Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

The exchange of tapers forum is for classic and personally developed tapers. The definition of classic tapers are those tapers that were developed by rodmakers that are no longer alive. Please understand that rod makers who have developed their tapers, and are active in the community, should not have their tapers cloned, or shared, without their permission, please refrain for asking for those tapers as it infringes on the maker.

Moderator: pvansch1

Post Reply
rickv
Sport
Posts: 33
Joined: 02/20/14 16:57

Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#1

Post by rickv »

I was wondering how much difference there is in the Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe taper? As I have a Payne 204L and a Canadian Canoe and thought maybe the 206 would be a nice fit in between those two.

User avatar
carl otto
Master Guide
Posts: 867
Joined: 01/31/10 19:00
Location: Michigan

Re: Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#2

Post by carl otto »

I fish these rods. My experience would be the Payne 205 might be a better "in between" rod to have. Based on the rods I own:

204L is on the edge for a 5 or heavy 4

205, again a transition rod, handles a 5 or 6

Canadian Canoe comes into its own with a WF7. Also as a side note: Payne made another 8'6" 3/2 rod on the Canadian Canoe taper but labeled as a "dry fly special" I believe. Apparently some folks did not react well to the CC name, so Payne made the same taper, different name for marketing. The DFS rods come on the market for less money then the CC rods. A quirk of the market.

Carl

upstate
Master Guide
Posts: 491
Joined: 12/30/11 08:38
Location: New york

Re: Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#3

Post by upstate »

I agree the 205 would be better! I have both rods the 204 is a 4wt. And the 206 for early season is a 6wt. I use Wulff Bamboo lines on both.

Tom

User avatar
Flyman615
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 6237
Joined: 12/21/04 19:00
Location: Black Hills, South Dakota
Contact:

Re: Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#4

Post by Flyman615 »

Well, and FWIW, my early 8 1/2 ft. 205 (4.27 oz.) is a 4/5 wt. while my later 9 ft. (4.50 oz.) 206L is a medium action 5 wt. and definitely not a 6 wt. in my view. BTW, both rods have 16/10 ferrules.

Scott
Flyman615

"An undisturbed river is as perfect as we will ever know, every refractive slide of cold water a glimpse of eternity" - Thomas McGuane

rickv
Sport
Posts: 33
Joined: 02/20/14 16:57

Re: Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#5

Post by rickv »

Okay, thanks everybody. I have plenty 3 piece 5-6 weight rods. What I’m lacking is 6-7 weights. Does anyone out there own a Payne 206?

RickV

User avatar
LeeB
Master Guide
Posts: 810
Joined: 09/09/08 18:00

Re: Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#6

Post by LeeB »

Rick;
Because you're comparing to a 204 or a 205, I assume you're interested in a 8 1/2' - 3/2 rod. I have a 1940s rod which is 8 1/2' - 3/2, has 17/11 ferrules, weighs 5.5 oz., and is great with a DT6/WF7. In that timeframe, I believe this rod would have been listed as a 204H, as the 206 was a 9' - 3/2 rod at that time. As of the 1951 catalog, the 206 became an 8 1/2' rod, and the 205 was introduced as a rod with a taper slightly stronger than the 204. (Earlier there was a 205 cataloged which was the same taper as a 204, but with darker colored cane.)
Point is, if you're looking for an 8 1/2' - 3/2 that will handle a 6/7, you could be looking for a 204H (prior to 1951) or a 205, 206 (post 1951).
Lee

rickv
Sport
Posts: 33
Joined: 02/20/14 16:57

Re: Payne 206 vs Payne Canadian Canoe Taper

#7

Post by rickv »

Thanks Lee, that makes sense.

Post Reply

Return to “Taper Exchange”