Best rod for trotting?

[tigger]

I managed to get hold of a Normark Titan 2000 13' the other day and OMG, it was so heavy and imbalanced and also 12' 9" !!!! Must be a metric thing (3.9m as opposed to 13' which is 3.66m).

It was nothing like I had been lead to believe. Soft tip, very stiff middle & butt and the tip did NOT blend & work with the other sections at all.

I was VERY disappointed.

Some one's sold you a broken rod. They where 12ft, 13ft, 14ft and 13 to 15ft.....never a 12ft 9in.

 

[barbelboi]

Trotting rods. Hmm. Nobody has yet mentioned the Harrison 15ft. Which is a rod that copes perfectly with double figure kennet barbel and Itchen grayling equally, and handles well with a pin. I have too many rods as it is, otherwise I'd be ebay shopping for one - but if anyone has one and they want to swap for something else which I may have, please let me know.

The GTI 15' is a good rod, I still like using my late 90's model, only down side it's a tad heavy to use where a 12' Titan will cope.
Jerry
PS You beat me to it tigger - there's unfortunately a few that will sell dodgy rods with broken tips - always best to do your homework before buying second hand.

 

[flightliner]

Quote:
Originally Posted by flightliner
Purely subjective this but the one thing that lets it down for me is the cork butt. Its got flat spots worked onto it and it "flares" out towards its back end---total nonsense in my eyes and at the first chance I get its off to Sheffield rod builder Terry Smith to work out the nonesense of it and give it a traditional look.

If you haven't already, at least give it a try before you get it done. The "armlock" handle is a feature that I'd happily have on every cork handled rod I own. Looks strange but is good in use.

As its primarily a stic rod I,ii give it one and one only try as years ago I bought a matching pair of daiwa pms112s 1-25 avons that had the same handle design that were (for me at least) 'orrible! so I had them "spun out" and from then on I started to enjoy them for what I had intending them for.
I know the guy who gave the design to Daiwa and not knocking him personally it was one that suited him but not me, I've seen how he holds his rods so I fully understand why he came up with what he did,I myself on the other hand hold my rod in a very differant manner and the trad' way is what suits me best.
Another thing that is not suited to me is the thickness of the butt-- that too will diminish after (possible?) treatment along with the very wierd reel seating.
The blank is what I wanted-- its superb for my purpose and its absolutely mint and it was at a never to be repeated price.

 

[Richox12]

'Some one's sold you a broken rod. They where 12ft, 13ft, 14ft and 13 to 15ft.....never a 12ft 9in.'

No, it's not that. It was labelled as 13' but when you actually measured it assembled it was 12' 9" and nothing was broken (tip was longest section anyway). That's why I think it's a metric v imperial thing and 3.9m not 3.96m. Joints were not worn either so not overly long.

 

[barbelboi]

'Some one's sold you a broken rod. They where 12ft, 13ft, 14ft and 13 to 15ft.....never a 12ft 9in.'

No, it's not that. It was labelled as 13' but when you actually measured it assembled it was 12' 9" and nothing was broken (tip was longest section anyway). That's why I think it's a metric v imperial thing and 3.9m not 3.96m. Joints were not worn either so not overly long.

Are you sure you haven't bought a mongrel - i.e. the tip section is from another rod. I don't have a 13' Titan2000 to compare but my 12'er is three equal lengths of 4' 1 & 1/2" and assembled is 11'11". It certainly couldn't be called heavy or unbalanced - the blanks are very slim even by today's benchmarks and the action is nothing short of brilliant.
Jerry

 

[Richox12]

Are you sure you haven't bought a mongrel - i.e. the tip section is from another rod. I don't have a 13' Titan2000 to compare but my 12'er is three equal lengths of 4' 1 & 1/2" and assembled is 11'11". It certainly couldn't be called heavy or unbalanced - the blanks are very slim even by today's benchmarks and the action is nothing short of brilliant.
Jerry

No. It's not mine but a friends. He has had it since new. Nothing broken. Tip longer than middle and middle longer than butt. No wear to joints (to speak of) and 12' 9" when fully assembled.

Honestly I am amazed at how 'poor' it is. I had expected a real 'wow' factor. But, no, it's top heavy and imbalanced. Inferior (weight, balance and, IMO, action) to modern rods. I don't think it's stood the test of time that well.

I am thinking that all those who post such rave comments have either simply never seen better alternatives (fair enough) or have the rose tinted specs on.

 

[barbelboi]

No. It's not mine but a friends. He has had it since new. Nothing broken. Tip longer than middle and middle longer than butt. No wear to joints (to speak of) and 12' 9" when fully assembled.

Honestly I am amazed at how 'poor' it is. I had expected a real 'wow' factor. But, no, it's top heavy and imbalanced. Inferior (weight, balance and, IMO, action) to modern rods. I don't think it's stood the test of time that well.

I am thinking that all those who post such rave comments have either simply never seen better alternatives (fair enough) or have the rose tinted specs on.

Everyone to their own but you're the first negative poster of the rod in question that I can remember - re: your last paragraph, for similar use, I have two of the Preston Carbonactive series and although I consider them exceptionally good rods the T2000 is the one I prefer to use.
Jerry

 

[tigger]

No. It's not mine but a friends. He has had it since new. Nothing broken. Tip longer than middle and middle longer than butt. No wear to joints (to speak of) and 12' 9" when fully assembled.

Honestly I am amazed at how 'poor' it is. I had expected a real 'wow' factor. But, no, it's top heavy and imbalanced. Inferior (weight, balance and, IMO, action) to modern rods. I don't think it's stood the test of time that well.

I am thinking that all those who post such rave comments have either simply never seen better alternatives (fair enough) or have the rose tinted specs on.

As I said earlier normark didn't make a 12ft 9inch titan so the rod your speaking of is either damaged or simply isn't a genuine normark titan.

By the way, I post rave comments about normark match rods and have never seen any better alternatives (tried loads of top end rods)...co's there ain't none...simples.

 

[nhs service]

I suppose it is a personal thing, if it doesnt feel 'right' then you are not going to have much confidence fishing with it.
The ultimate test is on the bank though, I had a Titan 2000 13' and there is no doubt it definitely hung on to fish a lot better than any other rod I had used, where before there were pull outs and break offs now there were fish in the net.
All the best.

 

[sam vimes]

There's no doubt in my mind that the Normarks are good rods. However, I'm less than convinced that they are worth the kind of money that they sell for second hand. Strikes me that there's a good dollop of cult about them, where the price exceeds their real worth by a fair margin.

 

[guest61]

There's no doubt in my mind that the Normarks are good rods. However, I'm less than convinced that they are worth the kind of money that they sell for second hand. Strikes me that there's a good dollop of cult about them, where the price exceeds their real worth by a fair margin.

Good point, which also provokes the question, if they were so good why were they discontinued?

 

[sam vimes]

Good point, which also provokes the question, if they were so good why were they discontinued?

The usual reasons are that manufacturing costs increased to a level where they'd have had to increase the price to one they deemed the market couldn't stand (no one likes a price hike on an existing product), or profit margin would have to be reduced. Lack of sales or simply a policy of product rotation. All of the above can apply to the best product in the world.
Discontinuation rarely has anything to do with how good, or bad, a product is, unless it really is appalling.

 

[guest61]

The usual reasons are that manufacturing costs increased to a level where they'd have had to increase the price to one they deemed the market couldn't stand (no one likes a price hike on an existing product), or profit margin would have to be reduced. Lack of sales or simply a policy of product rotation. All of the above can apply to the best product in the world.
Discontinuation rarely has anything to do with how good, or bad, a product is, unless it really is appalling.

Normark are a blind spot for me, their 'high water mark' being when I wasn't angling. There is a thought that Rive are now using the same blanks -

Welcome to Benwick Sports Angling Centre

If the link doesn't work navigate to on the LH menu to Rive.

Does anyone have experience of Carbotec trotting rods?

 

[porto]

What do you think about Drennan Ultralight 14 ft match rod?

 

[tigger]

What do you think about Drennan Ultralight 14 ft match rod?

Not a patch on their older match rods. The older im9's where in a different league to the one they presently produce.

 

[trotter2]

What do you think about Drennan Ultralight 14 ft match rod?

They are good but lets get this sorted once and for all they are a light rod for stick float and light waggler use. They are or never will be a trotting rod for using big floats.
Sorry but there is a hell of a difference between what is marketed as a match rod and what should be deamed a trotting rod. Long trotting is not stick float fishing

 

[Richox12]

Not a patch on their older match rods. The older im9's where in a different league to the one they presently produce.

Totally disagree. Older IM9's were way too soft, no control at all by comparison to Matchpro range.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:26 ----------

As I said earlier normark didn't make a 12ft 9inch titan so the rod your speaking of is either damaged or simply isn't a genuine normark titan.

By the way, I post rave comments about normark match rods and have never seen any better alternatives (tried loads of top end rods)...co's there ain't none...simples.

Nope. Double checked. It's exactly as it was when bought new. Assembled 12' 9" but labelled as 13'. Feels heavy & unbalanced by today's standards. Tip flexes but mid & butt don't work with it. Definitely not what I was ever lead to believe. Not worth £200 now let alone 10 - 20 years ago. Very disappointing.

 

[barbelboi]

Totally disagree. Older IM9's were way too soft, no control at all by comparison to Matchpro range.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:26 ----------



Nope. Double checked. It's exactly as it was when bought new. Assembled 12' 9" but labelled as 13'. Feels heavy & unbalanced by today's standards. Tip flexes but mid & butt don't work with it. Definitely not what I was ever lead to believe. Not worth £200 now let alone 10 - 20 years ago. Very disappointing.

Sure you haven't got a ringer - I'd love to see a photo of this rod.
Jerry

 

[tigger]

Sure you haven't got a ringer - I'd love to see a photo of this rod.
Jerry

I think he's on a mission

---------- Post added at 21:25 ---------- Previous post was at 21:02 ----------

Totally disagree. Older IM9's were way too soft, no control at all by comparison to Matchpro range.

I did ok today with my origional 14ft im9 ....hitting chub,dace,roach and perch at 50yds plus and no shortage of control.

 

[sam vimes]

Gents,
there's no need to get angsty just because someone doesn't like the gear that you do. Personal preference and all that.