einscodek

Just got back from fishing this mornin when I shoulda been workin' 22" bass measured and weighed at 4.5 lbs (picture attached) Caught off a spincast setup.. Daiwa Goldcast. Caught a 21" the previous month weighing 4 lbs off the same setup. These guys must not be feeding well, I'd expect these guys over 20" be around 5 lbs+ Sorry for the picture quality it was just me by myself and the lil piggy was shakin' and bakin'. Oh the two anglers in the picture up the shoreline were using a spinning and baitcasting setup but didnt catch a fish this morning. Spincast aint for bass is it? Can you tell I love my GC?

Like I said.. Those that say spincast isnt for bass or pike+ .. tell it to a spincast reel.. it doesnt care it does what it does When I took a 16" largemouth today I didnt even pause to think "oh my God I actually caught a bass on spincast" .. lol.. With my Daiwa GC reel, I'll take on most anything in freshwater and even some salties.. a reel is only part of the equation for fishing.. and the GC120 can handle alot for me..

all the reasons listed above.. and as a shock leader for braid as enough shock will snap even my 50# braid

It aint under $15 but Seaguar Tatsu IMO the best Fluoro.. is on sale at tacklevvarehouse .. I paid double that a spool! BTW I only use it as leader

Havent tried the Abu but all the top-of-line spincasts should have oscillating spools..Abu, Zebco.. I just like a larger aperature so I went with Daiwa. I think plenty of guys fish with spincast but since there seems to be some stigma about it being a beginner reel kids use & most dont come out and certainly dont boast of it. But when I hear knocks against spincast, I just have to say its the best setup I have even tho it took me forever to find the right combo for effective fishing. Not saying it right for everyone by no means (and it may be too heavy for kids) but its right by me. 4.3:1 retrieve isn't as fast as my Trio30s by any means but its plenty good.. Daiwa GC120 (12oz) Sufix 832 20# Braid (I dont like dealing with mono memory issues esp in spincasts) Use it on my Crucial flippin stick and yes call me crazy but also on my swimbait rod.. If weights an issue, GC100 is 10oz and I'd probably pair that with 10# 832

Heard that about Silvercast somewhere before.. think ad to do with small clearance it had for the line and maybe just for the smaller Silvercast models..Also Silvercast doesnt have oscillating spool and line has better chance to dig in.. Silvercast or even Goldcast .. I'd stay away from the smaller models as the spools are low capacity and when the spool is low the angle at which the line needs to go gets steep and casting distance from there suffers.. But to say spincast cant catch bass is silly..its just a fishing tool..its still about the man behind the tool.. besides when spincast was in its hayday in the 60s, 70s, 80s .. they caught lots of bass everywhere on those old Johnsons and Daiwas.. like any tool, it has its plusses and minuses and some variations and models are better than others.. I recently pulled in a 21" LMB on my GC setup/composite rod.. had no problem pulling in that 4 pounder..

Lotsa good baitcasting rods out there.. going from spinning to baitcasting you need to get yerself a good starter reel.. thats the most important.. Curado or better Shimano reel..

That's a 1 ounce lure your tossing around with 12# fluoro.. I'd bet its a shock related breakage esp if you have a snappy cast to try to get that lure out there for a longer cast. Else like others said, check all the guides. If you like Fluoro I'd go with Seaguar Tatsu .. its been very durable for me..

Yes spincasters in general have some overall issues. However, Daiwa GCs I've used have reduced most of those. Larger aperature reduces line friction.. I also mirror polish the line contact areas with a dremel to lower resistance. The larger model has an oversize spool so it can hold more line and higher # .. still not as much as a baitcaster tho. 4.3:1 is a decent gear ratio can pull good line on each turn Oscillating spool means I load it with braid I do have a quality spinning reel but my spinning setup is not as trouble free as my spincast.. Trouble-free means I get to spend more time fishing going after the big ones!

Don't knock good spincasters.. spent alot fo trial and error putting together my spincast outfit and its very productive. Catch 3 lb+ LMB all the time on my Daiwa Goldcast GC120 outfit working anything from light swimbaits, crankbaits, worms, topwater frogs. 35-40 yd casts with 20 lb braid. If I go back to mono no doubt I could add another 10+ yds to those casts. I do carry a spinning outfit also but the Daiwa GC outfit is by far the most trouble free allowing me to fish more of the time.

As indicated, across manufacturers the importance of IM can get lost in the differences in resin and manufacture. For example some Daiwa rods use multilayers of diagonally oriented graphite to twart torsion stresses. Others may play with this and that. Not knowing the manufacturing factors, isloated down to one manufactuers which turns out quality rods (in my case I eventually narrowed down my myriad of choices to 2 different IM generations across Shimano Cumaras/Crucials/Compres) then looking at IM may made some more sense to me. Assuming Shimano manufacturing across lines are fairly consistent and theres no reason not to believe, IM can be more a factor. Nothing to say you cant use IM to try and evaluate across manufacturers cause the base material is obviously imporant but design and manufacture is as well. I hear higher IMs are more brittle. I have not seen anything to substantially back this up.. looks to me all the IMs are equally brittle. I see higher IMs having improved tension max loads but not shear and compression.. no improvement there. Weak links in chains are where they fail. These weak links are where higher IMs will fail near the weaker areas of a rod (tips) with less IM10 material used to shave rod weight, it becomes more susceptible to these stresses more so than the lower IM rods. Now with a different manufacture like Daiwas multilayer crisscrossing, now again we'd be comparing apples to oranges again.. or different apples at least.

Hadn't seen that thread. Thanks.

Fully agree the end-product application is the whole point. However, alot of manufacturers these days are selling technique specific rods and I was considering 3 older generation rods where differences in IM between generations where it came down to the IM as the major difference..its unknown if their resin or manufacturing tech improved as well.. Chose IM10 but nearly went with IM8 on a price point .. both models felt great in hand. I skipped over IM9 in consideration.

Looking to upgrade my rod and in the process dove into some details regarding graphite etc and just wanted to share some brief general findings. Agree or disagree here it is: DISCLAIMER: There is more to a rod than just its graphite. The resin and the production process are major factors as well. Resin formulation can vary greatly between manufacturers as can the production process. These are unknown to us as successful methods devised would be considered industry secrets. So this discussion can only hold these factors steady and only focus on the known common factors and that is the graphite supplied by Hexcel rated by their IM system. MATERIAL OBSERVATIONS: ------------------------------------------------- Tensile strength improved most dramatically jumping from IM6 to IM8 and then IM8 to IM10 However, shear strength by some measure essentially steady from IM6 to IM10 Compression strength and compression modulus characteristics have also held fairly steady from IM6 to IM10 The weak link here is compression and shear. When a rod flexes, there is both tension, compression, and some shear forces. So improvements in just material tension#s will not make the rod less apt to fail. In addition, since less IM10 material is used, there is that much less material to confront those compression and shear stresses in a rod flex. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS: (not a big surprise to most) ------------------------------------------------- IM10 rods will generally be lighter ..assuming less graphite in the form of IM10 is used in the rod as compared to previous IMs IM10 rods will be more likely to fail ..especially in the more delicate areas where there is less overall material (such as near the tip) to confront flex forces esp. compression and shear IM10 rods should be more sensitive ..since the graphite fibers themselves are more rigid and thusly better to transmit vibrations such as fish bites and or lures hitting structure etc.. however the rigidity of the complete rod structure itself is also a factor in sensitivity BUYING REMARKS: ------------------------------------------------- FOR RODS FROM SAME MANUFACTURER (assuming the same manufacturing process..resin/production) IM8 would seem to be a "best buy" at this juncture. If you are looking for better than IM8, I would skip IM9 and upgrade to IM10 as I do not see the significant material improvement from IM8 to IM9 worthy of the price jump. ACROSS MANUFACTURERS It get a little fuzzy since manufacturers may use differing amounts of the same IM material and different formulations of resin and production process. I'd stick with a reputable brand for rods with high cash outlays. Hope this helps.. any thoughts?