How long is short enough?

  • Thread starter Becks and Brown Trout
  • Start date
B

Becks and Brown Trout

Guest
I have been small stream fishing for a good few years now. I frequently fish very small heavily overgrown becks and In that time I have used everything from a 5ft through to an 8ft.

I have now reached a conclusion.

That even in the tightest of places the best all round rod length for small streams and becks is ... a 7ft 6" . Short enough to get under just about anything but long enough to deal with high banks behind . With a little bit of length to hold line of the water and control the drift. So there I have said it , I am sure you will all think I am wrong but I know I am right..

Oh yes and a three or four weight is perfect, none of this 1 and 2 weight nonsense,,,,

I am sure you will all agree and dont expect any opposing views..:whistle:

Andy

Becks and Brown Trout
 

matsmcfly1

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
369
Location
East Lothian
I have been small stream fishing for a good few years now. I frequently fish very small heavily overgrown becks and In that time I have used everything from a 5ft through to an 8ft.

I have now reached a conclusion.

That even in the tightest of places the best all round rod length for small streams and becks is ... a 7ft 6" . Short enough to get under just about anything but long enough to deal with high banks behind . With a little bit of length to hold line of the water and control the drift. So there I have said it , I am sure you will all think I am wrong but I know I am right..

Oh yes and a three or four weight is perfect, none of this 1 and 2 weight nonsense,,,,

I am sure you will all agree and dont expect any opposing views..:whistle:

Andy

Becks and Brown Trout
My favourite type of fishing is on small tight stretches as you describe above. To this day I still use an old 7' 6", 3# shakespeare rod that I was given as a gift many years ago (must have been about 8 years old) and find it does the job it is required to do very well :)
 

JeffR

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
9,674
Location
Staffs
With you on that I think Andy. I got a 6'6"#3 for small streams rather than my "normal" '8 #4, but to be honest, fun as the short rod is, its sometimes a nuisance too, for the reasons you say. Also, for some reason when using furled leaders they seem to wrap themselves around the tip of the short rod more than they do with the longer one, but that may just be my cack-handedness:eek:
 

canefly

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2009
Messages
849
Location
UK
What suits one doesnt suit another!
Where I fish,5 foot is my favourite and I fish much better with it:)
I dont have any high banks though,its all wading instream.
 

danielp

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
2,331
Location
South East England
I like my little 7' 3# but would happily use a 7'6'' so completely agree with your choice. It would appear opinion is not as divided as I expected on that front!

I do think the extra little length helps keep it above bushes and cover behind you whilst still being short enough to tuck casts under trees etc... the perfect compromise for me anyway.

Dan
 

lawrenceh_w

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
589
Location
Shinfield, Berkshire
Dependent on the overhead cover and how high the banks are will see me use either a 6'6" or 7'6" rod. On my local river where I'm wading 90% of the time and it's pretty covered by trees I find the 6'6" just about right.

On most other small streams/rivers I find my 7'6" #3 pretty much perfect ... although I was thinking on Saturday that an 8'-8'6" #3 would be useful as well ... :)
 

ferral

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
1,259
I've recently been struggling with high flows and high vegetation using my 7ft rod. The river is too deep to wade easily without chest waders in some places and the vegetation is to thick and high to allow easy casting from the bank with a short rod at moment, the last two trips i've wished i had a rod a foot or more longer to help. However most of the time 7ft seems perfect.
 

guest21

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
34,881
Location
Northants
I've got 6', 7', 7' 6" and 8'. I'm with you, 7'6" is ideal. Can't see (in my case) losing 6" or 18" makes much diff, you've still got to watch what you're doing.

In my experience it's not the length of the rod that causes the problems-it's throwing line out behind or above you.

If I had to choose I'd probably keep the 7'6". Please accept my appologies for not arguing :D.

Chris.
 

Englander

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
1,528
Location
Central Scotland
Andy

My 7' 3wt is my go to river rod , however i wade a few wee burns where its just too long !

My 5' 9" 3/4wt is the Daddy in these places :D

I can fish place others fear to tread ;)

Id be happy only ever to fish tiny burns as this rod is simply divine :cool: any excuse to use it :wine:

And to think i was scared of buying a rod under 7' ...............:eek:mg:

Stephen
 

walney

Active member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
30
Location
Roundhay, North Leeds.
I recently sold a 6ft as it felt too short and now have my rods calibrated to suit my rivers, 7ft for small streams such as the upper Nidd, 8ft for theupper Aire and Wye and 9ft for the Wharfe. I should stop reading threads like this as it only gets me thinking, em yes a 71/2 ft would be so useful for... no stop it!
 
B

Becks and Brown Trout

Guest
Thanks for the replies but am a little surprised that there isnt more arguing. For years I have used a Hardy featherweight 7ft on small streams. Also a 7ft 6inch 4wt St croix avid when it was a bit blowy. I noticed that the 7ft 6inch was never a problem length wise infact I found that the extra 6inches was a real help at times. ( no comments please) :whistle:.

To the extent last year I got a 7ft6inch 3wt and now never use the featherlight.

Andy


Becks and Brown Trout
 

lawrenceh_w

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
589
Location
Shinfield, Berkshire
I guess the reason no-one's arguing is that a 7'6" (#3 or #4) is a bloody (almost) perfect small stream rod in most cases.

Having said that, I do really enjoy my 6'6" rod (that can be converted to 5'6" ... thank you March Brown designers) to be brilliant in those jungly-type rivers.
 

mart_s

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2009
Messages
1,158
Location
West Yorkshire
I use a 7' #3 for small streams just a cheapy Shakespeare if I had the money I'd by myself a guideline lpxe 7'6
 

discodazz

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
799
Location
Wallsend
I wont argue with you either, my go to rod is a 7'6" #3. As much as I love fishing my 5' rod its just not as versatile.
Daryn
 

beryl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
9,579
Small streams are hugely different that's why there's no argument. You pick the length that suites yours. The lower stretches of mine are 8' territory. Go up a mile and a 6' is too long. I'm buying a little five foot because I actually need it to fish the last 1/4 of a mile of my stream. It simply cannot be fished otherwise. I don't want a car full of rods so I've settled on a 6' and a 5' always setup that live beside the passenger seat when not in use. Simples
 
Last edited:

beryl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
9,579
Andy

My 7' 3wt is my go to river rod , however i wade a few wee burns where its just too long !

My 5' 9" 3/4wt is the Daddy in these places :D

I can fish place others fear to tread ;)

Id be happy only ever to fish tiny burns as this rod is simply divine :cool: any excuse to use it :wine:

And to think i was scared of buying a rod under 7' ...............:eek:mg:

Stephen
Why isn't it in your equipment list then;)
 
Last edited:

airsprite

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
588
Location
Birmingham
Small streams are hugely different that's why there's no argument. You pick the length that suites yours. The lower stretches of mine are 8' territory. Go up a mile and a 6' is too long. I'm buying a little five foot because I actually need it to fish the last 1/4 of a mile of my stream. It simply cannot be fished otherwise. I don't want a car full of rods so I've settled on a 6' and a 5' always setup that live beside the passenger seat when not in use. Simples
So right there Beryl, all streams are different :thumbs: On most i fish 7ft or 7ft 6" is a good compromise, go round a bend and you find yourself in a tunnel of trees where a 6ft rod would be handy then further up it opens out and 8ft rod would give some advantage.
I have a little 5ft 6" that i rarely use, but for one tiny brook i fish its perfect, its so overgrown i take a pair of pruning shears in my bag :eek: a little trimming here and there make the next trip a wee bit easier :D

Steve
 

beryl

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
9,579
So right there Beryl, all streams are different :thumbs: On most i fish 7ft or 7ft 6" is a good compromise, go round a bend and you find yourself in a tunnel of trees where a 6ft rod would be handy then further up it opens out and 8ft rod would give some advantage.
I have a little 5ft 6" that i rarely use, but for one tiny brook i fish its perfect, its so overgrown i take a pair of pruning shears in my bag :eek: a little trimming here and there make the next trip a wee bit easier :D

Steve
Me too. My better half complains its the only gardening I do! Someone will be along shortly to damn us for unsporting behaviour;)
 

stevesnaps

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
1,051
Me too. My better half complains its the only gardening I do! Someone will be along shortly to damn us for unsporting behaviour;)
I agree,a branch will only have one chance to snag my fly:eek:and it gives a bit more room for the King Fishers and Dippers to use the Small Stream Highway.:thumbs:
 
Top