Sweet. Right from the time when the letter coded, diameter-based line system was transitioning to the numerical, weight based system. Had forgotten that some (all?) suggested DT6. That, with the L4 would have had me starting with a DT 5. Great reports and pics here.
Not to change that, but an observation, experience based. Right from their time, these were relatively thin-walled blanks in the technology effort to make lighter fiberglass blanks. Much more comprehensive checking would be needed to know for sure. I always thought they were a bit more fragile--a legit design trade-off even if true--than some others of the time in similar configurations. That was strictly anecdotal, seeing them broken here and there.
So I stumbled upon a UL spinning rod of, essentially, the same blank construction. It was a sweet rod, but I had no special affinity for it, and willingly risked it in a little test. I hooked a good schoolie striper in a swift river, and when he went down a chute and around a bridge abutment, I seized the opportunity to test the rod severely by giving him the butt. I thought the 6 lb. test line might break and I'd be out one sinking Rapala, but it didn't go down like that.
Oh well. That rod, like the fly rods shown, was nicely put up with a great set of slip rings. I abused it on purpose. As Roland Martin would say in a blooper episode where he breaks a rod, "Don't do that."
If it had been one of the fly rods shown, I sure wouldn't have, expecting a lot of fun from a neat rod for a long time.
Posted: 26 Mar 2020, 15:06 • 
