Fox vs. Wychwood

[ken more]

S-Kippy, maybe any rod would feel lifeless without a fish attached to it
Joking aside, perhaps were all just highlighting other considerations before buying a new rod, as you say pro's and con's in all. Hope everyone enjoys the fishing

 

[nicepix]

I do wonder about people who don't seem to understand that you can enjoy your fishing without owning the most expensive tackle on the market. The guy will be perfectly happy with a £60 rod.

Rockie; the Fox Royale is a new model. There won't be many people who have used one and even less who are able to do the comparison you are asking for. Sometimes you just have to go on instinct.

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Merit in both points of view IMO. I dont think you necessarily do get twice the rod if you pay twice the price...but you can get a significantly better rod for a bit more money. I've owned both Fox & Wychwood barbel rods in the past and didn't like either enough to keep them. The Fox was OK but the Wychwood [Rogue} just felt lifeless to me.

That said,they may well have come on a bit since as the Free Spirits have. When the FS first hit the market I was heavily into my barbel fishing but I thought they were ordinary. The latest FS rods though are very,very nice. Sadly...I rarely barbel fish now but if I did I'd certainly be looking at one of these not least because I know a bloke who could get me one a bit cheaper

Free Spirits are a bit pricey but they are very nice rods. The only FS rod I've got is a Hi-S Power Float and it really is a bit special.

Just a thought...what about the Daiwa Barbel rods ?

13 or 15 foot power float Skippy ??

---------- Post added at 22:39 ---------- Previous post was at 22:30 ----------

I do wonder about people who don't seem to understand that you can enjoy your fishing without owning the most expensive tackle on the market. The guy will be perfectly happy with a £60 rod.

Rockie; the Fox Royale is a new model. There won't be many people who have used one and even less who are able to do the comparison you are asking for. Sometimes you just have to go on instinct.

Your right, you don't need the most expensive rod to enjoy your fishing, what you need is balanced tackle.

But if you have a top range rod and its balanced with the right reel, etc, then you will notice the difference.

I have caught fish with a tree branch and line before, just to show some one who at the time, had a pole worth silly money. Now clearly he could fish further out, but he only caught skimmer bream as i did.

I would have been in trouble had i hooked a Carp

 

[S-Kippy]

Its actually a 12 footer Ray....bought for heavy float work but proving extremely versatile. I don't like long rods as you know....girlie wrists.

Was that tree branch a Wychwood ? That's exactly what my Rogue felt like.

 

[nicepix]

Your right, you don't need the most expensive rod to enjoy your fishing, what you need is balanced tackle.

But if you have a top range rod and its balanced with the right reel, etc, then you will notice the difference.

I have caught fish with a tree branch and line before, just to show some one who at the time, had a pole worth silly money. Now clearly he could fish further out, but he only caught skimmer bream as i did.

I would have been in trouble had i hooked a Carp

You see. You are off again. If you had a top of the range rod........

If you followed your logic nobody would be happy until they had bought the most expensive tackle. It's bollcox! You can enjoy your fishing just as much with mid-range or even cheap end tackle.

 

[Paul Boote]

Now, I have some very nice kit, not all of it must-have up-to-the-minute Big Brand, and some of it, well, pretty grotty, totally Non-Scene stuff.

When I was fishing pretty well every day for two to four hours for barbel and river carp in the 2000s, rather too successfully for some barbel fishers on some sites it turned out, I found that when fishing club water that was starting to be hit on heavily by newly arrived, Where's the Barbs?, Camo Clones, unidentifiable non-brand carbon rods that might have been, say, a tad too thick in the butt for New Fashion Victim Taste or be carrying Fujis or generic Far East oxide single-leg guides of a type no longer seen on modern fishing rods were a boon.

"With that gear and in those clothes and lacking an adjustable throne, 'e must be a noddy. Walk on by, 'e can't tell me anything...."

Not the carriage, but the driver.

 

[S-Kippy]

You see. You are off again. If you had a top of the range rod........

If you followed your logic nobody would be happy until they had bought the most expensive tackle. It's bollcox! You can enjoy your fishing just as much with mid-range or even cheap end tackle.

Nothing wrong with [some] budget end gear...I have plenty myself but the difference in feel/performance is noticeable if you move up. That's my experience anyway and that's all Ray is saying....that you will [probably] enjoy your fishing even more with a better stamp of tackle.

I simply dont accept that budget end gear is as good....good enough maybe but as good...never. It depends on whether you personally think the price differential is worth it,assuming your budget allows. Some do...some dont.

I believe Ray still uses a Mitchell 300 on occasion so he is slightly misguided but on this one I think he's right.

 

[nicepix]

Good enough is good enough for me.

My gripe is that whenever somebody asks for advice about say a £60 rod the thread invariably ends up with someone making out that the route to eternal happiness is something costing three times as much. Some people can't afford to pay £200 for a rod. Others, myself included, are quite happy with what more modest tackle we've got. I don't stare at my Shimano tip thinking that I would enjoy my fishing more if it was a Harrison tip in my sight.

The guy is wanting to advice to choose between two new rods costing sixty quid. He doesn't want his potential pride and joy undermining before he's even bought it.

 

[rockie99]

I appreciate the comments made on this thread, along with the guidance provided.

Now, I'm not a beginner, and I too have had most of the high end rods mentioned. I'm not restricted on price.........BUT...........

I fully agree that you can tell the difference between let's say a Harrison blank, and a 'cheapy' blank, but being far from an expert fisherman, I've come to the reckoning that something cheaper is good enough, especially if I trash it by accident by bashing it through the brambles or bushes so to speak.

Both rods I cite look similar to me, I was interested if anyone had personal experience of either, having owned predecessors of the rods in question myself.

It looks like a toss up between the two as both have their relative merits, and each brand has its followers.

Hmmmmm what to do........

Thanks for the advice all.

Cheers

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Good enough is good enough for me.

My gripe is that whenever somebody asks for advice about say a £60 rod the thread invariably ends up with someone making out that the route to eternal happiness is something costing three times as much. Some people can't afford to pay £200 for a rod. Others, myself included, are quite happy with what more modest tackle we've got. I don't stare at my Shimano tip thinking that I would enjoy my fishing more if it was a Harrison tip in my sight.

The guy is wanting to advice to choose between two new rods costing sixty quid. He doesn't want his potential pride and joy undermining before he's even bought it.

As i said before, ( but clearly some one didn't read it correctly ), you don't have to have the most expensive tackle to enjoy fishing.

I do use a Mitchell 300 and a Mitchell Match at times, I also use an ABU Mk V1 rod at times, all 40 years old or more.

I also said not everyone can afford the top end tackle, ( again some one hasn't read the post correctly), but ha ho.

The post asked for advice on Fox vs wychwood, my advice is, ( now please read carefully), If you can afford it go up to the middle range of Free Spirit, i wouldn't buy either of these rods. I have had Fox and Wychwood rod, and i don't rate them, but thats just me. If i want a top bit of kit, i work hard and save hard to get it, like yourself nicepix, i don't have money growing on trees.

rookie 99, i have had a look at these rods, If i had to, i would get the Fox out the two. But i know what i would do.

---------- Post added at 18:39 ---------- Previous post was at 18:32 ----------

Its actually a 12 footer Ray....bought for heavy float work but proving extremely versatile. I don't like long rods as you know....girlie wrists.

Was that tree branch a Wychwood ? That's exactly what my Rogue felt like.

Yep, had as much wobble as a fox

---------- Post added at 18:49 ---------- Previous post was at 18:39 ----------

You see. You are off again. If you had a top of the range rod........

If you followed your logic nobody would be happy until they had bought the most expensive tackle. It's bollcox! You can enjoy your fishing just as much with mid-range or even cheap end tackle.

Try reading the post correctly, It's right, and my advice ( again if you read the post correctly) was to go for the middle range Free Spirit. Your logic isn't logic,

Your Quote,

If you followed your logic nobody would be happy until they had bought the most expensive tackle ?????????????

Do you mean, If we followed your logic ????

Shimano tip vs Harrison tip, I know what i would rather save and buy. But theres nothing wrong with Shimano

 

[Phil Adams]

Just to let the OP know, I stuck a Shimmy 6010 baitrunner on the 1.75lb Royale and it feels pretty good. Although the reel is large it would work quite nicely for bags and feeders.

My 4000 Exage and Stradics felt slightly too light for me.

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Just to let the OP know, I stuck a Shimmy 6010 baitrunner on the 1.75lb Royale and it feels pretty good. Although the reel is large it would work quite nicely for bags and feeders.

My 4000 Exage and Stradics felt slightly too light for me.

Thats why I said about having balanced tackle.

 

[Phil Adams]

Thats why I said about having balanced tackle.

Absolutely. I've a Nash Elite 1.5lbtc, which suits the 4000 sized reels (and smaller) much better due to its very slim blank. The Fox is not quite as slim, and is no doubt built with suitably thick walled carbon to take some stick when casting heavy feeders and leads.

The 6000 is possibly slightly overkill but would be good for winching in such leads. A 5000 may balance better still, but I have none to try.

 

[ken more]

Thats why I said about having balanced tackle.

Would it be impossible to have balanced tackle with the originals posters query?

 

[nicepix]

Would it be impossible to have balanced tackle with the originals posters query?

I think that is a good point. As well as noting that 'balance' is affected by personal preferences and the combination of individual rod and reel types.

 

[russell_bush]

Belsh, a bit random, but did you used to drink in The Express 10 or 15 years ago ? (You may still, I don't know.)

 

[belsh]

Yes I did. Still do sometimes. How do you know that? I don't owe you money do I?

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Would it be impossible to have balanced tackle with the originals posters query?

I don't see why not, but it would depend on what reels he has to go with the rod of his choice.

Nothing worse than having a reel that is to light, or to heavy, the rod just wont feel right, and this can cause problems with casting etc.