Line again part 2.

Philip

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,447
Reaction score
483
I want to use gear appropriate for the species and sizes of fish I'm targeting. I don't worry about the 30lb+ carp that could take the bait intended for roach.
Its true that if we all geared up to land the biggest fish you (could) hook in a given water then chances are we would all be using ridiculously heavy tackle, there has to be an element of compromise involved.

In terms of the orginal question I have been pretty happy using 3.2 Drennan float fish for Chub trotting. The FF lines either side of it - 2.6 I would feel a bit undergunned and 4.4 I think would be a bit crude. 3.2 seems to be a good compromise between strength & finesse, for me anyway and has even coped with a number of unexpected river Carp that gatecrashed swims. Not sure how it compares diameter wise with some of the other lines out there. As for pre-streached lines I see them as being hooklinks not mainline.

Matching lines up with the right rod makes a big difference too imo...heavy stiff rod and light line wont be a good combo for example.
 
Last edited:

dicky123

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
633
Reaction score
4
The season before last I thought I'd hooked the mother of all barbel trotting. Several swims following it down stream found me landing a scrapper 20lb pike hooked just on the chin. On 4.4 hook link it gave me a lot of confidence to be honest.

Philip. For chub I'd agree 3.2 would be spot on, barbel 4.4 would be the least for me, as the Trent is heavy in some places. I still think the carp double mentioned in my original post on a 1.7 takes some beating though? Interestingly it was on a Acolyte Plus rod, showing just how subtle these modern stepped up rods can be.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,994
Reaction score
1,339
One point no one has mentioned yet is using a line capable of standing up to the method your going to employ whilst fishing.
For a number of reasons I find myself doing a lot of casting when trotting. If constantly casting distances using a centrepin reel then the line takes a bit of a battering and so I need a robust mainline to cope with the wear. I also prefer to fish straight through and so if targetting barbel or chub I like either 4lb or 6lb on my reel. If I feel the need to scale down for whatever reason then adding a lower diameter bottom takes a moment or two so isnt an issue.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,323
Reaction score
572
Location
North Yorkshire.
it was on a Acolyte Plus rod, showing just how subtle these modern stepped up rods can be.
Be wary of how you think of the Acolyte Plus. It's stepped up compared to an Acolyte Ultra. However, it's closer to most other manufacturers standard match rods than their stepped up or power match rods. The Acolyte Ultras are the anomaly in that they are a fair bit lighter (in action) than the average modern match rod.

Rather than thinking of the Acolyte Plus as stepped up, people would be better off thinking of it as standard and the Acolyte Ultra as stepped down.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,994
Reaction score
1,339
Be wary of how you think of the Acolyte Plus. It's stepped up compared to an Acolyte Ultra. However, it's closer to most other manufacturers standard match rods than their stepped up or power match rods. The Acolyte Ultras are the anomaly in that they are a fair bit lighter (in action) than the average modern match rod.

Rather than thinking of the Acolyte Plus as stepped up, people would be better off thinking of it as standard and the Acolyte Ultra as stepped down.
Not sure about that Chris, i've hit and held quite a few god sized barbel using the 13ft plus and given it some serious stick. I've even lifted weights with it to test it's metal and it's much more power than you'd imagine. I think it gives the impression of being a normal match rod when your catching smaller fish because it has such a great action.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,323
Reaction score
572
Location
North Yorkshire.
Not sure about that Chris, i've hit and held quite a few god sized barbel using the 13ft plus and given it some serious stick. I've even lifted weights with it to test it's metal and it's much more power than you'd imagine. I think it gives the impression of being a normal match rod when your catching smaller fish because it has such a great action.
Most float rods are a lot more powerful than people give them credit for, it's always been the case. However, the snag here is that you don't use Acolyte Ultras and you don't have that many modern "standard" match rods to compare. You also push the limits of your rods a lot further than most. There's little doubt that the Acolyte Plus is a very capable rod, but compared to most other modern power/stepped up/specimen float rods, it's really not particularly powerful. If your frames of reference are the likes of the Drennan Tench Float, Drennan IM8 Specimen and even the Normark Avenger, the Acolyte Plus will undoubtedly appear to be up there with them. However, I'd suggest that such rods also have much greater finesse than most modern power float rods. They also have relatively low line ratings, which should give the game away somewhat.

The Drennan Tench Float (depending on the model, IIRC the Super Tench had something about 8lb with hi-tec mono) had mainline ratings of around 3-6lb. Standard match rods of similar vintage were likely to be no more than 4lb. A modern standard match rod is unlikely to have an upper rating of less than 6lb, but 8lb is getting increasingly common. By comparison, an Acolyte Plus (13') is rated 4-6lb+ and the Acolyte Ultra (13') is rated 2.5-4lb+. There's no doubt in my mind that the Ultras are light match rods by modern standards. The Plus are heavier, but not hugely by the same modern standards. Go back to the eighties and nineties and there's little doubt in my mind that the Ultra would have been considered "standard" and the Plus to be a power version.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,994
Reaction score
1,339
Most float rods are a lot more powerful than people give them credit for, it's always been the case. However, the snag here is that you don't use Acolyte Ultras and you don't have that many modern "standard" match rods to compare. You also push the limits of your rods a lot further than most. There's little doubt that the Acolyte Plus is a very capable rod, but compared to most other modern power/stepped up/specimen float rods, it's really not particularly powerful. If your frames of reference are the likes of the Drennan Tench Float, Drennan IM8 Specimen and even the Normark Avenger, the Acolyte Plus will undoubtedly appear to be up there with them. However, I'd suggest that such rods also have much greater finesse than most modern power float rods. They also have relatively low line ratings, which should give the game away somewhat.

The Drennan Tench Float (depending on the model, IIRC the Super Tench had something about 8lb with hi-tec mono) had mainline ratings of around 3-6lb. Standard match rods of similar vintage were likely to be no more than 4lb. A modern standard match rod is unlikely to have an upper rating of less than 6lb, but 8lb is getting increasingly common. By comparison, an Acolyte Plus (13') is rated 4-6lb+ and the Acolyte Ultra (13') is rated 2.5-4lb+. There's no doubt in my mind that the Ultras are light match rods by modern standards. The Plus are heavier, but not hugely by the same modern standards. Go back to the eighties and nineties and there's little doubt in my mind that the Ultra would have been considered "standard" and the Plus to be a power version.


Chris, you know i've got the DH RS powerfloat version and comparing the rod to my accy plus rods it's no more powerfull, infact it doesn't feel as powerfull under load!
Now according to all the blurb from DH and daiwa the RS PF is meant to be a very powerfull float rod for bullying in large barbel etc....so where does the accy fit in?
After using the accy for hit and hold purposes I was curiois about it compared to other rods so I actually tested numerous different rods in the exact same spot and it was an eye opener! I tried heavier rods like the Hardy marksman 11ft and 11ft 6inch avon rods and they seemed to bend round to the same degree as the accy float rod, as did my avenger, drennan im8 specimen float etc....sounds like bull I know but I have no reason to make it up and i'm sure you know me well enough to know that's not my style.
Maybe the old match rods with the lighter line ratings where more powerfull than we remember. I do know I used to use a standard silstar match rod for carp fishing and I caught countless carp to 20lb + with it. I do remember laughing with my pals at the bend in the rod and we often wondered if it would snap. Same goes for a silstar winkle picker leger rod, I used that for the carp on the same water and again it was bent round so far it appeared that it would snap, but it didnt lol. The thing that let those old rods down wasn't so much the metal sliding reel bands but the full duplon handles which soon became crushed causing the reels to be loose. To remedy that I just taped the reels on permenant....i'm straying here arn't I lol.
I remember reading an article saying ignore the higher line rating for the biggest part as it's the lower one that you should be more interested in as that's when your most likely to break off. Obviously if your rod tip isnt soft enough your lighter lines may easily snap on the strike or when a decent fish makes a mad dash at the net etc. If your using heavier lines then that's not really an issue....if you get my meaning as your holding the rod and putting the pressure on. All food for thought though :).
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,323
Reaction score
572
Location
North Yorkshire.
Chris, you know i've got the DH RS powerfloat version and comparing the rod to my accy plus rods it's no more powerfull, infact it doesn't feel as powerfull under load!\par
Now according to all the blurb from DH and daiwa the RS PF is meant to be a very powerfull float rod for bullying in large barbel etc....so where does the accy fit in?
There are always going to be anomalies and inconsistencies between manufacturers and individual models. Ultimately, just putting Specimen, Power or any other synonym tells you almost nothing of a rods actual power. However, I suspect that anything Dave Harrell has had a hand in is also not very likely to be quite as heavy as many modern rods. I'd expect a relatively old school (primarily river) angler to have a very similar outlook and view of float rods as you (and others on here). Ultimately, you can put whatever name you want on a rod, it doesn't necessarily mean much. You can only ever generalise, but I'd still maintain that the average power rod now is way heavier than an average power rod of 20-30 years back. I'll also stick with my thinking that the Acolyte Ultra is a light actioned rod by modern standards and that the Acolyte Plus, as nice as it is, isn't overly powerful. The fact that you, I, and others might have landed some seriously big fish with them doesn't change anything. I've landed just as big with match rods that make no pretence of being stepped up in any way. It's much like the "steely" description I saw applied to an Acolyte recently. To me, steely conjures rather excessive images of power. I suspect that the comment was actually referring to the action being faster than his preference. This is the biggest issue we face when using these unquantified terms. Test curves are anything but perfect, but at least they aren't vague and indeterminate descriptions.

After using the accy for hit and hold purposes I was curiois about it compared to other rods so I actually tested numerous different rods in the exact same spot and it was an eye opener! I tried heavier rods like the Hardy marksman 11ft and 11ft 6inch avon rods and they seemed to bend round to the same degree as the accy float rod, as did my avenger, drennan im8 specimen float etc....sounds like bull I know but I have no reason to make it up and i'm sure you know me well enough to know that's not my style.
Maybe the old match rods with the lighter line ratings where more powerfull than we remember.
I've little doubt that many match rods are/were under rated. Line ratings alone can often be rather dubious. However, I still have no doubt at all that the general trend for float rods, as with carp rods, barbel rods, poles etc, is for them to be increasingly powerful. What was considered light twenty to thirty years back, is nigh on impossible to find now. Genuinely light actioned float rods are few and far between. The "standard" of every type of rod is invariably heavier than the standard of yesteryear. 30 years back, a 2.5lb carp rod was heavy. These days it's about as light as you'll find. A few manufacturers don't do less than 2.75lb. Barbel rods are the same, 1.75lb is pretty much the standard, I remember my first proper carp rods being 1.75lb. Though it's much harder to quantify, I've little doubt that float rods have gone down the same road regarding upward power creep.

P.S. I checked the keeper rings on three of the upper ranges of Daiwa float rods a week or two back. The vast majority were stiff or varnished up completely solid.
 
Last edited:

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,994
Reaction score
1,339
P.S. I checked the keeper rings on three of the upper ranges of Daiwa float rods a week or two back. The vast majority were stiff or varnished up completely solid.



Not good is it!
Especially when theyre charging such high prices for those higher end rods. Those keeper rings are a hazard when your handling the rod.

How did you go on with those removable hook holders you bought , was it last year?
I forgot already lol.
 

sam vimes

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
11,323
Reaction score
572
Location
North Yorkshire.
Not good is it!
Especially when theyre charging such high prices for those higher end rods. Those keeper rings are a hazard when your handling the rod.


I tried several of the DH Tournament RS, Tournament Pro and Air AGS rods. The latter start at the best part of £500. Not one of the hook keepers I tried folded out as I'd expect it to. A fair number were stuck solid and many just moved a fraction. That said, I'm not a fan of that style of hook keeper. I much prefer the simple loop that's a feature on the Acolytes and many Shimano float rods. I suspect that cutting my finger to ribbons (I've no idea how I managed it) on one of the fold out keepers probably doesn't help my antipathy towards them.


How did you go on with those removable hook holders you bought , was it last year?
I forgot already lol.
Spot on, I've bought more since. Most of the float rods I use regularly, that don't already have a keeper, have had them fitted.
No sign of them marking the blanks that was a concern. The cheap and nasty Chinese ones aren't a patch on the genuine Fuji versions. They don't work as well and they don't last very long.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
8,994
Reaction score
1,339


Spot on, I've bought more since. Most of the float rods I use regularly, that don't already have a keeper, have had them fitted.
No sign of them marking the blanks that was a concern. The cheap and nasty Chinese ones aren't a patch on the genuine Fuji versions. They don't work as well and they don't last very long.



At least we know what to get now if a rod has no hook keeper and want one. I would have ben surprised if something fuji wasn't up to scratch, fuji are my favourite guides :).
 

whitty

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
5,538
Reaction score
1,154
Location
Luton Bedfordshire.
Not good is it!
Especially when theyre charging such high prices for those higher end rods. Those keeper rings are a hazard when your handling the rod.

How did you go on with those removable hook holders you bought , was it last year?
I forgot already lol.
And these are,I've never heard of those???
 
Top