exaggerated rod length
supertrollr
Posted 10/16/2019 1:55 PM (#948377)
Subject: exaggerated rod length


when the race for the longest rod will end ,what size will be long enough ? did i seriously missed something because i keep using no more than 8f ? it's clear that they will continue to build longer and longer one if you keep buying it just because it's new. imo the 9 to 10f long rod are pure junk for good net job and for a good control. but that's just me.
vegas492
Posted 10/16/2019 2:23 PM (#948378 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 1036


I have switched to 9 foot rods. Love them. Took about 2 hours to get used to them. I like my 8.5 footers, but prefer those 9's. I do still love the 7.5 foot jerk bait rod, but dang, the 9 footer is where it is at for me.
I get yah, though.
Kirby Budrow
Posted 10/16/2019 2:38 PM (#948379 - in reply to #948378)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 2318


Location: Chisholm, MN
I've been using 9 foot and longer rods for probably 9 years. I would never want to switch to a shorter one. My favorite is my 9'6". I don't see an issue with control or netting. I think it depends a little on your height. Shorter people might like a shorter rod since they are closer to the water, but my wife is like 5'4" and uses a 9 footer and loves it as well. I also casted the st. Croix 10 footer for a few hours and liked it. I wouldn't purchase one, but there is nothing wrong with it. It flings small bucktails a mile.
esoxaddict
Posted 10/16/2019 3:54 PM (#948382 - in reply to #948379)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 8772


I think it ends when they no longer fit in the rod locker. That said, look at the average age of a muskie angler. Longer rods might not be of much benefit when you're 30, but as age catches up with you, they start to become a commodity. I still like a shorter rod for certain lures, but the difference between doing figure 8's all day with an 8'6" or longer rod vs the old 7' rods? Night and day...

My wife (5'2") absolutely hates the longer rods. We switched her over to 7 footers and it made a huge difference for her being able to work her lures properly. (she's 5'-2")
supertrollr
Posted 10/16/2019 5:06 PM (#948384 - in reply to #948382)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length


yeah good point for figure 8 and the rod locker. kirby i don't like when i have to put my rod tip towards the sky or when i have to fall back to net a fish that's why i hate these long rods.i didn'T know the 9f were there since that long .time flies
Tackle Industries
Posted 10/16/2019 6:39 PM (#948389 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 4053


Location: Land of the Musky
To each their own but I have a ton of customers that swear by our long 96, 10 and 106 TI Musky rods. They love them. Especially taller guys or people who have larger V-bottom boats. They can really get into a good figure 8 when needed and they cast like a dream. But at the end of the day, buy what you like and makes you happy
https://tackleindustries.com/shop/musky_pike_bass_walleye_crappie_fi...

Enjoy.
James
IAJustin
Posted 10/16/2019 7:15 PM (#948390 - in reply to #948389)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 2011


I don’t find netting fish , (even solo) with 9’ + rods really any different than with shorter rods , just move you hand to fore grip or above when time to scoop.. I have 8 casting setups only one is under 9’... I’ve never thrown anything longer than 9’8” but would probably like it
gregk9
Posted 10/16/2019 7:27 PM (#948391 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 791


Location: North Central IL USA
Nothing over 9 for me. An 8'6" can pretty much do anything I need to do with a lure and it's what a use the most.
joh10891
Posted 10/16/2019 7:57 PM (#948392 - in reply to #948389)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 112


Something important about rod length too is the length of the rod butt or rear grip or whatever you call it. Basically how much of the rod length is on each side of the reel seat haha. For example, some models of St. Croix have shorter butts, so they "fish" like a longer rod, if that makes sense. On the TI rods, a ton of the length is in the butt, which I personally like for tucking under my arm when working baits, but can untuck and utilize the length when casting or doing 8s. Basically, all 9ft rods are not equal, as a lot of butt length basically disappears when you tuck it under your arm. A 9ft rod with a long butt like a TI is my favorite, IMO.
Tackle Industries
Posted 10/16/2019 8:41 PM (#948394 - in reply to #948392)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 4053


Location: Land of the Musky
That is a great point. I have told many customers our 9ft rods fish more like an 8'8" rods... That fat butt 18" handles on them are really nice...

joh10891 - 10/16/2019 7:57 PM

Something important about rod length too is the length of the rod butt or rear grip or whatever you call it. Basically how much of the rod length is on each side of the reel seat haha. For example, some models of St. Croix have shorter butts, so they "fish" like a longer rod, if that makes sense. On the TI rods, a ton of the length is in the butt, which I personally like for tucking under my arm when working baits, but can untuck and utilize the length when casting or doing 8s. Basically, all 9ft rods are not equal, as a lot of butt length basically disappears when you tuck it under your arm. A 9ft rod with a long butt like a TI is my favorite, IMO.
vegas492
Posted 10/16/2019 9:56 PM (#948399 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 1036


My wife can now cast all day, and cast well, with her 9 foot Elk River custom rod, with a Jig Ripper Handle. The long rod is nice and her hooksets are better, but that Jig Ripper really takes the pressure off of her wrist and allows her to cast all day.
Innovations in rods and handles have really helped her get into musky fishing and I love that. She's getting really good at working baits. Because of that, it's added more time in the boat for me and really helped us both enjoy fishing for these critters.
Kirby Budrow
Posted 10/17/2019 7:00 AM (#948407 - in reply to #948384)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 2318


Location: Chisholm, MN
supertrollr - 10/16/2019 5:06 PM

yeah good point for figure 8 and the rod locker. kirby i don't like when i have to put my rod tip towards the sky or when i have to fall back to net a fish that's why i hate these long rods.i didn'T know the 9f were there since that long .time flies


I think I bought my first 9'3" Okuma telescoping rod in 2010...or 2011. Not 100 percent sure.
Fishysam
Posted 10/17/2019 9:59 AM (#948418 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 1209


8.5for jerk baits and 9.5 for the rest is my preference I have a 10.5 but it's not my preference
twofishy4u
Posted 10/17/2019 7:34 PM (#948453 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 72


This is a great point. Bought my first new boat in 2001 at 21 years old. A good muskie rod was 7' and had a 6500c3. The rich guys had the calcuttas. Got back into it years ago by accident throwing bass spinnerbaits and catching Musky on.....a 7'MH bass rod with 40lb braid. My biggest issue the last couple years has been getting newer muskie rods that don't weight a ton...they all do now...length has a lot to do with it. I also like to palm my reels and hate the super long back handles. It's literally impossible to find a 8' rod that has a 14" rear grip that weights under 8 ounces that can throw any kind of muskie lure ( 4-5 ounces) ….good thing for me I just built one......6 ounces built! But I laugh at these guys tossing huge lures with these huge rods....these last 2 years I've had about 20 hours of total Musky fishing time in and we've caught our 2 biggest fish to date....wife a 26lb and me a 30lber. Both in small 300-400 acre lakes with HEAVY musky fishing pressure.
upnortdave
Posted 10/17/2019 8:24 PM (#948460 - in reply to #948453)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 668


Location: mercer wi
I really like to fish 1 of St croix 10 'xh with rubber lures, but when I was playing with them at the store before they hit the market, I just didn't like the 20" rear grip and the fact it was split grip. I could feel the blank digging my ribs just playing around. I cast with reel in my right hand when throwing rubber then switch. The transition to other hand i hand butt end catching my hoodie. Smaller lures the reel never leaves my left hand. I love super big figure eight with rubber to make them dance more then a figure 8 with a straight bait like tails.
kdawg
Posted 10/18/2019 10:40 AM (#948489 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: RE: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 757


I think the bottom line here is to use the rod you feel the most comfortable with and that will help you catch the most fish. I laugh at some of the posts where guys say" Go long or go home." My first musky book" Secrets of a musky Guide", by the late legendary Tony Rizzo, Tony was using a 5'03" rod, and he managed to land plenty of big fish. Use the rod you feel confident in, in boating muskies, whether it's a 7-8 footer or 9-10 footer. All I know is I will always hesitate when someone says you "need to use this" to catch fish. Kdawg
stdevos
Posted 10/18/2019 12:43 PM (#948492 - in reply to #948392)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 416


Location: Madtown, WI

joh10891 - 10/16/2019 7:57 PM Something important about rod length too is the length of the rod butt or rear grip or whatever you call it. Basically how much of the rod length is on each side of the reel seat haha. For example, some models of St. Croix have shorter butts, so they "fish" like a longer rod, if that makes sense. On the TI rods, a ton of the length is in the butt, which I personally like for tucking under my arm when working baits, but can untuck and utilize the length when casting or doing 8s. Basically, all 9ft rods are not equal, as a lot of butt length basically disappears when you tuck it under your arm. A 9ft rod with a long butt like a TI is my favorite, IMO.

I am not very fond of the longer butts. I switch hands after a cast, casting with left hand on butt, right thumb on spool. I have to extend my arms out awkwardly to cross the rod across my body. If I'm wearing a flannel or something, it gets hung up on my shirt. I have had to cut a couple inches off the butt to make it comfortable.

supertrollr
Posted 10/18/2019 2:28 PM (#948495 - in reply to #948489)
Subject: RE: exaggerated rod length


kdawg - 10/18/2019 10:40 AM

I think the bottom line here is to use the rod you feel the most comfortable with and that will help you catch the most fish. I laugh at some of the posts where guys say" Go long or go home." My first musky book" Secrets of a musky Guide", by the late legendary Tony Rizzo, Tony was using a 5'03" rod, and he managed to land plenty of big fish. Use the rod you feel confident in, in boating muskies, whether it's a 7-8 footer or 9-10 footer. All I know is I will always hesitate when someone says you "need to use this" to catch fish. Kdawg

so well put.
Rotorhead
Posted 10/18/2019 7:47 PM (#948511 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: RE: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 157


Location: West Central WI
I don't know if this has been discussed in another post, but longer rods have effectively decreased the distance between boat partners. While good safety would be to watch the arc of your cast, either overhead or to the side away from your boat partner, there come times when handling your rod, when the two can intersect. Has anyone else notice more close calls than when we fished with 7' to 7'6" rods? Personally, my favorite lengths now are 8' or 8'6" but thinking of building a 9' rod this winter. My handles or butts are 15" to 16" but no longer. That's plenty to give me the casting torque I need and a good feel when tucking between arm and ribs.
southern comfort
Posted 10/19/2019 9:34 AM (#948534 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 390


I am 68 years old and have been musky fishing for over 40 years. I am thrilled with how easy 9ft or longer rods are on your body. This applies to casting, doing figure eights and netting. I can still fish all day with these rods. I agree with the safety caution with rods that are 9' or longer when there are multiple people fishing in your boat. It does require greater awareness.
NPike
Posted 10/19/2019 7:08 PM (#948547 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 612


I personally come to prefer 8' for overall heavy jigging, jerk - glide baits and cranks. I use a 9' St Croix only for distance casting with spinners and bucktails. Here the x-tra length helps. But yes it takes a lot of getting used to when the fish comes boatside - netting. I fished 4 over 40 years with 7' or 7.5' so perhaps?
And yes if using the 9' rod watch for the others in your boat. Initially my buddies were concerned when a few came to close to there heads.

Cabbage Patch
Posted 10/20/2019 4:48 PM (#948562 - in reply to #948547)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 200


Location: Milwaukee, WI
I bought a 9’3” Elk River last year and figure 8’s out of the front of a deep v is great! I have 8’6” rods and the extra length is noticeable. I would go 9’ all day.
BassThumb
Posted 10/21/2019 9:28 AM (#948572 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length





Posts: 69


Location: Royalton, MN
I'm really appreciating the St Croix 10' heavy Blade Master. I'll be getting the xtra heavy Stretch Dawg next season. I just fished the whole weekend on Cass with only the Blade Master. I was letting my dad use my 8' 7" XH 13 Fishing Omen Black that I normally use for Suicks and Phantoms and such. I had no problem working those baits with the ten-footer.

I think I'm hooked on the long rods. I've really begun to enjoy the 20" butt for creating leverage on the cast. You can really load the rod up, making it launch the lure for you. "Work smarter, not harder" comes to mind.

If I had a custom, I'd drop it down to 19" because it's sometimes a minor issue with the butt getting caught in the clothes under my left armpit when I switch from a retrieving position to a two-handed figure-8 position. Otherwise, the benefits of bomb casts and giant, deep figure-8s outweigh that minor hassle.

There's also a lot less effort being put into casts, and that puts less strain on my wrists and elbows. I think that's a huge attribute that would be appreciated by many. Just a little flick and that lure is flying. Same reason I like 7' 4" rods for bass fishing.

As with any rod, you should be aware of what's behind you. This one is no different.
sreding
Posted 10/29/2019 10:26 AM (#949076 - in reply to #948377)
Subject: Re: exaggerated rod length




Posts: 11


Being a bit taller (6'3") I really like my 9' and 9'6" rods. Nice big figure 8's are much easier and that 9'6" casts bucktails forever. The only thing I don't like is transporting/storing them.