Temple Fork fly rods are being touted, by the vendors I think, as equivalent in action and speed to top end rods such as Sage and Scott.

Has anyone actually handled say, a Sage, and the comparable Temple Fork (TiCrX I think), and if so, how would you compare them for weight, speed, damping, and anything else you can think of? If comparable performance can be gotten for about half the price, who could resist, even if it is only a backup rod.

Hi Jack,

I haven't fished extensively with any of the newer fast-action Sages, but I own a TiCr 8wt and 6wt, and have cast the TiCr X and Sage Xi2 side by side- both are very fast. Your timing has to be spot-on to really make the rod work. I think that they are similar in weight (the TiCrX may be a bit heavier), but both feel like heavy-duty fishing tools in your hand-- the 'light-in-hand' characteristic of a Sage just kind of goes away in a 8wt or 9wt meant for stopping bruiser trevally and bonefish.

I think the TiCrX is more 'tippy', that is, you're only feeling the rod load really at upper 1/4 of the rod, even more so than the TiCr (understandably), whereas the Xi2 may feel a bit more progressive. Both can lift fish from the deep, though, from what I've heard.

The aesthetics on the Sage Xi2 are great, as expected; I love the deep deep blue. But the TFO is really nice as well-- a really serious double-uplocking reel seat, and the medium-blue blank color is very cool.

I think the warranties are about the same; I've only heard about really quick turnaround with the TFO guys, and Sage nearly sets the standard for warranties (though sometimes you do have to wait a bit).

Try and cast them side by side, even with a heavier shooting head or sinktip line if you can so you can really see how they perform; if you're trying just a floating line, definitely overline the TiCrX by a line weight so the rod can load. Both throw razor-sharp loops, great for wind.

Based on cost alone, if you're not worried about the 'bling' factor of the Sage, I'd go for the TFO-- to me, it's a really sharp looking rod. And like you said, at less than half the cost, hard to beat! I'm really happy with my TiCrs. Go give them a cast with some Sages side-by-side and see what you think; correct me if you think I'm wrong here everyone, but I believe the TFO TiCr would be most similar to a Sage XP, and the TiCrX is like an Xi2. Not sure about the Professional series comparison... anyone have any thoughts?

PS- for more opinions on TFO rods, check out Dan Blanton's bulletin board: www.danblanton.com/bulletin.php and do a search.

Cast well, fish decent, stiff, dead tip compared to my Sage's. 9wt shattered on Kings and 5wt 6pc bound up on the ferrule while fighting browns. Not that it bothered me while fishing, but I couldn't for the life of me get it undone and I didn't work that thing down. After we got it separated at home, noticed the female end had gone all oval on me. Never seen this before.

I got no faith in TFOs.

Every manufacturer has their range of models and each has unique characteristics. In other words, apples and oranges. I recently had an opportunity to cast a Sage Fli and an Xi2 side by side. While there are casting differences, there are also differences in the hardware and the construction. That's true with TFO as well.

So, the next time someone tells you the lower priced rod is the "same" as the more expensive rod. Lay them side by side. There is a difference.

As a note, I have seen quality issues with many of the imported lower end rods. Blank coatings that have high and low spots with the scrim clearly visible, reel seats that do not hold a standard reel foot, guides that rust, and cork that has been badly filled. Like everything else, you get what you pay for.

I have been on a nearly 40 year quest to find the best price point tackle available. When top of the line rods were $200 I refused to pay it. Now that those top rods are $700 plus I refuse to pay that.
I have made some mistakes but I have found some very fishable rods too.
As for imported, a lot of Cabela's house brand stuff is Pac Rim. With the exception of the Three Forks I am very pleased with the quality of Cabela's stuff.
Nothwithstanding some bamboo I have never paid retail price for a rod. Even those I built I refuse to pay retail for the blank.
Some of the stuff I have was bought at model change. The reason Sage changes models so often is for the sole purpose of touting a "improved" rod to appeal to those that must have the latest greatest. IMO one of the best rods Sage ever made is the RPL (bought mine at MRFC for 30% off).
Be patient, keep looking there are some bargains to be had.

I went looking for a new 3wt rod. I went to several places looking for rods. I was planning on buying a Sage TXL or Winston. I casted the TXL, VPS light and TFO. They didn't have a Winston so it wasn't an option. In the end I bought the TFO.

The primary reason I bought it was of those three rods, I did like the length and action of the TFO better. I haven't fished with it yet, but, it feels pretty good in the backyard.

I am still looking for my "goto" 3wt., but for the time being the TFO will do the job. When I find it, my daughter will get my TFO.

I would have to agree with many of the comments from the above - noteably the negative comments.

The higher-end rods from TFO are fast, light but are dead sticks, don't have lifting power, are fragile and the cork feels like the sandpaper the other guys use to shape their handles. The lower-end models, I believe the IM6 blanks, that I have cast are dogs. If you must buy Korean made rods check out the Redingtons. Or better yet, buy from the guys that TFO is trying to duplicate, Sage and Scott.

I have to disagree with the last poster, and most vehemently. I have a higher end TFO rod - the TiCr 12 wt. Before I go on, let me state what I use the rod for and my background here. I am a tarpon/big game fish nut. I look every year for better equipment, cost be damned (more on this in a moment). My main go to rod for tarpon for the last 6 years has been a T&T Horizon 12 wt. I've tried numerous rods over the years and so far none have unseated this as my favorite rod - great casting feel, good fish fighting power, etc. I've tried the Sage rods, GLX Crosscurrent, Scott rods, etc. and with my guides arsenal I also have access to other top end rods. The TFO TiCr simply blew me away. Since I bought it last year it has put the brakes to some nice giant tarpon (over 120 lb.). After getting a feel for its casting (I liked it initally because it outcast my T&T) I can, in calm conditions, launch 115-125 ft casts with it. But...and this is the kicker since nowadays most rods seem to cast well but can't fight well...this rod outfights every 12 wt I have tried. It has unbelievable power. I'm not talking about little 30 lb steelhead, or 3 lb. bass. I'm talking about fish well over 100 lb. that bust rods (and I've busted a few believe me). I've tested this with deadlifting capability too. The TiCr 12 wt has unbelievable deadlifting power, more than any other 12 wt I've tested to date, and by a large margin.

Now, I love the fact that the rod is great performing, even better that it's so inexpensive. You might even think that's why I buy it, and you'd be wrong. There is not a single piece of equipment I would not buy if I thought it would improve my fishing. My reels include Tibors, Abels and now Charlton's (the one I just bought for my tarpon fishing this year includes extra spools for a total of $2500). If I really thought an Xi2 or GLX would be better, that's what my Charlton would be hanging on come this May in the Keys.

The comment:
"The higher-end rods from TFO are fast, light but are dead sticks, don't have lifting power, are fragile and the cork feels like the sandpaper the " alone leads me to believe you have no real world experience with TFO and are just biased against foreign made rods or low priced rods.

The TiCr rods are well known as being anything but light - they are either on par with the rest of the rods in their class, or are even heavier. No lifting power? Try 14 lb. deadlift with *any* 12 wt from any of the high end manufacturers. I can tell you that most of them blow up around 10-11 lb. and that is from actual testing. I'd like to know how you determined if TFO's don't have lifting power? Can any of the rods you use for comparisoin dead lift 14 lb. like my TiCr did? The only rod I know of that might do that is the Cam Sigler.

As far as cork, granted it's not the same flora grade my Sage's, T&T's, Powells, etc but it is as good as the St Croix Legend Elite IMO, and it *is* sanded smooth.

Thanks for your input regarding my comment on the rods. As far as me commenting on full-blown Tarpon rods like your 12 wt. - I simply am not in a position to. My above comments were derived at through my experience with TFO rods ranging from 3 wt - 9 wt and all models except the TICRX (I think thats the name of the newer model). I still believe in my comments based on my experience with the various models and line weights, but next time I should state my reference benchmark in the beginging to be fair and accurate. We all have our opinions and I respect yours as well as anyones.

My experience was with the 4wt professional. I had it for a year and never did get to where I really liked it. As others have stated, it seems like all the flex was in the top 18" of the rod. this seemed to make it difficult to cast short casts since there wasn't enough weight to load the rod. Once 30' or so of line was out thing felt pretty good, but you do have to be spot on with your timing. I could get some long casts out with it, but ...I don't know...seemed like you had to work too hard to make it work. I traded it in on an A2 and am much happier.

my 2 cents.

Interesting that you traded the TF Professional for an A2. I'm a fan of the A2.

Do you feel the TF Pro has a faster taper than the A2?

Keith,

What you are describing is exactly how some rods are rated. That is how it should be. The AFTMA designation is for 30' of line past the tip to load the rod. From there is is the responsibility of the fisherman to determine what line will work best on that rod for that person's fishing range. Since you're range seems to be a lot of shorter work, you need to throw a 5 wt line on that rod. If you planned to cast 50' all day to rising fish then stick with the 4 wt line to do it. That is how rods are supposed to be rated. Unfortunately some manufacturers assume what each rod will be used for. For instance, a 9' 5 wt and an 8' 5 wt from the same company in the same product line will require different loads to load the rod. More often than not the company will figure that 9' 5 wt to be used on long casts and big water punching into the wind all day so they wil design based on 50' of a 5 wt line. They will take a 'powerful 5' (many times an honest 6 wt) and label it a 5 wt. In the 8' rod they figure smaller streams and shorter casts. They design the rod for 20' of a 5 wt line and often times slow the action a little.

Now Joe Flyfisherman comes in wanting a 5 wt rod that will throw bass/panfish bugs at the local pond and nearby stream. The 9' 5 wt above feels 'stiff' on his 30' casts. The 8' 5 wt doesn't have the power to turn over his flies like he thought a 5 wt should. Neither of the rods should be labeled a 5 wt as neither will feel particularly well loaded at 30'.

Manufactuers infer uses for rods and design around what they think we will use the rods for. Each manufacturer rates them differently and each will infer a different use. There is little to no standardization.

Thanks,
Casts

The nicest thing about the internet is how you get no perspective on the range of opinions being given. It is clear to me that half you guys can't cast your way out of a bucket, while the other half might be Lefty Kreh in disguise.

Formula1 just gave you a well-thought out, intelligent, experienced answer that is right on the money, and the rest of you just kept yammerin like your experience catching 9" trout stockers was going to stand up to it. When a post like that is made, it's the definitive answer, and the proper response is "Thank you sir may I have another."

There is such a thing as knowing what the hell you are talking about, and no, your opinion is not the holistic equal of everyone else's.

LJ

?????????...... Sheeeesh.

My .02,

CG

"Formula1 just gave you a well-thought out, intelligent, experienced answer that is right on the money, and the rest of you just kept yammerin like your experience catching 9" trout stockers was going to stand up to it. When a post like that is made, it's the definitive answer, and the proper response is "Thank you sir may I have another."

LJ, you kidding?

What Formula1 said is he dead lifts with his 12 wt! Most fly fishers (even in the salt) would have a coronary! I sure wouldn't want to do it to a $600 rod! For that purpose any broomstick that will hold a fly reel with a ton of line capacity and a great drag will do the job! I don't know how many of us care to actually cast a fly rod in the 12-17 wts that are used in off-shore fly fishing. I have cast a 12 and a 15 and frankly...no thanks! In other words...they are meant to fight big fish and they do it well. Pretty fittings and good finish just aren't that important.

I'll place my St. Croix against the TFO any day. I have a small hand and have my cork grips turned down. My TFO's look like they have acne. The St. Croix LE cork turned down beautifully!

On the other hand "casts by fly" has provided some good feedback on the issue!

Here is my two cents ( and tis probabally not evern worth that). I went looking for a back up 6 wt, to take to New Zealand this past February, and did not want to spend a month's wages on a rod.

The local shop had TFO's, Scott, Sages, and Winston. I got to cast to the Scott E2, Winston Ibis, TFO TiCr, and the new Sage launch. I ended up getting the Sage Launch 6 wt 4 piece for $195.00.

The TFO seems to me to be a faster rod than the Launch, but the over all feel of the Launch won me over. That is not to say that the Launch is a G model Scott, in fact with a good double haul, you can bang out some real bombs if you need to.

IMHO, I like to really feel the rod loading up when I am casting, and that is where the Launch seemed to have an edge. I also found it easier in the 20-30 feet casting range.

Would I have been happy with the TFO, you bet, and you cant argue the price. The Launch is a bargain as well, and the fit and finsih on these rods are really slick. I would cast both, and see whihc fits your casting stroke the best.

It's great that we have some sensational options in rods these days with out having to sell a kidney.

Best of luck,

Rabmen

Big Dummy-

Are you really offended by the word hell or do you just not know what 'holistic' means?

No anger involved whatsoever - I am simply pointing out that a rank newbie capable of a 30' cast can make it sound like a rod he isn't qualified to evaluate in a parking lot is a piece of garbage. You folks keep your racist, rolled-in-the-USA beliefs and enjoy them; the rest of the world will be laughing all the way to that tarpon rolling 87' off the larboard bow. Don't worry, real flyfishers would never exert themselves enough to make that cast anyway. Might get sweaty.


LJ

"You folks keep your racist, rolled-in-the-USA beliefs and enjoy them; the rest of the world will be laughing all the way to that tarpon rolling 87' off the larboard bow. Don't worry, real flyfishers would never exert themselves enough to make that cast anyway. Might get sweaty."

LJ,

You might take a look in the mirror. You don't know all the folks on this board. And while some folks only fish one way because of opportunities or finances that doesn't make them less of a fisherman. Some folks have fly fished for 30 years and know quite a lot about small stream fishing and nothing about tarpon. Does it make them wrong?

I suggest that if you're going to make it in the "world" economy you better develop an understanding of cultural differences and how to disagree with folks without "pissing" them off. Right now, you've got a long way to go.

good luck,
Dianne

------------------------------------------------

My TFO experience was in a flyshop watching a guy looking over their short trout rod. 6' I think. When I saw the large honkin out of place reelseat that this company thinks should be on a tiny trout rod, I was convinced that they don't have a clue. Hopefully (for them) they have a clue in the saltwater area.

BD

No anger,.....then call people racists. That doesn't seem right to me.

And if real fly fishermen are only those who fish tarpon, I guess I'm not a real flyfishermen. I won't lose sleep over it. And no, I'm not the best caster in the world. Probably couldn't cast myself out of a bag, as you call it. I still catch fish though. I still know enough to share my fly box with you on the nearest stream full of 12 inch native bows.

And as far as F1 being a definitive response.... a definive response defines the object, as far as I understand the term. If it were the definitive response, why doesn't it account for my 5wt and 9 wt failure? Oh damn, there's that logic again!

I believe my post had nothing but facts in it--the 5wt warped and got all bound up, the 9wt blew up. Both were due to flaws in the blanks. I got a new 9wt and sold it. Got a new 5wt, and have been using it--but I must admit, it's served me very well since then.

But again, I must be a racist since I'd rather pay more for my Sage?
It looks better in my Toyota truck than the TiCr anyway....

some fff certified cast instructors are telling me that tfo is making a fine product esp for the price, i am not fff certified but have been a salt water fisherman for a while and own sages, scotts, st croix, and a bunch of other rods, generally buy the top end - get suckered in by adds, however the tfo has come a long way since lefty kreh put his name on them -- had an early tfo and was terribly dissapointed but tfo gave me my CASH back, THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON THEY GOT A SECOND CHANCE FROM ME. the new rods are fine for me an 80 -90 ft cast is about all i use can't get accurate beyond that with sages either. for what they cost and they will give you your cash back what do you have to lose?

I disagree with your evaluation. I feel the TFO is harder to control than the A2 at any distance. I can't out distance the A2 with the TFO - the distance is about the same, but with the A2 I can control the cast better at long distance, and especially at shorter distances.

I had the TFO for nearly a year before I finally traded it off and I tried to make it work for me. Altough I could cast the thing, it just wasn't as enjoyable as the A2. In regards to some of the other comments by other posters, I'm no long distance caster, but am no slouch either. My long cast are about 70', but somewhat uncontrolled. I'm pretty deadly accurate at 55'. Furthermore, I have no desire to cast any further than I do since I have no real reason to.


I don't know how to answer this exactly. I think the cast is more distributed over a longer section of rod. I also feel the A2 is a little smoother than the TFO - probably for the same reason.