Long term investment potential: My prediction is that the makers who are best known for longer, larger rods will drift into the background in collectability and value, and the ones who specialize in high-quality rods traditional lengths and wts ( 7' 3/4; 7 1/2' 4/5 wt; 8 ft for a 5) with connections to famous houses/makers of times past, will be the more desirable rods. The generation of collectors (now in their golden years (age as well as bank accts)) who cut their teeth on smaller Leonards, etc, are now perhaps turning to longer hollow builts for diversity in their collections, but I can't see future generations (who will know from their 1st days astream the advantages of good carbon fiber) be willing to pay huge $$$ for the long, relatively heavy rods, even if they are hollow, rare, n-sided etc. I guess what I'm saying is, watch for the cane world to turn to the little rods for better collector potential in the coming decades...........
This forum began as Clark's Classic Bamboo Rod Forum, founded by Clark Davis for all who share a passion for classic rods. The forum is now owned by Whitefish Press aka Dr. Todd Larson - banjo.
For those who don't use English as their primary language we now have a translator for your language of choice hosted by Google.
0 Kudo
- Members Corner
- Forum Announcements
- Collecting Bamboo Fly Rods
- Fishing Bamboo Fly Rods
- Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.
- Rod and Reel Makers Forum
- Information About Makers & Manufacturers
- Taper Exchange
- Appraisals & Identification of Bamboo Fly Rods
- Ephemera, empherma and Ephemerella.....
- Book Talk
- Photos, paintings, written stories and talents.
- Classic Reels
- Collecting and Tying Classic Flies
- The Cooks Kitchen
- The Classic Fly Rod Classifieds
- Technical Support
Brandin Rod on an unmentionable site
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 creakycane |
On the contrary...... | #61 | ||
|
Posts: 1877 10/27/2008 14:06 |
Last Edited By: creakycane 10/27/2008 16:49.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
poudre1 |
#62 | |||
|
Posts: 178 10/27/2008 16:36 |
Boy Kevin...you really opened a can of worms with this thread!!!
Dave |
|||
|
|
||||
|
poudre1 |
#63 | |||
|
Posts: 179 10/27/2008 16:43 |
newtobamboo2 wrote:I have sold him several collectible Bamboo Fly Rods! Dave |
|||
|
|
||||
|
firehole |
#64 | |||
|
Posts: 3534 10/27/2008 17:48 Local user |
I've gone against the buyer on a few occasions and always came out on the short end of the stick.
Dennis |
|||
|
|
||||
|
tim simbari |
#65 | |||
|
Posts: 259 10/27/2008 18:40 |
Horsesho wrote: Amen. These are very nice rods, and not cheap. There are no less than a dozen makers.....all alive, that bring prices similar. This God like comparison to greats long since dead suggests a change in prescription medications is in order especially since so much of Per's taper work was derived from careful study and adaptation of some of the great tapers, there would be no second generations without the first. You might want to think about that as well as what they accomplished with the tooling of the day, most of which they invented.
Last Edited By: tim simbari 10/29/2008 18:57.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
pcg |
#66 | |||
|
Posts: 1733 10/27/2008 19:10 Admin |
And since Creaky broached the subject, I'll toss in that short rods are vastly over-rated, and I thoroughly disagree that short rods are some future
paradigm for smart investment. I've spent well over a decade fishing for everything from rainbows to monster steelhead, and find myself reaching for 9 1/2
and 10-foot rods far more than I reach for shorter rods. In fact, my shorter rods are largely useless, and certainly overrated. It's the rare small stream
that requires a 7 1/2-foot rod. Let alone something even smaller.
And BTW, I've handled a few rods, and cast many dozens of rods from the 1900s through the most recent graphites. Per Brandin's rods are superlative. And it's probably necessary to say that I don't own one, nor do I have one on order. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
firehole |
#67 | |||
|
Posts: 3535 10/27/2008 20:15 Local user |
pcg,
8' and shorter rods have always been the rods of choice by buyers for the last 20 years or more and will continue to be. Langs last auction results can attest to that. Short rods are useless? Come on give me a break I've taken 24"+ fish on short rods 8' and less and I'm sure most of the forum members have too. If I lived on the Buckley or Kispiox in BC and fished for 20lbs+ steelies I would probably have a longer but few of us do. Dennis |
|||
|
|
||||
|
PYochim |
#68 | |||
|
Posts: 408 10/27/2008 20:19 |
Soft Hackle wrote: This is exactly the post I was waiting for. As a relative neophyte, I am curious to see the responses of those who are in possession of the rods in question and can furnish the forum with the information regarding the comparison. Enquiring minds want to know!!! |
|||
|
|
||||
 bow river |
#69 | |||
|
Posts: 814 10/27/2008 22:31 |
brandin rods from what i have heard and seen are worth what he has them on his web site listed for , his rods are as good as the other top builders , everyone
will have a say who they think is the best builder on this planet , i have spent the last few days looking and checking around for a nice rod to add to my
collection ,
it surprised me when i heard from a fair amout of guys who think his rods are yes great but alot say he is not the best builder , i would say it's all average with the same good name builders keep coming up , they all make such great rods today , we are the ones who have the choice and were the ones who pick for what we like yet the next guy might hate the rod , on the rod that fetched so much lets all just be a little bit honest on this subject , no way was that rod worth $8900 , the reason and the only reason that the brandin rod went for that amount of money was that 2 guys wanted it for the cause , yes it had TOMS name on it , the 2 guys , yes both ,and hats off to the guy who won the rod , he had a great big heart and was doing it as he knew tom is not all that well health wise and the money was going to a great builder and a very good cause IMHO i wish them both the very best and hope that someday it will come back to them double for being so kind hearted ,
Richard
Check out my web site for vintage reels & rods , guided float trips on canada's # 1 best trout river http://bowriveradventures.googlepages.com/home |
|||
|
|
||||
|
jz2 |
#70 | |||
|
Posts: 162 10/27/2008 23:38 |
Pyochim
I consider myself a neophyte too, although I've had a chance to cast and fish some awesome flyrods. That said, I think selecting a flyrod is subjective. How does a fly rod work for you? Does it cast well? Does it speak to you when you use it? Does it fit your budget? Does it mesh with your self image? Does it have an emotional attachment? Even when people agree, they can disagree. I have a friend - we both own brandins - and we have almost the same taste in fly rod actions - between us we've cast dozens the finest fly rods from every maker, including payne, powell, leonard, brandin, yerxa, fe thomas, granger, phillipson, male, klausmeyer, hardy, young - you name it, the list is endless. We keep trying to buy from each others arsenal, and occasionally point out exceptionally good deals to each other. but we also disagree - he has an incredibly rare, short, light line Eustis Edwards - it is a penultimate edwards, and I can't cast it to save my life. I have a rod by a highly-respected contemporary maker - and in my hands a great casting rod. My friend put it down after a few casts because he disliked it so much. My bottom line is cast as many rods as you possibly can, keep a wide open mind, and don't buy what's "hot" if it doesn't work for you.
Last Edited By: jz2 10/27/2008 23:43.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
tiptop |
#71 | |||
|
Posts: 373 10/28/2008 06:13 |
pcg wrote: I'm on pcg's side on the long rod vs. short rod debate. The current market force for shorter rods was created by the low numbers that were made in previous generations resulting in today's perception that shorter is better. Our great grandchildren may turn back to the long rod by the same force working in reverse. The rare 8.5' or, dare I say it, 9' rod made today by a top builder may be the holy grail 50 years from now. In the same way, without doubt, Brandin's rod prices are greatly affected by the small numbers available. If he had built 100 rods a year for the last 20 years, we wouldn't be having this discussion regardless of how good his rods are. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
HERMES2069 |
Popular rod lengths | #72 | ||
|
Posts: 436 10/28/2008 07:28 |
It is funny how these threads fluctuate.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
cwood |
#73 | |||
|
Posts: 445 10/28/2008 08:36 |
brooker wrote: Exactly. Don't fool yourself guys. The new generation of fly fishers is starting off with long graphite and won't switch to heavy long cane rods with enthusiasm. Short cane rods are truly superior to graphite rods but by no means are long cane rods better tools than graphite. I fish with plenty of young fellas who think all my cane rods are heavy, but they can enjoy and appreciate the short rods; the longer rods they think are a joke and a novelty. You can't look at the past and supply and demand of short rods when you are thinking about future collectibility (or use). The new generation of fishermen don't think like the old timers. CWood |
|||
|
|
||||
|
pcg |
#74 | |||
|
Posts: 1736 10/28/2008 09:25 Admin |
I can only attribute this quote to inexperience:
Short cane rods are superior to short graphite rods and long graphite rods are vastly superior to long cane rods. This is precisely why long cane rods will never be in demand.Many of the old longer cane rods are exhilarating casters. I go Salmon & Steelhead fishing at least twice a year. My favorite rod? A 9 1/2-foot mid-1920s Edwards-made vom Hofe. It easily outcasts my longer Orvis graphites, & the sheer strength & power constantly blows away curious guides & graphite-only fishermen. It's become one of the few rods I treasure. I also spend 20 days+ on far smaller rivers fishing for browns & rainbows. Although I own a couple 7 1/2-foot graphites (that I paid far too much for), I find myself reaching for my 9-foot Edwards. There's a silken feel to the old DeLuxe that plastic just can't match. And I neglect to note the unexpected power of these old rods. If I need a beater--if I expect to bushwack a 1/4 mile--I bring one of my new Orvis rods. But when I do so, it's always a practical compromise. Before you start putting down old, long cane rods, cast a properly loaded example by one of the better makers. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
jeffkn1 |
#75 | |||
|
Posts: 1705 10/28/2008 09:40 |
A review of the bidding history on the Brandin rod shows that two people fought it out to the finish. Had the winning bidder not come into the auction the rod
would have gone for just over $4000, closer to where most of us might have expected a Brandin rod to end.
And yes, big cane rods still have a place in many fishing situations. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
cwood |
#76 | |||
|
Posts: 446 10/28/2008 10:04 |
Folks are always going to argue about the merits of long vs short rods, my point is that the younger fishermen today aren't going to buy into the
"long cane rods are great" philosophy because a long quality graphite is hard to beat. Calling someone inexperienced whom you obviously don't
know is silly. Different strokes for different folks. I personally don't like heavy, long rods, even if they can perform well, it just doesn't do it
for me.
CWood |
|||
|
|
||||
|
pcg |
#77 | |||
|
Posts: 1737 10/28/2008 10:20 Admin |
Brooker wrote,
long graphite rods are vastly superior to long cane rodsSorry, but such a comment reflects a lack of experience with longer cane rods. "Vastly superior"? There are advantages & disadvantages to both (for instance, if you have bad shoulders, you'll be delighted to be handed a graphite, regardless of its performance). But Brooker's comment is without nuance, & I very kindly attributed the statement to inexperience. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
quashnet |
#78 | |||
|
Posts: 2222 10/28/2008 11:23 Moderatus Muscae |
If I love chocolate ice cream, does that mean I have to hate peach ice cream? If I love my 6'3" Paul Young Midge, does that mean I have to hate my
8'6" Paul Young Special, or the two marvelous nine-foot Paul Young rods that I lawn cast earlier this month?
At the ice cream counter, I say "Two scoops please; chocolate and peach."
Quashnet's Paul H. Young Rod Database has photos and descriptions of over
360 PHY Co. rods, plus catalogs, accessories, etc. Thank you to all
who continue to send me PHY rod photos and info.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Sal Fontinalis |
#79 | |||
|
Posts: 527 10/28/2008 11:53 |
"....I'll toss in that short rods are vastly over-rated, and I thoroughly disagree that short rods are some future paradigm for smart investment.
I've spent well over a decade fishing for everything from rainbows to monster steelhead, and find myself reaching for 9 1/2 and 10-foot rods far more than
I reach for shorter rods. In fact, my shorter rods are largely useless, and certainly overrated. It's the rare small stream that requires a 7 1/2-foot rod.
Let alone something even smaller" is quite a statement! I will support creaky's statement that short rods are a better investment. Your biases
towards longer rods shouldn't preclude you from accepting hard evidence. As firehole suggested, all you need to do is check recent on-line auctions and
even this very site to see there is a premium attached to shorter rods and the trend has continued for many years. You may love your 9 1/2' and 10'
rods dearly but they will never demand the same premium as a shorter rod from the same maker. It has absolutely nothing to do with how well
you fish with them or if you think they are overrated. Even ol' Eustice built rods under 8' in length so he certainly
must have thought they had some merit.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
jeffkn1 |
#80 | |||
|
Posts: 1707 10/28/2008 12:38 |
No argument that short rods bring a premium and will continue to do so, as Per's rod demonstrates. But their perceived merits today don't jive with
what they were before the 1950's. Eustis made a 7' rod and their scarcity today says something about what kind of market share they had in his
lifetime. His offerings in some of the 1925 retailer's catalogs didn't even include a 7' rod though we all know he made one. Post-WW II the dry fly
came into its own , as did spin fishing, so one of the traditional functions of the long rod went away; you could then fish bait and small lures with a spin
rod.
Nowadays, weight seems to be driving bamboo rod sales and you can't get those long rods made light enough without sacrificing something along the way. Maybe I should take a survey among contemporary makers at Lang's show... |
|||
|
|
||||
- Members Corner
- Forum Announcements
- Collecting Bamboo Fly Rods
- Fishing Bamboo Fly Rods
- Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.
- Rod and Reel Makers Forum
- Information About Makers & Manufacturers
- Taper Exchange
- Appraisals & Identification of Bamboo Fly Rods
- Ephemera, empherma and Ephemerella.....
- Book Talk
- Photos, paintings, written stories and talents.
- Classic Reels
- Collecting and Tying Classic Flies
- The Cooks Kitchen
- The Classic Fly Rod Classifieds
- Technical Support
The Orvis database by Greg Reynolds Finally available again!!
Check out the Paul Young Rod Co. database which is owned and maintained by member Robert Golder (quashnet).
Paul Young Rod Co. database by quashnet
DISCLAIMER:The views, and opinions, posted here are the sole responsibility of the poster. Negative comments, when directed at individuals, or other private concerns, will not be tolerated, posters should treat this media no differently than any other media source, in other words, if you would not submit what you are going to post in the newspaper, or a magazine, and sign your name as the author, kindly refrain from doing so here. The Classic Fly Rod Forum is not an open air forum for vendor/maker complaints. If you seek resolution, it is recommended you talk to the vendor/maker. If you seek an audience, it is recommended you go elsewhere. The admin and the Moderators reserve the right to remove any items deemed inappropriate according to the rules of conduct prominently displayed on each forum. If you have any questions or concerns you are free to email us at
send email to the Classic Fly Rod Forum
Posting to sell Domain names and the like, i.e. SPAM, is against YUKU Policy, if you post these types of posts here you will be banned from this board and YUKU will more than likely ban you from the site entirely. Thank you..........
The Fly Fishing Loop is sponsored by flydepot.com
[ Home Waters | Next | Random | List | Search ]
