G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
I have been used to fishing with an NRX 853c for jigs. I bought the new Conquest 843C for fishing mainly 3/8 jigs with some 1/2 ( and the occasional 1/4 or 5/16) jigs. I will also use it as my soft plastics rod. The MBR tip is softer than I’m accustomed to, but I’m sure I will get used to it. I bought the 843c because it thought it would cast a little better and would also double as a good Senko rod. I’m second guessing myself for not getting the 844c. What are your thoughts?
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
I am commenting based on classic GLX models not the conquest which I've not fished. In open water, the 843 was always very good with light jigs. I can make the action of the rod effectively faster by fishing braid. A 1/4oz head and hula grub is something I'd commonly fish on a MBR843. So total weight of that is somewhere between 3/8 and 1/2.
The 844 was a rod I fished +1/2oz jigs, c-rigs, t-rigs, spinnerbaits, and frogs on. I say was because as I started to fish the NRX 894 I lost all interest in the 844. The longer rod allowed me to lift and slide jigs and worms over rocks that I would have never imagined 5 inches to be able to enable. Similarly fishing worms in florida grass with the 894 and 844 the leverage I had in fighting a fish with the 894 was far superior. Some guys may find the 844 easier to skip under a dock then the 844 but I don't really see a difference.
The 844 was a rod I fished +1/2oz jigs, c-rigs, t-rigs, spinnerbaits, and frogs on. I say was because as I started to fish the NRX 894 I lost all interest in the 844. The longer rod allowed me to lift and slide jigs and worms over rocks that I would have never imagined 5 inches to be able to enable. Similarly fishing worms in florida grass with the 894 and 844 the leverage I had in fighting a fish with the 894 was far superior. Some guys may find the 844 easier to skip under a dock then the 844 but I don't really see a difference.
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
i find the old GLX rods to be very different from the NRX rods. for example, i would fish those jigs on the old GLX 843 but my NRX 843 would not feel right to me. it can handle them fine, but i hate the delay of a softer tip when im trying to be the crawfish.
ive never fished the new GLX or Conquest but i assume they are more similar to the NRX than the "legacy" GLX as in a bit softer in the top 1/4.
if you dont need to scratch that itch just yet, maybe some xfast Conquests are in the works. Im sure a well balanced 894 or 893 Conquest would be hard to beat for bottom contact.
ive never fished the new GLX or Conquest but i assume they are more similar to the NRX than the "legacy" GLX as in a bit softer in the top 1/4.
if you dont need to scratch that itch just yet, maybe some xfast Conquests are in the works. Im sure a well balanced 894 or 893 Conquest would be hard to beat for bottom contact.
- bronzefly
- Pro Angler
- Posts: 5036
- Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 5:21 pm
- Location: www.tackletrap.com
- Contact:
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
I don't see this happening anytime soon. It would be interesting for sure, but the decision to discontinue Mag Bass NRX, and introduce only Mag Bass Conquest wasn't made without a lot of thought and consideration. As good as the JWR NRX rods are, and as popular as they are, I'm not sure from a business standpoint, a new JWR Conquest series makes sense anytime soon, if ever.bigfruits wrote:if you dont need to scratch that itch just yet, maybe some xfast Conquests are in the works. Im sure a well balanced 894 or 893 Conquest would be hard to beat for bottom contact.
Taking that into consideration, I've been a Mag Bass fan for a long time, and have been putting in some time with a few of the new Conquest rods, with more to come pretty soon. Sensitivity isn't something they are lacking in my experience so far. The action in comparison to a JWR is different, but it always has been with Mag Bass rods.
The new Conquest 844 is a much better 1/2 oz jig plus trailer rod than the 843, plain and simple.
www.tackletrap.com
facebook.com/tackletrap
facebook.com/tackletrap
- Hobie-Wan Kenobi
- Pro Angler
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:25 pm
- Location: Michigan (U.P)
- Contact:
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
I agree with bronzefly. I have the 843c Conquest and I feel a 1/2oz jig plus trailer would be too much. I can say that the Conquest taper is nice. The tip is not "soft" like the NRX JWR series. It is a different type of soft that blends into a stout backbone better the the NRX JWR does. I thought I should have went up a power until I loaded line onto the rod. With a reel and line, I was able to really feel that backbone without it being a distinct "tip" and "backbone" (stinger tip rod would he an extreme example).bronzefly wrote:I don't see this happening anytime soon. It would be interesting for sure, but the decision to discontinue Mag Bass NRX, and introduce only Mag Bass Conquest wasn't made without a lot of thought and consideration. As good as the JWR NRX rods are, and as popular as they are, I'm not sure from a business standpoint, a new JWR Conquest series makes sense anytime soon, if ever.bigfruits wrote:if you dont need to scratch that itch just yet, maybe some xfast Conquests are in the works. Im sure a well balanced 894 or 893 Conquest would be hard to beat for bottom contact.
Taking that into consideration, I've been a Mag Bass fan for a long time, and have been putting in some time with a few of the new Conquest rods, with more to come pretty soon. Sensitivity isn't something they are lacking in my experience so far. The action in comparison to a JWR is different, but it always has been with Mag Bass rods.
The new Conquest 844 is a much better 1/2 oz jig plus trailer rod than the 843, plain and simple.
IG @hobie_wan_kenobi_fishing
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
844 for shizzle...or 'fo' shizzle I guess
- Jason Penn
- Elite Angler
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 4:22 pm
- Location: Blytheville, AR
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
I haven't fished a loomis in 15 years, but a 5/16oz eakins jig with a twin tail was about as heavy a jig as the imx843 I had seemed to really perform well with.
- cndbasshunter
- Pro Angler
- Posts: 4216
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:32 pm
- Location: CANADA
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
843 would be too soft imo, 844 would fit much better.
Re: G. Loomis 843C MBR or 844c MBR for jigs
I like heavy hooks on almost all of my jigs. The 844 is a better choice for anything with a heavier hook. The 843 seems a little light for anything over 3/8 oz with a heavy hook.