In a Spin, Part 4 ? Choosing a rod and reel

Very interesting jeff.....excellent read.

Yes, always nice to read something about lure-fishing tackle, on which opinions have been divided for many decades... The info about braided line is new to me, because I've done little fishing in recent years and braid has developed considerably. I only ever used mono - BTW I'm puzzled by the reference to people protesting about line strength - rather puzzled by this. I always used the minimum BS line I considered practical, i.e. 8 - 10 pound for sea bass (I first used plugs & baitcasting kit for bass long before I met anyone else doing the same!) and 2 pound on my UL spinning outfit for chub, with tiny plugs.

Re rods, i appreciate that this site is driven by advertising revenue so brand namesneed to beprominent, but why not make your own? I always did, and now I'm getting keen again I've been assembling components to build more. First new rod will be a UUL rod for chub-plugging from a canoe on small rivers, based on a quiver-tip I picked up years ago, with tiny SiC guides, wood-insert seat, ABU505 or my old Cardinal 152, smallest plugs I can find... I've never liked long rods, and most of my baitcasters have been from 5.5 to 7 feet, spinners too.

Re multipliers, I suggest "casting reel" doesn't apply only to modern low-profile reels but is an Americanism they use more generally for a small multiplier, short IMO for "baitcasting reel". I agree about the RH v LH thing - a multiplier with the handles on the right side is traditional and makes perfect sense to me, eminently practical. I've always hated spincast reels! Have owned a variety of Ambassadeurs, currently have my much loved 4500C, 1500C (sadly never imported to UK, tiny & great for UL) and Mag 1 Plus that caught most of my bass when I still did lots of that.

Keep on writing! Regards, HPS

I've been through the stages of making my own rods donkey's years ago when the only decent spin rod you could get were the Abus.

Now, I just prefer to buy, but I have to say that some are Abu still and come from America. I've tried emailing Abu for details of any they might sell and zilch!

I name the rods only because that's what I've bought, the important thing was the castign weights of course.

Thanks anyway and there is a part 5.

BTW - I have added another Abu light spining rod since with a terrific sliding reel seat. I think it's from the Danish or German market, not sure.

I look forward to Part V... Re ABU rods, in the 1970s I owned a few ABU Caster series - 122, 132, 152 - though never any Suecia spinning rods because I've always preferred baitcasting kit except for UL applications. In the '80s I discovered Dale Clemens's books, notably Advanced Custom Rod Building, and my eyes were opened to the possibilities of building rods that were not only tailored precisely to my requirements, and better than factory rods, but finished in a completely individual way. I had a Diplomat 651 lying around virtually unused and sold it on ebay for enough to pay for top quality components to build two more rods...

I just don't like using rods designed (inevitably) as a compromise that will more or less suit lots of anglers. And making one's own is interesting & rewarding. I'm afraid I wouldn't use any current ABU Garcia rods! A problem in UK is that the availability of components is restricted, and decent baitcasting/spinning blanks are like hen's teeth, for reasons that are not clear to me - 20 years ago there was a better selection available, now one has to buy mail-order from the USA.

Agreed, a nice read Woody.

Out of interest did you do much lure fishing when you was living in the Fens?

Ahhhh! Now Yoggy, that will be giving away a little portion of "My Story - Part 4x4!"

You'll have to wait, I'm afraid

/forum/smilies/tongue_out_smiley.gif

I spent a pleasant couple of hours on the nene at oundle doing a spot of lure fishing last friday on the strength of your article woody.....it kinda got me in the mood for it.

Had one take.....pike grabbed my lure right in the margins,just as i was about to lift my plug out and recast.....must have followed it in???

It took me completely by surprise i must say!!! It leapt clear of the water twice and thrashed around before the plug slipped out.I estimateit was about the 8lbs mark,certainly bigger than any pike i have caught before and it would have been a first for me on a plug and a pb.

The search for my first 10lber continues!!!

If ever there's one following your lure, has a go then seems to disappear, try leaving your lure in the water. Because I have 6 feet of water in front of me on one swim I just let the lure hang there, don't move it at all and within a few seconds, up she comes again and grabs it.

Thrilling stuff.

Woody, Ok mate I look forward to it!!!!

Nick, Are youin for a session before Friday?. I`ll give you a bell.

"Woody, Ok mate I look forward to it!!!!"

You might be a little disappointed.

.

Or maybe not. Because you could end up VERY disappointed. So don't hold your breath.

Great article but I disagree with the bit about multipliers. As you explained that you cast with the right hand but in your case you also want to wind in with the right hand leaving your weaker arm, assuming you are right handed, to hold the rod and play the fish. This doesn't make any sense as you clearly need your stronger/prefered arm to cast out then you would almost certainly benefit from it when playing a fish so why not just leave it there and use the hand on your weaker/non prefered arm to wind in. All this messing about with changing hands all the time just wastes time and energy for nothing.

Another point in that we use gears to enable us to do things faster or to enable us to lift heavier things than we could normally so bearing in mind that a fishing reel is geared, doesn't it make sense to use your weaker arm/hand to operate it ?

It is very clear that if you are right handed in life you will use that arm for all the heavy tasks by preference so it stands to reason that if you are right handed then your reel handle must be on the left as your rod will be in your right hand.

Interesting stuff!

I'd take issue about spinning rod lengths though.

I suspect that the stated preference for a shorter spinner, is prompted byinefficient casting technique. There are several casting techniques, which I have seen in use for spinning. A couple of them obviously come from coarse float casting. Those casts are not efficient.

The most efficient cast is the single handed cast, with the index finger of the casting hand controlling the release of the line.

Many casters use too much force in the cast, which induces an inaccuracy into direction, angle and timing.

The secret is in a powerful controlled wrist action, accompanied by a steady thrust forward with the casting forearm. This ensures that all the power of the cast is obtained from the bend in the rod (rather like bending a bow).

A longer soft action rod lends itself to greater power and longer casts, with very little effort from the caster.

My fave (and very old) spinning rod started life as a match rod. I rejigged it for spinner work (wider rings). It will cast a 40g Toby over 100 yards! For close work, I obviously use very light lures. My normal BS is 4lb.

John Lee - it might interest you that in the average human body both arms as as strong as each other. The fact that one is more dextrous than the other has absolutley no bearing the fact.

The actual swapping of rod from one hand to the other takes less than a second and places the left hand in a far better and more supportive position that leaving the rod where it was in the right hand.

Bob Paulley - You're saying that all Americans (whose millions of anglers use 7½ foot rods maximum) are all wrong? In a casting contest I'll challenge you anytime with your ripped up match rod for accuracy combined with distance.

Can I just ask though, how do you spot a take at 100 yards? I should look again at your 4lbs line for pike (would that be?).

I am sure by nature both arms are meant to be as strong as each other but in reality we each have a preference and invarible find that arm to be stronger. Some of the jobs people do ensure that one arm is much stronger than the other.

I don't understand how the left hand can be in a far better and more supportive position when your right hand is already in the correct position. It doesn't matter if I am casting or playing a fish, my right hand is in exactly the same position as, it appears, are all my friends that I have asked. If I am spinning I like to be able to stop the lure where I want during the cast and be able to retrieve immediately especially when spinning in shallow water. Messing about changing hands would result in the lure fouling the bottom as I cannot cast and retrieve with the same hand and even if you could do it in under a second, I can't, it would loose the control necessary.

<blockquote class=quoteheader>John Lee 8 wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

I am sure by nature both arms are meant to be as strong as each other but in reality we each have a preference and invarible find that arm to be stronger. Some of the jobs people do ensure that one arm is much stronger than the other.</blockquote>


Ever done weight training? Lifted a small dumbell of 10 kgs (22lbs) with your left hand and then your right hand? Hardly any difference?

In fact the rod you're probably using has a test curve of maybe 3lbs or 4lbs and when a pike bends it over to a right angle, it's pulling 4lbs max. At that point you probably let it have some line off the clutch so the MOST you have to pull is 4lbs.

Now are you telling me that you cannot handle 4lbs strain on your left or weakest arm?

OK, now I take it you are casting with a baitcasting reel because that is what I am talking about for swapping hands. Not a spinning reel.

The position that you hold the rod for casting puts most stress on the extensor muscles in your arm, that's fine for casting. However, if you want to load that stress with a fighting fish, you're going to end up with tennis elbow because your forearm is largely on top of the rod holding it rather than to the underside of the rod supporting it.

In this way you bring the flexor muscles into play as well as a little guy called the pronator teres. He's a tough little fellow if you use him in the right way. Abuse him and he'll give you golf elbow.

You don't lose control swapping hands, the lure has already hit the water so you no longer need to control its flight. In the second it then takes to swap hands, it will have sunk, at best, 2 - 3 feet maximum. If the water is just that shallow, try a lighter or more floating type of lure.

Incidentally I do have some left handed baitcasters, but as soon as a fish takes, I then have to swap my grip to prevent aforementioned tennis elbow sprains. I did get some last year foolishly playing double figure carp on a fly rod where my hand was in a similar position. NOT recommended!

I am not 100% sure as to which reels you mean but I do not change my position on using either a multiplier reel and a fixed spool reel. Just had a few practise casts in the garden with friends and neither do they, so I am not sure what position you hold your rods as I cannot imagine holding it in any other way with the exception of the big beachcasters who use the multiplier at the bottom of the rod. The bit refering to muscles will affect either arm so that can be discounted. I have had torn subscapularis muscles in both shoulders, tennis elbows in both elbows (at the same time - not good) and carpal tunnel surgery in both wrists so I am fairly clued up with arm problems. I still have a torn subscrapularis muscle in my left shoulder but it does not affect my casting unless I need to raise my left arm too horizontal. The problem with tennis (golf) elbow is that once you have had it once it never seems to be far away. You have my sympathy as I know it hurts.

I am aware different people have different styles of holding their fishing rods. Matt Hayes must be the most cackhanded angler I have ever seen but he is very comfortable with it. You too may have a style that I would not feel comfortable but it works great for you. This does not make either your style or mine right or wrong as it is what works for us.

The water I was refering to requires a heavy lure to get to the spot but as you only have 18" of water to play with then you have to hit the handle as it lands or you are too late. I accept your ideas would work very well if it wasn't for the distance needed. Unfortunately that is where the fish are so that is where I need to cast.

Yoh Victor! (Meldrew).

Like many things, these discussions come down to personal preference.

I am also quite happy with a 7ft solid spinner. I have in my armoury a £2.50 kiddy's special, which has also landed some decent fishes in its time. Its horses for courses. If I am out for a quite constitutional along the beach (under Dr's orders) I find the shorty very convenient, coupled with another (very old) Shakespeare fixed spool. It all fits my little duffle bag and does not get in the way of the marching order!

I normally cast around 30-40 yards with this little thing, which is more than enough to reach the Bass, chasing the fry just a couple of yards offshore. I use my long conversion for getting at those bigger, irritating Sea Trout, that insist on shoaling in remoter spots, out of range of the fly from the beach and requiring big casts on the spinner.

The limitation I discovered with shorter spinners (many years ago) is in the strike. At longer range, the stretch of monofil impedes the set of the hook in the fish's mouth. This means that a my pronounced strike action is required. The consequence of this has been that, at around 50 yards range and above, I have lost quite a few really good fish, either because the hook could not be properly set, or, due to inattention, the strike was too strong and pulled the lure out of the fish's mouth, before it set.

A long, softer rod eliminates such large movements in the strike. A firm, steadylift of the rod tip of a longer rod, will nearly always set the hook, while apparently not spooking the fish into immediate dancing on the surface (a trait of trout and salmon).

As for your concern about the detection of a bite at long range, you are dispalying your coarse angling roots! Any "fine" fisher will happily tell you that, when spinning or fly fishing, the fish catches itself! The take on a lure is quite an adrenaline pumping event!

You ALWAYS know there's a fish there, when spinning!

Now! Spinning competitions! These seem to be pretty rare in the UK these days. Back in my younger day they were more common and I won quite a few of these. So I'll ignore your comment about Yanks and 71/2ft rods.

I have broken this reply in to two, for clarity and the fact that I am in verbal diarrhoea mode!

/forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

A classic example of horses for courses is in fishing the cove at Spiggy. Spiggy is a renowned Sea Trout Loch, beloved of the celeb angling fraternity, because it is not only very productive of good fish, it is located on the mainland of Shetland, not too far away from Sumburgh Airport and decent hotel facilities (and well away from gawkers).

It costs a few squid to fish the Loch, but the Cove is FOC.

Now there are 3 distinct marks in the cove.

The beach mostly fishes the younger Trout, always hungry and going after the abundant sandeel. This is the domain of the Fly Anglers, giving a decent return for the most inept water basher. The beach is about 75 yards long and the Trout feed up to about 10 yards off the beach.

To the left is a flat rock, about 30 yards out from the beach. Slightly larger Trout tend to shoal under the lee of the rock, which stands about 10 ft above the water at high tide. The trout (around the 2-3lb mark) tend to stooge around in the lee of this rock. The angler's problem is that, if you walk out on to the rock shelf, the fish bugger off! It has to be fished on the spinner, unless the fly fisherman cheats and loads his line with lead wire! A 7ft solid spinner will happily cast in under the overhang and winkle out plenty of plate-sized Trout.

To the right of the cove there are low cliffs, about 50ft high. About 100yds out from the beach, in under the cliffs, there is a group of rocks. This is where the specimen fish hang out. It is way beyond the range of the water bashers and yer average spinner. However, with my mean machine, I have gotten into them on a regular basis, using my fave 40gm Toby. The long rod option allows me to let the fish swim off with the lure. Keeping the rod tip low (a must, when playing Trout and Salmon) the specimens tend to dive and run, setting the hook nicely, for when they realise they are in stook!...... and start dancing!

My wife is partial to a Trout Supper. She'd mention her fancy of an evening, when we lived there. I'd jump into my car, with my 8ft hollow glass spinner, spend ten minutes bagging a couple of plate sized Trout from under the left hand rock shelf for supper.

Gillying visiting friends, I'd go for a specimen from under the cliffs and hand the rod to an unsuspecting novice, so I could adjourn for a whizz! Of course they wouldexperience, in short order, that gut wrenching rush, knowing there is a big 'un on the other end of the line!.......... while I would watch the fun!......... a good fish on one end......... and a newly converted angler on the other!.......... hilarious!

Interesting that this thread has revived. The topic will run & run, as it has done for decades. Anyone whose interest in baitcasting kit started in the 1960s, like me, just finds it odd that there should be any querying of RH-wind multipliers for RH folk, since the rest of the world (including UK anglers - see any pre-WW2 literature, then Bernard Venables, Colin Willock, et al...) has used them forever along with shortish crank-handled rods cast with the right arm then transferred to the left. And the grip is of course very different for those two functions. It's not only not a problem, it feels entirely rational and comfortable.

The rod I'm building right now is around 5 feet long BTW - a UL spinner admittedly, but the length is just right for its intended purpose, pursuing chub at close range from a canoe, which I hope to do in the next couple of weeks. That sea-trouting in the Shetlands sounds fun - why not pursue them in a canoe or light skiff? I have a chum up there, must ask him about them. I'd add finally that by far the bulk of my baitcasting with the tackle described above has been at close range from the shore (rock marks mostly) for bass, in the Westcountry - rods between 5.5 and 7 feet - and I never felt ill equipped or at a disadvantage at all. Best bass was only 7 pounds, but that was actually on a shorter & lighter than usual rod which a couple of beachcaster-using friends described as a "toy"!

Regards, Malcolm

John, if you are happy casting like that then fine. As you say, it's personal choice.

For me, it is right - look

at the top cover on all these Abu Ambassadeurs. They all have a scoop towards the rear, which isn't there for sheer beauty, it's to take the moon of the thumb - as




In fact, even my grip is a bit low on this shot and often the end plate is right in the palm.

Q.E.D! /forum/smilies/wink_smiley.gif

Bob, you never mentioned you were SEA fishing. OK, I'll allow you to use 9 foot rods in future as I did, BUT NO LONGER THAN THAT!

/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif

What's "monofil"? As you can see from the above pics, I only use braid - no stretch (well, 1 or 2% at most)!

Carry on!