This topis has probably been discussed already but I was not able to find that information. Can you guys with experience about these rods tell me the difference between the two - about how they cast - what type of fishing they were meant for.
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
OnlyTrout |
Leonard 50 versus 50DF |
Lead | ||
|
This topis has probably been discussed already but I was not able to find that information. Can you guys with experience about these rods tell me the difference between the two - about how they cast - what type of fishing they were meant for. |
||||
|
|
||||
upstatetrout |
#1 | |||
|
The only difference I know is whether they printed DF on the hang tag or not. Tom
|
||||
|
|
||||
CtKenC |
#2 | |||
OnlyTrout wrote:I have one of each, made during Tom Maxwell period ... he inked each. The 50DF-5 came via "Chief Inspector Cloozoe" and the HUNT 50 came via "GoFish66".
The 50DF-5 is much faster (stiffer tip) than the HUNT 50-5. I cannot testify if it is the HUNT attribute that makes it such, or, is it the DF simply has a faster, stronger taper than the regular 50. If you hold the assembled rods out straight in front of you, parallel to the floor and then wiggle them you would see the HUNT 50-5 flexes further down the shaft than the 50DF-5. My 50DF-5 can handle a 6wt very nicely and I'm certain it could also manage a 7wt nicely if the need called for it ... and, it is a lovely Dry Fly rod with the 5wt it is labelled for. Ken |
||||
|
|
||||
warrick |
#3 | |||
|
Theoretically, the "DF" designation should be a bit crisper action, and a bit more powerful.
Its true that there's no real telling what hang tag or butt cap may have been attached on any particular day. In my (limited) experience, almost every Leonard I've tried has had its own action. Most models seem far from "cookie cutter" similar. Much has been written describing the numerous (and sometimes confusing) model designations that the company put out over its long history. I'd say that the bottom line is that you'd have to physically compare most Leonards, side by side, to arrive at the truth for You. I have a 49DF which while rated as a 5wt, also gracefully presents a 6wf line equally well; it is easily that powerful. But it is equally sensitive to the take of a small panfish too. My 50 Hunt (DF) is yet another level of power well beyond the 49. But I'm certain that I could find either of those two designs, 49 or 50, (not Hunt), which demonstrate much softer and traditional actions as well. There's a Leonard for every fishing style, and finding the right one for you may be a journey. I'm certain that several of our forum members have 50's. IMHO it's a wonderful "do everything" model. Enjoy.
Last Edited By: warrick 01/30/2009 16:45.
Edited 1 time.
|
||||
|
|
||||
PA Limestoner |
#4 | |||
|
During the Maxwell era, there were relatively few master patterns to run through the beveller. What they did was to change the multiplyer setting on the head
which allowed the slope of the rod to speed up (DF), stay medium(M) and there was even a much slower full flex offered(FF). I have miked a number of these
Leonards on inch to inch intervals, and when I graph on engineering vellum paper, the slope differences are readily apparent. However by rotating on graph on
top of another the dots line up true to each other, showing they came from the same pattern. Tim Zietak and I talked about this a few weeks ago, and we both
agree that the differences in the actions between a DF and M are much greater in the standard blond rods. The flamed Hunts in DF and M are closer in
performance due to the stiffening effect of flaming.
|
||||
|
|
||||
bobbeegee |
#5 | |||
Go Heels!!!
Last Edited By: bobbeegee 01/30/2009 20:16.
Edited 1 time.
|
||||
|
|
||||