It is currently 28 Mar 2024, 08:11


1, 2  Next New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
Post 31 Oct 2019, 06:19 • #1 
Sport
Joined: 01/30/19
Posts: 34
Location: US-FL
What makes the latest glass rods (e.g. Echo Bad Ass Glass, Scott G4, or any other mfg) better than the oldies. Specifically, what changes in glass fibers, resins, tapers or construction methods make them better?

Very old glass rods had a wide weave fabric, then came e-glass, then s-glass. How about changes in resins?

Thanks for any info, opinions.


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 07:03 • #2 
Piscator
Joined: 08/10/05
Posts: 19077
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
linear glass was the big change in old glass rods,- it arrived in 1962, and everybody was using it by 1970.
I'd say better is subjective - light-line is a relatively new trend and as a rule, newer tapers are faster to get the attention of graphite buyers.
I honestly don't think you can find a Better rod than a Fisher-made SA System, and nobody is making a good 605 or even 705.


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 09:42 • #3 
Master Guide
Joined: 09/28/13
Posts: 467
Location: Boston MA
I agree that “better” is subjective and for an “apples to apples” type of comparison, one would need to focus on the 6-7wt rods.
One major difference is the variety of options now available in modern glass in length, line weight, number of sections, taper, color, type of glass...
As far as there being no modern glass 705s, Fred Paddock’s 705 from his Signature series of rods is spectacular (although no longer in production.) Mike McFarland could make a 7ft 5wt tailored to your taste as well.


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 11:36 • #4 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 03/16/08
Posts: 3540
Location: Upstate-NY
VT Diamondback Diamondglass was offered in a 605.
and didn't Mark Steffen offer a 705 at some point in time?


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 13:33 • #5 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 04/06/15
Posts: 1249
Location: Central Oregon
I see three main differences:

1) They can be found cheaper. If you figure the price in today's dollars, a basic Fenwick was $250-300. The modern Fenglass can be found under $200, and there are some nice rods for under $100.

2) They can be lighter. The 8'6"-9' classic rods can be a bit of a club, and the modern ones can be found with noticeably lower swing weight.

3) They can be found in lower line weights. Not many 2,3, 4wt classic rods out there. but there are all sorts of fun, light modern rods.

That said, if you want a medium length, medium weight rod, you can find something like a Fenwick FF75 at a great price and make a good case that nothing modern in the price range matches it.


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 19:43 • #6 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 09/18/09
Posts: 5561
Location: Relocated to the Drought Stricken West.
bulldog1935 wrote:
and nobody is making a good 605 or even 705.

I've found that a lot of the inexpensive 7' Asian 3wt blanks are good 5wts. The Proof blank I built out does well in this range. And I agree that there are some "Boutique" rods that fall in the category.

I haven't cast the Fisher glass 705, but the SA System5 was too stiff for me.


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 21:23 • #7 
Sport
Joined: 01/30/19
Posts: 34
Location: US-FL
Yes, linear construction is a significant change. Thanks for reminding me of that. How about resins? Wasn't there a change from polyester resins to something else; or maybe I have that backwards. Why di mfgs change resins? Are there newer resins in use? Are any fiberglass rods using nano technology?

Many of you folks are sweetwater trout fly fishers and as a saltwater guy I learn from your comments becvause I do not have that perspective.

Not to be nit pikin but I was hoping to hear more about specific technical changes, not so much about specific mfg models.. Perhaps something from salt-crusted guys too.

Anyhow - thanks everyone. Much appreciated.
,


Top
  
Quote
Post 31 Oct 2019, 21:49 • #8 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 04/06/15
Posts: 1249
Location: Central Oregon
From the Steffen website:

In 1993 Mark began experimenting with some of the available fiberglass on the market. Mark worked with woven and unidirectional E-glass and S-glass. The glass we currently use and believe is the best for the blanks we make is a modern version of S-Glass. These rods are light weight, unidirectional, 12 million modulus, with just enough epoxy resin to make the blanks both light and durable. The Fiberglass we have been using since 2003 is made for us to our specifications.

https://steffenbrothersflyrods.com


Top
  
Quote
Post 01 Nov 2019, 08:11 • #9 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 04/20/07
Posts: 8920
Location: US-ME
S-glass and unidirectional 'glass have been around for a long time. Their use/development in fly rod configurations was limited as development effort and market interest went to graphite in the late 1970s. Phenolic, epoxy, and polyester resins were all in use. Phenolic was discontinued because of environmental and workplace safety concerns, not technical deficiencies. Changes in resin/ prepreg forms since have been driven by the same concerns, performance characteristics having been secondary and not significantly changed. Processes that minimize excess resin in the blank were also well developed years ago. The height of 'glass development in terms of material was in the heyday. Refinements--and new models driven by new fisheries, techniques, and graphite induced preferences--are what the market offers today. Good stuff.


Top
  
Quote
Post 02 Nov 2019, 06:40 • #10 
Sport
Joined: 01/30/19
Posts: 34
Location: US-FL
Thanks whirlpool - much appreciated.


Top
  
Quote
Post 04 Nov 2019, 10:54 • #11 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/23/05
Posts: 4966
Location: US-MT
Carlz,
The Sci Anglers rods were faster than the Fishers I have cast.

Better?? I am not the one to say, I have cast few modern rods. The ones I have cast have lacked something, seemed too full-flexing, soft, and I generally like slow rods.


Top
  
Quote
Post 04 Nov 2019, 21:07 • #12 
Guide
Joined: 04/03/19
Posts: 221
Location: CO
The technical differences are hard to compare. My Phillipson is 50+ years old and still fishes like new. My Orvis Superfine is only 3 years old by comparison; not nearly enough time to test out its durability. Both fish great, but with significant differences in action...which is really more of a preference despite the industry’s insurance that fast action rockets are better. I remain convinced that any fly rod produced after the dawn of graphite really only incorporates minimal refinements in technology but massive updates for style.


Top
  
Quote
Post 04 Nov 2019, 22:46 • #13 
Master Guide
Joined: 01/21/12
Posts: 462
Location: US-NY
I'll compare a brown Scott 5 wt to a kenney 5 wt. The kenney has much less tip bounce. Both are good rods but I think the kenney is better.

With that said, I prefer the scott to most lower price modern glass rods I've cast, i.e. butter stick, blue halo, superfine, prime, cgr.

I had a steffen 5 weight, I liked it better than the scott but not as much as the kenney. Same with a paddock 5 weight that I think was rolled by mcfarland.


Top
  
Quote
Post 05 Nov 2019, 11:44 • #14 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/25/09
Posts: 2319
As rod actions are largely subjective this is what I have also experienced with vintage vs modern glass. Less tip bounce and quicker recovery.


Top
  
Quote
Post 05 Nov 2019, 13:44 • #15 
Master Guide
Joined: 12/31/13
Posts: 519
Location: US-Mount Pleasant, SC
While the fiber orientation and structure is obviously important, don't underestimate the power of resin to affect the material.

Dusty, we're all counting on you to Make Phenolic Resin Great Again.


Top
  
Quote
Post 05 Nov 2019, 13:57 • #16 
Guide
Joined: 03/05/14
Posts: 187
Location: US-MS
Jeez, I don't know, but the other day I got out my 1975 Sceptre 7'6" 5-wt, and I can't think of a rod I like better in that line range. That's a sweet rod for something 45 years old. So, as everyone said, it's subjective.


Top
  
Quote
Post 06 Nov 2019, 00:35 • #17 
Sport
Joined: 07/09/18
Posts: 46
Location: US-TX
Since acquiring my SFG 764 last month (which I’ve really enjoyed casting) I grabbed my FF-75 (marked5/6) and did some lawn casting. With a 4wt DT line, the SFG is a medium fast modern taper. But with a WF5F on both the FF75 and the SFG, the two rods are remarkably similar, and a real joy to cast.


Top
  
Quote
Post 06 Nov 2019, 17:28 • #18 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 12/27/14
Posts: 1501
Location: ON, Canada
Marty Romeo wrote:
Dusty, we're all counting on you to Make Phenolic Resin Great Again.


Ha!


Top
  
Quote
Post 16 Sep 2020, 22:45 • #19 
Sport
Joined: 06/11/14
Posts: 40
Location: US-NC
I don’t think new glass is better, it’s just a continuation. Probably the only real difference-one to the other, is that there are way more light line options than there were back then. Though I will say that an old school 7’ 5w fishes small streams for small stream fish, mighty well.


Top
  
Quote
Post 20 Sep 2020, 07:40 • #20 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 07/22/11
Posts: 1720
Location: US-TX
Phenolic resin great again? Ha is right!
Whirl was right about environment change.

Meanwhile, I will be biding my time with my Andy built Fisher.


Top
  
Quote
Post 20 Sep 2020, 09:27 • #21 
Piscator
Joined: 08/10/05
Posts: 19077
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
impossible to say any rod is better than a Fisher, but new glass rods tend to be lighter-line, and that makes them lighter in hand.
I personally will compare all to post-'62 Phillipson Scotchply (anisotripic reinforcing and perfect progressive tapers), and Harnell for older (resin and para tapers).


Top
  
Quote
Post 20 Sep 2020, 13:33 • #22 
Master Guide
Joined: 04/02/14
Posts: 537
Location: US- Northern CO
I have rods from Steffen i would never part with but i have sold a few of his off. i have a James Green i would never part with but i have sold a few of his too. I think i would keep the FF806 over some of the other Fenwicks including one very sweet looking rod built on the same blank. Also sold a few lami rods but one particular 4wt is mine for ever. kind of hard to say fast vs slow or New vs old. not all blanks are equal even if they have the same stamp on them. just IMHO


Top
  
Quote
Post 20 Sep 2020, 14:04 • #23 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/06/17
Posts: 2498
Location: South of Joplin
Any rod is better than a rod you don't have and have never seen so even a limp CGR is the best fiberglass that some guys have ever used.
I would guess though, that around 1970-75 that the fiberglass fly rod was at it's zenith, with 30 years of experiments and learning going into most designs at that time, and all that (or most) knowledge lost since then as the old guys passed on and the tooling discarded in favor of the multi section carbon sticks. The new generation of 'glass builders must have had to reinvent a lot of the tools and technology?


Top
  
Quote
Post 03 Oct 2020, 08:13 • #24 
Guide
Joined: 12/20/18
Posts: 204
Location: Yorkshire
I bought this Lamiglas honey from a forum member a few months ago and think it's as nice as any of my newer rods, and has intrigued me about other 'older' glass rods.


Top
  
Quote
Post 03 Oct 2020, 09:27 • #25 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 10/09/09
Posts: 2796
Location: US-NM
I really don’t know if the new is much better but some newer rod builders have designed some great rods and I appreciate all of the short 3wts that are around today that we’re not there in the 70’s.........Aurelio


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

1, 2  Next New Topic Add Reply



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group