1st Impressions: Cabela's CZN rod...

[Pete Erickson]

I wonder when the Shadows will start showing up in the pro shops back East?  I know that they have been shipping them this week from Vancouver, Wa (Rajeff Sports).



Oh,  and

Yesterday, I did find out that the Shadows will not be sold in Cabela's stores like some of the other base model Echo rods,  Tim old me that Echo has an exclusivity agreement with its small pro-shop dealers that says that their premium signature rods(like the Dec Hogan, Shadow etc.) can not be sold in the major retail outlet stores...I think Cabela's employees can still order the Shadow rods at a discount--however, but they just will not be available in the stores...  I think that is how he explained it to me

will you guys, let me know with a post, when you start seeing them in the shops...ok?

cheers
Pete

[Mark Hanes]

Will do Pete! I will be headed to a Echo dealer near me sometime the next couple weeks.

[Chris Topmiller]

you guys, let me know with a post, when you start seeing them in the shops...ok?

cheers
Pete

Will do.  Should be any day now. 

[Reid Bacon]

I would imagine that by Friday.  Monday the latest thats what ups says for mine.  I can't wait to give her a rip.

[Pete Erickson]

thanks for the heads up guys,

Which ones did you guys order?



I'm waiting for mine just like the rest of you...I cant get my 11 footer back from Bret

I'll just let him keep that prototype I suppose and hopefully Jamie will send me a new one!

hopefully some of you guys can demo or "borrow" the 11 footer--fish it and post what you think of it --if you like it...or even suggestions to improve it...

thanks guys
Pete

[Reid Bacon]

Pete I got the.10'6" 3 wt. I was between that and the 11 4 but figured I would end up having both by the end of the year anyway. I want to see how it works spiders and softhackles also.  Pretty stoked Pete.

[Steve Sawyer]

I read through this post and I have to say that I am a little confused.  I hear people say that whatever rod handles like or has the same action as a Z-Axis or whatever other type rod they are comparing it to.  There are many rods that have a similar action and power.  It's the components (particularly the graphite) that in my opinion separates one rod from another.  G Loomis has GLX, Sage has the Generation 5, and St. Croix has SCVI.  These types of graphites are what make these rods the standard which all others are compared.  These companies spend a lot of money researching and creating these elite forms of graphite (which is why the rods cost so much) and the buyer is rewarded with a premium product.  There is nothing wrong with Cabela's rods.  I have over a dozen Cabelas XML rods and Cabelas is my absolute favorite store and their customer service is top notch.  I also have the Cabelas LST fly rod that I really think highly of and even though it has similar action to my G Loomis GLX rod, it is not the same rod by any means.  So to say that you get what you pay for is not a bad thing.  This statement has nothing derogatory towards any company in particular, but there is a reason why the CZN cost $199 and the Z-Axis cost $695.  The real argument should be the marginal increase in return you get from buying a Z-Axis over a CZN and not how much the CZN is like the Z-Axis, because they are two different rods.

Disclaimer: The above statement is just my humble opinion and is not meant to offend anyone.  If I have, then I would like to apologize up front.

[Pete Erickson]

Steve those are great points,

I think 30 years ago domestic built rods could not be emulated very well by offshore manufacturing, but with today's globalization of technology and very smart engineers from around the globe---especially Asia and India, many of the past "secrets" of rod design have become very accessible to those foreigners who desire them.

so, pretty much graphite is graphite...different companies add polys and composites, and use higher modulus, but perhaps more importantly, the way a rod is wrapped determines a lot about it's action...especially the taper and thickness of the graphite walls.  If an engineer from Asia wants to figure out what the modulus used and the taper, and how an expensive domestic made rod is wrapped,  it isnt rocket science anymore...in fact other than the more expensive rod components, more attention to quality control, and great marketing...the difference in the price of a domestic made rod and an offshore made rod, might be mostly labor costs and facility overhead...not rod design superiority like in past decades.  So the higher modulus graphite  higher costs can be overcome by insanely lower labor and manufacturing overhead costs, i.e, offshore...

Also some of our favorite domestic made rods, with prices over $700.00 are not made with the most expensive high modulus graphite...sometimes a desired action calls for a little bit lower modulus graphite...that said, most expensive domestic blanks do indeed incorporate expensive high modulus...because it makes them lighter and more sensitive, and therefore more expensive!

 Here is some general info about graphite and what decides a rod's action in today's design climate:

From Ralph Heidecke: Types of Graphite (IM6 etc)  

Modulus is a term that describes the stiffness to weight ratio of the graphite that’s used to create the rod blank. Here’s how it works….when you cast a lure, the rod flexes with the weight of the lure, storing energy as it flexes. When the motion of the rod stops, the rod flexes and releases all of its stored energy to propel the lure. When you increase the modulus of the graphite, you increase the ability of that graphite to store and release energy. You also increase the speed that the rod releases the stored energy. That in turn, increases the lure speed that is generated in the cast. Increase the modulus and you increase the reaction speed and power of the rod blank.

Below is a general example of modulus ratings using G Loomis classes:
GLX - 65 million modulus
IMX - 55 million modulus
GL3 - 47 million modulus (IM8)
GL2 - 42 million modulus (IM7)
IM6 - 38 million modulus
Standard Graphite - 33 million modulus

Unfortunately, increased modulus results in increased costs. The highest modulus graphite material costs much more than standard graphite.

IM6 is a 'Grade' of Magnamite, a graphite product of Hercules Inc. BASF makes a similar product, as well as others. The important thing about IM6, IM7, IM8 ratings for fishing applications is the tensile modulus. Most dept. store rods that are graphite composites are around 30-35 million psi tensile modulus. The IM is a shorthand for that tensile rating. IM6 = 40 million IM7 = 41 million IM8 = 45 million Tensile modulus briefly is: (Courtesy Owens-Corning) "When a bar is pulled in tension, it has to get longer. The tensile modulus is used to calculate how much longer it will get when a certain load is applied to it. Units are normally millions of pounds per square inch. Higher numbers indicate materials which will not elongate as much as others when they are being compared under equal tensile loading conditions." That elongation, or elasticity, is what allows the rod to spring and bend back.

So (grossly oversimplifying) a rod made of IM6 can be built with similar strength and flex characteristics to a rod that uses cheaper material, while making the tube wall thinner, which in theory makes the rod lighter and more sensitive. On the other hand, just because a rod is built using IM6 does not mean it's a great rod. Exactly how the material is laid up in the blank, whether any other material (other graphite composites, fiberglass, aramid and gel-spun polys for instance) the taper, length, all go towards making a good blank. These things also affect the action (fast or slow taper). Then to make a good rod, you have to worry about the seat and handle, and how it's connected, guide material and so on.

[Steve Sawyer]

Pete,

Great Response!  I guess that shoots my graphite argument down.  Though, there is something definitely different to me from my Generation 5 and GLX rods compared to the other rods I have.  These rods feel and fish so much nicer to me.  I guess it's because they were made in the United States (I'm bringing nationalization into it now).  Thanks again for the response.

- Steve

[Pete Erickson]

In my opinion the "premium" domestic rods are almost always better designed, because they are the original, and more thought has gone into how they have evolved through the years-also they have nicer components, are prettier, and have higher quality control...because they are handmade.   But, Spending 700 bucks on a domestic rod does not always guarantee a superior product, as far as rod action goes.

in the end, I dont think your assertion is wrong at all, in fact, if money is no object, the guy that buys a $700.00 rod over a 175.00 rod will get the better casting(smoother), lighter rod 9 out of 10 times in my opinion...

the interesting thing about the new rod design environment now, is that fly fishers and rod designers from the West are working very closely with manufacturing engineers from Asia...to produce "NEW" innovative rod actions--not just copies.  Tim Rajeff was a G-Loomis chief rod designer for years--he knows how to design a great rod, regardless of where its made and has no problem traveling over to China to work with the engineers over there...in fact he is over there right now working on the ECHO 3's...


great topic!

[Steve Sawyer]

This is a good topic!

I am a big fan of domestic rods for the reasons you mentioned.  Though, I have never paid retail for any of them.  If you look long and hard enough, you can find a deal.

I assume Tim Rajeff is the brother of Steve Rajeff.  According to G Loomis' Web Site they (with Steve as their Chief Engineer) are developing a new graphite material that is a higher grade than GLX.  I can't wait for those to come out in August!

This is also off topic (as is everything else I brought up in this thread), but Pete, how did you get into rod designing and manufacturing?  I am a gear fanatic and have always been fascinated with the rod creation process.  

[Domenick Swentosky]

Steve has way more rods than anyone I know.  Tell em how many, Steve.  Wait, maybe you'd better not; there's a possibility that you're wife may someday read this.

Seriously though, his experience and research with this stuff will bury most anybody else around (Pete and other professionals excluded of course).

I just want one rod a little longer and a little faster than the Avid that I've been using for years, somewhere in the 2-4 bills range, and I don't actually enjoy the searching process.  I'd rather fish.

Enjoy the day.
Domenick

[Pete Erickson]

agreed Dom!

when my gear slutting starts cutting into my fishing time, it's time to step away from the cash register!

cheers
Pete
 

[Domenick Swentosky]

Figured I should follow up on this.

I exchanged the CZN 10 footer for the 9'6" and I fished it hard today.  To me, these feel like two completely different rods, and I liked this rod quite a bit.  As much as a I said that the 10 footer just didn't have the feel that I was looking for, the 9'6" does have that feel.  It feels light, has a really nice crisp action and a generally nimble feel in my hands.

I'm going to attribute a lot of my comfort level with this rod to the way it balances for me right where I like that fulcrum  point.  We talked about rod balance on here before, and I know that most of you don't seem to think it matters much, but after some experimentation, I think I'm coming to the conclusion that for me balance is a big deal, and with the fly line extended to the tip top but not out of it, the rod balances just about right where I want it on my finger. 

I'm very surprised at the power this rod has for a three weight.  I found a few nice fish in some very heavy water, landed them and only after the fact did I think about the rod, which really tells me something.  I just didn't feel under-gunned  like I though that I would.  This is nothing like the other three weights that I've fished with (albeit only a few).  I straight nymphed and cast dry dropper in some of the heaviest wind I've ever fished through, and the rod was fine.  I enjoyed the fact that I was able to really shorted my casting stroke.  Just a flick of the wrist could really deliver those nymphs nicely once I got used to the rod.  I didn't tie on a weighted streamer, but I plan to on Monday or Tuesday.  But I will be surprised if it is uncomfortable to fish streamers for a little while with this rod.  I threw some pretty heavy anchors today in that deep, fast water. 

My question to Lance, Pete or anyone else would be this:  What determines why a rod is listed as a three weight, four weight, etc.?   This just doesn't feel like a three weight to me, and I like it!

Enjoy the day.
Domenick

[Pete Erickson]

Dom,

That question represents the 1100 lb elephant in the room of today's fly rod marketing. Traditionally, the line weight of a rod was "assigned" by the fact that the rod cast a (let's say) 3wt line "well" at 30 feet.  All of that is obviously out the window with today's Euro-nymphing rods. 

It will be interesting to see if a new categorization system is developed...

we thought about trying to create another rating system for the Shadow Series, but we were also afraid of losing sales because of it!

[Lance Egan]

Dom,

As Pete mentioned, rod weight selection is a subjective issue. 

Technically a 3 weight rod should load with 30 feet of fly line out of the rod.  A 3 weight fly line weighs 100 grains (+ or - 6 grains) in the first 30 feet.  Since euro-nymphing uses little or no fly line, using the proper fly line on these rods is only an advantage to make the rod more versatile.  As you mentioned, you fished the CZN nymphing and dry dropper all the while into the wind.  If you used the rod for dries or streamers you would no doubt use more fly line, then making the line rating quite important. 

The CZN rods are matched to a line rating just like every other rod, based on the designers feel and preference. 

Long rods allow better hook setting and fish fighting leverage, and thus feel stronger, and fish better

In my opinion, a 3 wt. in 7 to 8 foot lengths should be softer than a longer rod.  I base this on the fact that an angler should be buying or using a 7 to 8 foot rod for brushy applications, where short casts are the norm.  When utilizing the flyline, a soft rod will generally load with less line than a stiff rod, so a softy would be best suited for tight quarters and short casts.  A longer rod 9 to 10 foot should be designed for medium to longer casts, and thus should be a bit stouter to handle those applications. 

The great thing about the CZN's is that they have a soft enough tip to load well in close or with little or no fly line out of the tip, but then have a strong mid and butt section to handle heavy anchors and fight big fish. 

[Domenick Swentosky]

Great detailed answers guys.  Thanks.

Lance, as you guessed, the other 3 weights that I've fished were small stream rods.  They were VERY different from the CZN which is why I was so surprised yesterday.

The 3 weight CZN is a really nice rod and I could see myself becoming very comfortable with it as my primary fishing tool. 

Enjoy the day.
Domenick

[Dejon Hamann]

we thought about trying to create another rating system for the Shadow Series, but we were also afraid of losing sales because of it!

I think that would be very useful, but I can definitely see your hesitation to lead it off!  Especially when it comes to this new generation of rods that aren't primarily used for casting there has to be a better way of marketing them.  The CZN and Shadow both say "3wt" on them and they are two COMPLETELY different rods.

It's definitely a risk, but if deployed with a bit of tact it might actually be an extra selling point setting them apart from the rest of the field.

[Pete Erickson]

Steve,

Sorry for the late reply,  I didnt see your question originally.  I was asked to co-design the Shadow Series with Tim Rajeff(previous Loomis rod designer) and yes brother of current Loomis rod designer Steve Rajeff.  Tim has taught me much of what I know about graphite and rod design...It has been a really fun learning process! 

Bret Bishop has also been a huge part of the development process of the Shadows...the man knows his shiiit!