New Drennan Rod

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
9,146
Reaction score
1,505
As a float rod i'd prefer it to be three seperate sections, 100% not a rod for me.

Through action ins'nt to my likeing either.
 

Keith M

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
4,266
Reaction score
849
Location
Hertfordshire
With its ‘semi’ through action and it’s line rating of 3 to 7lb it might be ok for small commercial Carp, Tench and Bream on smallish commercial waters, and unlike Ian I do like to be able to carry a couple of my float rods ready made up in protected rod sleeves; so the 2 piece plus handle section and being able to unfold my float rod and cast my float out in a few seconds can be a boon for me as it takes me a long time setting up for very short sessions; especially after a stroke I had a few years ago.

However it depends on the handle extension as it says it is a ‘retracting telescopic butt section’ which sounds a bit naff to me and could very likely be subject to wear.

Definately not a rod that I would want though.

Keith
 
Last edited:

LukeM

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Location
Dorset
I have to agree with the above sentiments, the old specimen tench float rod at 13’ with 6’ plus 6’ with the handle extension a separate 12” is a much better solution. The brass thread is a neat solution .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

trotter2

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
1,606
Reaction score
24
It would depend on the mechanism you would not want that getting jamed up ,so you can't pull it out. It will probably be a decent bit of kit if it's reliable. Probably not for me but interesting concept that I have seen used before on fly rods. But not without problems.
 

dicky123

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
650
Reaction score
17
I've still got the old Drennan 12.9'' IM9 rod that this looks much like. Lines up to around 6lb not in use since I brought others. Must to something with it sometime?
 

mikench

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
16,310
Reaction score
2,543
Location
leafy cheshire
I think the Korum Opportunist has a blank which retracts into the handle and a lot of telescopic rods do too. I'm sure Drennan will have done their homework. If it works maybe all their rods will be built this way.
 

pelamid

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Messages
126
Reaction score
234
Location
Cahors, France
Looks like a good idea - but would like to see how it stands up to dirt on the telescopic section. As that extendable section is just where some would hold the rod I can see dirt and groundbait being a problem.

I have at least three telescopic rods and all of them have scratches where particles of sand have slid in. It's a cleaning job that needs done regularly, but even then some scratches are inevitable.
 

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
9,146
Reaction score
1,505
I think the Korum Opportunist has a blank which retracts into the handle and a lot of telescopic rods do too. I'm sure Drennan will have done their homework. If it works maybe all their rods will be built this way.

Not the korum Mike, there are a number of others that do though. As an example, the nash carp rods have the telescopic bottom section. Same as any section that slots into another it should be kept clean and void of grit to prevent scratches.
I would prefer the telly section set up than that daft screw on bit of handle that drennan had on their "so called" compact two piece rods. The screw on section wasn't deemed to be a part of the rod 🤪.
 

spenbeck

Active member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
38
Reaction score
2
The retractable section in the butt is just like the Tri-Cast Legacy Extender 13-15'.
 

Keith M

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
4,266
Reaction score
849
Location
Hertfordshire
I would prefer the telly section set up than that daft screw on bit of handle that drennan had on their "so called" compact two piece rods. The screw on section wasn't deemed to be a part of the rod 🤪.
I personally would much rather have a separate screw in handle extension than a telescopic section that could easily get dirt and grit in it reducing its life, any day. Ian.

The screw on section wasn't deemed to be a part of the rod 🤪.
Of course the small screw in 'handle extension' was deemed a part of the rod; Ian; but not a part of the rod that had line running through it. It is just a short section of Cork on carbon handle extension that can easily be removed to make the rod easier to break down and fit into its rod sleeve that's all.

NB: I also have some 'two' piece quiver tip rods but they are basically 2 piece rods which come with quivertips which can be interchanged, and they are not advertised as 3 piece rods when they are sold are they Ian?
That would just be splitting hairs wouldn't it Ian? 🤪

Keith
 
Last edited:

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
9,146
Reaction score
1,505
I'd put money on it that I can assemble my three piece rod way quicker than you can assemble the two piece, plus a screw on handle piece (which we can't count as being part of the rod though 🤪).

If I took a quiver rod made up to use I think i'd have my tip section fitted already.....so deffo two pieces 🙄👍
 

Aknib

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,080
Reaction score
627
Location
Isle of Onamower
Looks like a flawed gimmick resigned to a low resell value to me, just my opinion.

I'd much rather invest in blank quality and technology, maybe the manufacturers in general have pushed the current status quo to its limit and are short of ideas?

Inconceivable on the face of it but probably what many thought when glass took over from cane and so we need a new revolution before i'll dip my hand in my pocket.

It will come, just as carbon followed glass but stuff like that Drennan rod just repels rather than attracts me.

I applaud the idea in general though, Drennan had a pop at this with the Acolyte Compact and are obviously recognising the convenience and value of made up, transportable rods that fit into today's lifestyle.

Unfortunately, neither the concept nor the ideal fit into my own and neither stand up to the scrutiny of cross examination.
 

mikench

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
16,310
Reaction score
2,543
Location
leafy cheshire
I'm never comfortable with a made up rod in a bag and sooner spend the 10 minutes or so starting from scratch on the bank or in the car park. ;)
 

Philip

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
4,514
Reaction score
685
Probably just me but I dont consider a 12 foot rod that beaks into 2 as "compact" ..I could understand the telescopic bit if it reduced the length to something that would fit in a standard car boot...but it doesnt, it only wins you 12 inches so it all seems a bit pointless to me.

If you want it compact just make it 3 piece. I have no idea how good the rod is otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Richox12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
440
Reaction score
37
Looks like a flawed gimmick resigned to a low resell value to me, just my opinion.

I'd much rather invest in blank quality and technology, maybe the manufacturers in general have pushed the current status quo to its limit and are short of ideas?
Who's to say it's not built on a quality blank anyway ?
 

Keith M

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
4,266
Reaction score
849
Location
Hertfordshire
It’s a common human trait to dislike anything that’s slightly alien, and totally different to what they’ve been used to in the past, like double handles on reels, and the two piece 13ft float rods that will fit easily into a protective 6ft rod sleeve; some anglers just don’t like them even though they have become very popular among a great number of anglers including some of our top and well respected anglers, who also find them a great idea ‘in the right circumstances’.

It’s always been the same since before they discovered that the world was round there have always been those that are sceptical to new ideas.

If you tend to fish lots of ‘very short sessions’ on clear waters fishing fairly close, where you don’t have much time to spend fiddling around setting up rods and chancing disturbance once you get to your swim then a rod that can simply be unfolded and used almost immediately and without chancing spooking the fish in front of you or any other wild life once you are on the bank then surely that’s a good idea isn’t it? Especially if you have already checked everything at home in comfort before you left your home.
However if I had to choose between a ‘telescopic’ handle extension or a ‘screw in’ handle extension then give me the latter every time.

However when you are going to be fishing at range or going to be fishing for a lot longer, then this advantage can seem less relevant to you, and being able to setup and prepare your swim in a more leisurely fashion without causing too much disturbance to the fish that you are targeting, then I can see why setting up once you arrive can be deemed to be more advantageous to some anglers.

It’s horses for courses surely.

Keith
 
Last edited:

tigger

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
9,146
Reaction score
1,505
It’s always been the same since before they discovered that the world was round there have always been those that are sceptical to new ideas.

Keith

We only think the world is round because we are told so.

There is a flat earth society who will have a really good answer for everything you throw at them in order to prove their thoughts that it is flat.

I've worn myself out trying to convince a good friend of mine the earth is round, his answers blow my round ones out the water !


I still don't fancy one of those new drennan rods though 👊👍.
 
Last edited:
Top