|
|
Post by rockhopper on Jan 16, 2006 16:53:42 GMT 1
Hi lads, im looking to buy a new rod in the near future and would appreciate any recommendations you could give me. Im looking to replace an apollo mk1, to fish mainly over heavy kelpy ground. Ive had the apollo 6 years now and rated it highly until last weekend, when lifting a fish about 6 pound (i was only 15 foot from sea level) the butt actually snapped in half!!(6 inches above the reel)  . That was the second time it had snapped, having snapped 8 inches from the tip end on only my second outing from new  . Ive been told the apollo mk2 is less prone to breaking plus they give a lifetime gaurantee but as you might expect im a bit wary of greys at the minute So which rod would you recommend?? cheers!! |
|
|
|
Post by bigstotty on Jan 16, 2006 20:03:50 GMT 1
Stick to Century rods. They made their name on the northeast coast with our snaggy rocks and kelp beds. Tough rods for tough conditions. They wont snap on you.
|
|
|
|
Post by nilfishes on Jan 17, 2006 1:11:23 GMT 1
I have an apollo mk2, bought not long ago. But due to my lack of catching fish over two pound so far I am unable to answer. The two pounder I caught was lifted up about 12 to 15 foot and the rod handled it with ease. I am wondering after your comment "Have I bought the right rod?"
|
|
|
|
Post by canecatch on Jan 17, 2006 18:52:41 GMT 1
hi rockhopper hope this dosent make you cringe ;D i have 2 butts and 4 tips in my collection of mk1 appollos cant fault them even though ive broken 2 tips early doors.i also have an m2 which ive caught fish up to 12lb5oz never had a problem with it though i tend to use the old faithful ,if you try N_E_ROCK_HOPPERS someone on their has a mk1 for sale how much ? hope this is some help good searching
|
|
|
|
Post by rockhopper on Jan 17, 2006 19:47:34 GMT 1
Cheers for the info canecatcher!! seeing as you own both rods, how do you compare the mk1 with the mk2?? There seems to be differing opinions about which is the better rod, what do u reckon??
|
|
steveb
Expert
UKSA Staff Northeast www.angling.ukf.net
www.angling.ukf.net/scotland glasgow angling center
Posts: 544
|
Post by steveb on Jan 20, 2006 21:29:10 GMT 1
hi rockhopper
ive had a conoflex highlander for a few years now and they are a very solid rod, the tip isn't as sensitive as the apollo but still has a good bite indication, i have dragged some good fish through some heavy tackle grabbing areas with no fear of it snapping and would recomend the rod to anyone , my mate has a highlander and an apollo mk2 and he is undecided to which he likes best but he still say's that the highlander is better for the very rough ground
|
|
|
|
Post by rockhopper on Jan 21, 2006 14:36:07 GMT 1
cheers steveb!! Just bought a conoflex nemisis plus from a friend of mine for 50 quid. The highlander was on me shortlist, but the nemisis was a bargain and made my mind up for me.  Just waiting on some favourable weather conditions to go out and give it some stick!! appreciate the info m8  |
|
|
|
Post by sanddancer on Jan 23, 2006 16:40:01 GMT 1
Hi all,
I have just bought a reelsport responce,It will lift anything I will catch,Bit expensive at £275 thoughCaught a 6lb cod last week at Seaham,the rod handled that no bother,my wife caught a big cod must have been around 9lb but lost it about two foot of landing it,snapped her line just before I could get a hold of it ,we were gutted.
tight lines
sanddancer
|
|
. That was the second time it had snapped, having snapped 8 inches from the tip end on only my second outing from new 
. Ive been told the apollo mk2 is less prone to breaking plus they give a lifetime gaurantee but as you might expect im a bit wary of greys at the minute 
