High End Rods

That's a bargain for a medium action rod. Bet there's nothing similar for $300 🤣. It is supposed to have a very light swing weight though. Guess who's looking for a x 6wt on clearance 😁
 
Sage can release the rpl, call it an rpl r8, put a different grip and guides on it, sell it for 1000 bucks and there will be people saying it's the best rod ever.
 
Agree. Rerelease z-axis, call it axis-z with 9th gen graphite technology. $800 and they'd fly off the shelves like they were free. The did xp release through Cabela's a few years ago and they kinda flopped. I think you could have picked one up in The bargain cave for under 400 bucks at that time.
 
The X is a nice rod. It was a little slower than I was expecting.

I'll cast the R8 if given the chance.
 
I tried the X in 9' 5 WT for a day floating the West Branch of the Delaware last Summer. I really liked it. It was intuitively accurate for me. I loved the grip. I found it a little on the heavy side, but that's not a deal killer for me. However, given that rods like the Sky G and NRX+ are in the same price range...

I ended up buying the Sky G 5 WT.

Caveat: I haven't tried a new rod for decades so the upgrade in pretty much everything is significant for me.
 
So many rods feel the same because rod companies mostly make very stiff rods and spend a lot of money in advertising to tell us a bunch of crap designed to convince you you need to spend more and buy the newest, fastest, blah, blah, blah. Cast some that actually bend, the way fly rods are supposed to bend, and you may find a rod you really like for not too much money.
 
Classicriver said:
So many rods feel the same because rod companies mostly make very stiff rods and spend a lot of money in advertising to tell us a bunch of crap designed to convince you you need to spend more and buy the newest, fastest, blah, blah, blah. Cast some that actually bend, the way fly rods are supposed to bend, and you may find a rod you really like for not too much money.
Click to expand...
Here's an 'uber' fast sage method being cast. How much more should it bend, into the reel seat? 😂. The caster needs to use the correct gear for what they are doing and make the rod work like it should.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220406-104047~2.png
    Screenshot_20220406-104047~2.png
    698.2 KB · Views: 66
For a 9' 6wt (what I use most often), as far as Sage, I'd take an XP over anything. I haven't cast an R8 core yet though.

I think I own a 690 rpl, sp, and tcr. They are all good.

To me for a 6 weight the best rods i own are:

Medium action - original Scott g 2 piece
Fast action - original loomis glx
Super fast - sage tcr

And honestly I'd take those rods over anything else, i think the xp is about equal to the glx, but i dont own one. After the z axis, i thought that series of sage rods got worse. And I think the tcr is just different than the tcx, method, igniter, etc. And i like it a little better.

My two cents
 
Last edited:
I was able to cast a few R8's today. Overall I like the rod. The rod taper in general seems to flex immediately to the 3/4 to 2/3 mark of the rod (from the grip) then get into the power. It put me in mind of a Scott Sector (which is a rod I like), or an overlined Igniter. The R8 tracks true and was extremely accurate laying line on both the forward and back cast.
I cast the 590, 790 and 890. The 590 felt like a slightly faster version of my 590 Trout LL.
I'd put an asterisk on the 890 R8 because the line appeared to be a bonefish quickshooter, or some short heavy head line, that I don't think the rod liked. I wouldn't replace my 890 Igniter with the R8 based on first impression.
The 790 R8 was a winner. It was fun to cast. It was accurate in close, accurate at distance both front and back, had light swing weight, responded well to hauling and had good loop control. I just liked it.

One thing that was out of the ordinary to me on the R8 was the reel lock under the cork. Due to the swept back design it left little clearance for the reel foot while changing reels.
 
Hi NRD, sorry to revive an older thread but did you end up liking Recon?
 
In general, I think the Recon was a good choice, but not necessarily the size. I liked the Recon so much I did most of my trout fishing with it last year. Have to admit, I'm loosing my taste for 10' rods.

I fished a lot this winter, and ended up deciding that Euro-Nymphing is the least fun way to not catch fish. I'll give it another try next winter, with the Recon.

Earlier this spring, I snagged a 9' 4 wt Helios 2 Mid Flex for $400. Paired with Rio Gold line, this has become my overall favorite rod.
 
Thank you and good to know. I’m about a year into fly fishing and have been on a journey with rods similar to your first post - but only have 2 at the moment. An orvis clearwater 9’ 5 wt and ll bean fiberglass pocketwater 7.5’ 4 wt.

Itching for a new rod already and was planning on a 10’ 4” for primarily nymphs and wets in western PA. Not worried about price. Recon was top of my list over Helios 3 at the moment but still deciding.
 
I don't think I can learn enough about a rod by casting in the yard.
That said, in my yard, my 10' 4 wt Recon performs very similar to my 9' 5wt Clearwater as to casting distance. What does that mean? I don't know yet.
I sometimes take two rods or two lines to the creek to compare performance. The above comparison is on my to do list, but not really a top priority yet.
Really, how far out do you want to hook a trout? Today, I was casting to rising fish at 50-60 ft, and thinking I didn't need any more distance.
 
I completely agree about yard casting - it’s done nothing to help my stream casting and beyond practicing the basic motion at the very beginning, I personally find yard casting to be a waste of time. I need to get better with estimating distance on water, but I think most if my hook ups have been within 30 feet.

It’s hard because without fishing a rod for a few days on the water, I don’t know how anyone can judge one. I guess that’s how you accumulate lots of rods.

I heard the extra foot of rod can help with line control on the water. Which I do think would be beneficial. So not trying to cast further, but curious if I’ll appreciate the extra length (or not like it at all). I also want to be realistic and not get a rod designed for dry flies, when I know I‘ll rarely fish them.

When I saw this thread, I was very interested to hear how you were finding the 10’ 4”!
 
I was looking for the best compromise for both nymphing and dry fly fishing, and I was very satisfied with the Recon. As my preference for dries has gotten stronger, the Recon gets used a lot less this spring.
 
Oh a longer rod definitely helps with line control. It's just unwieldy to cast around brush or carry. If you are going to fish truly large water, stand in the middle, and not move a lot its definitely helpful. But navigating shoreline rhodo, casting from under trees, etc and shorter helps.
 
Yes, I can imagine the 10 footer can have its issues in those situations. I’m thinking an 8.5’ 4” and a 10’ 4“ might be a good combination to add.

I thought I would like the fiberglass, but haven’t - I do think I may like it more down the road. Or for very small streams which I haven’t fished much.
 
Ive had my H3F for 3 years and since then, man, let me tell you all the ways it has changed my life!

My credit score increases 100 points, Ive lost 35 lbs, grew 3 inches, doubled my salary at work, and increased my libido 3 fold! Even my car is getting better mileage

People say to me what's different about you, why are you so confident, why are you so handsome! Well, when you're holding $1400 worth of high quality, space age technologies in your hands, you would be too!

It also does a pretty good job catching trout, if you're interested in that sort of thing...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top