Notes on Fiberglass
For some time, Bucky has been asking me if I’d write a blog post about the Hardy and Diamondback fiberglass rods carried by Blue Ribbon. He is quite a fan of both, and regularly fishes a Diamondback. I’ve been putting him off for a while now, but for no reason other than to spend a little more time evaluating the various models and collecting my thoughts. Ordinarily, I’d prefer to write complete evaluations about each of the following rods, but for the sake of brevity I’m going to limit myself to a few comments about each rod.
Before I start there’s one point I’d like to make. The recent resurgence in fiberglass rods has once again got people talking about “fiberglass” action, just as they often talk of “bamboo” and “graphite” action. There is no such thing. Not for fiberglass, bamboo or graphite. A rod’s action—the bend it assumes under load—is a function of design, not of material. In the hands of a knowledgeable rod designer, any of the aforementioned materials can be used to make rods with any kind of action. (Bamboo and fiberglass weigh more than graphite, and longer length rods built with these materials often exhibit a degree of self-weight momentum. This is often confused with—but is not the same as—the action of the rod.)
There are three models of Hardy fiberglass in the shop: 7’ - #3, 7.5’ - #4 and 8’ - #5.
The 8’ model is a superior rod, and I think the best of the three. It demonstrates excellent communication in close, it’s silky smooth at normal fishing distances, and when asked to go a bit long easily incorporates the butt section to carry the extra load. There is never a need to modify your casting stroke or to exercise care in where you place the casting load in this rod. It manipulates line easily, and can protect fine tippets as well. Rod material notwithstanding, it’s one of the best designed rods available today.
The 7.5’ rod is excellent, too. In close and at normal fishing distances, it is the equal of the 8’ model. For casts longer than 45 feet you will have to exercise some care with this rod, as the tip and middle are not as accepting of the additional load. (But casting over 45’ is really outside this rod’s purview anyway, so I don’t consider this a problem.)
The 7’ rod lacks the in-close communication of the other two models. In a rod designed for close work, this is a real negative. Owing to its relative stiffness, it is also not nearly as easy a casting rod as the other two. (I put a #4 line on this rod and it was much improved in this regard. So, to me, this is a #4 rod, not a #3.)
Blue Ribbon carries two models of Diamondback fiberglass rods: 8’ - #4 and 8.5’ - #4.
The 8’ rod lacks communication when used with a #4 line, especially at close and mid-range. At distance it’s a bit better in this regard but, truth be told, for efficient casting this should really be considered a 5-weight rod. With a #5 line on it this rod is excellent at everything short of distance work. I rank it just a hair behind the 8’ - #5 Hardy (because the Hardy requires no care in casting, even at distance). The overall appearance of this rod is not as aesthetically pleasing as that of the Hardy, but that’s at least partly due to the fact it’s $125.00 less expensive.
The 8.5’ Diamondback is really a #5 rod masquerading as a #4. If you use this rod with a #4 line—which you can do—you will end up expending more effort in casting than would be necessary if the rod were truly a #4. But as with the 8’ model, put a #5 line on this rod and it is much improved. The rod contributes more to the cast, and the in-close feel is far better. At 8.5 feet, the weight of this rod is noticeable during casting, as is the self-weight momentum (a feeling of heaviness in the hand, as the already slow action is somewhat exacerbated by the weight and length of the blank itself).
In summary, the 8’ Hardy and 8’ Diamondback (both used with #5 lines) and the 7.5’ - #4 Hardy are superior rods. Not superior fiberglass rods, mind you, but superior rods regardless of material. If the lengths and weights of these rods suit your needs, I strongly recommend comparing them to any of today’s graphite or bamboo rods.
Add a comment
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.