All Points Fly Shop + Outfitter - News

Over the past couple of seasons I've been fishing with the Galvan Rush Light on one of my trout setups. I carry a couple of rods with me, and this is usually rigged on one of them. Originally purchased the R5 for a 10' 4wt, I needed a reel with a little more weight to help balance it out. But, also applicable on other 9' 5wts for my general trout fishing. If I had tried to get the lightest reel possible, its versatility on other rods/setups would be minimal. A lot of trout reels made these days are an effort to make it as light as possible. For some situations this is great. But I wanted a little more balance on this setup and found that the Galvan Rush Light R5 was a perfect weighted match for my 10' 4wt. I thought at the time that it would only be used for this longer rod, but quickly found that this wasn't true. Now, I am using it on various 9' 5wt outfits as well. 

So your first question, and albeit a warranted one, would be: "is it too heavy?" While this reel does weigh more than other ultra-light reels in its class, I have not found it to be necessarily too heavy. It comes in at roughly 5ozs which is about middle-of-the road for comparable reels. What the Rush Light loses in points due to its weight, it gains back in durability. I've fished this reel for quite a while and combined with my clumsiness, it has seen its fair share of bumps/drops/falls. Notably, some situations where I've instinctively used my hand to brace a slip/fall on rocks, the Rush Light has taken the brunt of the fall as my "brace." No dents or significant damage. This is really important! When a lot of reel companies are making lighter and lighter reels, this usually means sacrificing durability. I find a lot of modern trout reels do not hold up well to normal wear and tear. 

The quality of the drag is also a strong suit for this reel. Sharing an almost identical drag system to the Torque, the Rush LT not only as a lot of drag but it's smooth and has minimal startup inertia. Although Galvan notes the Rush as having the same drag to the Torque, I'm sure this is true but, they are clearly tuned slightly differently. This is fairly common with reel manufacturers. Aside from that, the Rush has one of the best overall drag systems on the market. Further, the counterbalance is almost perfect. When that spool is spinning, there is almost no wobbling or degree of shaking that happens. This helps keep the outgoing (drag) as smooth as it is and keep the angler in control. 

The Small Stuff

• Price: $280 Reel / $135 Spool
• Made in USA
• Drag knob when set to the lowest drag settings is loose. This opens the possibility of unintentional drag adjustment during the day or while stored. Very secure however when increased drag is applied.
• Weight is 5oz. Not the lightest - not the heaviest.
• Top of the line carbon fiber disc drag system. Very smooth and plenty of it.
• Very durable construction. However lack of porting on the spool could require a little more time for your line/backing to dry out.
• Incoming click sound is great. Outgoing drag/click is different and slightly more muted. The only time this was an "issue" was when fishing in heavier water/rapids/noise - drag sound was drowned out a little.
• Design and aesthetics are not awe inspiring. The Torque clearly takes longer to make, but I do like the "traditional" look of this Rush.
• Drag system is not sealed (same as Torque). Although I've only used this in freshwater, there have been no issues so far.
• Push button spool release is dependable and easy to use.
• Reel/spool dimensions are very similar to the Torque. Good retrieval rate and has plenty of capacity of backing and virtually any fly line one would use for this sized reel. The R5 can still hold around 100yds of 20# backing with a WF6F line.

Words + Photos: Josh Thelin

Read more

Fishpond made some serious noise last summer when they released their new series of waterproof/submersible packs and bags. The field of waterproof packs is tough. They are growing in popularity with anglers and especially those taking extended trips. But further, they are hard to make. Well, at least good ones...So when a company, almost solely focused on making quality packs/bags/luggage, decided to go full throttle on a set of submersible fishing packs, I was all ears.

Before I left on a recent trip to Costa Rica, I knew I needed all my gear to be packed in waterproof bags. Fishing for a week in the jungle where it rains everyday would be the perfect place to test these out. I decided to go with the Thunderhead Submersible Backpack as it was able to fit all my gear and provided a good sized accompaniment to my smaller waterproof hip/sling pack (which I was also bringing). On fishing trips where I'm traveling on planes, the size of my bags is really important as I always try and get everything in carry-on. So knowing that this backpack would fit into the overhead bins and not present any issues as a carry-on while traveling is a huge plus! The shoulder and hip straps were very comfortable and allowed me to carry this bag, packed to the brim with gear, on long stretches in the airports with ease. 

When I arrived in Costa Rica to my fishing destination I used the Thunderhead Backpack as my daily fishing pack. It held:

• Rain jacket
• Fleece/thermal shirt
• Extra spools of tippet (the larger Rio saltwater ones)
• My (not waterproof) smaller camera bag with DSLR, extra lenses, etc.
• Two large fly boxes holding tarpon flies
• Pliers, tackle, tools, etc.
• Water bottle, cell phone, sunglasses case, and other various items

There was plenty of room for it all, and more. That was one concern that I had, especially when packing everything before I left. Fishpond also released the new Wind River Roll Top Backpack as well which has more capacity. So if the 1,648 cu/in with the Thunderhead wont cut it, the Wind River has 2,320 cu/in. 

The real test was the heavy rain. It wasn't light rain, or sprinkles. At various times of the day and night it down-pored. Specifically at the time the above picture was taken, not only was it raining, but we were headed back to the lodge. The rain combined with the force of us traveling, pushed a lot of water on this pack. (You can see the camera lens had a fair amount of water on it too). The first thing I noticed were the darker areas when it got wet. This made me very nervous. But, after final inspection when I got inside, everything was bone dry. I checked all the seams and the inside of all the dark spots. Nothing got through the final layer(s) of material. The only spot that did in fact leak water was the front top pocket. This front storage slot however is not waterproof and is simply water resistant. The heavy rain combined with us moving quickly allowed water to be forced inside that zipper. No worries however as Fishpond does not list this pocket as waterproof and I didn't expect it to be either. It has a water resistant zipper, but certainly not the heavy duty TiZip® zipper the main compartment utilizes. 

I liked the waist strap and the ability to (easily) attach pliers and other accessories. Plus, these waist straps can be removed. They can be bulky if not being used, so this is a good feature. The overall durability of the pack is very apparent. It is the same material Fishpond is using for their Thunderhead Sling Pack and Lumbar Pack. They are made from reused fishing nets using 1680D TPU coated recycled nylon. The two pull straps on either side of the TiZip® zipper make opening the pack much easier and they didn't feel like they will fall off after a while. This has been an issue with other waterproof packs using these zippers. They require more "umph" to open than traditional zippers and the constant opening/closing can wear down other pull straps. These felt good. 

Pros:

• Fully waterproof main compartment
• Great capacity 
• Comfortable wearing for extended periods of time even with heavy loads
• Heavy duty/durable construction
• Well thought-out accessory attachment points and removable waist strap

Cons:

• Front pocket is small - barely fitting anymore than a cell phone or wallet
• When attached, the waist strap is bulky if not being used

Words + Photos By: Josh Thelin

Read more

There is still a considerable debate as to which sole is better for fishing - felt, rubber, or metal studded soles. Years ago, felt was king. It gripped the river bottom better than (older) rubber soles and gave anglers piece of mind knowing they were a little more surefooted.

But with time, state regulations outlawed the use of felt in some areas, plus fishing companies developed better rubber soles such as Vibram. This lead to less anglers buying felt and a driving demand for comparable grip to felt. In came various rubber sole configurations, metal studs/screws/bars, and replaceable soles with multiple options. But are any of these better than felt? Felt was good while wading, but held clumps of snow during the winter and did not fair well during hiking (out of water).

A few years ago, with some slight apprehension, I decided to try the Simms Alumibite Star cleats. I fish in some rivers where the bottom is very slippery, and combine that with my aggressive wading (read: usually stupid), I wanted to give myself a little more reassurance in the water. So I bought a couple packs of these Alumibite cleats and tried them out. I wore them for a few seasons - put them in, took them out, put some back in, took some out, etc...This is what I found...

I used my Simms G3 boots for this test. There are 10 designated spots on Simms wading boots for their cleats. This made inserting them very easy, especially with a powered drill. There are 10 cleats per "puck" so to utilize all given slots, one would want two pucks to cover both boots. There is no question after putting these in the boots that they provide more grip on the river bottom. Whether it was rocks or logs, these aluminum based cleats gripped and dug into everything. This was very noticeable difference between strictly rubber. But after a while, this started to change.

I walk a lot when fishing - especially trout fishing. Whether it is actually in the river, along the river, or on paths getting to the river - I usually cover a lot of ground. So even after a full weekend of fishing, I would start to feel less "grippy" the next time I went out. After quick inspection of the bottom of my boots, it was pretty clear that the cleats were getting worn down and losing their edge (the "grippy" part). I also noticed a fair amount were falling out. This was solved by adding some Aquaseal before screwing them in. But, the issue of them getting rounded off persisted.

You can see from the photo above that a fair amount of metal would get worn down. This would happen to a degree that after a decent amount of wading/walking the cleats were flattened/rounded-off on the bottom. When all of the cleats got to this point, my boots were actually more slippery than before. The cleats no longer dug into the rocks/logs with their "bite" edge. The solution was to replace them, but that got expensive and I started to feel like I was chasing my tail doing so. 

Additionally, being the audio-nerd that I am, I recorded decibel levels of myself walking with and without cleats on the river bottom. It is seemingly an overstatement that cleats make noise on rocks, but it was enough of a difference to factor in the fish's hearing/senses as well. Trying to target spooky fish, especially in smaller rivers with cleats, proved harder. In some situations I don't think it made a difference, but in the smaller water it did. 

So, do Alumibite cleats work? Simply stated: yes they do. But keep an eye on them. If you start to feel less grip, replace the worn ones. These are the types of cleats you will want to replace before or after each multi-day trip. Simms also makes the Hardbite Star cleats which are supposedly more durable. I have not tested these to the extent that I have with the Alumibites. Review on those coming soon! 

Words + Photos by: Josh Thelin

Read more