12-10-2009, 06:28 AM
[quote pontoonman]What would you use, if you had to have a very short pack rod? How does this "nimrod" stack up to the pocket fisherman, telescoping, 6 piece, etc. would seem to be the question?
Pon[/quote]
Okay, by "pack", what are your priorities? Weight? Volume? Longest dimension broken down?
I did a quick calc: Assuming the steel is about 0.2" in diameter (and I'll bet it's fatter), and if you uncoiled the thing to about 30", the pole section would weigh just over 4 ounces, the total weight of a decent 5 weight 9' fly rod. A really good one would weigh closer to 3. Add the bulky, heavy trigger handle and I'd guess double that. That's just weight.
The Emmrods look to break down to about 16" long or so. A 6 piece rod with 16" sections would be 8' long. Shorter would be fine for spin fishing right?
Pocket fisherman - c'mon, that thing is a toy.
Telescoping: It can work. Not the fastest action or lightest or most sensitive, but at least you can get out to 5 feet or more. I just can't understand anyone choosing a rod shorter than 4'6" or so unless you're ice fishing.
If you're set on a 3 foot pack rod, I'll build you a kick ass 2 piece graphite rod using the top two sections of a quality blank. It'll cost less than the Emmrod, and weigh about a third or less than it.
Back in my gear days, my favorite trout rod was a one piece 5' rod with a straight cork handle and slip rings. If I were to build another now, I may go with a 2 piece 4'6" or 5". Those little rods will fish under 99.9% or normal conditions for light trout. Anything shorter (except for ice) is silly IMNSHO.
_SHig
[signature]
Pon[/quote]
Okay, by "pack", what are your priorities? Weight? Volume? Longest dimension broken down?
I did a quick calc: Assuming the steel is about 0.2" in diameter (and I'll bet it's fatter), and if you uncoiled the thing to about 30", the pole section would weigh just over 4 ounces, the total weight of a decent 5 weight 9' fly rod. A really good one would weigh closer to 3. Add the bulky, heavy trigger handle and I'd guess double that. That's just weight.
The Emmrods look to break down to about 16" long or so. A 6 piece rod with 16" sections would be 8' long. Shorter would be fine for spin fishing right?
Pocket fisherman - c'mon, that thing is a toy.
Telescoping: It can work. Not the fastest action or lightest or most sensitive, but at least you can get out to 5 feet or more. I just can't understand anyone choosing a rod shorter than 4'6" or so unless you're ice fishing.
If you're set on a 3 foot pack rod, I'll build you a kick ass 2 piece graphite rod using the top two sections of a quality blank. It'll cost less than the Emmrod, and weigh about a third or less than it.
Back in my gear days, my favorite trout rod was a one piece 5' rod with a straight cork handle and slip rings. If I were to build another now, I may go with a 2 piece 4'6" or 5". Those little rods will fish under 99.9% or normal conditions for light trout. Anything shorter (except for ice) is silly IMNSHO.
_SHig
[signature]