[Dave Medlyn]

Hi folks. I have a line weight question about a rod that I bought the other day. The rod is a sharps 12' double hand split cane rod called The Belmont.  Does anyone have any ideas about line weights for spey casting with this rod.  The serial number is on the rod but, I suspect incomplete #202
Thanks in advance for any help
Cheers Dave

[Rob Brownfield]

Hi folks. I have a line weight question about a rod that I bought the other day. The rod is a sharps 12' double hand split cane rod called The Belmont.  Does anyone have any ideas about line weights for spey casting with this rod.  The serial number is on the rod but, I suspect incomplete #202
Thanks in advance for any help
Cheers Dave

I suspect you are correct about the number being incomplete unless it is pre 1958...have a look at the numbering system here...
http://www.sharpes.net/ekmps/shops/sharpes/resources/Other/sharpe-s-rod-numbering-system.pdf

Back to the rod, I had a 12 foot Belmont and if I remember, its an 8-9 rod. Remember though, that is 8-9 for a double taper or spey line, not a modern salmon line . I doubt it would work too well with a Skagit or Scandi shooting head

I believe the rod was named after the road where sharpes had a shop and workshop, Belmont Street, from 1920-1971. The factory was in John Street, from 1954 to 1971. A smaller factory was also located in seaforth rod (nets mainly, hence the Seaforth).

I still use a Sharpes "The Carp" for my carp fishing, worth silly money to a collector, but why have it sitting on a wall when it can bring so much pleasure   And here is me using it to cacth carp on a wee Scottish loch

[Mike Thornton]

The line that most people used on this rod was a  Number 4 Kingfisher double taper silk line.  This would be equate to roughly a n 8/9 line in today's money.  One thing to be aware of is using a line that is too heavy, since this causes splitting between the upper and lower part of the ferrules.    Sharpes introduced so called " reinforced " ferrules on their rods , but even then splitting sometimes occurred.   It was no problem then, since obtaining replacements simple meant a trip to Aberdeen on the motorbike.  Changed days now!

[Dave Medlyn]

Hi guys,
Thanks for your replies. I paid €40 for the rod in a tackle shop about 20 miles from my house. I also got a Hardy Sunbeam 9/10 and a Hardy Marquis #7, both for €40 each. The reels are mint!!  #bargain!!
What line from the barrio range would suit the Belmont?
I'm going to use for grilse on a small river so I need a compact head to keep the line short-ish.
Thanks
Dave

[Dave Medlyn]

I'm thinking about the SLX line in an #8. Has anyone any thoughts in this choice??

[Rob Brownfield]

I'm thinking about the SLX line in an #8. Has anyone any thoughts in this choice??

Just my thoughts, and I am sure someone will come along with more knowledge, but two things, the SLX is rated for single handed rods, so I don't think it will be heavy enough for a double hander and secondly, the SLX is more of a integrated shooting head/advanced WF which I would think works better on a faster action rod.

The Belmont is a slooooow all through action rod that I think would work better with a proper old school spey line.

[Mike Barrio]

Hi Dave,

Sorry if I seem a bit backward about giving suggestions, it is just that this type of rod really needs a while on the water with a good selection of lines to try. I am very much aware that any advice that I give you could be totally wrong and I wouldn't like you to spend money on a line that turns out not to work for you

I believe the old Kingfisher 4 works out at approx 240 grains, about a #9 line in today's single handed casting standards.

 I would suggest trying to beg, steal or borrow a DT8, DT9 and DT10 from friends to try on the rod, or perhaps buying some cheap 'Mill End' lines in these weights to play with and get a feel for what works best for you.

Best wishes
Mike

[Dave Medlyn]

Right. Ok.  I suppose it's my own fault for loving these old rods that the old line weight question is never far away!!
I have an old hardy the croquet 13' double hander. Ended up on the advise of a cane rod builder to get a 40g snowbee scandi spey line, it works a treat. My casting is not the best but it was an instant improvement fro the trad spey line that I was using before. That was a 9/10 f spey master from scierra. I still have that kicking around. I'll give it a lash and get back with my findings.
Cheers
Dave

[Mike Barrio]

Would be interesting to hear how the 40g Snowbee feels on this rod Dave, might help towards finding an answer.

Purely a guess,  but I reckon we are probably looking at a Scandi type Spey line in the region of 30 to 35 grams

Cheers
Mike

[Rob Brownfield]

Purely a guess,  but I reckon we are probably looking at a Scandi type Spey line in the region of 30 to 35 grams

That's very interesting as it seems to go against the whole Scandi concept of faster actioned rods with shorter, snappier casting strokes.

However, just did some searching and a fair few seem to be using Scandi and even Skagits with 13/14 foot Scotties. However, more seem to be using the Airflo Delta Spey 8/9.

Why is it so complicated?

[Mike Barrio]

Hi Rob,

Dave said:

I have an old hardy the croquet 13' double hander. Ended up on the advise of a cane rod builder to get a 40g snowbee scandi spey line, it works a treat

I'm therefore thinking this type of line suits him?

[Dave Medlyn]

Hi folks
Went out this evening with my Scottie and the 9/10 spey. I've chopped the first 35' of the line off and have it loop to loop with the arse end of an old #4 wff line as a home made shooting head.
It was a bit better than the #7 line that I used the other day.  Struggled with line stick and fly turnover , but that could be,in part, my casting.
I'll try the 40g next time I go out.

[Hamish Young]

Why is it so complicated?

Not so sure it is Rob, the head lengths on both Scandi and Skagit aren't exactly long and the Airflo... well I guess it depends on which Delta Spey you get

Whilst I would not use a split cane double hander (due a traumatic experience some years ago on the River Lochy) I have experimented extensively with modern double handed lines (from Skagit to Spey) and found the softer fibreglass and early carbon rods enjoyable in an old school kind of way when casting those lines; indeed I have a 15' rod (possibly a Daiwa blank) that absolutely flies with a Skagit - and I mean it goes like a bat out of hell on that rod

I guess this means I really do not subscribe to the idea that a rod must 'do this' or is 'meant for that' when really it's a fishing tool and if the weights all match up and it suits the caster - who gives a toss

For Dave - if you're struggling with turnover then chuck a 10' polyleader on the front and see if that helps. Why take 35' off the front of the line by the way..... what's the head length and weight ended up ???

H

[Dave Medlyn]

Don't ask! I had a bit if a mind melt and thought I could make a shooting head. I was messing around with a 10' fibreglass rod by adding an extended fighting but to the arse if it, a kinda home made skagit rod of sorts.  It ended up working ok withe the chopped line and the old 3.5 times rod length. The rod is a #7.
Now I have the Scottie and I with I never chopped it up. You live and learn I suppose!! I have not had the chance to get out with the 40g line yet. How will I know if that line is too heavy? If that's a stupid question, don't mock me for it!!!!!
Cheers
Dave

[Rob Brownfield]

I guess this means I really do not subscribe to the idea that a rod must 'do this' or is 'meant for that' when really it's a fishing tool and if the weights all match up and it suits the caster - who gives a toss

I am normally of the "just because it says "xyz" on the blank it does not mean it can only be used for "xyz" I just envisaged a very slow actioned cane rod struggling with a shooting head.

Personally, I do not subscribe to the "it must be a fast action to cast a long way", believing that a blank has to be loaded to deliver Many folk struggle to load some modern rods.

[Marc Fauvet]

Many folk struggle to load some modern rods.

typically the same breed that believes that buying a Stradivarius will make them an expert violinist or that a Porsche will magically make them more attractive...   

[Rob Brownfield]

typically the same breed that believes that buying a Stradivarius will make them an expert violinist or that a Porsche will magically make them more attractive...   

However I do have a feeling that manufacturers are in a bit of a war with each other to produce the lightest, fastest, greatest rod of all time without caring about the anglers needs. Notice I said rod and not fishing rod

Sometimes I think the manufacturers forget that some people actually fish with the rods


I will have to cut this reply short as I have a test drive booked for a Porsche...thanks for the tip

[Marc Fauvet]

Rob, for sure i get your point and generally agree 

but !  whilst rod companies are indeed at war with each other (it's just normal business competition)
- they work on making lighter rods: normal, who would want a heavier rod ?
- fastest: firstly, there's a great misunderstanding as to what constitutes a fast rod action.
most associate it with it being stiff or resistant to flexion. that may very well be the case and is apparent in rather poor rod design but a well designed fast blank's 'magical' properties are that these blanks react quicker to the angler/caster's input on both flexion and deflexion: they give much greater control throughout all casting phases.

about rod manufacturers not caring about anglers needs:
generally speaking, i don't agree with that at all. for sure, Sage etc all have at least one super-fast model in their lineups but the general trend globally is to have more and more rods of moderate action. they do listen to all whining...  or otherwise they'd lose a lot of business.

now, the crux of the matter is high performance tools are made for users who know how to use them and can exploit the inherent characteristics of that tool.
going back to the Porsche example, they don't make cars for beginners and they fully expect buyers to know how to drive properly.  i can't imagine why it would be any different for high-end fly fishing rods ?

our little FF world is largely plagued with lazy fad followers that are all too eager to suck up the next hype being thrown out by advertisements or some other lazy bobo in a magazine, blog, or anywhere else on the net. they're like scraggly bearded bimbos that rush out to purchase the latest lip gloss  and later start whining all over the place that the grossly overpriced lip gloss didn't change their lives.

in regards to the two most common equipment rants: fly lines and rod actions, here's a quote from Bruce Richards that says it all:
” The line rating system is 95% OK.
There is no industry rod rating system and likely never will be.
The better your casting skills, the less you will care about the previous two points. ”

dude, i'm quite sure you know all this but lets just say that this comment was meant for the general public 
cheers,
marc

[Rob Brownfield]

Rob, for sure i get your point and generally agree 

Firstly, the Porsche did not work, now have a test drive booked for a Morris Minor!

Secondly, I am rather over simplifying things for speed of reply. You are right, many top end rods come in all sorts of actions, and I totally agree with the confusion over "fast" and "stiff". I do know that Viagra does not offer me a "fast" action

I guess where I am trying to go with this is that when you read the magazines, many of the reviews go on about stiffness and its importance to casting. The rods reviewed are all the same, very rarely do you get a review of a more forgiving rod. It seems as if "traditional" is bad and "nanotechnology" is a must. Personally I believe that to be misguiding when it comes to a "fishing" rod. Even the issue of "lightness" is not as it seems. You can make a "heavy" rod feel light in the hand by using weighted reel seats/butts. I have a rod made by Diamondback, its a 6 weight, 9 foot 6. It feels incredibly light in the hand. Lighter than my 5 weight Helios.

Ah the joys....

[Dave Medlyn]

Hi.
I took the sharps rod out last night with the 40g scandi line as suggested. Overall it went pretty well. The combo performed dam good actually, but at the back of my mind was the thought that the line was a bit heavy and could be bad for the rod.  A question at this point; how do I tell if the line is too heavy? It seemed to cast well and actually shoot line, which has never happend before !! I usually use this line with my old 1936 hardy 13' and the sharps rod does feel a bit lighter. There is a 30g snowbee scandi line on eBay ATM, and I'm wondering if the 10g difference would make a change in performance?? Any thoughts??

[Mike Barrio]

Hi Dave,

10g is obviously quite a big difference in weight, but I would stab a guess that this is more likely to be sweet on the rod. Take a chance and try it, if it doesn't work out you can always put it back on Ebay ...... and one can never have too many lines to play with

Cheers
Mike

[Dave Medlyn]

Thanks Mike, I might just try it!!

[Marc Fauvet]

-but at the back of my mind was the thought that the line was a bit heavy and could be bad for the rod. 
-A question at this point; how do I tell if the line is too heavy?

1) forget the false notion/myth that casting a heavier line can damage a rod, it just doesn't happen.
i and several other colleagues have tried grossly overlining rods using say, 10wt lines on 2 or 3wt rods to study various casting aspects. a lot of this was all-out distance casting and no rods where damaged in any way. it feels weird but that's a different story...
2) a line is too heavy when it feels too heavy for the intended purpose.
this has more to do with the person's casting level: the less experienced casters tend to prefer a heavier line whereas the more experienced generally go for a lighter line.

hope this helps,
marc

[Dave Medlyn]

The line that most people used on this rod was a  Number 4 Kingfisher double taper silk line.  This would be equate to roughly a n 8/9 line in today's money.  One thing to be aware of is using a line that is too heavy, since this causes splitting between the upper and lower part of the ferrules.    Sharpes introduced so called " reinforced " ferrules on their rods , but even then splitting sometimes occurred.   

I'm just a bit worried about over lining the old girl.
Thanks for your comment Marc and I'm not casting big distances so over weight line should not be a problem?
Cheers
Dave

[Marc Fauvet]

Dave, let's take the example of the line you're contemplating buying.
it weighs 10g more than the one you tested. for sure, any caster will feel that its a heavier line but its only 10g: not much and very, very little when you consider the stuff below.

- apart from structural damage (bings and dings, which is the usual culprit but angler pride usually has to blame anything except themselves... ), the only thing that might break a rod is how much force the caster applies to it but that doesn't happen in fishing situations.
- going back to the distance casting example where enormous amounts of force are used, this is when these rods break, generally at the stripping guide ferrule or under the cork grip.
i can't put figures to it but those excessive amounts of force are proportionately  much, much greater (dozens at least) than the extra 10g of the heavier line with a normal, smooth, fishing distance cast.
- fish and the force they'll exerce on a rod during a fight: expecting rod failure from throwing a 10g heavier line would be like thinking that a rod will handle say, a 10lb fish just fine but will start creaking and groaning with a 15lb fish, explode with a 20lber and implode with a 30lber but thank goodness and even if it makes for a good story at the pub, it doesn't happen in real life either... 

once again, just use the line that gets the job done for your needs at your competence level.  the 40g Scandi seems to be to your liking so why not spend some time with it and figure out if it needs to be changed later ?

cheers,
marc