G. Loomis actions

[bassnhall314]

Is it true that the G. Loomis MH can be compared to most M actions in other rod brands.  Because i was looking into getting a GL2 and i prefer a 6'6" M action and all i could find was MH.

[Top]

I have found this to be true... I have a GL2 7 ft MH power  Med  action and its definatly not nearly as stiff as my St Croix premier MH ...  I don't know how the taper would be... maybe a fast action rod would be a bit stiffer.. but I like my GL2 a lot... I caught my PB with that rod and a curado 200BSF

AL

[Hawgin]

When compared to a St. Croix, the Loomis rods will seem to be less "power" for their rating, but that is because St. Croix's tend to be underrated.  A medium St.C will seem more like most rods MH.  GLoomis tends to be closer to the actual power rating of most rod makers.  I would put it this way.  GLoomis ratings are accurate, St. Croix ratings are inacurate.  A medium GLoomis is an actual medium rod.

[roadwarrior]

I would agree with Hawgin.

Although there is no industry standard, St. Croix simply underates their "Medium Power" rods.

[flechero]

Is it true that the G. Loomis MH can be compared to most M actions in other rod brands

Yes, if it's a MBR rod. I think Loomis over rates the MBR line of rods by one power rating. As compared to almost every other brand. For instance, the MBR783 is a ML - M in my book and it's rated MH which it is not.

[bassnhall314]

thanks for the replys

do you think the 6'6" MH GL2 is too stiff for catching average 1-2lbs a big one being 3. usually using soft plastics and an occational crank or spinner.

[GAMEOVER]

thanks for the replys

do you think the 6'6" MH GL2 is too stiff for catching average 1-2lbs a big one being 3. usually using soft plastics and an occational crank or spinner.

Deffinatly not.

[roadwarrior]

The ideal power of the rod is more a function of the lure weight and/or cover you are fishing. I think you will find that a "Medium Power" rod meets the majority of your fishing needs. Medium power makes catching fish under five pounds much more enjoyable. That is what I would recommend.

[Guest DavidGreen]

As a builder that has built on Fenwick, Shikäri, St.Croix, Loomis, Sage, RainShadow, AllStar, blanks and thought I new something about POWER and ACTION of rods. I am totally confused now..

bassnhall314

Is it true that the G. Loomis MH can be compared to most M actions in other rod brands.

I'm confused here, this isn't an action rating it is a POWER rating.

Hawgin,

A medium St.C will seem more like most rods MH.  GLoomis tends to be closer to the actual power rating of most rod makers.  I would put it this way.  GLoomis ratings are accurate, St. Croix ratings are inacurate.  A medium GLoomis is an actual medium rod.

That's strange I find the two blanks the same. Of course your not comparing just an empty blank. Guides can change the way a blank reacts to bending just by way of the number and style used.

roadwarrior,

Although there is no industry standard, St. Croix simply underates their "Medium Power" rods.

You mean in your opinion that they are under ratings their finished rods. NOT the blank..

flechero,

Yes, if it's a MBR rod.  I think Loomis over rates the MBR line of rods by one power rating.  As compared to almost every other brand.  For instance, the MBR783 is a ML - M in my book and it's rated MH which it is not.

And you came to this by comparing just the empty blanks???

bassnhall314,

thanks for the replys

do you think the 6'6" MH GL2 is too stiff for catching average 1-2lbs a big one being 3. usually using soft plastics and an occational crank or spinner.

All this led to this question...1-2lbs with a larger 3lb fish are easily caught on any 6'6"MH POWER blank, doesn't matter who built them.. Yes a spinnerbait can be thrown on a MH POWER, as for cranks yes on a MH POWER with a softer tip in the MOD ACTION range..

Just my confused .02¢

Tight Lines!!!

[roadwarrior]

To clarify my statement (only):

I think the the St. Croix "package" that is described as a Medium Power/ Fast Action rod is comparable to a Medium Heavy Power/ Fast Action rod produced by other manufactures, especially when compared to the G.Loomis rods that I have used.

Slightly off topic:

When you are examining a rod, pay particular attention to the tip. A rod's "action" that may be described as "fast" can still have a soft or firm tip which is not generally a part of the description. Specifically, in the St. Croix lineup I have a Legend Elite (ES70MF) which has a firm tip and an Avid (AC66MF) with a soft tip. In the G.Loomis brand a MBR 844C (HF) with a very stiff tip and a PR844C (MF) with a very soft tip. Also note that the numbering system of the blank (844) might imply that they were the same or at least very similar....They are NOT! One is Heavy Power the other is Medium Power...go figure.

[flechero]

Boy, we are splitting hairs now...

flechero,

Quote:

Yes, if it's a MBR rod. I think Loomis over rates the MBR line of rods by one power rating. As compared to almost every other brand. For instance, the MBR783 is a ML - M in my book and it's rated MH which it is not.

And you came to this by comparing just the empty blanks???

No, I came to that conclusion by comparing and fishing with the finished rods, factory built as I have owned them over the past 15 years. I think that my experience with the MBR783, MBR784, MBR785 (both tapers) and the MBR843, MBR844, as well as a number of SJR rods (all of them in IMX or GLX) would qualify me to give my opinion on the ratings as compared to the other brands I have used... I said "I think Loomis over rates the MBR line of rods by one power rating"

I wish this thread had come up before I sold the casting rods, I would love to have gathered CCS data on all the rods mentioned here and been able to give an undisputable answer.

Anyone own a 783 Loomis and (preferably) a 6'6" Med st. croix that would be willing to measure the CCS data for us?? I can send instructions for measuring.

[Raul]

GLoomis does not manufacture GL2s baitcasting in 6 '6", no wonder why you couldn 't find it. There 's no MBR782 model in neither GL2 nor GL3, only in IMX and GLX.

[Alpster]

Anyone own a 783 Loomis and (preferably) a 6'6" Med st. croix that would be willing to measure the CCS data for us??  I can send instructions for measuring.

I have a G-loomis CR722 and a St. Croix PC60MF. Both are 6' and rated Medium Power, Fast Action. Would this be a fair comparison? I also have a G-Loomis CR724 (Heavy Fast) I can do the ccs test on these.

Ronnie

[flechero]

Anyone own a 783 Loomis and (preferably) a 6'6" Med st. croix that would be willing to measure the CCS data for us?? I can send instructions for measuring.

I have a G-loomis CR722 and a St. Croix PC60MF. Both are 6' and rated Medium Power, Fast Action. Would this be a fair comparison? I also have a G-Loomis CR724 (Heavy Fast) I can do the ccs test on these.

Ronnie

Ronnie,

I believe it's a perfect comp... both are rated med.   If you don't mind, could you also ccs the 724 to give us a feel for the spread on the Loomis ratings?

Let me know if you need any info or a plan for a ccs jig.

Thanks!

[Hot n Tot]

I have both the MBR783C Loomis rod that is rated 'medium-heavy' power, and a St. Croix Legend Elite rod EC66MF that is rated 'medium' power. These rods are rated for the same line sizes and lure weights, and if you compare them side by side they are very comparable. The St. Croix is a little stiffer due to the higher modulus graphite used. I'm betting if you compared the Legend Elite to a Loomis GLX rod you'd find they are very similar in action and power.  I don't think either company rates their rods incorrectly, you just have to determine what lures weights and line diameters you intend using them for and picking the right rods within their respective product lines.

[flechero]

I have both the MBR783C Loomis rod that is rated 'medium-heavy' power, and a St. Croix Legend Elite rod EC66MF that is rated 'medium' power. These rods are rated for the same line sizes and lure weights, and if you compare them side by side they are very comparable.

Exactly my point... one rated Med and the other Med-Hvy and they are about the same.

[Alpster]

Ronnie,

I believe it's a perfect comp... both are rated med.   If you don't mind, could you also ccs the 724 to give us a feel for the spread on the Loomis ratings?

Let me know if you need any info or a plan for a ccs jig.

Thanks!

Hey Flechero,

My ERN chart only converts up to 62 cents and an ERN of 7.9. The CCS data site has rods with ERNs of 16+. Do you have achart that converts cents beyond 62? If so I have the CCS data for the rods above.

Thanks!

Ronnie

[flechero]

Ronnie,

For the purposes of this discussion, the cent count alone should tell us what we are looking for.  However, this link has the chart up to 173 cents / 16.0 ERN.  (2nd page, right hand side)

http://www.common-cents.info/part3.pdf

Thanks for taking the time to measure them!

[Alpster]

OK, here's the objective measured data on the 3 rods I listed in the previous post. Because I can't locate an ERN chart that converts more than 173 cents, I will only show the cent count, which is still a valid relative comparison. All 3 rods were measured under the exact same conditions and used the same procedure.

Rod 1 - G-Loomis GLX - CR 722 - 6'  Med Fast casting factory made

           Action Angle= 78 degrees - Cent count =205

Rod 2 - St. Croix PC60MF - 6' Med Fast casting factory made

           Action Angle= 75 degrees - cent count =185

Rod 3 - G-Loomis - IMX - CR 724 - 6' Heavy Fast casting factory made

           Action Angle= 68 degrees - cent count =270

According to the "Common Sense System" which is widely accepted as a reliable method, all 3 rods are pretty much what they say they are. If anything the G-Loomis is a slightly heavier power than the comparable St. Croix, but has a little faster action. The Heavy power rod is included to show that the system works.

I hope this data is helpfull to you guys.

Ronnie

[Guest avid]

This is a stange thread that keeps re-appearing in different guises at different times.

I really think all this techno babble is a waste of time.

Reel Mech, who is among the most knowlegeable board members on this topic summed it best by saying.

All this led to this question...1-2lbs with a larger 3lb fish are easily caught on any 6'6"MH POWER blank, doesn't matter who built them..

In other words "what do you want the rod to do"

All this talk about comparing one manufacturere power rating to anothers is absurd.

A fishing rod is a complete design. From blank, to taper, to guides, to guide spacing, to balance, to materials, to methods of fabrication, and on and on ad nauseum.

To reduce it to which rod maker is "correct" in it's designation of power rating and which maker is "incorrect" is like saying a Ferrari has an "incorrect" power rating because it can't haul your bassboat.

[Alpster]

I really think all this techno babble is a waste of time.

For the most part, I agree. And like most threads, it's no more than an interesting disussion for those of us who are crazy about fishing rods and how they work. Take note that 1/2 of the posters on this thread are rod builders and are a little more passionate than some others. And my guess is, Reel Mech, who I agree may be THE most knowledgeable about the subject has had to eat or resell a cutom rod at a loss because a customer insisted that "it's not a Med., it's way too stiff" or something like that. It was a custom rod builder that came up with the "common cents system" to help solve this kind of problem. No one intended to offend or upset anyone with this exchange of information. At the time, it seemed more productive than watching "Oprah".  It's an interesting disscussion, nothing more.

BTW I bet at least one Ferrari owner somewhere, has called his dealer and complained because the boat trailer scrapes the pavement when he hits a dip in the road.

Ronnie

[flechero]

Avid, your post is simply not the case. The thread opened with the following line:

Is it true that the G. Loomis MH can be compared to most M actions in other rod brands.

It was answered by people who have and have used the rods in question and Reelmech (who in the past has supported the exact statements made by others) posted that he thought we were all wrong about something because the original poster used "action" instead of "power" in his question.

The fact of the matter is that an ultra-lite could whip 1-3 lb. fish under the right circumstances... but that was NOT the question posed.

And just for the record there is probablly not another member with as much respect for ReelMech's rod knowledge as me... He helped me out a bunch when I was learning the basics of rod building. I actually have a good understanding of blank design/materials/ratings/etc. and know what his conclusions are drawn from... but on this one (which has been rare) thread he and I are not seeing the facts (or questions) eye to eye and I think he just read my statements wrong.

The CCS data backs up what all but one have said. There isn't much else to say.

To reduce it to which rod maker is "correct" in it's designation of power rating and which maker is "incorrect" is like saying a Ferrari has an "incorrect" power rating because it can't haul your bassboat.

No one said either company was wrong... we all said they rate it differently. Which IS the case.

[flechero]

I really think all this techno babble is a waste of time.

For the most part, I agree. And like most threads, it's no more than an interesting disussion for those of us who are crazy about fishing rods and how they work. Take note that 1/2 of the posters on this thread are rod builders and are a little more passionate than some others. And my guess is, Reel Mech, who I agree may be THE most knowledgeable about the subject has had to eat or resell a cutom rod at a loss because a customer insisted that "it's not a Med., it's way too stiff" or something like that. It was a custom rod builder that came up with the "common cents system" to help solve this kind of problem. No one intended to offend or upset anyone with this exchange of information. At the time, it seemed more productive than watching "Oprah". It's an interesting disscussion, nothing more.

BTW I bet at least one Ferrari owner somewhere, has called his dealer and complained because the boat trailer scrapes the pavement when he hits a dip in the road.

Ronnie

You put it way better than I did. Thanks! Dude, please tell me you didn't miss Oprah today because you were measuring CCS date for this thread!!!! :'( :'( Yes, just kidding! ...lol

[roadwarrior]

BS, my friend avid.

I find this thread ABSOLUTELY fascinating. I read every reference and then googled the footnotes! I had no idea that this technology/ engineering/ design had been quantified in such technical detail. I went so far to have an engineer, who is a friend of mine, look at this in some detail and attempt to explain it to me in English! Man, I'm impressed.

However, I am still being stubborn. St. Croix rod ratings seem to be one level less than G.Loomis, at least on the specific rods I own.

Let's all go fishin'!

[Glenn]

As with anything - fishing or not - if it works for you and you like it, go for it!