|
|
Post by Daver on Apr 26, 2006 5:18:12 GMT -5
cranswallow, are you just at the wind up, i think you are. I have many blokes and I know mick really well his rods are good some better than others and yes the 6 weigth is the gem in his range, but IMHO I think you really are on the wind up cause you are talking crap, you may be paying for a name now on some models but the sage rods of yester year are some of the finest tools every built and still going strong and hold thier money as Jan said very very well. how many 20yrs old rods can command nearly 60% of thier original value? RPL's Rule  Next you will be trying to tell me that My wifes golf estate TDi which is a superb car is better than my audi a6  Rgds............Dave Downie PS I will not give my 6 weight bloke up either, but I will never give up my sage's all nine of them. |
|
|
|
Post by jan on Apr 26, 2006 6:57:09 GMT -5
You are paying for the name SAGE,HARDY ETC. Try a bloke rod. I have an XL50 9ft 4piece #6 and what a rod this is,The Hardy ,Sage,Loomis is not a patch on it. I have tried and owned all the above mentioned rods and I would not swap the Bloke for any of them. The Gem,Ultralite,TCR, have all gone on ebay but I am going to add to my bloke collection. Cran tried them, sold them - thats all i'm saying - if you really think you are paying for the name on a sage then you havent found the right one yet- i felt the same two years ago - then i cast a few; every now and then one just feels so perfect that you know its the rod you want to fish with from now on - add in the fact that its free on loan and you cant go wrong - imagine buying your next car, safe in the knowledge that it wouldnt depreciate in the next 5 years - wish i could say that for rods - i have several in the rack that cost good money and are virtually worthless now -still good rods but the value has gone. |
|
|
|
Post by beanieboy on Apr 26, 2006 6:57:18 GMT -5
Whilst the Bloke XL50 is excellent it is not as good as the RPL+ and XP [single handers] - however the Bloke 15' 5 piece 10/11 is IMO better than any Sage doublehander to date. cranswallow, are you just at the wind up, i think you are. I have many blokes and I know mick really well his rods are good some better than others and yes the 6 weigth is the gem in his range, but IMHO I think you really are on the wind up cause you are talking crap, you may be paying for a name now on some models but the sage rods of yester year are some of the finest tools every built and still going strong and hold thier money as Jan said very very well. how many 20yrs old rods can command nearly 60% of thier original value? RPL's Rule Next you will be trying to tell me that My wifes golf estate TDi which is a superb car is better than my audi a6 Rgds............Dave Downie PS I will not give my 6 weight bloke up either, but I will never give up my sage's all nine of them. |
|
|
|
Post by jan on Apr 26, 2006 7:06:08 GMT -5
probably true, sage double handers are pretty poor by all accounts - but how does it compare to a B&W Norway - generally regarded as the best value all round salmon rod out there by people who's opinions are worth having - and available at around £250ish
|
|
|
|
Post by RodKneeTrouter on Apr 26, 2006 9:13:34 GMT -5
I agree that Loomis is well overpriced here in the UK. Sage seems to be a bit more fairly weighted towards currency differences in my opinion - I.E. they are really expensive everywhere.  One point I want to make about £30 replacement sections for Sage rods: how can they justify the £450 price tag if a 4 section rod comes to £120 this way (ok lets say £150 with cork reel seat etc)? I know a lot of the excess goes to distribtors and final sellers - but come on folks... It gets worse: according to my rough estimations, this £30 section price still represents a 100% markup on the true cost of the section in question. From what I have read, it costs Sage about £60 to make a full rod (assuming that they are assembled in the US and not in the far east, which would make the costs even lower). I should point out that this is not counting research and development costs for 'generation x' graphite. Lets add in a generous £5 per rod for that. So lets say £65. Assuming that the blank costs them £20 (which is a very fair estimate), then a section from a 4 piece blank costs them £5. lets say £15 with labour, fittings, ferrules, research, and shipping. So you're still paying them more than double what its worth. I guess its a far cry from the £100 per section you pay if you buy the whole rod new. But it sure doesn't seem fair. I am also aware that the markups get even more ridiculously inflated when the blank is made in the far east as well. In case you think I made this up, you can read more here: www.sexyloops.com/sparton/graphiterods.shtmlMike |
|
|
|
Post by The Famous Grouse on Apr 26, 2006 9:24:11 GMT -5
i think you are missing the retained value out of the equation - the simple fact is that you can buy any sage you like, fish it as long as you want, and invariably get back most of what you paid - so its the cheapest rod option there is - even in the uk - if you are smart you can pick up a new or nearly new sage on ebay, fish for a year or two and sell for what you paid - thats cheap fishing and you get to use the best - i have tried, st croix, t&t, orvis and others, and even though the rods were okay the value for resale plummets - if you are buying to keep for ever that doesnt matter but if you think a change might be nice in a year or two then Sage is the cheapest option per day, even at UK ebay prices. if you add on the fact that even without a warranty card you can get a replacement section for less than £30, as cheap as rods like greys and airflo, and the value becomes obvious - you cant loose. When push comes to shove, are you going to spend £300 on a st croix or an orvis which can be really difficult to sell on in the UK (i speak from personal experience here), despite their quality, or £300 for a new sage in the knowledge that even if you dont like it you can turn it straight over and not loose a penny - thats a win win situation. Sell a fly rod? I don't understand. Grouse |
|
|
|
Post by Gillaroo on Apr 26, 2006 9:59:37 GMT -5
I think we know that the final cost we pay for a rod is well above the actual cost of manufacture but my point is that I don't mind biting the bullet and getting a top spec rod if it is that. The Loomis rods weren't and it's interesting to hear from those over the pond their views.
I wonder if Airflo floaters get the same bad press over there or do we send them decent ones in exchange for crap Loomis rods?
|
|
|
|
Post by beanieboy on Apr 26, 2006 10:34:02 GMT -5
Got my Bloke on e-bay for £170 - The Norway is a super rod, however it is no better than the Bloke - the latter must be the 5 piece, the 3 and 4 piece versions are too fast for most. probably true, sage double handers are pretty poor by all accounts - but how does it compare to a B&W Norway - generally regarded as the best value all round salmon rod out there by people who's opinions are worth having - and available at around £250ish |
|
|
|
Post by ultegrafly on Apr 26, 2006 10:40:11 GMT -5
I take it you've had several snap on you then Jan? I got to cast one of the Bloke rods for the first time last week and it cast very well, however the owner informed me that it was his third - the previous two had snapped. I've been hearing this an awful lot from Bloke rod owners! Infact they remind me of the original Airflo 'breaky breaky' classic rods, I never met an owner who didn't have one of those snap.
Cran, if you really think that the production Bloke XL50 is as good as a Sage, Whiston, T&T them I'm afraid I'm going to agree with Daver, because you are talking absolute rubbish. It was comments like yours that had everyone clambering to by an XL50 this time last year, I bet the majority of those wish that they hadn't.
Back on topic, both the Sage and Loomis rods are massively over priced in the UK, neither are worth more than £280-£300 when you look at some of the other rods you can get for £100-£200. If anyone pays £600+ for a Loomis then
1. either they haven't used one
or
2. they have no idea what they are doing and are only buying it because they think it must be the best, because it is the most expensive.
(probably both)
Kev.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gillaroo on Apr 26, 2006 10:56:28 GMT -5
My XP cost me around £280 (don't ask how) which is around the price of a Redington CPS, Platinum XD, or a non-ebay/forum Bloke.
I know what I'd rather have.
Gillaroo
|
|
|
|
Post by cranswallow on Apr 26, 2006 11:03:35 GMT -5
cranswallow, are you just at the wind up, i think you are. I have many blokes and I know mick really well his rods are good some better than others and yes the 6 weigth is the gem in his range, but IMHO I think you really are on the wind up cause you are talking crap, you may be paying for a name now on some models but the sage rods of yester year are some of the finest tools every built and still going strong and hold thier money as Jan said very very well. how many 20yrs old rods can command nearly 60% of thier original value? RPL's Rule Next you will be trying to tell me that My wifes golf estate TDi which is a superb car is better than my audi a6 Rgds............Dave Downie PS I will not give my 6 weight bloke up either, but I will never give up my sage's all nine of them. The rods I have mentioned in my reply are the rods that dont compare. I payed £600 for a 6wt TCR and the 6wt bloke at far less in price is a much better rod. Other examples include the Hardy Gem and Ultralite. I also agree the early sage rods were much better . The Sage XP six weight does not live up to the Bloke XL50 6 weight so in my opinion I am not talking crap. Tha RPL was for me a benchmark but the XL50 for me is the best 6 weight I have used. Cran |
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Apr 26, 2006 11:07:09 GMT -5
£600 for a rod?
Struth!! just think of the places you could have fished, and the fish you could have caught for that money.
|
|
|
|
Post by Daver on Apr 26, 2006 11:08:11 GMT -5
cran, fair point as you mentioned the tcr and you also are right on the rpl's as they were and still are the benchmark thats why I have 9 of them, I will retract my talking crap comment Rgds....Dave Downie |
|
|
|
Post by cranswallow on Apr 26, 2006 11:14:02 GMT -5
I take it you've had several snap on you then Jan? I got to cast one of the Bloke rods for the first time last week and it cast very well, however the owner informed me that it was his third - the previous two had snapped. I've been hearing this an awful lot from Bloke rod owners! Infact they remind me of the original Airflo 'breaky breaky' classic rods, I never met an owner who didn't have one of those snap. Cran, if you really think that the production Bloke XL50 is as good as a Sage, Whiston, T&T them I'm afraid I'm going to agree with Daver, because you are talking absolute rubbish. It was comments like yours that had everyone clambering to by an XL50 this time last year, I bet the majority of those wish that they hadn't. Back on topic, both the Sage and Loomis rods are massively over priced in the UK, neither are worth more than £280-£300 when you look at some of the other rods you can get for £100-£200. If anyone pays £600+ for a Loomis then 1. either they haven't used one or 2. they have no idea what they are doing and are only buying it because they think it must be the best, because it is the most expensive. (probably both) Kev. I thought this forum was all about opinions . Why pay £700 for a Loomis,£600.00 for a sage or £600.00 for a Hardy Angel when you can in my opinion get a Bloke XL50 for less than half price with a much better action and £300 in your hippy. Has a Fly Fishing rod become a fashion statement?. Cran |
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Apr 26, 2006 11:19:56 GMT -5
The fasion statement seems to be the case. You'll notice how people with Sage's love to announce they have them. Sage stickers on ebay go for ridiculous prices. it has become a status symbol (for some).
Still, if you pay your money, you takes your choice.
|
|
