Bamboo Tips - Tips Area
Rod Selection - 4/5 Weight Rods

< Home < Tips Area < Rod Selection < 4/5 Weight Rods

I'm looking for some suggestions, I would like to build a 9' 4 or 5 wt. 3 piece medium action rod to take to Montana this summer. In the Hexrod archive I found several 9' 6 & 7 wt and one 3 wt but no 4 or 5 wt. and no luck in the Rodmakers Archive. Does anyone know of a good taper for a 9' 3 piece 4 or 5 wt?  (Al Spicer)

I used to own a Leonard 9' 0", #4 line rod.  It was an early Leonard with close intermediates its full length.  A collector told me it was a Tournament model.  The rod had a slow full flexing action and would easily cast a #4 line anywhere from 20' to 60' with ease.  (Ted Knott)

At the risk of incurring The Wrath of Curry, the reason you can't find a light line 9 foot taper is that there aren't very many. The problem is that it takes so much cane to support the length and still produce the medium to fast actions which most people prefer, that the weight of a 3-4 weight is not all that much different than a 6-7 weight.  It's a little like sleeving an elephant gun to shoot 22 LR,  and hauling the thing around to pop squirrels.

There are two basic solutions:

1.  Read Reed's page,  become convinced that slow is the way to go, and build a rod accordingly. I suspect that the 9 foot 3 weight you found is the taper to a rod that I traded to Reed some time ago. It's very nice, but only if you agree with Reed.

2. Hollow build.  Use Hexrod to convert a successful 5-6 weight taper and have at it.  (Tom Smithwick)

This 9' 3 wt taper is one of my favorites.  I built it with a swelled butt and love to use it to fish soft hackles on the Manistee.  It is rather slow and I can relight my cigar during the back cast.  (Dennis Bertram)

Is this the Rod that you had at Grand Gathering?   If so, I liked it a lot. I also have a 9' Divine which 4 wt that is a bit quicker.  Olaf Borge liked that one. Al, you might like that one.  (Doug Easton)

Thanks to everyone that responded to my question about a 9'-0" 4 wt. Got lots of good suggestions and information. Looks like I'll be building  A.J.'s 9'-0" 4 wt. and a one of the 8'- 6" 5 or 6 wt. to take on my trip.   (Al Spicer)

What is the best 7'0" 2 piece rod for a 4 or 5 weight?  (Bret Reiter)

That's a how long is a piece of string question.  I'd say either Driggs or Payne 98 depending on what action you want.  (Tony Young)

Or the Dickerson 7012.  (John Channer)

There's dozens of 7 ft 4 wt and 5 wt rods that you could make. If you told me what type action you prefer I'd have a better idea as to the rod I'd suggest. Because one guy herald's a rod to be the best thing to ever come down the pike doesn't mean the next guy would like that rod whatsoever. What are you going to use the rod for? Is it an all around rod, a streamer rod, or a dry fly rod. No one rod will do everything to perfection and they're all a compromise in one way or another. You may be happy with a 4 wt for small dries and little nymphs but you know that it won't cast a big hex fly like a 5 wt line would. A lazy caster may love a parabolic rod but the aggressive caster who likes to use a lot of line speed would probably hate a para. The bottom line is, what compromise best fits your needs.  (Jim Bureau)

If you can use 7'2" I would say Driggs River!  (Danny Twang)

Did you get a chance to cast my 98 repro at the SRG?  It can be a rocket if you want it to, but also works pretty nice in close, at least for me.  (Mark Wendt)

You might consider having a look at Frank Neunemann’s web site where he gives tapers for some modified Garrisons with commentary on what he was aiming for. (Gary Marshall)

Driggs would be a good bet, but one that doesn't seem to get allot of attention here is the Leonard 38 ACM, nice medium-fast pleasant action. I kind of liked it and it has a "different" action than allot of the rods we normally build. Depends on what you want I guess.  (Shawn Pineo)

I have a request for a rod for a 13 year old for his first fly rod.  His father asked that I make something in the 7' to 7-1/2' range in a #4 or #5.  I am thinking of making a "Sir D".  Any other suggestions?  (Hal Manas)

You would have to have the Sir D in there as a big contender, I think; also consider the Payne 98 and the Driggs River Special.

I have just got the first Garrison taper I have ever made to the "put-it-together-and waggle-it" stage.  It is the 206, and it may well be worth a bit of thought.  Much better than I thought it would be, in fact.

My personal choice?

The Payne, I'm afraid. I must be a masochist - I just like Payne!  (Peter McKean)

I think the Sir D is a good choice. Heddon Folsom is another outstanding rod in that range, this is what I selected for my Grandchildren.  (Steve Trauthwein)

The PHY Driggs is a great all around rod in that range. The Garrison 209 is another that is a great rod, and it will be more versatile being a longer five weight. If the customer is set on a short rod, the Heddon Folsom taper in the archives is a super 7' 4 wt.   (Bob Maulucci)

I'd find it hard to go past the Driggs. I've sold quite a few of them to people who came around to my place wanting a "fast" rod. After trying a few out, they just about all want the Driggs (though some still want to be reassured that it's a "fast" taper).

I think it would be a great learning rod for a kid - you can feel the rod load, and it casts so easily. I took one to a BBQ the other day, and had novices casting a nice line after a very short period. A couple of them even put down their beer from their other hand.   (Nick Taransky)

The Dickerson 7012 is also a fine choice.  I let a fishing buddy cast mine, keep in mind that he is a graphite owner and thinks cane is too heavy. He loved it and was very surprised of its weight and close in loading as well as throwing a line when needed.  (Mike Hoffman)

I have a suggestion for you. I teach casting classes some and would suggest you go with a rod longer than seven feet. It seems to me that short rods are usually harder to learn on.  That said I would suggest the grand experiment rod taper that was introduced by John Long. The rod is a western style 5wt, 7'6" and I have made a ton of them. Everyone likes the rod. The rod has good control and every new caster I fish with picks that rod and wants one.  (Timothy Troester)

The Driggs....period.  Might as well start them out right.  (Gary Williams)

I have a potential client who is looking for his first cane rod.  After spending a couple of hours casting, I recommended a para 14. Has been fishing my para 14 and loves it, except he doesn’t like the way it handles hooked fish (too stiff).

Wants a 4 wt.

His quote of what he wants, “I need something that will cast down to size 20 tricos and up to a size 8 brown drake and a size 6 turkey leech.”

Looking for some suggestions for a taper.  (Scott Grady)

6' one or two-piece Lee Wulff Midge rod for 5 or 6 wt.  (David Zincavage)

He doesn't want a taper - he wants a miracle! Maybe a Payne 98 or similar. (Peter McKean)

Sounds like a sales opportunity for more than one rod.If he was buying a graphite rod he wouldn't expect it to do all those things, so why cane?

The Garrison taper Bret Reiter made for me can (and has) cast within those parameters but struggles at either extremity. (Nick Kingston)

I think he's going to be somewhat disappointed trying to cast a size 6 turkey leech with a 4 wt. A 5 wt, or a light 6 wt would be a better choice. (Mark Wendt)

In my experience, better to match the line to the flies being cast. This determines the rod weight required. Then think of the common casts (tight / open loops? long rolls? and so on) that are required to fish those flies. This determines the action of the rod.That said, why not a progressive taper of some kind? (Chris Moore)

I am thinking about making a 6’6” rod in a 4 or 5 weight.  I have been looking at Wayne Cattanach 6642 and the Orvis Battenkill Deluxe.   Looking for some input if you have made or cast either of these rods or have any other suggestions.  I want to make a shorter rod because I don’t have one.  It would be used mainly for smaller trout streams and maybe a little bluegill fishing all top water. (Rick Barbato)

The Marinaro Guppy might fit your bill. (Lou Barbaro)

I would be intrested in seeing the Guppy as well as the 6611 Dickerson. (Timothy Troester)

The Guppy taper is in the Split and Glued book. (Lou Barbaro)

I have a blond Dickerson 6611 that I like for small water that I like a lot. (Mike Arnold)

I like the Payne 96. (Timothy Troester)

I've made a few 6 ft one piece rods that are easy to cast that should fit your needs and could be converted to a two piece. Its my own taper. Here's a link for the numbers. (Ken Paterson)

I am finally ready & prepped to getting around to putting the plane to some strips soon and although I have considered a few tapers I "thought" best for my needs I find that I should fill a gap in my rod needs for the first one.

Could someone point me in the direction of a taper that meets my interest:

~7ft -ish
3 pcs
4/5 wt line. (Scott Allman (6/30/2016))

Does it really have to be a three piece?

It is impossible to make a three-piece metal ferruled cane rod that is as nice as a two piece would be.

Unless one is utterly inept at converting one to the other, of course, but this is not your problem. If you are used to modern rods traditional designs will feel very floppy. They were designed to cast soggy silk lines very short distances  this is not a very difficult pair of parameters to achieve,in fact they nearly all do it,more or less,and most of the tapers were merely guessed at,as you can see from Hexrod.

Go for a modern taper with a light tip, by which I mean garish taper on the top 25%, and a correspondingly stiffish lower third.

You are going to spend a lot of time on this, your first rod, and you don't want to produce a useless horror. (Robin Haywood)

I am finally ready & prepped to getting around to putting the plane to some strips soon.

Hi Scott - I do have to more or less agree with Robin and would also suggest sticking with a two piece rod at first. One set of ferrules is enough for a beginner to worry about. I would suggest a smooth, medium action taper to start with, so you can start trying to figure out what you really like. There are a lot of 7’ 4 weights tapers around. My own favorite in that category is the Garrison 202e. I would also suggest that you attend the Catskill gathering in September, if at all possible. There will be a lot of hands on things going on, and you will get to see and do things that might otherwise take a long time to learn. If you want an introduction to the terminology of rod tapers, there is an essay at this location:

Ignore the flowery BS Gene wrote about me, he is a well known prevaricator. The article was written for people starting out with no knowledge of tapers at all.  (Tom Smithwick)

I am maybe the only bamboo fisherman who is not fond of most PHY tapers that I have tried, and I do include the Sir D in that category.

This is NOT a criticism of the PHY rods and their derivatives; I am a solidly crappy caster, and I think I just don't quite synch with the timing of these rods.

The rod I would suggest, just to help round out the range from which you must select, is the Payne 98. I have made several, and it seems to me to be a pretty forgiving taper, where some small inaccuracies in planing do not render the rod useless. As well as being a poor caster, I also admit to not being absolutely on the money every strip I plane. I keep it as accurate as I can, but I am blowed if I achieve the sort of compliance with the numbers that many rodbuilders manage to produce.

So at least have a look at the Payne tapers, as they, too, have stood the test of time. (Peter McKean)

It occasionally happens that I agree 100% with Peter and in this case, I do.

Try the Payne 98. It's a great taper.

Having said that I do like the Driggs and the Sir D too. The Sir D is a forgiving taper that's very nice but the Driggs is not really forgiving. It's kind of hard to get a handle on at first and there are times it's not the ideal taper.

I currently find myself fishing a lot in places where I need a #4 or #5 and use a Driggs taper rod that I've had for about 20 years and I've concluded that I need a different taper that isn't a parabolic. 

The casting is usually inside of 35 or so feet and often under cover that isn't tight, just above me and pockets absoluteyl everywhere. It's bloody beautiful water to fish, being a mountain stream the fish are all small, I doubt there's a 3 lb fish in the entire system, not that I expect to ever see anyhow.

What's really needed is a responsive light rod that doesn't misbehave, and I rather wish I still had my Payne 98 so I'm about to do something about that and make another.

Good place to ask the question though. Has anybody made and used the F.E Thomas listed in The Lovely Reed?

I've never tried a true #3 before, never imagined I'd ever want to to be honest but I was thinking this one may be a nice one for the location I just described. (Tony Young)

I made the FE Thomas 6'8" 3-wt about 15 years ago, and only fished it once.  I caught a 12" (30cm to you) trout on it and felt that it completely overpowered the rod.  I managed to land the fish, but it made me uncomfortable.  I decided that I didn't need a 3-wt and haven't fished anything lighter than a 4-wt since.  I sold the rod to a guy who was absolutely delighted with it.  But, I don't think he intended to fish it.

Interesting bit about that taper though: in the book, Jack Howell claimed that Darryl Whitehead said it was the best 3-wt he's ever cast.  Darryl came to Corbett Lake six or eight years ago, and told us that he didn't fish, and wouldn't have any idea if a rod cast well or not. (Robert Kope)

Anthony Vincent Young, you are a gentleman and a scholar, and you have impeccable taste.

Sorry, cannot help with the FE Thomas. I did, though make a kind of chimera rod using two Wayne Cattanach 6' tapers, one 3 weight and one 4 weight. What I did was use the butt from the 4 weight, appropriately reduced in most stations, with the tip from the lighter rod beefed up a bit toward the butt end stations. I know it sounds odd, but it is a helluva good little rod when I want a six footer (which is very seldom) and it sort of suits my mongrel casting style. Also made a half dozen for various people in Victoria, and they all liked them. (Peter McKean)

Well that's very kind of you Peter.

I think I'd like to stay with a 7 foot or or very close to it, not more though. The Driggs is just a little too long to be comfortable at times but the main problem is I need to use a #5 to get it to load in these conditions and it's more than I want.

These streams have plenty of room across them and are occasionally reasonably wide so something longer than 6.5 feet is good, but the trees can get close to the surface of the water in places. If they get too close I just pass that section by. I find that the 6'3" rod I've used there doesn't work quite so well for fishing soft hackles, fine for dry though.

Small rods are very handy here in Victoria. So is a horse at times because these valleys can be STEEP! (Tony Young)

Your stream sounds like the streams we fish in the mountains of Tennessee. I have found that it works to have at least a 7-footer, strip the amount of line out the tiptop you figure you'll need, with it dragging downstream or piled at your feet and then launch a rollcast upstream to place the fly in the plunge pool or area of current. Does the Payne 98 taper rollcast well enough to get about 30 feet out that way? A lot of times there isn't sufficient clear area anywhere to get a casting lane, even downstream. (Bill Walters)

Most of this stream is quite wide, hardly ever gets to < 25 feet but the banks are completely covered to the degree that the only way along the stream is in the stream and it has a high flow for most of the year. So, the line really needs to stay out of the water as much as possible unless you're actually fishing it else you drown the fly all the time. It's like that for about 20 miles so it's worth a rod specifically for this spot.

I like longer rods as a rule, but the trees spend a lot of time just high enough overhead to be a problem with a 7-1/2" rod but a rod of < 7 foot isn't so good due to the flow of the stream especially if I use soft hackle flys that work well there. I own a 6'3" rod that I've used there and although it may seem a short rod would be better it won’t cover the water properly in this place. The shorter rod is fine for straight up and down casting, but line drag is an instant problem for anything other than that.

The Driggs is about the right length, but being a 4/5 weight rod casting in close it needs a #5 to load and that's what I sort of remember about the Payne 98 as well from the ones I've made in the past, it's a 4/5 so if I made one of them I'd likely be back to using a #5 line to load it in close which is why I'm looking for a light #4, I think a #3 would be struggling there. 

The fish aren't big, the normal range discounting the real tiddlers is 11"-15" and combined with the flow I think a #3 would struggle, people have privately written to me about the FET and that confirms it in my mind.

Anyhow, thank you to everybody who has offered help with this. My initial instinct was to just make a Dickerson 7012 because I already have a stable full of Dickerson taper rods just nothing this light, Harry has suggested a Granger and that may well be a good choice since I've never made one. (Tony Young)

I think you might like this one: Cattanach Sir D 7643. (JW Healy)

"One man's meat is another man's poison"...and so it is with tapers.  I happen to enjoy the Sir D and the Garrison 202e is another great taper.  I also readily admit that I'm not all that familiar with the Payne 98.  To echo several other comments, I also suggest you stick with a 2-pc rod as your first project.  You'll stress out enough on your first rod and going from 2 to 3 pc's will only add to that.  You want this to be a positive experience, not one that frustrates you to no end (although I, too, get frustrated at times. (Cliff Nigh)

Something us older rod-makers seems to forget to tell the new guys is to wear leather gloves while splinting and planing the strips. I find leather gloves locally for around $6.00 a pair. I have never kept track of how many rods you can plane before having to throw them away, but it is 3 or 4 rods. Well worth it if you have ever gotten bite by bamboo. Trust me, it will be a good investment, next to a Hock blade. (Lew Boyko)

Gloves must be hand-crafted from leather acid tanned by beautiful women from the belly skin of a basset hound X standard poodle, raised to maturity on a diet of chicken giblets and macrobiotic rice. The animal must be killed by embarrassment by having to wear a woollen waistcoat decorated with glittery pom-poms, at twenty years of age.
No other will do! (Peter McKean)

See, Peter! This is exactly why I never wear gloves while working with bamboo. There are no poodle/hound crosses where I live, and wearing gloves is wimpy anyway.

I much prefer my arsenal of duct tape, band aids, tweezers, and super glue depending on the severity.

Reminds me that wifey wasn't too happy with me at the boy child's wedding a couple years ago dressed in a tux with band aids on three fingers! Boy child's future in-laws were appalled! (Tom Vagell)

I use some cheap work gloves that I got at Sam's Club.  They are leather with a stiff cloth wrist guard.  I have long sense forgotten the brand name, but they work.  It is mostly the left glove that gets sliced to bits, but it is better than my left hand getting sliced like it used to.  That was good advice. (Hal Manas)

I have been watching all these comments while laughing to my self.  The gloves I buy are from Menard's here in Minnesota and they are from pig skin. While planing bamboo, and things start getting really sharp edges, you should hear them squeal And it is not oink, oink either... (Lew Boyko)

OK, all bull aside, you could consider this as a partial solution.

I elevate my forms a couple of inches above the bench, and insert supports here and there to minimise bending. I also raise the LHS end to reduce stress on my back as I plane. 

Then I clamp the plece of bamboo in place with a pair or two of those spring-loaded clamps in the appropriate size. There is a fair amount of opening and closing as the strip is turned over from side to side, but your hand soon gets strong enough to cope ( and I am 74 y.o. and osteoarthritic, so if I can do it, anybody can).

There are things about the deal that are less than ideal, but it means no cuts. (Peter McKean)

I follow Peter's regimen closely (raising the forms, using clamps, etc) but have not tried elevating the LHS end to reduce back ache.  Clever idea and I must try that next time around.  Thanks for the thought! (Cliff Nigh)

I also elevate my forms and use a spring clamp to hold the strip in place and thus have no need for gloves or finger protectors when I am planing. I usually plane two handed, pulling the plane as much as pushing it--all works fine for me. (Mike McGuire)

It was a young friend of mine who builds cane rods, and does really nice rattan grips (apropos of nothing) who suggested the raising of the LHS end of the forms; he is a physiotherapist by profession, so I thought it worth a try.

I find it very difficult to evaluate things like that, but as a general feeling it does appear to spare my back to some extent. I have quite severe ankylosing spondylitis, and my spine looks like a Bavarian pretzel at best, but my feeling is that I plane in greater comfort.

I raise the end about 2 - 2 1/2".

Hope someone finds it useful, anyway. (Peter McKean)

I have heard of other folks raising the left-hand side of the form and think I will give it a try. My question is being I am right handed and plane from right to left on the form, should not the right-hand side be raised.

Also, how many shims do you put under the form to keep it steady.

If I raised the left-hand side of the form, I would be planing uphill. Just wondering. (Lew Boyko)

The way I understand it, and I too plane right to left, is that when you are approaching the end of your planing stroke (at the left-hand end), you are having to reach out to make the distance, and also to dip down in order to increase your lateral reach.

Raising the end a couple of inches tends ro eliminate the need to make this reaching-down action, and in doing so it reduces the strain on back, shoulders and arms. (Peter McKean)

If you are planing the full length of the strip and you have your left hand on your strip at the beginning of your planing stroke, hesitate your stroke long enough to move your hand up to the position of the plane, then continue you stroke. It simply does not make sense to me to make this reaching exercise. I cannot see how you expect to control your planing this way unless you are at least 7 or 8 feet tall or your planing bench is only knee high! (Don Smith)

One of the nice things about using the clamps is that once the strip is secure, you can break the actual planing stroke into as many aliquots as you choose.

I just think that I need as much working for me as I can get, and following the physio's suggestion cannot hurt, and seems to help. But, sure, you could do it any number of ways, and your suggestion would certainly work. (Peter McKean)

I never tried it, but I used to think doing what the Morgan Mill guys do would work. Plane the pith of the bamboo to a flat parallel with the enamel and screw this to a stop that goes against the bottom of the forms.

You could plane as hard as you like with an iron as blunt as a spoon then and things would stay in place. (Tony Young)