I fish very old ponds with tons of trees around me. I'm I losing much distance from a 7'2" to a 6'10" rod of the same specs? 

It depends what you're casting, line diameter, cover, etc. Honestly, I don't mind a slightly shorter rod. 

I'll chime in and say you won't lose distance but effort to reach the same distance will be more. When throwing deep divers, I feel like the wind resistance and line weight are what determine how far it ultimately travels. I hit the same distance with a 6'10 rod as a 7'3 with most baits except heavy carolina rigs where you can clearly see a difference. 

Another bank beater here. Same specs on both rods? I probably wouldn't notice much of a difference between the two. 

 

 Personally, if there's any trees around where I fish, I go smaller. My best rods for those situations are between 6'0 and 6'6 and I usually stick with the 6'0. When you're trying to cast around trees and wind up "short arming" the cast because you can't get it situated well due to branches or whatever, it kills whatever advantage the longer rod would give you, regardless.  

Probably not. 
All things being equal If you do it would be measured in inches 

 

 

 

 

Mike

It’s 4” . I wouldn’t think it would matter that much

 

I don't like anything over 6'6".  Sometimes those are too long.

Also a bank beater. Because of limited space, I fish very short. 5’4” spin and 6’2” fly. Not looking to bomb casts. I don’t miss the length. 

Rods with wide lure weight range are generally better distance casters in longer lengths.  

These rods have progressive taper, which loads in a band moving down the rod with increasing lure weight - perfect for wide open spaces.  

 

In tight spaces, rods with narrow lure weight range generally cast farther, because they load more of the total rod length.  

 

One surprising exception for me has been Daiwa Black Label Travel 5-pc.  

6'6" ML rod casts below its rated low end to the distance of many of my longer rods, and still handles its rated high end very well.  

Nope. Just depends on the lure weight, line and how the rod loads. All things equal you shouldn't loose any distance. 

1 hour ago, bulldog1935 said:

Rods with wide lure weight range are generally better distance casters in longer lengths.  

These rods have progressive taper, which loads in a band moving down the rod with increasing lure weight - perfect for wide open spaces.  

 

In tight spaces, rods with narrow lure weight range generally cast farther, because they load more of the total rod length.  

 

One surprising exception for me has been Daiwa Black Label Travel 5-pc.  

6'6" ML rod casts below its rated low end to the distance of many of my longer rods, and still handles its rated high end very well.  

Impressive rod!

Tom

22 hours ago, bassheel said:

I fish very old ponds with tons of trees around me. I'm I losing much distance from a 7'2" to a 6'10" rod of the same specs? 

If you don't have room to swing a 7'2" rod, then what does it matter if a 6'10" can't quite make the distance of the longer rod?  If a 6' rod allows for a full swing versus an abbreviated swing with a 6'6" rod, then I'd be opting for the shorter rod.  You will get better distance.

 

Offhand I can think of only one 6'6" casting rod that I really, really like.  Personally I like 6'10" minimum with casting rods.  Prefer shorter spinning rods, but that's probably because that's what I used growing up.

19 minutes ago, new2BC4bass said:

If a 6' rod allows for a full swing versus an abbreviated swing with a 6'6" rod, then I'd be opting for the shorter rod.  You will get better distance.

 

Exactly. In thick trees, you might actually be able to make some casts that you couldn't make at all with a longer rod.

 

Lately I've just been fishing a 6' because I'm trying to find the fish. I don't stay in one spot very long. When you have to do a lot of walking, especially through woods, it's just so much easier all around to use a shorter rod.

 

Most of the lures I throw go about the same distance with a 6' or a 7'. Stuff like curly-tail worms are about the only thing where I really notice a difference.

Nearly 40 years ago most of my fishing was wading small creeks, rivers, and streams;  much of the time I was on the bank or had my back up against it.  Totally frustrated with some of the difficulties, I went to a rod maker and asked him to make me something good.  The result was a G Loomis blank, MF, cut down to 5'6".  I caught nearly 1,000 smallmouth on that rod, using 1/16 and 1/8 oz. lures the first year I used it.  I still have that rod, and it is not for sale.  The guy who made it now lives near me and still does a few as a hobby.