|
|
Posts: 293
| How do these rods compare? Looking for the opinion of somebody that has used both...Mainly going to use it for big blades.
Thanks |
|
| |
|
Posts: 306
| Hope you don't mind that I haven't used both, but I replaced my vast collection of Shimano Compre Musky rods with a TI 9' MH last year. Absolutely loved it for Jr. Double Cowgirls (the ones 10% smaller than Double 10s) and smaller. Thought it a smidge too light (though plenty capable) for Double 10s or Bulldawgs. Planning to buy the XH for that purpose (and all my jerkbaits) before my July trip. Can't compare the TI to the LT Big Nasty, but can say it was superior to the Shimano Compre Musky rods in every way. I put a full comparison of them on this forum last year after my last trip. I felt the TI was that good of a rod that it deserved the extra kudos. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 981
| I've used both...owned a bunch of TI XHs and they were/are great rods. I now have all big nasties and is my go-to rod for just about anything I throw.
Both rods are great for blades but if its just going to be a blade specific rod and depending on how much you throw blades then just go with the cheaper rod so you don't have $360.00 in a rod that tends to sit in the boat |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1224
Location: Okoboji | go nasty and dont look back |
|
| |
|
Posts: 908
Location: South-Central PA | Both are great rods...but you can get 3 TI's for the price of a Big Nasty.
jeremy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Booch - 2/19/2013 2:14 PM
Hope you don't mind that I haven't used both, but I replaced my vast collection of Shimano Compre Musky rods with a TI 9' MH last year. Absolutely loved it for Jr. Double Cowgirls (the ones 10% smaller than Double 10s) and smaller. Thought it a smidge too light (though plenty capable) for Double 10s or Bulldawgs. Planning to buy the XH for that purpose (and all my jerkbaits) before my July trip. Can't compare the TI to the LT Big Nasty, but can say it was superior to the Shimano Compre Musky rods in every way. I put a full comparison of them on this forum last year after my last trip. I felt the TI was that good of a rod that it deserved the extra kudos.
No offense, but you haven't used either one.
I haven't used the TI, but I enjoy using the Big Nasty very much.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 908
Location: South-Central PA | Allow me to give you more input. I've used both rods, a lot! I like the action of the TI's. To me, they load better. I like my XH for double 8's and 10's and single 12's. If I was going to throw double 12's or larger, I'd move up to the XXH. As far the the Big Nasty, I've only used it for 8's and 10's and it handles them well. I don't have experience with it throwing 12's.
jeremy |
|
| |
|
| I use both. They will both do the job, but my preference is the Big Nasty because the cork handle is about 3" shorter - they are both 9' long rods overall, but the longer handle on the TI is a little awkward for me on the figure 8 and will catch on my shirt if it's a looser shirt and I switch hands on the 8. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Both a great rods. I'd say the choice depends on what you like in a fishing rod and your budget. For blades, I like a slightly softer rod to make casting the light, wind resistant lures a little easier. The TI XH is a little slower and softer than the Big Nasty. If you want the rod to load up a little less in the 8, the Big Nasty has a little stiffer tip and could make fast figure 8's with big blades a little easier.
In my mind the TI XH could be a dedicated blade rod while the Big Nasty would be a dedicated Mag Dawg sized rubber rod, and probably also a nice crank ripping rod - though both will do either job.
Tucker |
|
| |
|
Posts: 410
Location: With my son on the water | I just bought a 9' XXH TI. I will probably put a pounder on it and leave it on it. But like the other person said this handle is waaaaaaaaaay to long. In the fall with more cloths the handle will get caught during the figure 8 all the time. We really don't need anymore leverage to throw a bait that heavy as I normally slow them down so they don't go so far.
I just ordered a few rod caps from Mudhole and I am going to cut off like 4 inches of the handle so it matches my other rods. While I am at it I am going to add so lead in the handle too so it isn't so tip heavy.
But I also agree with some others, you can almost buy 3 TIs for the price of a Legend. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1638
Location: Minnesota | i have not used the big nasty but i have used the ti .i will never buy another ti rod again there a cheap rod thats all i can say good abought it mine is the xxhevy for up to 36 oz.i would say its more for a 16 oz rod. i hate the rod so much im going to buy a 2 pound bull dog and snap it in half and film it. like i said i have not used a big nasty but i would buy that over a ti rod |
|
| |
|
| I like the idea of taking 4" off the handle, but would have to accept that it would be an 8'8" rod instead of 9' - which it pretty much is anyway unless I put both hands on the handle during the 8 - but then the handle is so long it catches my shirt! I think I just talked myself into trying to make it an 8'8" rod.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | The 1st time I used my TI rod I thought the handle was too long as it caught my T-shirt even when transitioning into the 8. Apparently I've changed my technique because now I have no problems, even in heavy fall clothes. If I had a custom rod done I'd go with an 18" handle now too. My rods with 16" handles feel short now. I'm only about 5'8" also so I don't have extra long arms.
If you do shorten the handle, I might only go an inch or so at a time till it's comfortable. After getting used to a longer handle my one rod with a 14" handle drives me nuts now. Just personal preference but you may want to give a longer handle a shot to see what you think after getting used to it.
Muskyhunter47, I'll enjoy watching you filming yourself tossing the 2 Pounder. I have a feeling you might wear out your shoulders before breaking the rod. Maybe you'll catch a pig on the 2 Pounder while trying, lol.
Tucker |
|
| |
|
Posts: 410
Location: With my son on the water | I have several St Croix rods and several Musky innovations rods which all have handles in that 14 to 16 inch range (they are all the same length). I bought another rod that had a longer handle and used it for a year and it drove me nuts. Fortunately I bought it with the agreement that if I didn't like it I could return it, so I did.
I bought the TI without actually looking at it so I didn't know how long the handle was for sure.
My plan is to cut it down so it is the samd length as all the other rods. I got a good deal on it so if it doesn't work out (oh well).
One thing to add, I wear one those inflateable life jackets 100% of the time so that maybe influencing what I do. (But the reason for that is a different story) |
|
| |
|
Posts: 265
Location: Hudson,WI | kodiak - 2/19/2013 2:30 PM
go nasty and dont look back
I agree!! I loved my Big nasty so much, I bout another one. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 149
| Do yourself a favor and buy a tackle industries rod. They perform just as good as the St Croix and cost a lot less. These are truly great rods. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1716
Location: Mt. Zion, IL | Get the big nasty and don't look back. The TI is an ok rod, bit it is no St. Croix. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7
| Last year about this time I was looking for a new rod and posted a poll - see link below. Based on the responses 2 companies stood out - Tackle Industries and St. Croix. After reading a ton of reviews on both rods and looking at them at fishing shows I came to the conclusion that based on the cost difference and the positive customer service reviews that I would give the TI rods a shot. I ended up purchasing a 9 ft XH and a 9 ft MH. They performed great all year - I am very pleased with my purchase. I used the XH on Mag swimbaits and double 10's and the MH on double 8's and small/med crankbaits. Over the summer I also had the chance to use a friends St. Croix rods and they are great rods also - from quality and performance standpoint both rods are in the same league. You obviously are not going to go wrong buying either rod.
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=71...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 410
Location: With my son on the water | Just a bit of clarification. If you lay a 9 foot TI and an 8'6" St Croix next to each other and line up the reel seats the tips come to the same length. The extra length of the TI is all in the handle. I am not saying that is good or bad but I cut my TI down to make the handle the same length as the St Croix, but now I have two 8'6" rods. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4053
Location: Land of the Musky | Personally I think cutting an 18" handle down to a 12" handle would be odd to fish with but btfish is correct on the lengths of TI rods vs the SC rods but that would be an 8'6" St Croix with the shortest handle the SC rods come with. They also have a 16" handle too you can get on the 8'6" BN. If you have ever talked with us at a show you have probably heard me say that our 9' rods fish like an 8'6"-8'10" rod from reel seat up. Its the extra leverage the handle gives you during casting, in the fig 8 and overall comfort that makes the difference (as many of you already know). The 8'6" St Croix rods have a variety of different length rods from the reel seat up depending on the handle configuration you get with that rod as well. I think they have 4 or 5 different length handles you can get on their musky models making each 8'6" or 9' rod different "lengths". Its a good point to note when you are picking out any rod brand if overall length from the reel seat up is your target (trolling would be a good point). The "longest" 9' rod has the shortest handle  And technically a 9' St Croix with split grip handle (17" long) is 1" in handle length less than ours so they are almost identical from the reel seat up if you compare a TI 9' rod to SC 9' rod and both brands with the longer handles fish from the reel seat up like a slightly shorter rod but you will be much happier with a longer handle length IMO on any rod brand you buy. And last, like many have said above, you won't go wrong with a SC.... We did not build our rods to compete with a premier rod like SC either but I think our quality/price over the years has done a very good job getting our TI rods close. Our primary goal is to get quality musky tackle into the hands of our customer for a good price. We want everyone to be able to afford to fish.
Come check our rods out at the Wausau show this weekend. We will also have rods in various booths at the MN show in April. Feel free to email me to find out who will have them in MN. Check out the new 6' kids rods too!
FYI--In 2013 we are coming out with all new 7', 7'6" and 8'6" rods. Handle lengths on the 7s will be 13" and the 8'6" will be 16" in length. Don't worry, we are keeping the 18" fat cork handles on the 9' rods.
Thanks
James
[email protected]
PS-I love the loner handles. I am 5'10" and anything under a 16"-18" handle just feels wrong... JMO for my personal fishing habits.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | You need a longer handle to get the most out of these new long rods. They cast more effortlessly if you have correct casting motion which is where most people who don't like the longer handles are having their problem. You want your cast to be like a pendulum with your shoulders staying in the same place instead of throwing your arms out with the rod on every cast. Most people don't realize their casting motion is very inefficient and often complain about being tired after a full day of casting. Basically you want to keep your shoulder in place and during the cast pull your bottom hand in while leaving your top hand roughly in place. Most people swing both arms wildly making more effort for themselves and creating much more stress on their joints. Not only that but it usually leads to a shorter cast. Having a longer handle makes this process much easier and balances the rod much better during retrieve.
Personally I extend my handles out to 17-18" (I'm 6'1" ish) and it's done wonders for my length of cast, duration on the lake, and improved my ability to do better figure 8's. IMOP the only thing St.Croix does wrong with their rods is makes the handles too short. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 833
| Treats that is intersting, I had an 18" handle on a custom and actually shrank it to 16". The casting wasn't the issue, it was the transition on the figure 8 that kept getting hosed up for me. As mentioned above it would catch my shirt and would create problems. I agree with you on casting mechanics, one of the under appreacited aspects of the sport that makes people better. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 785
| x2 on the longer handle, especially when slinging big plastic... but I'm 6'-1" as well. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 133
Location: South Bend, Indiana | RyanJoz - 2/24/2013 9:32 PM
Get the big nasty and don't look back. The TI is an ok rod, bit it is no St. Croix.
Well said. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 55
| I love my TI rod and you simply can't beat the price. Their customer service is outstanding as well! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 139
| As mentioned you can get 3 TI's for the price of one SC.. i used TI's rods all the time and they are fantastic for the price. I have 1 or 2 SC's too just not the big nasty. I also prefer the longer handles. SC seems to have shorter handles. I notice the difference when casting. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2384
Location: On the X that marks the mucky spot | Brad, you get used to it. Most people keep their rod pointed out. Just tip it up a bit and it's no problem. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 293
| I just wanted to thank everyone for their input!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Muskie Treats - 2/26/2013 10:33 PM
Brad, you get used to it. Most people keep their rod pointed out. Just tip it up a bit and it's no problem.
I agree, you get used to it. I think as the bait nears the boat I lower the rod tip and begin to extend my arm. Reach over and grab the butt of the handle before starting your 8 and crossing the rod across your body.
I'm not sure what I changed, but I know the longer handle hung up on my clothing initially but does not anymore, whether it be a loose t-shirt or heavy fall clothing/rain gear.
I'm only about 5'8" and would think if I can get the handle to clear most average to taller guys shouldn't have any problems. If I ever have a custom rod built it will have an 18" handle.
Tucker |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1141
Location: NorthCentral WI | ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 865
| I am not fond of the longer cork handles either, I have several St.Croix rods and last fall I purchased two TI rods 9' rods. Used both them a dozen times and wound up selling them. For me the handles were just too long and kept getting hung up on my clothing . I would recommend the St, Croix Big Nasty without a doubt. It's true you can get three of the TI rods for the same price of the BN rod but what good are three rods, if you don't like using them? Sr. |
|
| |
|
| I love my TI rods and I do own a BN. It sits in the garage now. Love the longer handles on the TI rods too. The fat grips are so much more comfortable during a long day of fishing and the longer handles really make launching baits effortless. To each their own but the TI rods are as good as any St Croix I have ever used or owned. JMO
Ron
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 456
Location: Kansas City BBQ Capitol of the world | Pappy - 2/23/2013 4:13 PM
I like the idea of taking 4" off the handle, but would have to accept that it would be an 8'8" rod instead of 9' - which it pretty much is anyway unless I put both hands on the handle during the 8 - but then the handle is so long it catches my shirt! I think I just talked myself into trying to make it an 8'8" rod....
What he said. |
|
| |
|
| So if you bought the 9' Big nasty with the 17" handle you would be cutting the handle down so the rod is 8'8" to. I don't see the difference in lengths between a TI 9' with 18" handle and the BN with a 17" handle. If guys don't like the long handles they are going to hate both the 9' TI and the BN.
Ron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 908
Location: South-Central PA | Coming from a custom rod builder's perspective, I've heard a ton of opinions on handle lengths, sizes and shapes. I've also done extensive reading on ergonomics to find what is best for the majority of fishermen. No two fishermen are built exactly the same. There are so many variables when considering the grips on a musky rod: arm length, hand size, strength, agility, type of clothes worn, etc. The crazy part is, you can do all the measurements on someone and based on the result, they should prefer a certain type of grip. Trouble is, when you talk to them about the build, they prefer something much different. There are some guidelines to follow when discussing grips, but all that can go out the window in the name of personal preference. I've built rods for women who were 5'6" and they want an 18" rear grip. I've also built rods for men who were 6'6" and they want a 16" rear grip.
With all of the rods I've built and all of the potential customers I've talked to, I feel that I have a pretty good idea of what the average fisherman / fisherwoman is looking for in a set of grips. Most prefer a rear length of 17"-18" and a diameter of 1.25". For a fore grip, most prefer a grip in the 5"-6" length with a full-wells or a reverse half-wells. Virtually 99% prefer a fore grip with a large palm support (hump) in the middle of the grip.
No matter what grips come on factory rods, you'll find those who love them and those who hate them. You can't please everyone all of the time. The moral of the story is this: find out what grips you prefer on a rod and buy a factory rod (or have one built) to suit your preferences.
jeremy |
|
| |
TI 9' XH vs. LT Big Nasty