# Zziplex Straight Eight versus XTR Groundcaster



## tw (May 1, 2003)

Hi,
I posted this in Open forum, but I'm hoping some of you tournament guys may've fished with them. 
I spoke with Big Dave yesterday and he enlighten me as to the XTR loading further down the rod when casting, which means it'll be a little easier on the old back when bowed up on a decent size fish. After Surfrat explained the advantages of the soft tip of the straight 8, in that it acts as an indicator when A fish first bites. I was wondering how the XTR compares with bite detection? In put would be greatly appreciated How do you think it compares with being able to detect a fish bite while holding them?
Thanks, Tim


----------



## Connman (Apr 14, 2001)

You don't want to be holding a 13'8" rod for bite detection .


----------



## Tommy (Jan 24, 2001)

I can't answer to how well the XTR performs as a fishing rod. I have heard good things though. What I can comment on is the S8 zzippy. I have had one for about 3 years. It is an outstanding fishing rod. Will cast 4oz nicely and will toss 8nbait with the best of them. The secret to this rods performance lies in the it's progressive action. The soft tip gives it the great bite detection and also gives it the capability to throw down to 4oz. The powerful midsection gives it the ability to throw 8nbait nicely as well. The only issue that I have with the rod is the butt diameter. At about 1.25 inches it is fatter than my lami 1502 and makes gripping a wet 7500 or sl30 size reel a bit of a challenge for those of us with small hands.

Overall a very nice fishing rod capable of throwing a long wasy.

Tommy


----------



## Black Beard (Jan 25, 2001)

Hi Tommy - XTR stands for 'Experimental Tournament Rod' and it ain't something you'd want to be attached to with 40lb of muscle pulling the other way!

I have by US standards a small amount of experience with big fish from the shore, but the one thing I have learnt - mostly the hard way - is that you need a rod that bends when something heavy is pulling back!

When not on the field the XTR is used mainly as a rock end rod in the UK, that's skull dragging fish out of boulders the size of a truck covered in kelp.

The original TXR was a fabulas rod, I used one at the NEC demonstrating casting over a lake and it was so easy to cast with a wonderfully progressive action. 

Sadly, with today's wannabe casters demanding stiffer and stiffer rods to compenstae for little if any style the current XTR is nothing like the original. Stay well clear for a fishing rod from clean beaches.

Telling it like it is with apologies to no one. BB


----------



## Tommy (Jan 24, 2001)

Hey Neil,

From your description I'm glad I didn't try the XTR as a drum rod... 

The Straight-8 doesn't sound like it's anything close to the XTR in action or in the way it handles a big fish. I've caught drum up to 49" on mine and it handles the larger fish nicely. Plus it will sling a bait out there with the best "heavers" available.


Give it a try TW

Tommy


----------



## Connman (Apr 14, 2001)

I like a little flex in my fishing rods too but the xtr is in use by a few drum guys and makes a decent 8-10oz rod . I have seen some 50lb drum beaten on it with 12lb test and abu 6500 and you'r right it doesn't flex a whole lot ,especially the xtr sport . I am not a drum expert but my experience is to not necessarily try and haul a drum out , let them tire themselves against the reel drag and work them in slow . It seems the harder you pull on a drum the harder he pulls back .
Neil it sounds like the original xtr was somewhat similar to the quattra sport???


----------



## Big Dave (Jan 22, 2001)

In the overall grand scheme of things I have to say, I fully believe that the XTR groundcaster (not xtr sport) is a better casting and fishing rod then most of the heavers I’ve seen. Now let’s keep in mind, we are talking about true heavers! (8 + Bait) And yes it’s a bit more heavy duty that the S8 but it’s performance with heavy sinkers and bait cant be denied. It also has a very parabolic mid section and tip, that really gives and bends under pressure. Which is what you want in fish fighting ability, and the butt section gives a great fulcrum point for leverage. If I were going to fish lighter than 8, say in the 4 up to 8 range I may choose a different rod. But as a fish fighting heaver goes I think its hard to beat the groundcaster. One of the most popular rods today as far as large heavers goes, is the All Star 1509. That rod is praised buy a ton of fishermen, yet it too is a beast of a rod very stiff mid section and not for some a polite rod to load and cast. The XTR groudcaster loads a lot easier than the 1509. But this is a real difference fisherman have many opinions on rods. There are a ton of guys that like that big lami heaver. I for one don’t it just feels like a big ole spongy rod that to me seems like a throw back to the original hatteras heavers Cheer Big Dave


----------



## Connman (Apr 14, 2001)

Just saw this new rod by Nick perhaps it will be the solution .New Breakaway Stinger


----------



## peter (Apr 19, 2005)

"Sadly, with today's wannabe casters demanding stiffer and stiffer rods to compenstae for little if any style the current XTR is nothing like the original."

All hail the mighty NEIL

we are not worthy to clean the mud from your lead oh great one

how will we ever manage without you to show us the light


----------



## Black Beard (Jan 25, 2001)

"All hail the mighty NEIL
we are not worthy to clean the mud from your lead oh great one
how will we ever manage without you to show us the light" - Peter

If you have issues with someone I suggest you declare your problem and identity rather than lurk in the shadows sniping - Neil


----------



## Led (Feb 1, 2001)

Neil,

Not sure who you are aiming your views at here  
Possibly the most technical caster in the UK has been using an XTR for many years.  
As you say the XTR is one of the easiest rods to cast with any reasonable style.


----------



## ADIDAF (Mar 24, 2004)

*hey peter*

you're either a moron for posting something like that as your first post or a coward for registering a new board name just to take a shot at someone. 
Which is it?


----------



## kinnakeettom (Sep 25, 2004)

4 old drum all over 50lb. were caught couple of weeks ago using the XTR. The XTR is my backup behind the WR-300 century and its a bit softer, so a bit more user friendly. Like Dave said it will handle 8ozs. with bait easily if you give the entire rod time to load. But then again I think the angler himself, along with proper scouting, knowing his equipment, fresh bait,and luck puts the fish on the beach, not rods or reels alone.


----------



## Gravedigger (Aug 18, 2003)

What weights will the WR-300 century handle?


----------



## surf rat (Jun 30, 2004)

*straight eight*

I don't know about the XTR, but I do know the straight eight is a great rod. I have caught a lot of fish on mine. It cast as well as anything with 8 oz and bait. It fights large fish better than any rod I have ever used. It is my favorite rod to put a large fish on the beach as quickly as possible so he may swim away. I can feel my bites far better with this rod than anything I have ever fished. Many times I have caught large fish by either feeling a light tap or seeing the tip bend. It is a true fishing rod.


----------



## kinnakeettom (Sep 25, 2004)

can backcast 12oz. with it without a problem.


----------



## Black Beard (Jan 25, 2001)

Yes Andy, I know Peter casts with an XTR but the original question was regarding the suitability of the XTR as a fishing rod.

Having caught a few big fish in the US and watched the XTR develop from a delightful rod to use into a very stiff rod, it is - in my opinion - not a rod well suited to fishing for big fish - BB


----------



## Led (Feb 1, 2001)

Neil,

I understand your view on the XTR for fishing  But then no surf rod is a great rod to play fish on.  

It's the reference to the 'today's wanabee casters', I wasn't sure who that was aimed at. 

I cast with an XTR and if your not pointing at me then who ?


----------



## FL FISHERMAN (Sep 30, 2002)

> It's the reference to the 'today's wanabee casters', I wasn't sure who that was aimed at.


I think that was aimed at people that don't want to take the time to learn the "technique" and "finesse" on how to cast, instead going for straight telephone poles that can cast 16 oz without bending the tip a 100 yds by using brute force.



> I cast with an XTR and if your not pointing at me then who ?


And I don't think that was aimed at anyone using an XTR but just showing the progression from the original rod to where it is now. And surely not you Led or any other accomplished caster on this board. 


At least that is the way I took it.


----------



## Black Beard (Jan 25, 2001)

Jason - thank you. I could not have put it better myself, you are right on the button - Neil


----------



## Led (Feb 1, 2001)

Neil,

The only reason I asked was that most XTR's are sold in the US  

Led.


----------



## SuperTramp (Jun 8, 2005)

I have a pair of XTR's which I purchased used, following Leds advice in regard to rock-end rods!
I like them a lot (cheers Led), but I should also mention that the models which I use are very powerful indeed, but thats from a fisherman/casters point of view, not that of an accomplished caster who uses his to fish!

I don't actually know how old they are, but they have from memory, powertex butts around 1 1/16th of an inch diameter. Both have a hand-written decal that says XTR below the tips Zziplex sticker. One tip is perfectly smooth, and one has a slightly ribbed finish: Both have powertex butts! ( Any ideas Led/Neil/Dave?)

They are by far, the most powerful rods that I have ever fished with. That includes a Zero Plus, Pendleteque Pro-Am, and The Conoflex Scorpion Sport.

Its the only rod I have ever used that has kicked back, if the cast is not perfectly smooth. Using the reel up with a 7 ounce lead and half a mackerel, casting OTG into a gale with wet hands: the hand holding the lower handle has to really hold on, as the rod seems to kick as the lead is released. 

Don't read to much into that, it may well be that my technique is to blame, but it is still an extremely powerful rod indeed! Fishing practicalities aside, would it be better to cast this rod with the reel in the low-position, and use a reducer for the retrieve?

I think that a longer rod can work against you with powerful fish in deep water. I have taken fish to over 35 lb's, with no real problems using 10 ft uptiders in deep water, and fish to 12 lbs from shallow beaches using beachcasters. But I had the fight of my life last year when I hooked a 6.5 lb smoothhound in 30 ft of water on a Zziplex HPM4500. The leverage of that little fish, diving at my feet, on the end of a 13ft rod was just incredable, and I was very lucky to land it!

Sorry about the long post, it's my first. I fish around South Wales in the UK, and would not call myself a caster ( Arialised thumper more like), but I intend to learn a bit more this summer!


----------



## Connman (Apr 14, 2001)

ST , I would think you have a Xtr and an Xtr Sport , the ribbed ie unground being the Sport .


----------



## Big Dave (Jan 22, 2001)

Zziplex has made XTR sports in both ground and un-ground versions. All of the factory wrapped XTR Sports are ground. While some blanks were left with the extra material on the blank giving it that spiral finish. Big Dave


----------



## SuperTramp (Jun 8, 2005)

Thanks very much for the reply gents: I dont suppose that I can be certain whether they are XTR's or XTR Sports as they are a matching pair of custom builts?

I was looking at an XTR on eBay Uk just now, that has a similar decal style to my Zero Plus.
Noting that my XTR's have quite large diameter butts, and the hand written XTR motiff, would I be correct in assuming that they are not the new slimmer classic version?

Finally, if you could oblige: Is this rod best cast with the reel down the but, when using OTG with heavier weights?

Thanks for your expertise gents!


----------



## Connman (Apr 14, 2001)

ST , take the two tip sections and put them on a table with about 10" of the tip supported If they are both the same model they joint will hang down equal on both with perhaps the ribbed one slightly higher . If there is an 1" or 2 " different in how they hand the I would suspect that the stiffer is a sport and the other a regular xtr . (this may not work if they are wrapped significanlty different as under wrap and high build can affect the flex somewhat )
Dave has said that there is a newer xtr that is slimmer but the word on the Jersey casting board is that they are still built on the same mandrel with just newer materials. 
Low reel will certainly make them easier to cast , at 13' 8" they are a long rod that benefits from low reel . Try and get a slider to fit , if you are lucky and the shrink tube is thin a 28 fuji will fit , otherwise you have to go to the big 30mm which is a handful


----------



## Big Dave (Jan 22, 2001)

Not sure where the NJ board heard that tid bit about the new slimer XTR being built on the same mandrels. But the dimensions of the new XTR is so different from the others that it does not seem possable. The new XTR butt is 7 feet long and is under an inch in dia. Just from the feel of it I can tell you this rod is going to be a casting machine. It has all the attributes of a tourny rod, fairly stiff tip section that is not quite as fast or soft in the top 24 inches as other tourny rods. it has a very powerful progressive arc in the tip section. The butt section has just the right amout of flex in the upper butt section and a firm handle in the lower section of the butt. A very nice stick for sure. Big Dave


----------



## Led (Feb 1, 2001)

I've been using the new slim line 2 equal piece XTR for 8 weeks now and I can tell you it cannot be made on the same mandrel as the internal bores are totally different.

The action is not too dissimilar to that or the original XTR, but with the crisp recovery of the Sport.

At times I have been bitten by my XTR SPort, this has yet to happen with the new model.


----------



## Connman (Apr 14, 2001)

Dave , the Jersey site not New Jersey , as in The Channel Islands near France .
This is the quote I saw ...
"Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:50 pm Post subject: 

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

hi, talking to terry carrol last week and he says the new xtr is the same dimensions as the old xtr just diff materials and resins , mind u not sure about new two equal sectioned xtr , xtr will not fit in hst butt , i have tried the zziplex sv butt on xtr tip no prob, depends what type of cast u do, i have tried the tournament extreme a few years ago and did,nt find it bad at all , the give in butt made it castable had my best cast with extreme . xtr is a very nice rod and also is castable in my opion due to softness in butt, i know there is now quite a few variations of the xtr , sport , fulcrum butt, powerpoint butt, standard parrallel but it all depends what u like john "
As you can see he does say he hasn't seen the equal lenght models which seems to be what you and Andy have .
Sounds like this new slim xtr you have might be interesting !


----------



## Led (Feb 1, 2001)

Conn,

I'm currently using the new model as I'm concerend that by using my original XTR Sport I could aggrevate my damaged right ankle. (long story won't bother you with it).

It's as easy to cast as a Primo Synchro, not harsh or too much of a handful - a delight to use.


----------



## SuperTramp (Jun 8, 2005)

Morning Gents.

Fascinating thread, and with apologies to the original poster for extending his thread, but if I may add just a few brief comments that may be of some general interest.

As we all know, Terry has a penchant for experimentation - this of course is very healthy, even though sometimes it may lead to significant differences between a particular model, depending on its position in the evolutionary curve?

Having taken connmans advice, I have ascertained that both my xtr's are likely to be sports. The tips are very stiff, and while they are superb big fish rods, they are unlikely to show smaller bites particularly well - not a critisism in the slightest - horses for courses etc!

Noting leds comments in regard to the latest model having a butt which has a degree of flex, the older (oldest?) higher-diameter powerpoint butts, such as on my rods ( 1 1/16" diameter): have practically no give in them whatsoever.

For example, if you held the top of the butt, wedged the base against a floor, then pushed as hard as you like with your other hand in the center: there is hardly any give at all! Again, this is not a critisism, and they are fantastic rock-end haulers: but they can bite! 

The newer xtr's ( plural, because of the new equal length model, as well as there apparently being a model based on the old mandrels, but using an updated carbon/resin) appear to be totally different to the originals, and perhaps better for it, but I would leave that opinion to one of you real casters!

I guess that the evolution of this rod is true to it's title: XTR: eXperimental Tournament Rod. The never ending journey of the search for perfection!

I know that Terry is planning to release a new range of slimline rods, and I believe that I may have a prototype. I bought a rod advertised as a Zziplex Synchro ( Not Primo Synchro ) from a chap who won it in a recent North Eastern casting comp, sponsored by Terry. 

What a fantastic piece of kit, and it is nothing at all like the Primo Synchro ( itself a superb rod !). Slim, very easy to cast, loads of power, and a great fishing tip. Its almost like a stepped up Bass-rod ala Phase Taper (Love that rod for fishing 5ozs hand-held in a big surf.)

The only Zziplex that I have owned, which I just " dont get" is the Z125G. I bought this a few years back, intending to use it like I now use the Phase-Taper. 

I was told at the time that it was a stepped-up Bass rod. I disagree with that, as it is clearly a beach-caster, and a tad too heavy to hold for long periods when fishing a big surf. 

What I don't understand is the tip. The butt and mid section are very similar in action to a 2500 Powertex or 2500LM (great clean-ground fishing rods) but the tip is as soft as a noodle, and will bend into the slightest tidal run like a quivertip ( poor bite detection other than for drop-back bites).

My best guess is that its either a means of keeping in contact with a light lead when pendulam casting? Or it was designed for South East match fishing in areas of weak tidal flow, like the 50/50 match? 

It doesn't work at all well in the Bristol Channel ( 3rd highest tidal range in the world after Bay of Fundy, and The Yantze River ) as the tip sets at around 45 degrees to the tidal flow: I guess it would be a great rod for the Florida pompano run though! I meant to ask Terry out of curio, but he's a busy guy and I dont like to disturb him.

Sorry if I ramble on a bit! That new equal length section XTR certainly sounds a sweet rod, and would appear to have taken things back to the original user friendly model that Neil described!

_*Having caught a few big fish in the US and watched the XTR develop from a delightful rod to use into a very stiff rod, it is - in my opinion - not a rod well suited to fishing for big fish - BB*_

I will go with that, other than its fine with my big-fish: double figure Cod, Smoothhound, Conger etc! Your big fish appear to be BIG FISH, and I dont know if I would like to be attached to one of them on an older XTR Powertex Sport: 

The fish ain't going to give - the rod ain't going to give, and its a bit like the problem that I have with my car: Theres a loose nut between the steering wheel and the drivers seat!  

Tight Lines.

ST.


----------

