Hi All,
I’m considering maybe trying to get hold of an Orvis CFO fly reel, for use with a 6 weight rod.
It would appear that Orvis have been a little ‘ambiguous’ over the years with their line capacity ratings for each model, and so I was hoping to get some real-life information please.
I’d rather go slightly larger than on the small side, as I want to be able to load a double taper 6 weight line, plus some backing (to increase the arbour size, and accommodate that fish of a lifetime should it come my way)!
Any words of wisdom greatly appreciated.
Many thanks,
Jim
Orvis CFO line capacity??
- Bobby Marlene
- Arctic Char
- Posts: 1517
- Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 7:21 pm
- 10
- Location: Houston, TX
Re: Orvis CFO line capacity??
Hi Jim, I have a 123, III and IV model. 123 holds a 4 weight silk line. III holds a 5 weight silk line. The IV is loaded with a modern (plastic) 5 WF with 100 yards 20lb backing and there is still space. It could hold a 6 weight DT but I do not think you´ll get much backing on it. I have never handled a V model. These reels are very, very light. So I think you could go with a V model. Is it for stillwater? On the river you´ll not need much backing anyway.
All my reels are "vintage", 70s or early 80s models. No idea if a new reel is any different to the old models.
See also this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=27262&hilit=CFO
Success, Bobby
All my reels are "vintage", 70s or early 80s models. No idea if a new reel is any different to the old models.
See also this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=27262&hilit=CFO
Success, Bobby
- Bobby Marlene
- Arctic Char
- Posts: 1517
- Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 7:21 pm
- 10
- Location: Houston, TX
Re: Orvis CFO line capacity??
See also here:
http://classicflyrodforum.com/forum/vie ... =72&t=4239
Seems a CFO V is comparable in weight to a Hardy Princess. Should be ok for a 6 weight rod.
http://classicflyrodforum.com/forum/vie ... =72&t=4239
Seems a CFO V is comparable in weight to a Hardy Princess. Should be ok for a 6 weight rod.
- Liphook
- Barbel
- Posts: 4701
- Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:21 pm
- 5
Re: Orvis CFO line capacity??
I have the III and IV models and agree with Bobby. I think all the Orvis reels I've had (Battenkill discs and LA's, Mach, Hydros) are slightly on the small side for their stated line ratings. That aside the CFO's are a lovely match for a traditional rod and the ratchets sing a pretty tune.
- Beresford
- Sea Trout
- Posts: 4261
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:26 pm
- 12
Re: Orvis CFO line capacity??
You can always cut the fly line in half if you're not going to be casting far and presumably that's the case given the choice of a DT over WF taper.
I have an Orvis Access Mid Arbour III and it is a stunning little reel.
I have an Orvis Access Mid Arbour III and it is a stunning little reel.
The Split Cane Splinter Group
- SlimJim
- Ruffe
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 8:15 pm
- 10
Re: Orvis CFO line capacity??
Hi All,
Thanks for all the info. You have confirmed what I had suspected - that I should go at least for the IV size, maybe even the V.
Funny you mention the Hardy Princess Bobby - that is another reel I’ve been checking out on eBay and vintage tackle sites. I’m not in any huge rush, but I enjoy the process of mulling these things over!
In terms of the type of fishing...most will indeed be on rivers (hence the DT line). However, there might also be a few occasions where I would head to stillwaters - hence the wish to have a reasonable amount of backing.
In reality, I will probably end up with a couple of different reels (...yes, I know), so I’ll end up with a WF and DT option.
Thanks again for the replies and information - very much appreciated.
All the best & good luck,
Jim
Thanks for all the info. You have confirmed what I had suspected - that I should go at least for the IV size, maybe even the V.
Funny you mention the Hardy Princess Bobby - that is another reel I’ve been checking out on eBay and vintage tackle sites. I’m not in any huge rush, but I enjoy the process of mulling these things over!
In terms of the type of fishing...most will indeed be on rivers (hence the DT line). However, there might also be a few occasions where I would head to stillwaters - hence the wish to have a reasonable amount of backing.
In reality, I will probably end up with a couple of different reels (...yes, I know), so I’ll end up with a WF and DT option.
Thanks again for the replies and information - very much appreciated.
All the best & good luck,
Jim