204L or 50-1/2 and why....
Moderators: pmcroberts, uniphasian
204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#1Hi Everyone!
Starting to think about an addition to the quiver and in the spirit of celebrating having lasted half a century on this good earth. Was interested in a longer and lighter lined rod for more finessed and nuanced fishing situations. I would likely look at a modern built blank to build up. The Payne 204L has garnered what seems to be a lot of rightful praise, while it seems like it is harder to find much on the Leonard 50-1/2. I came across it looking through HEXROD and "Peter Collin" who posted the taper stated it being the best rod he'd ever cast.
So......which, and why?
Starting to think about an addition to the quiver and in the spirit of celebrating having lasted half a century on this good earth. Was interested in a longer and lighter lined rod for more finessed and nuanced fishing situations. I would likely look at a modern built blank to build up. The Payne 204L has garnered what seems to be a lot of rightful praise, while it seems like it is harder to find much on the Leonard 50-1/2. I came across it looking through HEXROD and "Peter Collin" who posted the taper stated it being the best rod he'd ever cast.
So......which, and why?
-
- Guide
- Posts: 246
- Joined: 09/19/14 12:54
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#2I am lucky to have a Thramer version of the 204L one of his last pre-retirement rods. Love it. Powerful 8-1/2 ft 5 weight in a three pc. Big water, big fish, I’d say. Bought it for out West,wind, etc. No knowledge of the 50-1/2.
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#3I've really become a fan of the 8-1/2' 2/2 5wt. I built on a Dennis Stone blank. He tagged it as an FE Thomas "Light Special". Hollow built with fine tips and a mildly swelled butt. Most of my fishing is on smaller to medium sized streams. Not brook trout mountain sized but 15-30' with obvious variety in width here and there.
What I don't understand is the notion that rods in the 8' and longer are frequently billed as "big water" rods? A 5 weight is capable in those longer lengths of reaching out on a river such as the Delaware, but can fish headwaters with 6 or 7X just as well. At 4.6 ounces I can fish all day and the benefit of ease in mending and reserve power in the butt if needed, makes it for me at least a perfect "all around" rod.
I recently acquired an 8-1/2' Sewell Dunton again in a 2 piece that is rated a 6 wt. It is a faster action with a pronounced swelled but akin to the 50-1/2 mentioned and it fishes closely in regards to the Stone rod on the same streams. Of course they're 2 different rods, but my point is the length doesn't dictate where or how they fish. I have shorter rods as well but find the 8-1/2 footers getting the nod most of the time. Just my humble 2 cents!
What I don't understand is the notion that rods in the 8' and longer are frequently billed as "big water" rods? A 5 weight is capable in those longer lengths of reaching out on a river such as the Delaware, but can fish headwaters with 6 or 7X just as well. At 4.6 ounces I can fish all day and the benefit of ease in mending and reserve power in the butt if needed, makes it for me at least a perfect "all around" rod.
I recently acquired an 8-1/2' Sewell Dunton again in a 2 piece that is rated a 6 wt. It is a faster action with a pronounced swelled but akin to the 50-1/2 mentioned and it fishes closely in regards to the Stone rod on the same streams. Of course they're 2 different rods, but my point is the length doesn't dictate where or how they fish. I have shorter rods as well but find the 8-1/2 footers getting the nod most of the time. Just my humble 2 cents!
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#4I love my 50 1/2 DF, in the right situations. I would not describe it as a "powerful, big river rod", and in fact, I like it with a DT4 as much as a WF5. For me, it's ideal during the last hour or so on the Delaware, when the wind has died, and the good fish have settled into their lanes and are sipping spinners. Delicate, accurate presentations with smaller flies and light tippets. Not the rod for earlier in the day when the wind is up.
Lee
Lee
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#5The original Payne 204's that I have cast did not give me the impression of power when I was casting them. The word that comes to mind for me when using an original Payne 204 is elegant and graceful. Several Payne 204's cast and fished here. One of a handful of rods that impressed me enough to want to buy one instead of making my own.
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#7Hi Lee....I wonder how much different the taper is on the 3 piece vs 2 piece that you can find in Hexrod. Sounds lovely. I had considered playing around with the taper just a pinch. Assuming yours has extraordinarily fine tips, how are they keeping up? The 2 piece taper certainly does get way up there over the first 15-20".
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#8I don't have any experience with the 2-piece taper, so can't comment there. No issues with the tips, but as indicated, this is not a rod I push hard. The overall rod only weighs 4.25 ounces, so on the lighter side for 8 1/2 footers, but delightful when conditions are right, and one of my favorites.
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#9That's one sublime looking Leonard.LeeB wrote: ↑10/01/21 17:48I love my 50 1/2 DF, in the right situations. I would not describe it as a "powerful, big river rod", and in fact, I like it with a DT4 as much as a WF5. For me, it's ideal during the last hour or so on the Delaware, when the wind has died, and the good fish have settled into their lanes and are sipping spinners. Delicate, accurate presentations with smaller flies and light tippets. Not the rod for earlier in the day when the wind is up.
Lee
I want to be buried with my favorite rod.
I hear the Styx River has Fish.
I hear the Styx River has Fish.
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#10Lee,
That reel case looks like Alan Kube’s work. Is it?
That is a stunning Leonard, my favorite color scheme….
Gary
That reel case looks like Alan Kube’s work. Is it?
That is a stunning Leonard, my favorite color scheme….
Gary
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#11Thanks Gary.
No, the case is a Hardy, with the standard Hardy markings on the front.
Lee
No, the case is a Hardy, with the standard Hardy markings on the front.
Lee
Re: 204L or 50-1/2 and why....
#14By happenstance, I came across one of each of these rods during the past few years. Both were in really bad shape, not fishable. The Payne had pretty bad water damage under the guides which someone had tried to repair by, among other things, sanding part of the midsection almost round. The only saving grace was that the ferrules on both rods were still quite good, I guess a testament to the craftsmanship back then. I spent a lot of time restoring both and along the way lawn cast both of them a fair amount. They are really similar. I have since sold the Leonard and kept the Payne if that means anything. The action of both is super smooth with a DT 5. My supposition is that Jim Payne was trying for something like the action of the 50 1/2 with his design, but take that for what it's worth. Anyway, as mentioned above, for throwing dries on mid or smaller streams, they are both fantastic. I wouldn't fish the Payne in big water or wind.
Don Titterington
Desert Canyon Rods
West Linn, OR
Repairs/Renovations
Custom Builds
Desert Canyon Rods
West Linn, OR
Repairs/Renovations
Custom Builds