expand our rod “quiver”. One trend of this is the development of good quality rods at lower price points. It is easier to sell a guy with a dozen rods already another rod at $300 than another $600 - $900 rod.

A big chunk of TFO’s success has been in sales to “oldtimers” picking up “back up” rods and / or rods that allow the angler to expand his / her flyfishing experience. I think the introduction of the Sage bass rods shows Sage is serious about getting some of that market share.

Guy

19

Buddy hit the nail on the head in the comment that this is a marketing issue all the way, not a rod issue.

I remember being puzzled by the dearth of information on rod/line weight. Then I saw the weight in grains of the line, looked at the AFTMA charts and thought “oh my, that’s a heavy set up!”

It all boils down to the vague nature of the ad campaign. They certainly had some goal in mind when they produced the campaign in that manner.

20

I haven’t had a chance to try out the new rods, but I will this spring. Am I missing something here about the line? It’s my understanding is that it is not a typical line because much of the weight is upfront in a big, fat taper. This was done in order to help turnover the BIG flies. Is this correct?
It would have been more truthful if Sage had called these their Tournament Rods rather than Bass Rods. Other than fishing large flies, tournaments, or thick vegitation I’m not sure I see a lot of uses for me. I just don’t fish the kind of water that would call for this very often. Having said all that, I am very interested in giving them a try when I will be fishing for large LM, from a tube, and in lakes with some great thick cover.

Diferent strokes for…oh, you know.