Orvis does it again

[Cold]

Fly fishing is definitely the first hobby I've had where people get so bent about the gear that people get nasty. As a result (or as a cause?), the manufacturers prey on this.

It just gets me how literally every new product that comes out uses the same, tired marketing: THIS is the high-tech solution that will solve all your problems with the old crappy tech you have now!

Six months later...

No...THIS is the NEW solution...that old stuff is crap!

Like many have said, graphite is graphite...unless you're making great leaps and bounds in that dept., you're just changing its arrangement (taper), and its jewelry. And while any mfgr. is certainly entitled to do what they like in that regard, it irks me a little when they make a taper change and act like they reinvented the fish.

If this taper was so great and the old one just wont cut it..why didnt you use this taper years ago?

For me, when I go gear shopping, I want something that will satisfy my needs, stand up to the punishment typically received on the stream, and look good doing it (quality workmanship). I dont feel the need to spend an extra 20% for the latest tech that wont be the latest tech in 6 months.

For me, it all boils down to what makes you happy. For some, it IS having the best gear in existence, and I guess thats why this trend continues. For me, it's getting out on the stream and catching some fish. I've never encountered a situation where a top-of-the-line rod or reel would have caught me a fish that my nice mid-grade setup wouldnt. I've used a few high-end rods, and many of them are very nice...but not nearly nice enough to me to justify the price.

Just my 2 cents...of course...I'm using a high end computer to post...so maybe its my buck fifty?

[waynep]

Cold: I agree. . . . No one needs the latest high tech stuff to fly fish. My primary 5 wt is an Orvis Silver Label. You all know how old those are. I bought it new in 2001. It's still a nice rod. Yes there are lighter rods out there. I am considering replacing it, but the reason is not what most would think. It's a 2 piece and the car I am driving is smaller so I would like to replace it with a 4 piece rod just to make loading the car easier.

[Icemanxxxv]

I agree with Bass Bug. Good job BassBug-

Here here! 500.00 for a fishing rod? Hmm not in my life or budget! I think my wife would divorce me if I paid 500 dollars for a fishing rod, and don't think I would blame her!

[Bamboozle]

So if fishing is all about catching prowess; are the manufacturers REALLY saying: "you will catch MORE fish and be a BETTER fisherman with the latest & greatest" or are some folks just projecting.

Here's what Orvis says about the freshwater Helios:

The new patent pending Helios 3 weight is so innovative and, frankly, so far ahead of all other fly rods it skips generations in how fly rods should feel, cast, and fish. Our 3 weight is so sublimely light, incredibly responsive, deadly accurate, and just plain easy and enjoyable to cast that to compare it to other graphite rods is like comparing graphite to bamboo. There is no comparison. The 3 weight Helios fly fishing rods are that good. And everyone is noticing.

• greatest feel of action for more accurate and longer casts

• superior sensitivity and responsiveness

• the strongest fly rod on the market

• loads quickly, crisply, but nimbly

• supremely-balanced feel

• unmatched fish-fighting power

• better tracking for dry flies and nymphing

• smoother transition of power

• reduced casting fatigue

SO, is any of this true?

Could any of it BE true?

If it it ISN'T true, I assume you tried the Helios against the competition and aren't relying on hearsay?

If it IS true, does it matter to you?

IF it doesn't matter to you, why do you care if it matters to others?

BETTER is an ambiguous term. Things CAN be better or of higher quality but that doesn't mean you have to like it. It also doesn't mean because YOU don't, that it isn't better.

Quality also isn't always about performance, sometimes it's purely about pleasure or reward. You don't buy a Ferrari because it will make you better driver and unless you race or drive the Autobahn, you ain't buying it for performance. You buy it for the sheer driving pleasure owning an exotic sports car gives you, and because you can. NO other justification is necessary.

The same goes for $700 fly rod.

There are 15 varieties of Wheat Thin crackers in my supermarket because some people want choices in this world. The last time I checked, Nabisco wasn't saying that the folks that preferred the Sun Dried Tomato & Basil Variety were more sophisticated than the plain cracker eaters, but I bet some fly fishermen might pick a fight over it.

Someone who voices issue with another person's tackle is classless IMHO regardless of which direction the price is. It seems to me the problem is with the company some folks keep, or simple class envy, not the manufacturers. Maybe I'm naive but I don't get "you are a useless cheap tackle schlub who won't catch anything with your K-Mart rod" when I peruse the new catalogs.

There will always be a new and improved product that raises the ire of those that choose to NOT choose it, just as there always will be someone who will choose it. That's a guarantee I can live with.

There will also be constant battles on flyfishing message boards about the same thing anytime someone mentions tackle that costs more than a few bucks. That's a guarantee I can live without.

[Big Bad Wulff]

I will most likely never own a $500 rod. And not from not being able to afford it.

[Cold]

Take a look at the marketing points...not that this is an item-specific (or even industry specific) issue...but, honestly, it's downright silly.


greatest feel of action for more accurate and longer casts - huh?

superior sensitivity and responsiveness - compared to what?

the strongest fly rod on the market - the only remotely objective statement on the board. but let's see the numbers? And stronger how? I guarantee you a $20 eagle claw featherlight will take more beadhead impacts.

loads quickly, crisply, but nimbly - what fast action rod mfr. wouldnt say this?

supremely-balanced feel - not only a nebulous "feel good" statement, but compared to what?

unmatched fish-fighting power - ooook...if you want to get technical, a 9-foot 5 weight chunk of rebar would have more fish-fighting power...unmatched just means that no other rod has exactly the same level

better tracking for dry flies and nymphing - compared to?

smoother transition of power - compared to?

reduced casting fatigue - compared to?

____________

Not trying to "Orvis-bash", as I said, every company does it. Personally, I like several Orvis items that go with me every time I fish (waders, 2 of my reels, tippet...)

I guess what it boils down to is that Louise in marketing would lose her job if the best she could come up with was:

"Introducing the whiz-bang shabow XGZ-asymptote LH: same as last year, but 3 grams lighter!"

[Hoochman]

I just looked up the component list for a few other rods since someone did it for the Orivs just to see what the other companies are spending. Oddly enough, according to a component manf's website, the most expensive rods on the market from one manufacturer in particular have some of the cheapest guide sets you can buy. I mean, I just saw a thread on another site about this company's new end all be all "saltwater rod with H2O Technology" and was talking up it's guide set as something super high tech and special so I figured it was....nope. Low low end and so was the reel seat. Same with a few others out there.

I just hate it when the manufactures try and play up things, assuming the ignorant consumer will just buy into it because of marketing buzz words. You guys are right, graphite is graphite. Tapers, wall thickness, scrim, and adhesives are changing, but graphite isn't. I'm still trying to figure out how a $700 has $40 worth of guide sets and a $15 reel seat...looks like graphite is changing...it's getting more expensive. I think someone should challenge the manufacturer's words in print...they say they have the lighest rod; weigh it on a certified scale and see if it is the weight printed in the catalog/on the rod. They say it has the lowest swing weight...how did they come up with that? Show me statistics and the test that proved it! They say it is stronger than the other brands....ok, again, how did you test this and show me how brand a, b, and c stood up to the tests...oh, and let an independent company do the testing. So funny how false and/or misleading advertising goes unchecked.

The high end rod market is pretty high end, but what some friends and I were discussing the other day is the whole 'overseas' rod market where the rods are costing the manf about $20-30 and they're selling them to us for $150-$500. We figured the profit margin for those rods (for the manf) is way more than high end rod makers. Guess everyone has to make money, that's the way it goes, but when folks say they are getting a deal for $169 rod that costs $20 vs a $600 that costs $200 to build, it seems the better deal is in the higher end rod if you're just looking at numbers.

For me, I'll use some lower end and some higher end depending on what I'm doing. You can drink a $2 bottle of wine same as you can a $20 bottle and have the same result, just depends on how you want to get there.

B

[Cold]

You can drink a $2 bottle of wine same as you can a $20 bottle and have the same result, just depends on how you want to get there.

Too true...but please...let someone else drive the Ferrari that night.

[flyguy66]

For me, I'll use some lower end and some higher end depending on what I'm doing. You can drink a $2 bottle of wine same as you can a $20 bottle and have the same result, just depends on how you want to get there.

B

And even the majority of the world's top wine experts now openly admit than in the $10-60/bottle range, price is not indicative of taste. Taste is subjective. A good number of today's wine experts even extend this down to wines sub-$10. This is often because of preferences for blended and young wines, which are way less expensive to produce.

This is...to me...the real problem with this thread. There's a ton of vitriolic bigotry and hostility flowing both ways here for no good reason. The most expensive fly rods to produce today are hand-made bamboo rods made to custom order. And depending on who makes them, they vary widely in price too. Is the $900 one better or worse than the $15,000 one? Depends on who you ask. And THAT is the fact! The rest is BS. Graphite rods are no different.

It is utter nonsense to think that because you spent more money you are going to cast or fish better...period. Poppycock! Rubbish! You might ENJOY it more. But it isn't going to make you better. You also might NOT enjoy it more. You might enjoy a $100 or even $50 rod more. It's entirely up to you. But I seem to remember a certain gentleman from around here we all called Castwell who did demonstrations with a cheap SA fly rod he bought at Wal-mart. And after he "wow'd the crowd" with his skills with this "wunderrod," he would find a kid or woman in the gang and give it to them to keep...and explain it was dirt cheap so it was no big deal. He did this to make the point that the cost of the gear doesn't factor into the performance equation. He said, "Any mainstream fly rod on the market today is perfectly respectable and a competent caster can learn to cast an entire fly line with it." And if JC was anything he was 2 things: an expert fly caster and an expert in the field of commercial/industrial product development. Right?

I take issue...as some of you who have posted here do too...with the way things are being marketed in this industry. And...as an outdoor journalist...I take even greater exception to the lack of integrity I see repeatedly in equipment reviews in the hook and bullet media. I expect exaggeration and omission from the marketing spin doctors of the mfg's and retailers. But those in independent media have a responsibility to the CONSUMERS, not their advertisers! Advertisers are supposed to advertise because the consumers are paying attention. And the consumers are supposedly paying attention because they respect the opinions and rely on the info they get from the media. And the system has become totally corrupted - bought off my the ad $$$. It's disgusting. That is why I do not take paid advertisers directly. I use blind, content generated, pay-per-click advertising that generates revenue from advertisers I never deal with. My content is scanned by search robots and ads are generated based on keywords and phrases from among advertisers who pay the owners of those robots. And I get a cut based on frequency. It allows me to be truly independent. Where I have equipment sponsors and prostaff relationships for the non-writing things I do in hunting and fishing, I clearly and repeatedly disclose this fact to my readers/viewers. And I am careful not to over-sell their products/services. But I believe in them or I wouldn't be associated with them. And they all know that if they have a product I don't like/use, I feel free to say so if asked. And I've done so many times. I recently explained this policy of mine in a meeting of prominent, old guard outdoor writers and they were blown away - very excited and positive about it, but taken by surprise that such a thing could be done in this environment. A few were book-only writers nowadays because they hated the compromise of magazines and TV shows. One was a famous major newspaper columnist, and he was wondering how it could be applied to possibly save a newspaper from itself. I don't think the technology could make the leap. Besides...they're tree-killers. And let me make it clear right here that it is my strong opinion that FAOL has NEVER had a problem in the media ethics department, either! It is one of the few other shining examples of integrity left in this regard.

But I don't understand why we sportsmen and women cannot simply agree to disagree - most especially on matters that have ZERO substance and significance. I do not care one iota if half or more of you go out and buy the entire line of Orvis Hydros fly rods...and Helios fly rods. Knock yourselves out. Have fun! That's what fly fishing is all about. But please don't insult MY intelligence or try to mislead the less educated/experienced fly anglers among us (mostly those considering their FIRST rod purchase) by trying to convince them that they will never be as good of anglers as you are unless they too spend $700 on a fly rod. It's a lie. And I will...in the interest of truth in advertising...be forced to point that out.

I absolutely guarantee you that there are a whole bunch of us around here who can outcast and outfish anyone on this forum who has paid retail for a Helios. And if we're ever in the same place at the same time, I'll be happy to do my part to back that up...again, in the interest of truth in advertising.

And I too carry many Orvis products to the stream with me every time I go.

[D. Micus]

The evolution of a fly fisher:

Beginner:believes he/she will be a better caster if he/she can get rid of his/her $100 fly rod and buy a $700 fly rod.

Intermediate: buys and fishes $700 fly rod

Advanced: goes back to fishing $100 fly rod

(that being said, i own a helios. but it was given to me by outside magazine for calling them out when they had used a pic of a guy throwing a horrendous back cast in one of their articles. It's a great rod, and when i moved from missoula to saudi arabia orvis swapped the 5 wt for a 9 wt at no charge)