Here’s the link:
http://midcurrent.com/gear/retro-rod-review-four-graphite-models-that-changed-the-fly-fishing-world/
Randy
Hype is what it is. Hype. I can tell you as a professional is this business, that Acuvue contacts are all hype and advertising. Hydroclear is pure bull dung.
Thanks for the link. I love my Sage 696 RPL; unfortunately it’s a 2pc so I only use it on local trips - does a great job casting a Teeny T250 for shad. Once we move out west it’ll be back in the truck full-time.
Regards,
Scott
I’ve owned the Sage 590 RPL and replaced it with the GLoomis GLX so I agree with those two choices.
I would add the Fenwick HMG that started the graphite rod revolution. In my view, the difference between the HMG and fiberglass fly rods was huge, greater than the dfference between the rods in the article and the fly rods they competed with. The only rod that came close to as much a perforance leap was the GLX compared to the fly rods of its time.
I still use my GLX for Montana Fishing.
Interesting blurb & thoughts - here are a couple of mine.
While I get where the author is coming from, if it hadn’t been for the RP, there wouldn’t have been a RPL. The IMX is the rod responsible for putting Loomis into more retail racks and if they hadn’t gotten all of those new dealers on board…?. Winnie’s IM6 was and is very nice, but for my money, Loomis’ IM6 was a more practical all around fishing tool.
Best, Dave
I agree that hyperbole is at least as pervasive in fly rod marketing as it is in most other products these days. Even though I was impressed with the rod when I actually got to cast it, the terminology used in the marketing for the new Sage One is so over the top that it’s hard not to laugh out loud when reading it. That being said, I think it’s arguable that there have been rods that “moved the market”, meaning they achieved something new and better than what had been the norm, so much so that other manufacturers sought to do the same from that point forward. Which rods those were can be debated endlessly I’m sure, but I do believe there are some that can claim such impact. I’m no expert by any means, but it seems to me that the GLX series for example drew great attention to and set a new standard for lightness when it came out, prompting others to try to match and promote the same attributes in their subsequent offerings. I’m biased on this one to be sure, but I’ve always thought the Winston BIIX did the same kind of thing. After a lot of years in which the industry was all about faster and faster actions, at the expense of line feel and close-in casting in my observation, that rod was the first one that offered a credibly fast (and oh yeah, ridiculously light) rod that had fantastic line feel and an unprecedented casting range. Every manufacturer sought to follow suit with rods that described that same combination of attributes - whether it was the Sage Z-Axis, Orvis Helios, or even more recent creations like the TFO BVK, the marketing was no longer JUST about “fast”. Interesting concept to be sure and one that could provoke a lot of fun water cooler conversation…
Yeah buddy!
I’ve got a Sage 690-2 RPL that will never leave my rod arsenal. The latest-n-greatest aint 1/2 the rod the RPL is.
Three out of four ain’t bad.
Never owned a Sage but had four of the classic GLX’s. I sold three and kept one only to bust it in the Outer Banks a few years back. I sold the GLX’s to get a few Winston BIIx’s and never looked back. What I still wonder at how long it took manufacturers to catch up the the old GLX’s. Graphite scrim ain’t all that new if you look back at those old GLX’s.
My daughter called dibs on my IM-6 TMF when I kick the bucket and the 6’ 10", 3 weight ‘G’ I have is probably going with me to the great beyond. What a rod… art in workmanship and art in performance.
I will blame Sage’s new Advertising Agency for the hyperbole on “THE ONE” I’m trying to be kind here, since Sage and Far Bank were very long time Sponsors here…
one should have some loyalty after all. But then the same ad agency is the one who dropped FAOL from Sage’s advertising budget. I wonder how much their sales have increased?
I will never get rid of my 490-4 RPL.I also have my first love, a 6wt Fenwick HMG I like very much.
I am now in a relationship with a Payne 100 4wt Cane Rod lovingly built for me by Mike Shay.
I don’t respond much to Hype.
DuFf
Also take note that these are manufacturers with the largest advertising and marketing budgets.
which in turn created more sales and thus allowed them the funds to experiment and come up with new, original design concepts.
No real threat as I don’t own a Sage but with the ladies comment I guess The One won’t be for me.
Interesting, and obvious note to the article was that the rods listed were models that changed the author’s “world”. Each were noteworthy model series rods that were great sellers for the respective manufacturers, but were not necessarily “revolutionary” as noted by previous posters. I have owned a few RPL’s ( a 590-2 and 790-2) and feel that their actions are fantastic for general application; as i feel that they do most things exceptionally well, and were built like tanks. I retain the 790 as my primary Bass rod. I have owned Scott G’s and Winston IM 6’s, and enjoyed fishing them for their trouty attributes. I often regret selling my 804-3 piece Scott G. As to Loomis rods, I have cast a few, and was often amazed at the line speed and distance one could achieve with little effort. Never could see forking out the retail for a Loomis as i could never get over the ugly factor (for me).
Well- if the Sage One is the end-all of fly rods, what will “replace” it? the Version 1.1?
Chuck
Wow - had not even thought of that! Does that mean no other rods will be produced by Sage? Hmmmm…
You know, I have thought that very thing 8). Sage seems like they may have shot themselves in the foot with such a name as “ONE”. I too am wondering what is next…"NEW and IMPROVED ONE" or maybe ONE [b]+
aa[/b]
They could name their next reel the Only so you’d have the One and Only.
Regards,
Scott
One quick question, why was the Orvis Ultrafine, 7’9" 2wt or Superfine 7’6" 1wt not included? It opened the doors to truly light line fly fishing which is potentially a contentious subject, but I feel they should have been included rather than yet another 5wt.
News Flash: Inside source tells me that we’ve got four years till the One’s replaced by number Two…