Hardy LRH rods

[David]

Thanks once again for everyone's info on Hardy rods, it's given me a lot to think about. Perhaps, unless others want to carry on with the subject, for me I think I have more than enough info. Thanks everyone.

[Bobthefloat]

I once collected the complete set of LRH rods

0 1 2 3 from left to right

[Beresford]

Great image that and a comparison view I've never seen before. Mind you I've never seen an LRH 0 before either.

[Olly]

Only made for a few years was the 0. The range started in 1937 I think with 2 variations.

[Dave Burr]

I've banged on about the LRH range over the years and, despite moving most of my cane on, I still have an LRH 1. I have cast it around 70 yards without too much trouble and have landed plenty of carp including fish over 30lbs. It may not be everybody's favourite rod but It works for me.

[Liphook]

Interesting that the guide spacing is near identical for the 3 heavier models yet I hear them being described as quite different in action. Are they based on similar but stepped up tapers?

[Olly]

I wouldn't call them heavier but longer! Designed as salmon spinning rods so a summer version(1), a heavier version for spring/autumn(2) and a floodwater one with steel core(3). Checking the rod's weight confirms the model - at 12oz - 14oz and 15oz resp.

The no 1 was designed for 'general spinning for salmon, pike etc'. No2 was designed as a heavier version. Taken from the 1937 catalogue.

In 1969 only one version remained called 'LRH Spinning' with a casting weight of 1oz.

[Liphook]

The test curves, casting weight range, 'power' or however you wish to measure 'action' are surely different though Olly? Are the 1,2 and 3 not the same length? If so then how do the rods vary in taper/'power' whilst the guide spacing remains (by eye from the pictures above) the same? I understand, within readon, the addition of a steel core and the implications that brings, but what about the cane itself? I thought you'd know as you seem to own a few

[Olly]

Yep - I do use the LRH 2 more! 2 for carp - 2 for pike - and 2 for - well anytime I need a strong rod. Barbel snag fishing - tench feeder fishing in weed - eels - 8lb chub ( I wish) - etc. So far with the LRH 2 I have had carp to about the 20lb mark and unlike my Chapman 550, it has handled fish well esp near snags. Yet to use for moggies but no guarantee the mog won't be 70 or 80lb so a bit of caution required there - find some smaller ones!

Not for distance work either - I try not to fish that way much now but would use the black stuff and reels newer than ABU 66s if needed.

At 9ft 6 a bit short but as Dave mentions very usable especially with the current trend for shorter rods. The No:1 is about 1.5lb test curve. I would think the No:2 is round about 2lb t/c and the No:3 higher - possibly towards 3lbish. Not measured any rods with the micrometer - they just feel very nice and capable when used carping.

I think the LRH 3 may be rather like my Chapman Dennis Pye in t/c - a bit too strong unless using large deadbaits - perhaps used for Masheer in India?

[Liphook]

Cheers Olly Possibly the no3 was aimed at salmon in places like Norway too? I'd like to know the tapers used for all 4