November 11, 2009, by Mark Waldin
As I have done with rods in the past, I am collecting forum comments on this rod into a single place to make it easier for you to see what people are saying. We are now carrying this blank and rod on Flycatcher custom fly rods. Here is what people are saying:
”990-4 - My first impression was, ” Hey this rod is really stiff!”, but subsequent wiggling and casting altered that impression. The rod seemed to be very stiff in the region between the top of the cork and the middle of the rod, without being noticeably stiff in the top 1/3 to 1/2 of the rod. I know that may not make a whole lot of sense, but that was my gut “feeling” when I first picked it up. After I picked the rod up, I stripped off about 30-35 feet of line, flipped the line out in front of me, made a quick backcast, and let the cast go. The line shot forward like it came out of a cannon. It layed out in a straight line, tugged at the reel when it reached the end, and dropped to the asphalt. The end of the line (not including the leader and yarn) was only 70-80 feet away so it was not a huge cast (I was only trying to lay the line out to set up for the next cast), but with the wind in my face it impressed me nonetheless.
At first, I concentrated on casting with about 35 feet of line outside the tip and shooting the WF line without a double haul. The next few casts were equally impressive. I slowly lengthened the amount of line that I had out and added a double haul to see how the rod would respond. I was able to pick up about 55 feet of line and shoot it without too much effort. I was able to put the fly out at about 90-95 feet. Longer casts and casts started with more line outside the tip were more trouble. Some were okay, some piled up, and some had tailing loops. To tell the truth, I am not quite sure whether it was the wind, my poor technique, or the rod. If I had to guess, it was probably a combination of the first two; probably more of the second one than the first one. These distances are close to the max distance that I can consistently reach with my 10 w Xi2 on the water. (Of course these distances are estimates. I guesstimated the distances by measuring the casts against the number of “panels” on the adjacent sidewalk. Each “panel” was about 7 to 8 feet long- I measured this distance by laying my 6 foot frame down on one. The end of the sidewalk was 13 panels away - between 91 and 103 feet.)
My impressions are that this rod is a true cannon. It responded best to a quick but smooth stroke that wasn’t too forceful. Too much force or too much arc didn’t really add anything to the cast. Dropping the rod too far back made it hard efficiently load it. With moderate effort it delivered good line speed and straight line tracking required to punch a fly into the wind with no wobble or bounce back. It picked up the line efficiently. It had good feel for a big stick, but not touchy feely amounts of it. After casting dozens of casts with it, my initial feeling of stiffness in this rod seemed to stem from something besides pure stiffness. It seemed as though the lower half of the rod was not really much stiffer than its predecessor, but rather transmitted more of the “feeling” down the rod along with the flex. Some rods transmit the force by not flexing, but all you get is the dead club-like feeling. It is hard to put into words, but this rod seemed flex a bit in the lower half of the rod, while still transmitting many of the details of the force through to the handle. I think it would serve well as a surf rod. If the impressions hold in real life I think it would cast all but the largest flies very well, and I would even use this rod in many of the conditions where I currently use my 10 wt.
1090-4
It provided strikingly similar performance to the 9 weight. Moderate effort and quick steady application of power (with 30-40 feet of line outside the tip) generated very high line speeds and laser-like casts. Additional line was easily picked up and carried in the air, until my bad technique kicked in. I simply have no business trying to carry 70 feet of line in the air. Between the tailing loops, the wide loops, the (mistimed) dumped casts, and backcasts that overlapped with casters behind (and 90 degrees) to me, I was glad that I was only casting yarn. I was able get casts out to past the 100 foot mark, which I normally only reach with shooting heads (even at the casting ponds). Who knows how much of this distance will translate to on-the-water situations.
As I said, this rod was strikingly similar in feel to the 9 wt, but with more power and slightly more weight. For those that prefer a lighter weight rod, it won’t change your mind For those that prefer a 10 weight. This will cover all the same bases as previous 10 wts, but with a little less fatigue than most. It is a true saltwater rod, not just an inshore rod. It will be just as at home in an offshore situation as on the beach.
890-4
Given the similarities of the 9 and 10 wts, I expected this rod to exhibit the same characteristics. I was quite surprised when I first made a cast. Though it looked identical, the performance was quite different. Whereas the 9 and 10 wt rods had some flex deep into the rod, the majority of the flex was in the top third of the rod, whereas the 8wt had noticeably more flex deep into the rod. I would like to say that it fled well past the halfway point and possibly two-thirds of the way down the rod, I think that this was more of a reaction to the big difference between it and the other rods than reality. The difference was substantial, though; almost like they took the 9 wt and peeled of a couple wraps of graphite off the bottom and on off the top. It was different enough that I had to lengthen my casting arc and slow down the cast a little. It did seem to lack that feeling of stiffness in the middle that others had, which gave an overall impression of more “feel”. (If you are not sure what that means, I am not exactly sure either. Maybe it means hat I have lived in Kah-li-for-ni-yah for too long)
My first two casts with it produced tailing loops (I swear it was the rod and not me). After that I managed open loops that dumped at 60-70 feet. Finally after a dozen casts, I started to get dialed in. The casting style that worked best was still a smooth steady application of power, but over a little longer time and a little longer arc. It seems that the recovery speed of this rod is a little slower than the other models. At the end, I was able to reach out the 90 foot mark regularly. I have cast the 890-4 Xi2, but that was several years ago, when I bought my 10 wt, so it is hard to compare the two. I currently own an RPLXi 8 wt and an XP 8 wt. This rod has an action that seems to be a blend of those two rods. It had a flex similar to my RPLXi (maybe a little less) with more feel like the XP. Throw in better fish fighting capabilities and there you have it.
1290-4
I never have cast a 12 wt, but thought that it would be fun to see how it went. they had two rigged up - one with a foregrip and one with a standard grip. I chose the latter for no apparent reason at all.
This rod was very similar to the 9 and 10 wt rods. It is noticeably heavier, thicker and stiffer than those two, as was the fly line, so I expected much different. Again, my first cast was simply a quick one-handed cast with no haul just to get the line out in front of me and prepare to start casting. The line seemed to leap forward. For some unknown reason, I thought that a 12 wt rod would require a bit more effort, but using about the same amount of effort that I used on my first casts with the 9 and 10 wt rods yielded a laser sharp 70 foot cast.
It responded to the same relatively short arc, smooth techniques that the other two responded two. It was noticeably heavier, though not oppressively so. I am not saying that it is a rod that I would want blind cast all day long, but the relative length of time that I could cast it versus the time for 10 wt would likely be closer to 1:1 than 2:1. It had a little less feel than the 10 wt, but since I have never cast a 12 weight rod before I was not sure whether this was a function of the heavier rod wt, the particular rod line, or the fact that I was not loading it efficiently. If I were a betting man, the latter reason would be closest to even odds.
This rod was also a cannon. I was able to reach out to distances around 110 feet, which is in the neighborhood of my longest cast ever in a pond or on the water. Next time I will bring a tape measure!
Overall Impression
My overall impression of these rods is quite favorable. They have many of the same qualities that led me to buy a 10 wt Xi2. They are relatively light for a heavy-duty fish fighter. They have a good amount of feel without sacrificing line speed or (perceived) durability. Most importantly, they seem to generate tremendous line speed with a minimum of force, which makes it easier to cast them for long periods of time. The line speed seems to be a little more than that generated by the Xi2, but since I fish mine with a lot of heavy sinking lines and these all had rated floaters, it may have little or nothing to do with rod designs.
The 9wt, 10wt, and 12wt all had similar feel and performance, while the 8 wt seemed to be aimed at slightly different target. I would be curious to see if the 7wts and 6wts feel like the 8 wt. My guess is that 8wt was designed with a more all-around usage in mind. While 9-12 wts will be primarily used in the open ocean, be it on the beach, inshore, or blue water, an 8 wt will likely be used on the flats, in the back bays and sloughs, and on tidal rivers and sounds as well as on those other conditions. A slightly softer rod and slightly slower action (though far from slow) might have been deemed more appropriate. I like a little faster, lighter rod for the flats (hence my 8wt XP), but for an all around saltwater/brackish rod it would be a good choice.
I would not ditch my Xi2 for an Xi3, but if I were in the market for a good saltwater rod, these would definitely be near the top of the list.” — stripersonline.com
_______________________________________________________________________________
“Here’s what we thought of it.
- The Xi3 is noticeably faster than the Xi2. Jerry Siem at Sage says that the midsection of the rod in particular was sped up a bit. It feels faster overall, with a more consistent bend throughout the rod than the Xi2.
- The new Fuji stripping guides are giant! We’re told that they’re lighter and more durable.
- The reel seat is great - the lock rings have a very deep pattern that makes it easy to crank ‘em down.
- We buy the claim that these rods are more accurate. Cutting-edge rod building technology is a bit beyond us, but we can tell you that the fly tends to land where you want it to land.
- It hucks! Maybe it’s just the faster action, but your line sails, and the difference is more noticeable when you’re dealing with some wind.” –blog.deneki.com
_______________________________________________________________________________
“Finally got to cast a few of the different the new Sage X I 3 when the Sage Rep stopped by the shop Monday. Thanks Ben, now I’ll have to get all new Saltwater Rods before my next trip South. Besides the price $695+ the rod is definitely an improvement over the X i 2 rods. I’d have to say the rod seems to be lighter and more powerful. It wasn’t a windy day outside the shop but picking up a whole line and shooting it the whole length took less effort than my other rods. I really like the blue finish, guides and rod case. All in all, if the rod going to help me cast a crab 10 more feet to catch that permit, it going to be worth the investment.” — nomadanglers.com
_______________________________________________________________________________
“One word - CANNONS.
Got the 7-10wts in and they’re absolute rocket launchers. I’m a big Xi2 fan (own 2 9’s and a 10) and am having a hard time trying to convince myself that I don’t need the new rods.
Butt section is a little stiffer, tip section is a little softer, making it more castable all around, but still able to pick up 50-60ft of line, redirect, and put it right back down. Lots of power deep down in the butt section of the rod. Nice hot Pacific Blue colors too…” –flyfisherman.com
_______________________________________________________________________________
“The butt section felt stiffer, while enlarging the “timing sweet spot” and becoming more “castable at shorter distances. I was able to quickly pickup lots of line (50ft-60ft depending on the line wt) and quickly get a cast off. My favorite was the 9wt. It was the perfect blend of power, accuracy, and feel. It had enough power that I would use it in place of my 10 wt Xi2 for many applications.
The 8wt felt substantially different than the 9wt and up rods. It seemed to bend deeper and have a softer butt section. It didn’t feel bad, just different. If looking for a rod in the 8wt-9 wt range, I would cast both before deciding.
All of these rods were setup with full floating lines, which I don’t use much on my Xi2, but I still felt that I could cast the lines a long ways, as long as my shooting head distances in most instances. It was quite windy that day, and I chose a location where I could cast directly into the wind to get a feel for the worst case scenario, which you usually don’t get with test casting. The rods performed well; punching into the wind, even with my flawed casting style.” –flyfisherman.com
_______________________________________________________________________________
“I met a Sage rep the other day and had the chance to cast the nine weight XI3. Its a really nice, super fast, extremely light fly rod. If you thought the 2 was too stiff though, you won’t much like the 3. Definitely reminded me of the TCR.
Excellent rod for long distance work, not my cup of tea though. I’ll stick with my Legend Elite’s.” –southeastflyfishing.com