Bamboo Tips - Tips Area |
|
< Home < Tips Area < Rod Selection < Sir "D"
The Sir D has been 'thrown around' as a good rod for the inexperienced builder. I would like to know where it originated, why it is thought to be good for this purpose and what sort of rod it is to fish. I have a taper for it that came from the list, but when I plot the measurements there is a conspicuous 'bump' near the ferrule end of the butt (.220-.244 at the 55 to 60 stations). I would be interested in anyone's measurements so I can compare with the ones I have. This is the one I have. Is it right on? 0 .067 I don't remember anyone saying the rod is well suited, in itself, for beginning makers, just a dandy for your first fly rod. (Mike Shay) The taper spreadsheet that David Ray so kindly posted to the list contains 11 "Sir D" tapers, and I don't see this one in that list. This IS one that was posted to the list a while ago. (Neil Savage) I would strongly recommend anyone making that first step at making a cane/bamboo rod first try a coarse/spinning rod at there first attempt. The reasons for this are as follows: 1) The thickness of the strips you will be working with are thicker than with a fly rod and hence easier to handle and to control. 2) Coarse/Spinning rod tapers are far more tolerant to poorly planed strips in so much that should the taper not be true (and trust me on a first rod it won't be that accurate.......) one won't notice the difference in the action of the rod. However , should the taper be out on a fly rod one can easily change the line rating by few line sizes simply by being out of tolerance by say 5 thousandths or so on a strip. In other words your first rods action could be very disappointing when the rod has been finally assembled and trial cast. So, if you are contemplating that first and all important rod select a simple spinning rod taper, and preferably a short one at that. Happy planing. (Paul Blakley) I like your theory, but find that it doesn't fit well with my own ideas. First, skinny strips are easier to plane than fat ones... Ever notice that butt sections are more prone to glue lines than tips? Of course, I've never had that problem <g>. If one has problems with skinny strips, his plane is almost surely dull. Also, on a first rod many folks are far more persnickety than they will be on number two. The likelihood of tapers being way off isn't that great. I like Wayne's 7' two piece 4 weight as a first rod. It casts well enough that those who make it want to come back for more. (Harry Boyd) A fine explanation and I would have to agree with your observations. That said, and here's the but, if my memory is correct when I started rod building I had at least three attempts at making a decent tip section and with each failure I became more despondent and ready 'to jack' the hobby. My confidence only came about after completing that very first rod and for me it wasn't a fly rod (as by now I had given up the hope of ever making a tip section suitable) but a 6' spinning rod (that daughter once used for worm fishing for trout , and is still a resident in her wardrobe). Once I had completed that very first rod the ' rush in me' to complete a rod had gone and when I returned to making a fly rod, I found I was taking my time , step by step and bingo, eventually I found that making fly rod tip sections was quite easy providing I didn't rush things (using a blunt plane being one of them) and took my time. What I am trying to say is that if you are keen to get that first rod out go for a spinning taper as FOR ME it was the easiest way to get a result and the confidence to progress. (Paul Blakley) I totally agree on that and would add maybe to make it a short one piece spinning rod, something like a 5 footer. No ferrules to deal with. (Geert Poorteman) I can't say why the Sir D might be well suited to the beginner but I'm a beginner and plan to make the original (IE: Cattanach 7’ 4 wt) as my second rod and the Sir D as my 3rd, and the Sir D quad as my fourth. Why, because I had a chance to cast the WC 7’ 4 wt at the Bishop gathering and simply loved it. It case well, roll casts great allows me to feel what the line is doing in while I'm casting. It's going to make a great high country and brush rod. It'll roll cast 40 feet with a flick of the wrist ala Joe Humphreys. My understanding is that the Sir D is the same rod with .002 or .003 more in the first 2 or 3 stations (don't have it in front of me). I think Darryl didn't like the stresses put on the original or some such thing. Anyway, I'm going to build it simply to see the effect of such a change on a rod. I'm really into to short 4 wts so making a bunch of the same type isn't going to matter much. I'm building the quad for the same reason. My first and only rod so far has been a Paul Young Midge. Is that a good rod for a beginner? I don't know but if fishes fine. How did I do taper wise? I don't know because I never measured the glued up rod. (Jim Lowe) Hey, if it fishes well (or if it fishes well FOR YOU) who cares if it matches the original??? (Neil Savage) I wonder why this rod, or any other rod for that matter, would be suited to an inexperienced rodmaker. For a beginner I would rather recommend a rod with a thicker tip like the Driggs. Or a one piece 5' UL spinning rod, without the hassle of ferrules. (Geert Poorteman) The Sir D was the second rod I ever made, first one was a Payne 98 with a .066 tip. If Barry takes his time, I don't think the Sir D should be all that difficult, but that's only speaking from my own experience. (Mark Wendt) I am currently building my first rod based on a Sir D taper in a 3 wt. (under a builder's tutelage) I've sanded it down a little too much, but for my first attempt, I'm satisfied. I am of the opinion that a newbie should make a rod that he/she will enjoy to fish, no matter what weight or style of fishing. If you run into problems, that's why this list and other forums online are designed to help out. I say go for the Sir D. I taped the blanks over each other yesterday and I can tell it will cast sweetly, with a little punch at the midpoint if I need it. Lurking too long and taking advice from this list as gospel will make you insane eventually. (Aaron Dimig) Ya ya ya - drag me into this - it was Mikee - it was his homebrew - he made me do it - and then - Dennis standing there off to the side - it was a clubhouse thing and it has been shared before . . . so - does it really matter? The issue here is this - does the rod fit the streams you intend to fish and does it fit your personal fishing style. I really need to expand my web site so many of the folks here can see and vision what this taper was created to fish (Larry Tusoni and the folks at Goldrush.com have helped with the space) then if you look at the pictures and say "Hey, this is my stream," then I would suggest that you might try the taper. OR we can do the Jeff Foxworthy test. If you roll cast for hours . .. . . you might make a Sir D If you have ever caught your crotch as you slid over a log . . . . . You might make a Sir D If you have ever missed a strike because of the strike speed of a fish . . . .You might make a Sir D If you can spit a Wad of REDMAN across the entire width of the stream . . . . . . . .You might make a Sir D If the Brook trout you catch are smaller than the one tattooed on the back of your right hand . . . . . You might make a Sir D If while you are fishing you hear a banjo picking this unusual tune in the distance . . . . . .You might make a Sir D (This one is for you Doug) - If you have ever seen a GUY fishing with a teddy on . .. . . . . .You might make a Sir D (Wayne Cattanach) Let me add to this, If you like a nice casting rod, You just make a Sir D. It is my # 1 rod and I have not been sorry that it is. (Tony Spezio) That's the right taper for the Sir D. The bump which you note in the taper is referred to as a hinge and should be put in the rod. It is to aid in roll casting. I made two Sir Ds and they have become my go to rod. They are better for me when fishing dry flies (which I am sure is what they were designed for) but I have found that I can cast smaller weighted flies (nymphs and buggers) using a heavier, shorter leader, well enough to get by. The taper is originally designed by Wayne Cattanach and can be found in his book, and slightly modified by Darryl Hayashida (Sir D himself hence the name), both members of this list. They should probably chime in and tell you the story about how it originated I am not quite up on that myself. I personally love the finished rod, the way it casts, etc. etc. (Bill Bixler)
I just finished wrapping the guides on a 7'6" Sir D 4 wt. I took it to the park to give it a test drive. All I can say is WOW. I'm not much of a caster, but this rod seemed to come alive. I was able to easily throw out 60' casts (much farther than I usually need to) with nice tight loops and a wonderful soft fully extended leader when it landed. This is rod number 5 and was meant for a friend - too bad for him because it just became mine. It's the rod I posted about the broken tip on. I glued it and wrapped it in silk. Seems to be good, but I think I'll plane out a second tip just in case. In the back of my mind I was thinking that tapers really didn't matter, that it was more the caster than the rod - not any more. Not that the skill of the caster doesn't have a lot to do with it, but this taper really worked for me. Thanks Wayne. (Aaron Gaffney) All the old timers on this list has heard this story before about the Sir D. I started flyfishing a couple years before my Dad, and when he decided he would like to fly fish, I tried to teach him how to cast. We were using an Orvis graphite rod. He could not cast further than 25 - 30 feet. No matter how much he practiced he just could not cast past 30 feet. He would get the line draped around his head, or crack it like a whip and pop the fly off. I suggested that he learn how to wade very quietly because he would have to get close to the fish to be able to reach them with a fly. When I started making bamboo fly rods, by pure luck I made him Wayne Cattanach's 7042 (It wasn't called the Sir D yet). I was resigned to many casting sessions so that he would be able to cast a bamboo rod, but the first time he picked it up, a couple of smooth false casts and the line whispered out in a perfect cast 50 feet. I was totally astonished to say the least. I raved about it so much on the Rodmakers list that Wayne named it the Sir Darryl Favorite. That rod is the third rod I made. I've been using mine for over ten years, it's #5. (Darryl Hayashida) I am building the Sir D #4 now but I doubt what size of ferule is the right for this rod, In the first I thought it must be a 13/64 but I looked on Hexrod and they were talking about a 12/64 ferule. My second question is how to transform this taper with the same qualities for different line weights. (Jaco Pronk) There are a bunch of the Sir D tapers stretched and shortened at this site. (Pete Van Schaack) You can increase the line weight by adding 0.005 to 0.006 inch to each station this works also for decrease. This is taken from Ray Gould's book Constructing Cane Rods. I have tested this for severay Rods and it works perfect for me. There is also section where is explained how to change the action without changing the line weight. I made an Excel spreadsheet depending on this calculations and that also gave great results. (Rainer Jagusch)
I have two 6' culms left, both more appropriate for tip sections than butt, but I wish to use them to build a rod. What 2 piece taper would be best for these culms? (Louis DeVos) Have you made a Sir D? That is what I would recommend. (Tony Spezio) I second the Sir D. (Lee Orr) You should easily be able to get 48 strips out of two culms of bamboo. With that you can make two rods with two tips and one rod with a single tip. As for what rod you'll make, it's up to you. Keep in mind that some of the culms with less power fibers might be better used for 3 wt and 4 wt rods. As for which one to choose, you'd need to be specific about what you want in a rod. (Jim Bureau)
There must be 100 of you out there who have made Sir D's. I made my own with a full wells handle and love the way it casts, but am thinking it looks a bit clunky. I'm making another for a raffle prize for Central Jersey Trout Unlimited and was wondering what sorts of handles you've used. I'm also considering a pair of wedding ring type sliders over cork for the seat. Suggestions? (Art Port) I used a cigar shape on mine, but I am partial to a western or superfine grip. (Scott Bearden) I've made 6 or so Sir D's and all have a cigar grip with uplocking hardware. Typically I use a full well for heavier rods say from 6 wt. on although I do like grip and have used it on a few 5 wts. (Doug Alexander) Cigar. (Ren Monllor) Just something to think about. I really like to use cork as a seating material - it gives some leeway to help accomodate the variation in reel feet that you get from brand to brand, and it is secure and quiet, no rattles, nor any tendency for the rings to slip. Also, I have used either Garrison-style buttcap-and-wedding-ring attachments on most of my lighter rods, and I really like them. In recent times I have been using them also on 5-weight and 6-weight rods. But for the last half dozen-and-a-few rods I have built I have been using Bellinger's Cork Core reel seats, and I think they are the greatest thing since we discovered beer! They look great, function beautifully and have immaculate hardware. They have even forced me to overcome a long-standing dislike of uplocking or upsliding hardware! The butt cap especially is a great place to have engraved the owner's name, rod details or whatever. My only complaint so far is that with some of the US reel feet the fit is a bit (a lot) tight, and you need to relieve either the cork or the metal ring that slides into the butt. Should go nicely on a Sir D. Most of the rods that I build are built as custom rods, and the grip is what the owner specifies; but the two styles that are easily the most popular are the Western and the Reverse Half Wells. These just seem to me to be the styles that trout fishermen can use comfortably all day, and pick up and put down easily without having to kind of get used to them all over again every time they pick them up. The fact that they look pretty nice as well doesn't hurt a bit, either! (Peter McKean) I have been using a cigar, but modified slightly. It tapers a little toward the reel seat. (Jim Sobota) One sage piece of advice that I was given - make the handle comfortable for the user. My 2 wt has a full wells grip that looks as if it was taken from a 6 wt. However, I have big hands and do not like the feel of small handles. I like the full wells as it provides a tactile "key" for my thumb. (Greg Dawson)
Any feelings regarding the Sir D 7642? I've made eight Sir D 7042 and each one is loved by the lucky recipient, so now I'm considering making the 7' 6" taper and would like some thoughts. Is the action at all similar to the 7"? The stress curves pretty much look the same, but I'd like to hear from anyone who has built both and fished both. (Tom Key) P.S. I would also like any personal suggestions for a fairly fast taper (by cane rod standards) in the 7'6" range. I haven’t fished both. The Catt 7642 is the same as a Young Perfectionist except for one station dimension. I fish the Perfectionist all the time and love it. The deflection characteristics will be significantly deferent from the 7042. In my opinion: The 7042 is a fast action rod in that it has a lot of tip flex when it is loaded but I think it’s more suited to a heavier line than a 4 wt. The 7642 is more of a parabolic action and more suited to a 5 wt. (Al Baldauski) You didn’t mention that you were looking at the Sir D’s. The Sir D 7642 is distinctly different from the regular 7642 which is the one equal to the Perfectionist. The Sir D 7642 is a longer version of the Sir D 7042 and their Stress curves are very similar. So, yes, those two should be similar in performance. They both comform to the “fast” action criteria. They both seem to have deflection characteristics appropriate for the line weight specified. So if you liked the Sir D 7042 you should like the Sir D 7642. (Al Baldauski) I made one for my wife with a .03 swell in the last 3" of the butt. Everyone who has cast it seems to like it. Now, If I could get her to fish with it a bit. It is light and quick with more reserve than most people expect. I made one for myself that I think is a bit too stiff. The swell was a bit different. (Doug Easton) The 2 that come to mind right off are the Wilcox Montanan, 7'6" 5 wt. and the 1952 version of the Dickerson 7613 from Jack Howell’s The Lovely Reed, here again a strong 5 wt, though many say it is better suited to a 6 wt, and refer to it as the 7613 Guide. Both are fast by bamboo standards. (Will Price) It may not make any difference but I should have mentioned that the Wilcox is a 3 piece (Will Price) I made the Dickerson 7613. As made, it isn't happy with a DT 5 (at least for me) but it really LIKES a WF 6. (Neil Savage) I built a 7643 Sir D (the 3-piece version) this past summer, but I've never built a 7042 so I can't make the comparison. I'm not sure if I'd call it a fast rod, but it sure is a sweet handling rod. It's well worth building, even if you decide later that it isn't exactly what you were looking for. (Paul Gruver)
I maybe opening a whole can of worms but... I need opinions about the Sir "D" 7633 (7'6", 3 wt., 3 piece) for a fledgling bamboo lover. Looking at the curves the taper seems to be fairly fast (as fast relates to bamboo rods). Faster is something I am looking for the rookie. He backpacks, hence the 3 piece, and fishes smaller water = 3 wt. I am very partial to Wayne Cattanach tapers. In other words... I am not sure I should trust myself. Anybody have a history with this particular taper? Or are there other tapers that will fit the faster casting I am looking for. I do want to stick with a 3 piece configuration. (Pete Emmel) I can't say about the 7633, but I build the Sir "D" 7643 last summer. It's a great rod! I chose the 3-piece because I wanted it for travel. It's one of the faster bamboo tapers that I've used, so I'd say give it a try. If you find you don't like it, you can build a different taper the next time. (Paul Gruver)
|
