High Dollar vs. Less Dollar Rods

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Matt Paluch, Aug 9, 2007.

  1. Fish glass and save your cash. You don't have to worry about nicks in an old Fenwick. Can't see where an all aluminum reel seat or cork with a few pores or inexpensive but corrosion resistent guides has any effect on performance...likewise for thread and epoxy. You fish expensive rods because you like them, or they look prettier, or you like the prestige, or you get a good discount on them, or any other of a number of non-performance related reasons. A good rod can be had for less than $200 for sure. Most of our industry is composed of products that sold on the basis of hyped up marketing for profit reasons. Let's face it, a shop makes a whole lot more selling a $600 rod than it does a $100 rod. All of mine cost me less than $100 each. Likewise, I haven't come across a single local fishing situation where a Pflueger Medalist doesn't perform as well or better than a premium reel (and they used them for most bluewater saltwater applications for years). The same goes for most fly lines. My Scientific Anglers Air Cel lines perform just fine as do my Maxima leaders and tippets. I've even gone back to my old favorite non-breathable but practically bullet proof OS Systems waders and Borger Weinbrenner wading boots to supplement my summer LL Bean aquastealths. And it just isn't the money. I have owned and sold or traded premium rods made by Orvis, Sage, Winston, G Loomis, and Powell and premium reels by the original Lamson, Ross, Hardy (including Perfects and St George), and Orvis. The same goes for other premium gear (like Simms Guide waders)and a host of intermediate stuff through the years. I understand the marketing and why fly shops and companies sell the high end stuff and, I'm glad it is available. I promise not to look down at you (or up) for owning it, but don't even pretend to think the high cost is related to performance.

    Randy
     
  2. I give up...

    Time to talk about what fly caught that beautiful fish or where to camp on the yak... maybe even the true location of Rattlesnake creek. But no more which rod is better conversation for this guy here. Maybe someday I'll meet a few of you on the water and we can cast each other's gear and say "wow, you have some fun stuff to fish with." I'll scamper back to my hole filled with overpriced... way over used gear.
     
  3. Rode a Honda for three years and it was never in the shop. My Harley spends a significant amount of time in the shop. Honda ride was smooth and quiet. Not so with the Harley. Harley cost thousands more.

    OK...I've gone to far....I digress.
     
  4. With all due respect to everyone.... THis is really sort of a funny argument. ...... I do believe that , on average, higher priced rods are generally better than lower priced rods. But to automatically assume "you get what you pay for"? Hilarious!!!!!!! Remember when Loomis came out with their GLX spey rods? They have a 900+ dollar price tag, and some of the worst finish work ever. Crooked guides, removable tip-tops.... I'm sure they've remedied the problem over the last year. But anyone that put the cash down for those rods didn't get what they paid for.

    THis is especially a difficult thesis when discussing spey rods. Are you going to seriously tell me that the $980 Loomis or a $1200 Hardy is twice as good as Bob Meiser's Highlander? Or three times better than the Deer Creek rods? Sure it may have a more expensive reel seat, nicer cork, or shinier thread. But it's doubtful they will function as well. I honestly can't think of a single spey caster that knows whats out there and , given unlimited funds, would choose the Loomis or Hardy. If they were the same price, I would take the Deer Creek over the Loomis, as asked in the original post.

    Branding factors into the price tag, too. Does anyone really not think that the name bumps the price up 10, 20, or 30 % when you buy a Sage, T&T, Winston, Hardy, Orvis? I own stuff with those names on it, but I truly believe it is overpriced for what you are getting. I mean, how much of my money is going into the glossy, slick advertisements in every fishing magazine in the world?

    The market for fly rods probably functions like any other market. If you say your item is the newest/best with have a cool color gloss, and a slick name, someones gonna buy it. It really doesn't have to be that good.
    There's a sucker born every minute, and a few of them flyfish.

    Finally, what are you paying for if you "get what you pay for in a fly rod"? I mean if you do want the most expensive components and a name, then don't give a second thought to your purchases. But, when you start to discuss performance, a big price tag doesn't guarantee anything.

    I too hate certain bohemian attitudes and when people try to downplay the quality of anything that isn't the cheapest thing on the market. But to take on the opposite of the bohemian attitude, and declare that the most expensive item must be the best, is just as silly.
     
  5. Holy Crap! Is this really what we are going to discuss on this forum. This is like asking who was the best running back or quarterback of all time. This is a question to which there are OPINIONS, not answers. I am still fishing with the $99 combo I got at Outdoor Emporium 10 years ago. It is not pretty, but I can still cast plenty far, and I catch plenty fish. If you want to spend $100 bucks, then do so. If you can afford $1000, Great. The point is...GO FISHING!!! Who the hell cares what you are using. Are some "better" than others? Sure. But the best rod in the world doesn't catch much fish if you are not fishing and just spending your time making useless arguments.

    Love and Peace!

    Pieter
     
  6. Well I was the first to get on you on the other thread. Im not going to waste my time going on and on. But I have two points to say. I think your 10 to 1 ratio is a crock. And Im all for you having your own opinion about rods and such but what really got me mad about your other thread was you mentioning names of two well known rod makers that put out a GREAT PRODUCT and stand behind there products 110 percent. You could of made your point just as well without putting the names of these rod manufacturers in your post. And I would be glad to fish with you anytime but sorry dude, HANDS OFF MY STICKS! Seems you have a problem with breaking rods. Kevin
     
  7. i still find it hilarious that someone who has a 10 to 1 breaking fly rod ratio thinks that spending more money is the solution to his problem. :rofl: now that's some yuppy sh*t. throw money at something and the problem magically goes away.
     
  8. Good catch Chris. Maybe he's like the government and "solves" problems by throwing more money at them.
     
  9. Ditto.

    Chris, Right on!
     
  10. Randy, so is the same true of a Ford Taurus and the Lexus? Just crafty marketing?

    Let's face it, and I'm not just talking rods here; you usually get what you pay for....
     
  11. Bad example, the Harley will pick up more chics. This however is not true of fly rods.:beer2:
     

  12. Concur....that's why I still have the Harley.

    Crap, I'm shallow....I hate this thread...I don't want to play no more, I'm taking my toys and I'm going home.
     
  13. Wrong. It is a good example. The topic is performance value (as a casting instrument or motorcycle) per dollar spent, not about how much money you have to spend to pick up chicks. On that alternate topic, I'd argue that the more you have to spend to pick up chicks, the less effective you are as a man, the less game you've got, and the less attraction you have as a male sex object. But this is getting way off topic.
     
  14. Touche! I know a lot of old, high dollar gentlemen (Sages so to speak) with very young, image conscious wives. It would seem that their high dollar "rods" worked in attracting a catch that would seemingly be unattainable....

    Please, we must stop NOW!
     
  15. Tim wakefield costs the Red Sox 4 million per year he has 14 wins. Diusuke Matsuzaka costs 14 million he has 13 wins.

    My Forecast 11-6 6/7 cost me under $100.00, With a medalist 1496 1/2 and a line under $200.00. It is the Tim Wakefield of rods. I got exactly what it paid for, but I paid for a much better deal than the best high priced similar rod, even if the high priced rod is better.
    Bang for the buck money is better spent for gas travelling to where the steelhead are than on rods. That is why I choose to use my assets less on rods and more on other facets of fishing.

    18 tommorow,
    cds
     
  16. I agree with Jason on this!!! Try to nab a hot Bellevue blonde without a mid range BMW, Benz, Mazaratti etc. Not saying it is impossible, but $$$$$$ talks and adds to your overall presentation!

    Now the real question is would you rather have a high heeling, red lipstick wearing blonde that will hit the spa while you go fishing or a less money motivated person who will adorn herself in Simms and Fish Pond and be casting next to you! Both I have yet to find, but when I do, yall will be the first to know.

    Speaking of baseball, Barry Bonds worth the money or not? Who knows, but he certainly has put up the numbers for the Giants at a premium price!!
     
  17. Absolutely. Look no further than Fred Thompson, the presumptive savior of the GOP in the 2008 election.

    K
     
  18. I am a firm believer in buying quality and buying what you want the first time. But I am also a value guy. Cars, bikes, skis, furniture, ect always has a value point. The point where is very little difference of the functionality of what you are buying, but the price goes up for extras, cosmetics, the name, ect. I usually look for that point.
     
  19. Wow... an entire thread devoted to little more than feelings... Gentlemen, other than to expound upon your feelings, brand loyalty, and amex card balances: what really was the point of this thread? Value is completely subjective to the consumer and has as much or as little to do with the MSRP of the unit sold as the buyer gives it credit for.

    Blanket generalizations and assumptions about the fly rod quality, workmanship and value are.....well.... pointless.
     
  20. Love my original 8'6" 7/8 weight Berkely Cherrywood rod with the red metal reel seat...soft mid flex and I don't think I could break it staring at it :) 17.99 with a Berkely reel mad in China and WF8 line...of course that was 1979. :) And purchased at Pay-N-Pak...remember?
     

Share This Page