mann2

BST Users
  • Content count

    245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About mann2

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,368 profile views
  1. I see your point how enforcement of my idea could be very difficult.
  2. I was recovering from surgery when this debate was underway,but now I would like to say that I feel each sport fisherman should get one trophy striper tag each year, provided that the trophy parameter was set VERY high (maybe 48" from the surf;perhaps even a bit higher from boats). This could be done in conjunction with other limitations (including slot limits) until the fishery returns to sustainable levels. In the meanwhile everyone could still chase their dream.
  3. I don't know how much freedom of movement your friend had on the party boat,but he would probably would have more on a beach or jetty,and that might have improved his casting distance. That said,12 oz of lead plus an additional couple ounces of bait is more than twice what you believe the Ugly Stik was rated for.That's hardly ideal, so 40 feet of casting distance sounds pretty good , especially compared to some stories I've read about various graphite rods that break because they are casting only slightly more weight than they are rated for. I think this story makes a pretty good case for the Ugly Stik. Thanks for your response,
  4. Thanks c7272. This is very interesting information. The newer version of the Ugly Stik 12 foot spinning rod (#USBWSF2040S122) is rated at 3-8 oz so it should have been able to give you a decent cast with your lower payload between 6 and 8 oz,especially when you were slinging the lighter end of that range. At least its "unbreakable" blank allowed you to lob payloads of up to 18 oz ,though. From what have I read many more expensive surf rods would have broken under that stress,but I guess this is one of Ugly Stik's major selling points, I wonder if anyone can offer information on what happens when a fisherman pushes an pre-2017 Ugly Stik surf rod to the high end of its rated weight ? There must be a lot of stories out there as these surf rods have been around a long time.
  5. I assume you were using the older ( pre-2017) 12' spinning Ugly Stik rated 2-12 oz.,not the newer 12' spinning Ugly Stik rated 3-8 oz. Is that correct?
  6. The newer 12' conventional has two models:Heavy and Extra Heavy.The Heavy is rated is rated 4-10 oz.The Extra Heavy is rated is rated 6-12 oz. The newer 12' spinning is rated 3-8 oz The older (pre-2017?) 12' conventional has two models:Heavy and Extra Heavy.The Heavy was rated 2-12 oz.The Extra Heavy was rated 6-24 oz ,which seems extremely high. The older 12' spinning was rated 2-12 oz. Which rod were you using (casting or spinning; new vs old;and if casting ,H or XH) and if you can remember,what was your sinker weight plus estimated bait weight? On the older rods the recommended maxim lure/bait rig weights were often not printed on the blank,so if you buy a new one and the recommended maximum lure/bait rig weights are not printed on the blank check the new catalog/website,because on some rods there have been significant changes. Thanks, Mann2
  7. I have seen a few comments here from some in the past about the Ugly Stik's surf rod's ability to throw bait and sinkers. What actually happens negatively (if anything) when a fisherman pushes his Ugly Stik to the high end of its rated weight ? For example if the weight of the sinker plus bait used on a 10' Ugly Stik (rated for 1-6 ounces) totals 5 or 6 ounces. Or if if the weight of the sinker plus bait used on an 11' Ugly Stik (rated for 2-8 ounces) totals 7 or 8 ounces. I can't imagine these rods would break (or am I wrong?). What is the downside ,if any,of pushing the Ugly Stik surf rods to the top of their rating? Thanks, mann2
  8. Livefreeordie, thank you. I ended up buying an 11 ft ugly stik big water spinning rod also (the old style with the ceramic guides). Mine is a heavy action (12-40# line),and after checking a few old catalogs, which indicate a lure/bait rating of 2-8 oz, my guess is that yours is also a heavy action (not MH)-but I might be mistaken.
  9. Boy the braid really beat up those guides quickly. I am guessing this is a post 2016 Ugly Stik Bigwater with factory stainless steel guides. When did you buy it?
  10. The Ugly Stik I’m look at is rated for 1-6 oz. so I am expecting that 2-3.5 oz lures should not feel too heavy. At the same time I think that the 1-6 oz rating should accommodate a 3 (or at least 2) oz sinker ,with a chunk of bait. Hopefully, anyway.
  11. 2.0 -3.5 oz lures will be the range of the lures I will use. mann2
  12. According to the 2018-2019 Shakespeare catalog both use the "Ugly Tuff" guides. According to the 2017 Shakespeare catalog both use the "Ugly Tuff" guides. The 2016 catalog shows the Bigwater series using double footed Fuji stainless steel guides with aluminum oxide inserts ,and states that the Tiger rods use heavy duty stainless steel reinforced guides and "tip tops" and displays a Fuji graphic , and that the "Tiger Lite" rods use "double footed Fuji stainless steel guides with aluminum oxide inserts". Finally it mentions that the Tiger Jigging rods "tip tops""have alconite inserts,although that's the extent of the information made about the Jigging rod guides.
  13. Ugly Stik surf rods used to have Fuji stainless steel guides with aluminum oxide inserts.,but now they have switched to 'Ugly Tuff one piece double-footed stainless steel guides" which they say provide excellent durability and eliminate insert pop-outs. 1)Are these really an improvement (if so,in what way?) or just a way to cut costs,maybe with unchanged quality or maybe with some disadvantages (if so in what way?). 2)Could this change simply be an attempt to accommodate those who use braid?. 3)Finally -are any other rod makers following Ugly Stik's change from outsourced brand name guides? Ugly Tuff one piece double-footed stainless steel guides have been around for a while so there has been a reasonable time to make a fair judgement so I'd love to hear some of your opinions. Thanks, Mann2