Ciao all,

I'm an designer of rods, I worked with "Modern Flies" italian rods manufacturer company for which I designed the Maxia serie, now I work with a spanish company "Think Fly world" and with the german company "RST" and from few months I began a new collaboration with my friend Steve Parkes of "AtomSix". I have done this little introduction to say that after 15 years of rods design, I know something of them.


I would want to know what's your ideal rod, for example # 3. I don't want know the brand but the type of rod.


Do you remember the old Sage rpl # 5 ? In Italy, we used it with a line 3, because in that period the rods for line 3 it had a butt very very soft, for example the Sage LL serie. With the soft butt, we adapted our cast at rod but this wasn't the better way.


Today the conception of rods is changed and the measures from 7' to 8' for small stream and stream, are more fast.
If you noticed, today the actions of all rods are similar and today the companies have correlated the curves with the rapidity, and this has been possible also for the use of the modern carbon. Infact, before it was easy to see a good curve but with a bad rapidity and often this it was normal. The soft butt was the first and more important problem of the rods and today, this is the first thought of designer. Before, the butt rods had the accentuated taper, today it is more cylindrical, It is enough to see the old rods and the new rods.


A rod with good butt and a not very good tip, is an acceptable rod, but a rod with not good butt and a good tip, probably is a bad rod.


Fortunately the last generation of the carbon are mixed and so it is possible to have butt more efficient.



I don't want bore you with these tecnical arguments, but I like to know your ideas, what's your ideal rod ? I'm sure we can talk about this argument for a long time.

Thanks


Fly fishing Masters - Italian Fly Fishing School - Fly Fishing Masters

__________________


www.flyfishingmasters.co.uk
www.flyfishingmasters.it
max@massimomagliocco.it

You can have the perfect fly, tied with excellent materials but if you do not present it in the right place and in the best possible way, it serves no purpose! Massimo Magliocco

Max

First of all there is no argument simply individual preference.

I don't know how to say this but I know you want honesty with comments that are helpful to you in your work. We will see if you are really interested in what others think?

The first purpose of a rod for my use is the ability to protect the tippet, the hook and the fish with casting secondary. I can cast with any rod; I can't always fish with all rods and the new fast rods do not fish well! They are designed for casting and not for fishing and sadly people have this thing in their mind about casting and the need for line speed and I do not agree. The best rod designer today in my opinion is Tom Morgan. Tom understands fly fishing not simply casting. Tom was a Montana guide for many years and deeply understands the sport.

Tom Morgan Troutrods - A Modern Fly Rod Legacy

“During this time, another development was taking place. With the new graphite rods, anglers could learn to cast more easily and could cast greater distances with less effort, all of which was a great benefit for those wanting to learn the sport. However, for most rod designers this was a siren song to make stiffer trout rods. American sportsmen shows proliferated along with their accompanying casting ponds. The trout rods that sold the best were those that would cast the farthest. The same thing was happening with most fly shops. The rods were demonstrated on lawns or in parking lots, and the rods that cast farthest won the sales competition. From my earliest days of making graphite rods, I noticed this shift, but I would never succumb to that design philosophy. My designs have always been based on my many years' experience as an angler and not on anything else. First, and foremost, the rods had to be great fishing tools.”


“Great trout rod actions were developed over generations by skillful anglers. Today anglers are fishing the same waters, under similar conditions, as their predecessors did. They still need rods that behave and perform like rods of the past. When choosing a rod don't let manufacturers who are designing rods based on business goals or advertising hype dictate what you use for your trout fishing. Many rod designers don't appreciate our fly rod heritage, and, from my experience, they don't understand what makes a great fly rod. Spend time thinking about your fishing conditions and the distance that you will be fishing. Then select a rod that works easily at that distance, and, has the great fishing attributes needed for hooking and playing fish. One that will help you become a better angler and let you enjoy your sport more completely. Don't settle for less, for somewhere exists a rod that will deliver this exceptional fishing joy, and, with some effort, you will find it.”

Tom Morgan Rodsmiths - Graphite Rods

Max, I don’t mean to offend you but from what you have demonstrated in your videos and our discussions I can not imagine I would ever select a rod you design as your focus is on casting, high line speed, light lines with leader length unnecessary long for the angling condition which forces you to use an uncomfortable fast casting stroke necessary to power the light line.

Perhaps if you focus on tournament rods specifically intended to cast for competition your rods would be the best design in the world but with the philosophy you share here few skilled trout anglers will want them.

Remember the customer is always right even if you disagree with what he likes. My focus is on fishing. Our worlds could not be further apart. Always remember there are more anglers interested in fishing than casting.

If every you wish a rod to be field tested I would gladly do that for you and return the rod undamaged with an honest report.

Tight lines!

Bobby

__________________
"Tight lines from Vermont where the winters are long the fish are wild and the women are good looking."

For many of us in the outlying areas of these islands a lot, if not most, of our casting is off the water: speys, rolls, snaps and pokes are our bread and butter. As such we would have a different view I think and regard the tip action/faster rod a real retrograde step to the extent that we have to rely on older rods. My best rod - 7.5 ft 3/4 weight is now 16 years old.

The tip action/fast recovery rod is quite the opposite of the type of rod I like for small streams. I think that I know the reason for the difference: the streams that you appear to fish are relatively open and allow overhead/side casting or at least an accurate placement of a D loop.

However such a rod is a poor roll and spey caster unless you can place the anchor of the D loop precisely: I know as I have tried some of the casts I use and they simply don't work well with tip action rods. Many of us here fish in rivers where an overhead cast is a rare event. More than that we often have to place the anchor for the spey/ switch a long way from the body. For such casting where the line has to be manipulated in far from perfect casting conditions would say the fast rod is a poor choice. Most small stream fishers that I know of here will say the same: fast rods and overgrown streams are a bad mix.

On the other hand most of the people I know who are fine open water fishers seem to prefer the tip actioned/fast recovery rods. This basic divide is obviously no accident.

I don't really like the term fast action. It implies that the terminal speed of the tip during a cast is much faster. but I don't believe this is so: the terminal tip speed of slow and fast rods is likely to be nearly the same but the slower rod achieves this speed in a longer arc - this is why there is no practical difference in the distance that a slow rod and a fast rod can cast. It is also the reason why the spey/roll casting ability of the slower rod is superior as it is delivering it's maximum power at a time in the cast where a fast recovery rod has spent it's power.

Try this test: using the 7ft 3 weight tip actioned rod, place the anchor of a jump roll/switch cast 8 metres in front of your body then carry out the cast. Most people would have great difficulty even getting the line off the water. I know I do. Now try the same cast with a slow actioned rod of the length and rating. Not only will the line lift but it has enough energy to cast a considerable distance.

However I can see that where highly manipulative casting is not required then the default characteristics of a tip action/fast recovery rod - narrow loops, higher line speed for a given amount of effort - will make it easier for many. It's all a question of what is best for individual circumstance there is no single perfect rod.

Best Regards
Malcolm

Bobby,
I don't want that you to have misunderstood what I wrote


1) I wrote that I'm a designer only for to say that I'm not inexperienced of rods

2) I don't want advertising, I would only know how is in your mind the best rod for small steram

3) If you prefer a slow rod or fast rod.

4) The rods that I designed, was slow and fast. I have wanted only say that in the world of production of the rods there was an evolution.

I would have like developed the ideas about the rods

Nothing else.

Max

__________________


www.flyfishingmasters.co.uk
www.flyfishingmasters.it
max@massimomagliocco.it

You can have the perfect fly, tied with excellent materials but if you do not present it in the right place and in the best possible way, it serves no purpose! Massimo Magliocco

Malcom,

you don't confuse the rapidity with the power of the rod.
Often the rapidity and power don't agree, because is the action that decided if a rod is slow or fast. But the rod can to be slow and power or fast and power.
You told that you prefer a slow rod, but you can to have a rod slow and a line very fast, it depend of the your cast.
Max

__________________


www.flyfishingmasters.co.uk
www.flyfishingmasters.it
max@massimomagliocco.it

You can have the perfect fly, tied with excellent materials but if you do not present it in the right place and in the best possible way, it serves no purpose! Massimo Magliocco

Max

I thought I pointed you towards Tom Morgan design rods as being the best over all designed rods. That is what I like and I felt I made it clear why.
Vision Cult rods are also a design I like and being a European production rod you must be familiar with them. The are of a Med/Fast to slow progressive taper rod also.

I simply can't imagine you designing a rod of this type is all!

Bobby

__________________
"Tight lines from Vermont where the winters are long the fish are wild and the women are good looking."

Ah, Tom Morgan.. For me the best designer ever..

For small waters i like 7 to 8ft medium actioned rods with a fast recovery such as the BIIt's, Cult's and the likes.. Big rivers totally different story..


Jerry

__________________
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.

Hello Max,

first to answer your question : my ideal #3 rod would first and for all be a rod where I can use very fine tippets on. I'm a firm believer in fishing as light as possible (it is technically challenging and it's definitely generating more takes). I always linked line weight/rod action to tippet diameter, so an ideal #3 rod must allow me to fish tippets of .10, .08 and even .06,5 mm.

Now for your second quote and my personal concern : I think you design rods that suit the Italian casting style and that means putting lighter lines on rods built for heavier weights. This gives you the line speed needed for the casts, but implies the need for thicker tippets. A .06,5 tippet will not withstand the hooking power of a #5 rod IMO. This is (to me) confusing because I think your rods will be made for heavier lines (#5)than you will advise on them (#3). This will be confusing to many people and definitely to beginners. Or am I wrong?

Best regards,
Johan

__________________
Johan Janssens

"Power", what a can of worms that is! I think of power as relating to the true line weight of a rod. So while a true 3 weight will have different action and recovery speed the power should be the same? Or am I being too simplistic.

So when advertising blurb says "a powerful 4 weight" my immediate reaction is - "it's a 5 or 6 weight". For example I have a TCR 5 competition casting rod at the moment. It is a powerful 5 weight - because it is a 7/8 weight which someone has declared as a #5 to comply with tournament casting rules!

I've not tried Tom Morgan's own rods - they are hugely expensive - but I have tried the B11t which is fine but still biased too far towards the tip and too fast in recovery for my liking. Just my opinion of course!

Now this all makes sense to me, except the obvious wrong bit at the bottom about the IIt that is Other then that very well said Endrick

__________________
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.