Super User skunked_again Posted January 15, 2008 Super User Posted January 15, 2008 you have $350, do you spend more on the rod or the reel? i chose to spend more on the reel ($229) and less on the rod ($109). i did however spend some quality time fondling the G-Loomis rods until my wife ordered me to move on. Quote
Fish Man Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 rod but if it were me each one would be mid priced and i would spend the rest on new lures Quote
Cephkiller Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 Shimano Citica Loomis IMX So.....rod. Quote
flippincrazy Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 Rod. But if your confidence will be better with the better reel then do that. Quote
Super User Bassn Blvd Posted January 15, 2008 Super User Posted January 15, 2008 Rod..line..then reel. Quote
ABC123 Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 Rod..line..then reel. You can land a fish with a broken rod, you can land a fish with a broken reel, but you can't land a fish with broken line. ;D Quote
ABC123 Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 you have $350, do you spend more on the rod or the reel?i chose to spend more on the reel ($229) and less on the rod ($109). i did however spend some quality time fondling the G-Loomis rods until my wife ordered me to move on. The MSRP on my 4 spinning reels, combined, is $5 less than the MSRP of my worm/plasics rod. Wouldn't do anything different if I had to do it again. At any rate, buy what you like, like what you buy. There is no set requirement that say's the rod must be better. As long as it works for you, that's all that matters. Quote
Super User Catt Posted January 15, 2008 Super User Posted January 15, 2008 $350 divided by 2 = $175 Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted January 15, 2008 Super User Posted January 15, 2008 Hey skunked_again! I'm with you, buddy! Maybe rods are more important for "catching" fish, but the fun factor skyrockets with a great reel! On average, my reels represent 67% of the cost of a combination: 1/3 rod, 2/3 reel. To be specific regarding your $350 question: Pay $225-$250 for Shimano Chronarch 50MG. Find a St. Croix Avid AC70MF on sale for$70-$100. (Sightings have been reported at Gander Mountain). Quote
Hooked_On_Bass Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 To be specific regarding your $350 question:Pay $225-$250 for Shimano Chronarch 50MG. Find a St. Croix Avid AC70MF on sale for$70-$100. I like how you think roadwarrior! Although, the Chronarch is a 51MG for me ;D . Quote
jacktrevally Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 Reel- Stella 3000FD $630 Rod- Tica scla 6f t $18 Reels for me cover most of my budget! Quote
Super User Raul Posted January 15, 2008 Super User Posted January 15, 2008 It depends on the purpose of the setup, my most expensive rods are the rods I use for baits and techniques where sensitivy is a factor ( worming & jigging ). My least expensive rods are for baits and techniques where sensitivity is not such an important factor ( crankbaiting and spinnerbaiting ). Reels, most of my reels are in the $2-300 range for BCs and $80-150 in spinning. Quote
joshmb1999 Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 Definitely rod where sensitivity is a factor and the reel where it is not so much Quote
Popeye Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 As much as I'd like to spend more than I have on my rods, my reels have cost way more. Still, the rods I did buy are the best I could afford after paying for the reels and are way better than the cane pole I used as a kid eons ago:o) I totally agree with the sensitivity/rod cost comments. Quality/sensitivity does cost more, but since I fish mainly for fun, if I miss a strike because my $100 - $150.00 rod didn't detect it, oh well. Quote
TournyFish001 Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 daiwa exceler = $69 retail. $281.00 to spend on a rod ;-)... you could land a GLX on ebay for that. Quote
Jake. Posted January 15, 2008 Posted January 15, 2008 $350? Rod: St. Croix Avid, $180 Reel: Abu Revo SX, $150 so... the rod. Quote
Super User skunked_again Posted January 16, 2008 Author Super User Posted January 16, 2008 the rod choice was easy, the johnny morris rods were on sale. i thought the reel choice was also going to be easy, a revo stx but hey shimano has a rebate going so i started messing with the chronarch reels, then the daiwas and before i knew it i was walking out with a daiwa sol. it was a tough choice an i know at least one forum mod will think im crazy but after i mounted the reel on the rod i had to have the sol over the chronarch. the sol does cast oh so well though............ Quote
Super User Micro Posted January 16, 2008 Super User Posted January 16, 2008 I'd vote MORE ON REEL, LESS ON ROD, only because this is the way it has worked out for me. But, I guess you can pretty much spend as much as you want on either. Quote
Grandpa Posted January 16, 2008 Posted January 16, 2008 Even though in the "initial" cost of a combo I seem to spend more on the reel I don't seem to break as many reels as I do rods. :'( So the answer is Rods. Quote
Super User roadwarrior Posted January 16, 2008 Super User Posted January 16, 2008 i know at least one forum mod will think im crazy but after i mounted the reel on the rod i had to have the sol over the chronarch. Well, probably just one. : 8-) Quote
Super User .dsaavedra. Posted January 17, 2008 Super User Posted January 17, 2008 i would try to spend equal amounts on both, but if one had to be higher it would be the rod. because the imo the rod is much more "involved" than the reel. Quote
kms399 Posted January 17, 2008 Posted January 17, 2008 I spend more on the rod. that is where you get your sensitivity. and for me it is all about sensitivity. the reel just holds line and has a drag. but i will say that for a spinning reel my max would be around $80 (symetre) for a casting reel my minimum would be $120 (citica) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.