Back in about 1961 or so I purchased my first fly rod, something that was good back then and cost about $30.00 when that was half a week's wages. Now it would be considered a strange choice indeed.
It may well have been in the store for a long time before I purchased it new but it turned out to be very useful for Bass, Pike, and Muskie. The lines used with it were, using the then only grading system, HCH double taper and GBF weight forward. This is about the same as #9 weight using the system than came in during the early 1960's and still current.
Now, can anyone provide me with any information on the True Temper fly rod model 1325, a combination hollow steel butt section and fiberglass top section? My collection also includes four Diamondback rods from the original manufacturer but occasionally the old TT is taken out and used, always with memories and satisfaction.
Fly fishing from a canoe is a favourite hobby that is both restful and rewarding for me.
Thank you for any information anyone could provide.
Ken.
True Temper fly rod.
Moderators: Ken M 44, fishnbanjo
Re: True Temper fly rod.
#2Don't know about the fly rod, but an HCH is a DT6. Funny though! I am 72 and I have never seen one of those letter described fly lines!
Re: True Temper fly rod.
#3In the early 1960'S it was decided to change the method of identifying fishing lines as to weight and tapers if any.
The older system might indicate, for example: C. HCH, GBF, etc.
Translation: level line, double taper, weight forward, and so on.
These three would be considered bass weight lines roughly equivalent to the current system listings for 8 weight and 9 weight lines for bass. When the newer system was introduced it was felt the first 30 feet measured by weight would make it much easier to obtain a balanced rod/line system whereas previously a lot of guesswork was needed to find a satisfactorily balanced rod/line combination.
When the "new" categorizing was introduced rod manufacturers also started listing the recommended line weight such as 5 or 6 weight for trout and 8 or 9 weight for bass. This made it much easier for the fly fisher to find the right combination quickly.
Remember back then hair bugs etc. along with casting plugs were much bigger than are generally used now.
Living through the confusion of switching over was thought to likely cause problems but it was an easy transition. There were far fewer choices of lines then than there are now.
Just a bit of history from an old guy who lived through the transition.
Ken.
The older system might indicate, for example: C. HCH, GBF, etc.
Translation: level line, double taper, weight forward, and so on.
These three would be considered bass weight lines roughly equivalent to the current system listings for 8 weight and 9 weight lines for bass. When the newer system was introduced it was felt the first 30 feet measured by weight would make it much easier to obtain a balanced rod/line system whereas previously a lot of guesswork was needed to find a satisfactorily balanced rod/line combination.
When the "new" categorizing was introduced rod manufacturers also started listing the recommended line weight such as 5 or 6 weight for trout and 8 or 9 weight for bass. This made it much easier for the fly fisher to find the right combination quickly.
Remember back then hair bugs etc. along with casting plugs were much bigger than are generally used now.
Living through the confusion of switching over was thought to likely cause problems but it was an easy transition. There were far fewer choices of lines then than there are now.
Just a bit of history from an old guy who lived through the transition.
Ken.