What high-end, sensitive spinning rods

[rangerjockey]

I'm a fan of the poison adrena. I can't imagine a knot that would hang on those guides.

[GamblerSam]

NFC xray or carbon.

[Mahomee]

Nrx are great and my knot goes thru them fine.

I am at a loss to understand when people claim they can build a rod as good as Nrx, most using the Nfc blank.

If they could and do it cheaper than they would surely have gone to market already and be the one people are comparing to.

[JJohnSind]

Nrx are great and my knot goes thru them fine.

I am at a loss to understand when people claim they can build a rod as good as Nrx, most using the Nfc blank.

If they could and do it cheaper than they would surely have gone to market already and be the one people are comparing to.

I'm guessing you haven't had a well made rod in your hands to compare with, otherwise you'd know. That's not saying every rod builder makes the best though, so I agree with the skeptism. Those saying "cheaper" are cutting some corners (ie. lesser guides, cheaper cork, etc). For fun, let's break down the NRX. Yes, it is absolutely a great rod, but specialized in bottom contact. Most of the ones I've had my hands on have extra fast tips - great for sensitivity, but shortcomings on many other techniques. Love them or hate them, NRX's use recoil guides. I hate them. They are noisy, groove easy, and I believe the flexibility takes away sensitivity (wouldn't common sense say that a stiffer guide transmits vibrations better than a softer, flexible guide?). On the NRX spinning rods, they have the Fuji VSS reel seat backwards, in other words, there is so much cork above the reel seat that your fingers would never touch the blank (this may be a personal preference, but a deal breaker for me). NRX uses cork, fairly good cork, but not the best available. "Best" is just cosmetically better, no functional advantages, but if you're looking for functionally better, carbon fiber is more sensitive, lighter and more durable. As far as the blank, nothing can be taken away from NRX. It is what it is and is the standard for comparison for a reason. The reason you hear so many use the NFC blank in comparison is because everything Loomis has before the NRX, was designed by Gary Loomis. He restarted a new blank company (North Fork Composites aka "NFC") several years after the sale to Shimano and NFC's blanks from their standard modulus to their high modulus matches up with everything Loomis has up to the GLX. The NRX is a notch above the GLX, NFC has two lines above the GLX (NFC's HM for comparison) - the X-Ray, and now the C6O2 Carbon Air. As far as NRX's innovation, the "Spiral X", Gary Loomis himself was on a podcast recently and when asked about this he chuckled and said it was technology from the 90's, and blanks have come a long way since. Either way, sensitivity seems relatively the same to me, when comparing X-ray to NRX, much less the supposedly better C6O2. Weight-wise X-rays exceed NRX's (are lighter - a hair, but nonetheless, lighter). I believe lightness also contributes to sensitivity. I have had my hands on a few C6O2's and they are noticeably better than the X-rays, but very limited in availabilty. If anyone doubts that the X-ray is equivalent to the NRX's, the C6O2's definitely exceed. The retail cost of a C6O2 blank is $350.00, so, no, you are not building cheaper than an NRX.

Here's my point: if the blanks are relatively the same (I believe that the NFC might actually be better, if not anything else the fast action is more useful to me than extra fast), would not a rod made with better guides, better reel seat, better handle (and possibly better ergonomics), and also lighter in weight overall (I bet you never thought that there would be rods lighter than the NRX), not be a better finished product? I'm not even taking into account fit and finish, as that would vary among rodbuilders, but all the NFC's I've had my hands on were average at best on build quality (gaps in threads, slightly misaligned guides, missed spots on epoxy, etc). Want to see a very good mass produced rod with exceptional build quality? Get your hands on a Megabass Destroyer line.

As far as why people who claim to make better rods not gone to market, you are missing the point of custom built rods. They are not mass produced and marketed with a corporate advertising budget. The customization IS what allows for a better build. In many cases, a well build custom rod will actually cost MORE than store bought brands. Of course, all rodbuilders are NOT equal, so just because its "custom" doesn't mean its better. The potential is simply there, with the right builder.

As for me, I can afford anything I want and even have some $1,000.00 store bought fly rods that I can't make any better myself (hence why I didn't even try). Not keeping and using the NRX was not about saving money, it was about having something better (at any cost, so if it ended up being more, so be it). I have had and have used NRX's, so my assessment is based on that experience. I would be careful about knocking someone's claim that they have better rods until you've tried them in person yourself. You might be surprised how good rods can be.

[dragon1]

I'm guessing you haven't had a well made rod in your hands to compare with, otherwise you'd know. That's not saying every rod builder makes the best though, so I agree with the skeptism. Those saying "cheaper" are cutting some corners (ie. lesser guides, cheaper cork, etc). For fun, let's break down the NRX. Yes, it is absolutely a great rod, but specialized in bottom contact. Most of the ones I've had my hands on have extra fast tips - great for sensitivity, but shortcomings on many other techniques. Love them or hate them, NRX's use recoil guides. I hate them. They are noisy, groove easy, and I believe the flexibility takes away sensitivity (wouldn't common sense say that a stiffer guide transmits vibrations better than a softer, flexible guide?). On the NRX spinning rods, they have the Fuji VSS reel seat backwards, in other words, there is so much cork above the reel seat that your fingers would never touch the blank (this may be a personal preference, but a deal breaker for me). NRX uses cork, fairly good cork, but not the best available. "Best" is just cosmetically better, no functional advantages, but if you're looking for functionally better, carbon fiber is more sensitive, lighter and more durable. As far as the blank, nothing can be taken away from NRX. It is what it is and is the standard for comparison for a reason. The reason you hear so many use the NFC blank in comparison is because everything Loomis has before the NRX, was designed by Gary Loomis. He restarted a new blank company (North Fork Composites aka "NFC") several years after the sale to Shimano and NFC's blanks from their standard modulus to their high modulus matches up with everything Loomis has up to the GLX. The NRX is a notch above the GLX, NFC has two lines above the GLX (NFC's HM for comparison) - the X-Ray, and now the C6O2 Carbon Air. As far as NRX's innovation, the "Spiral X", Gary Loomis himself was on a podcast recently and when asked about this he chuckled and said it was technology from the 90's, and blanks have come a long way since. Either way, sensitivity seems relatively the same to me, when comparing X-ray to NRX, much less the supposedly better C6O2. Weight-wise X-rays exceed NRX's (are lighter - a hair, but nonetheless, lighter). I believe lightness also contributes to sensitivity. I have had my hands on a few C6O2's and they are noticeably better than the X-rays, but very limited in availabilty. If anyone doubts that the X-ray is equivalent to the NRX's, the C6O2's definitely exceed. The retail cost of a C6O2 blank is $350.00, so, no, you are not building cheaper than an NRX.

Here's my point: if the blanks are relatively the same (I believe that the NFC might actually be better, if not anything else the fast action is more useful to me than extra fast), would not a rod made with better guides, better reel seat, better handle (and possibly better ergonomics), and also lighter in weight overall (I bet you never thought that there would be rods lighter than the NRX), not be a better finished product? I'm not even taking into account fit and finish, as that would vary among rodbuilders, but all the NFC's I've had my hands on were average at best on build quality (gaps in threads, slightly misaligned guides, missed spots on epoxy, etc). Want to see a very good mass produced rod with exceptional build quality? Get your hands on a Megabass Destroyer line.

As far as why people who claim to make better rods not gone to market, you are missing the point of custom built rods. They are not mass produced and marketed with a corporate advertising budget. The customization IS what allows for a better build. In many cases, a well build custom rod will actually cost MORE than store bought brands. Of course, all rodbuilders are NOT equal, so just because its "custom" doesn't mean its better. The potential is simply there, with the right builder.

As for me, I can afford anything I want and even have some $1,000.00 store bought fly rods that I can't make any better myself (hence why I didn't even try). Not keeping and using the NRX was not about saving money, it was about having something better (at any cost, so if it ended up being more, so be it). I have had and have used NRX's, so my assessment is based on that experience. I would be careful about knocking someone's claim that they have better rods until you've tried them in person yourself. You might be surprised how good rods can be.

FWIW, Gamakatsu Luxxe Efreet rods are STOOPID light for their power levels and incredibly sensitive and impeccably put together.

[willwork4fish]

I'm guessing you haven't had a well made rod in your hands to compare with, otherwise you'd know. That's not saying every rod builder makes the best though, so I agree with the skeptism. Those saying "cheaper" are cutting some corners (ie. lesser guides, cheaper cork, etc). For fun, let's break down the NRX. Yes, it is absolutely a great rod, but specialized in bottom contact. Most of the ones I've had my hands on have extra fast tips - great for sensitivity, but shortcomings on many other techniques. Love them or hate them, NRX's use recoil guides. I hate them. They are noisy, groove easy, and I believe the flexibility takes away sensitivity (wouldn't common sense say that a stiffer guide transmits vibrations better than a softer, flexible guide?). On the NRX spinning rods, they have the Fuji VSS reel seat backwards, in other words, there is so much cork above the reel seat that your fingers would never touch the blank (this may be a personal preference, but a deal breaker for me). NRX uses cork, fairly good cork, but not the best available. "Best" is just cosmetically better, no functional advantages, but if you're looking for functionally better, carbon fiber is more sensitive, lighter and more durable. As far as the blank, nothing can be taken away from NRX. It is what it is and is the standard for comparison for a reason. The reason you hear so many use the NFC blank in comparison is because everything Loomis has before the NRX, was designed by Gary Loomis. He restarted a new blank company (North Fork Composites aka "NFC") several years after the sale to Shimano and NFC's blanks from their standard modulus to their high modulus matches up with everything Loomis has up to the GLX. The NRX is a notch above the GLX, NFC has two lines above the GLX (NFC's HM for comparison) - the X-Ray, and now the C6O2 Carbon Air. As far as NRX's innovation, the "Spiral X", Gary Loomis himself was on a podcast recently and when asked about this he chuckled and said it was technology from the 90's, and blanks have come a long way since. Either way, sensitivity seems relatively the same to me, when comparing X-ray to NRX, much less the supposedly better C6O2. Weight-wise X-rays exceed NRX's (are lighter - a hair, but nonetheless, lighter). I believe lightness also contributes to sensitivity. I have had my hands on a few C6O2's and they are noticeably better than the X-rays, but very limited in availabilty. If anyone doubts that the X-ray is equivalent to the NRX's, the C6O2's definitely exceed. The retail cost of a C6O2 blank is $350.00, so, no, you are not building cheaper than an NRX.

Here's my point: if the blanks are relatively the same (I believe that the NFC might actually be better, if not anything else the fast action is more useful to me than extra fast), would not a rod made with better guides, better reel seat, better handle (and possibly better ergonomics), and also lighter in weight overall (I bet you never thought that there would be rods lighter than the NRX), not be a better finished product? I'm not even taking into account fit and finish, as that would vary among rodbuilders, but all the NFC's I've had my hands on were average at best on build quality (gaps in threads, slightly misaligned guides, missed spots on epoxy, etc). Want to see a very good mass produced rod with exceptional build quality? Get your hands on a Megabass Destroyer line.

As far as why people who claim to make better rods not gone to market, you are missing the point of custom built rods. They are not mass produced and marketed with a corporate advertising budget. The customization IS what allows for a better build. In many cases, a well build custom rod will actually cost MORE than store bought brands. Of course, all rodbuilders are NOT equal, so just because its "custom" doesn't mean its better. The potential is simply there, with the right builder.

As for me, I can afford anything I want and even have some $1,000.00 store bought fly rods that I can't make any better myself (hence why I didn't even try). Not keeping and using the NRX was not about saving money, it was about having something better (at any cost, so if it ended up being more, so be it). I have had and have used NRX's, so my assessment is based on that experience. I would be careful about knocking someone's claim that they have better rods until you've tried them in person yourself. You might be surprised how good rods can be.

Agree with John regarding the C6O2's...they are better than any blank/rod I've ever had in my hands (NRX, Steez and Legend Elite included). As far as the cost goes, yes retail is $350 but I have built 4 and have 3 more blanks and a SWB807 coming and I've never paid more than $150. In terms of a spinning rod right now a C6O2 SJ703 is $125, built with Torzites and a carbon grip/butt and my preferred seat which is just a standard DPSM (other "higher end" grips won't be more than another $25) you're in it for less than $350 in parts (retail). Even if someone charged you $250 to build it your still less than an NRX. And as long as you're not looking for any fancy threadwork or marbling and just want a super light, super sensitive rod this is an easy build.

Yes they are limited to just a few models but in all honesty I've used my SJ703 for neds, DS, smaller tubes, finesse jigs, 2.8's, etc and it's better than any other 6-10lb line spinning rod I've used.

[slipknobber bot]

Nrx are great and my knot goes thru them fine.

I am at a loss to understand when people claim they can build a rod as good as Nrx, most using the Nfc blank.

If they could and do it cheaper than they would surely have gone to market already and be the one people are comparing to.

Go get one built, you will no longer be at a loss.