Thomas and Thomas Contact 3 Plus "Landing Power"

[Sneaky Pete]

Let me start by saying I am in no way connected with Thomas and Thomas. I am a rod junky who fishes everything I can get my hands on. I've been fishing the Contact 3+ 10'9" 2 Weight since March. It's an excellent rod. I have the Contact 2 in 10'2wt and 10'9" 3wt. The Contact 3+ in IMO is a real improvement. I was suspect at first thinking...Goodspeed had left the company and this was going to be a same rod in a new wrapper type rod. It is not in any way. The flex point is higher, it's lighter and the taper flex combo makes delivering the new light leader light fly formulas much much easier. Lower first guide helps handle lighter leaders.
Lower swing weight helps fish all day without fatigue. It feels like a 10 foot rod in your hand. The knock I keep hearing is lack of landing power. I do understand this feeling. However, what I think it has is slightly less "lifting" power than the older models. However, It is unfair to compair the 10'2wt Contact 2 to this rod. By their own admission the Contact 2 2wt was a 2/3 weight. Not the same at all. I use mine as an all rounder. It casts dry flies beautifully and acts more like a 3wt than a 2wt. To compare to a Sage ESN is wrong as well. If Sage even made a 10'9" 2wt with that composite they use it would be a noodle. I prefer the delivery, presentation, Tippett protection and strike detection over lifting power. Using lift on big fish is a mistake to begin with. The rod teaches you that side pressure is how you fight big fish by keeping the fight under the fast water. Relying on lifting power to land big fish means you are fighting them wrong and your lost fish lost rate will go up.

Sure you may be under gunned a little on a huge riffle on the Delaware with no place to to pull the fish out of the heavy current, but that's not where I would fish this rod. I have caught several large wild fish with this rod in the 20 inch range with no problem using side pressure to move the fish out of the heavy current to slower water. My catch rate is higher mostly due to the total control have over my flies. I spend more time in the drift with less effort. If you are fishing those 100 yard wide super heavy riffles you may want to try the 11'5" 3 weight. It's so light you'll feel like you are fishing a 10'6" rod. My next purchase.

 

[greywolf]

Let me start by saying I am in no way connected with Thomas and Thomas. I am a rod junky who fishes everything I can get my hands on. I've been fishing the Contact 3+ 10'9" 2 Weight since March. It's an excellent rod. I have the Contact 2 in 10'2wt and 10'9" 3wt. The Contact 3+ in IMO is a real improvement. I was suspect at first thinking...Goodspeed had left the company and this was going to be a same rod in a new wrapper type rod. It is not in any way. The flex point is higher, it's lighter and the taper flex combo makes delivering the new light leader light fly formulas much much easier. Lower first guide helps handle lighter leaders.
Lower swing weight helps fish all day without fatigue. It feels like a 10 foot rod in your hand. The knock I keep hearing is lack of landing power. I do understand this feeling. However, what I think it has is slightly less "lifting" power than the older models. However, It is unfair to compair the 10'2wt Contact 2 to this rod. By their own admission the Contact 2 2wt was a 2/3 weight. Not the same at all. I use mine as an all rounder. It casts dry flies beautifully and acts more like a 3wt than a 2wt. To compare to a Sage ESN is wrong as well. If Sage even made a 10'9" 2wt with that composite they use it would be a noodle. I prefer the delivery, presentation, Tippett protection and strike detection over lifting power. Using lift on big fish is a mistake to begin with. The rod teaches you that side pressure is how you fight big fish by keeping the fight under the fast water. Relying on lifting power to land big fish means you are fighting them wrong and your lost fish lost rate will go up.

Sure you may be under gunned a little on a huge riffle on the Delaware with no place to to pull the fish out of the heavy current, but that's not where I would fish this rod. I have caught several large wild fish with this rod in the 20 inch range with no problem using side pressure to move the fish out of the heavy current to slower water. My catch rate is higher mostly due to the total control have over my flies. I spend more time in the drift with less effort. If you are fishing those 100 yard wide super heavy riffles you may want to try the 11'5" 3 weight. It's so light you'll feel like you are fishing a 10'6" rod. My next purchase.

I have heard some good things about the Contact 3. I just wish it was a lot more affordable. $995 is a lot of money for a nymphing rod.

 

[Nocktavius]

Would be curious about the 10’9” 3 wt as I consider even euro 2 wts to be toys. It’s pretty far down the list of stuff I’m looking to buy though

 

[wildtrout2]

I just wish it was a lot more affordable. $995 is a lot of money for a nymphing rod.

I think that's a lot of money for any rod. 😉

 

[greywolf]

Would be curious about the 10’9” 3 wt as I consider even euro 2 wts to be toys. It’s pretty far down the list of stuff I’m looking to buy though

I fish some places where 20 inch plus trout exist in decent numbers and you have to keep them from getting into cover to prevent losing them. I have found that a 3 weight 10 or 10.7 foot euro rod can turn these fish ( with a #3 or #4 tippet) but a 2 weight euro rod cannot. So I stick with 3 weight unless fishing somewhere that only has small trout

 

[wildtrout2]

I fish some places where 20 inch plus trout exist in decent numbers and you have to keep them from getting into cover to prevent losing them.

I need to go fishing with you. 😆

 

[Sneaky Pete]

I hear ya on the cost. The best rods today very expensive for sure, but they also hold their value. One thing I always do before getting a new rod is figure out what I can part with to get it. I have a great local fly shop that takes used gear on trade for store credits. They will give you credit for just about anything. Old packs, vests, vices, nets, rods, reels, books...ect. It adds up.

When I upgraded to the Contact 3 it was all done with trade ins. I used a Contact 2 as one of my trades and got $480.00 for it. I believe that rod was $750 when I got it 4 1/2 years ago. So the way I can justify it is...Net cost was like $60 bucks a year to fish that rod for the time I fished it. I fish year round so, it was 5 bucks a month for a premium rod. That's how a rod junkie justifies his habit.

BTW: Greywolf, I totally agree with your statement. I am not so fortunate. The only place I fish with 20 plus inch trout in decent numbers is the Delaware system and I do bring the 3 weight if I am nymphing which hopefully I'm not if I'm there. However, I have caught some 20 inch fish on the Farmington River with my 2 wt.. That river does not have a lot of woody debris and it's not a huge river so you can side pressure them out of the current. If you are unfamiliar it is sort of like the size of Penns from Cherry and up.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

I need to go fishing with you. 😆

No kidding.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

I fish some places where 20 inch plus trout exist in decent numbers and you have to keep them from getting into cover to prevent losing them. I have found that a 3 weight 10 or 10.7 foot euro rod can turn these fish ( with a #3 or #4 tippet) but a 2 weight euro rod cannot. So I stick with 3 weight unless fishing somewhere that only has small trout

I'm sure the answer is no...but if you'd like to share what body of water you fish that has wild 20 plus inch fish that will actually take nymphs fished with 3x tippet I am all ears. You are most likely a much better nymph fisherman than me. I can't get anything to eat a nymph using 3x. My leader starts at 3x.

 

[greywolf]

I'm sure the answer is no...but if you'd like to share what body of water you fish that has wild 20 plus inch fish that will actually take nymphs fished with 3x tippet I am all ears. You are most likely a much better nymph fisherman than me. I can't get anything to eat a nymph using 3x. My leader starts at 3x.

Just to be clear I use fluoro leaders and most of the spots I am referring to are private water.

 

[greywolf]

I hear ya on the cost. The best rods today very expensive for sure, but they also hold their value. One thing I always do before getting a new rod is figure out what I can part with to get it. I have a great local fly shop that takes used gear on trade for store credits. They will give you credit for just about anything. Old packs, vests, vices, nets, rods, reels, books...ect. It adds up.

When I upgraded to the Contact 3 it was all done with trade ins. I used a Contact 2 as one of my trades and got $480.00 for it. I believe that rod was $750 when I got it 4 1/2 years ago. So the way I can justify it is...Net cost was like $60 bucks a year to fish that rod for the time I fished it. I fish year round so, it was 5 bucks a month for a premium rod. That's how a rod junkie justifies his habit.

BTW: Greywolf, I totally agree with your statement. I am not so fortunate. The only place I fish with 20 plus inch trout in decent numbers is the Delaware system and I do bring the 3 weight if I am nymphing which hopefully I'm not if I'm there. However, I have caught some 20 inch fish on the Farmington River with my 2 wt.. That river does not have a lot of woody debris and it's not a huge river so you can side pressure them out of the current. If you are unfamiliar it is sort of like the size of Penns from Cherry and up.

I do the same thing. Sell some older fly fishing equipment to help pay for new stuff. Haven't had good success selling on Craig's list

 

[Nocktavius]

I hear ya on the cost. The best rods today very expensive for sure, but they also hold their value. One thing I always do before getting a new rod is figure out what I can part with to get it. I have a great local fly shop that takes used gear on trade for store credits. They will give you credit for just about anything. Old packs, vests, vices, nets, rods, reels, books...ect. It adds up.

When I upgraded to the Contact 3 it was all done with trade ins. I used a Contact 2 as one of my trades and got $480.00 for it. I believe that rod was $750 when I got it 4 1/2 years ago. So the way I can justify it is...Net cost was like $60 bucks a year to fish that rod for the time I fished it. I fish year round so, it was 5 bucks a month for a premium rod. That's how a rod junkie justifies his habit.

BTW: Greywolf, I totally agree with your statement. I am not so fortunate. The only place I fish with 20 plus inch trout in decent numbers is the Delaware system and I do bring the 3 weight if I am nymphing which hopefully I'm not if I'm there. However, I have caught some 20 inch fish on the Farmington River with my 2 wt.. That river does not have a lot of woody debris and it's not a huge river so you can side pressure them out of the current. If you are unfamiliar it is sort of like the size of Penns from Cherry and up.

I’ve yet to see a plastic rod that holds its value. Lotta used contact 2’s going for 300-400$ on marketplace. I’ll probably have to sell 3 of mine to get a single contact 3.

My paynes on the other hand are basically like buying bitcoin

 

[ROVERT]

I can't get anything to eat a nymph using 3x. My leader starts at 3x.

While I mostly use 4X to nymph, you should be able to catch fish on 3X much of the time. I recently mic'd a spool of fluoro that I've used a lot and is listed at .007" (4X). It is actually .0079", so essentially 3X. The fish didn't seem to notice.

 

[greywolf]

While I mostly use 4X to nymph, you should be able to catch fish on 3X much of the time. I recently mic'd a spool of fluoro that I've used a lot and is listed at .007" (4X). It is actually .0079", so essentially 3X. The fish didn't seem to notice.

I agree. Using fluoro leader / tippet I have no problems getting trout to bite on nymphs using 3x and 4x on heavily fished public streams. On less pressured water 3x and 4x even work well with dry dropper Fishing. I only go to 5x or 6x when fishing very small flies like 20 or smaller or very heavily pressured streams with few really big trout like the Tully.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

I’ve yet to see a plastic rod that holds its value. Lotta used contact 2’s going for 300-400$ on marketplace. I’ll probably have to sell 3 of mine to get a single contact 3.

My paynes on the other hand are basically like buying bitcoin

I wish I had a Payne. Wouldn't compare it to Bitcoin though. Pretty sure the value of your Payne hasn't dropped 40% in the last year like Bitcoin has. Not even my "plastic rods" have done that.

If you ever want to trade some stuff in.......Try this fly shop. Ask for Grady he's the owner. Best trade in values I have found.

https://www.farmingtonriver.com/

 

[Sneaky Pete]

I agree. Using fluoro leader / tippet I have no problems getting trout to bite on nymphs using 3x and 4x on heavily fished public streams. On less pressured water 3x and 4x even work well with dry dropper Fishing. I only go to 5x or 6x when fishing very small flies like 20 or smaller or very heavily pressured streams with few really big trout like the Tully.

I'm not sure I get it. You only fish 5x or 6x on streams with really big trout? Then breaking strength is not the issue. So, that tells me that you are trying to give a more natural presentation in order to fool high pressured and big educated fish, which makes perfect sense to me.......but why not all the time then? I guess I'm just trying to understand, what is the advantage of fishing heavier tippett if you don't have to? It doesn't cast small nymphs better (14-22), it doesn't get to the zone faster, it's less sensitive, the current effects it more, the fly doesn't look more natural....and so on. So, what's the point? Why do you only go to 5x or 6x in certain situations if you know it's better? Not trying to be offensive in any way. I just don't get why with the strength and abrasion resistance of the new material we have available now... there is still some sort of strange stigma in some circles that it is bad to fish 6x. Is it some sort of ....it's better for the fish thing? You can land them faster? Because when I am nymphing I am most of the time inside 25 feet when I catch a fish and my soft long rod can lean on 6x and get a fish in the net in 20 seconds. Yet, when I'm casting a dry fly 70 ft and hook a big fish on a #20 BWO with fast action rod I can't get that fish in nearly as fast. Yet somehow that's more acceptable. Someone help me make sense of it.

 

[Bamboozle]

I’ve yet to see a plastic rod that holds its value. Lotta used contact 2’s going for 300-400$ on marketplace. I’ll probably have to sell 3 of mine to get a single contact 3.

My paynes on the other hand are basically like buying bitcoin

I could sell every Winston plastic rod I own for what I paid or more so it depends on the plastic, model and what you paid...

As far as euro rods go, when folks decide 13, 14 or 15 feet long is where it's at, the 10, 11, & 12 footers will be worth even less. In the meantime I'll keep high sticking my Tenkara zoom rods...

 

[greywolf]

I'm not sure I get it. You only fish 5x or 6x on streams with really big trout? Then breaking strength is not the issue. So, that tells me that you are trying to give a more natural presentation in order to fool high pressured and big educated fish, which makes perfect sense to me.......but why not all the time then? I guess I'm just trying to understand, what is the advantage of fishing heavier tippett if you don't have to? It doesn't cast small nymphs better (14-22), it doesn't get to the zone faster, it's less sensitive, the current effects it more, the fly doesn't look more natural....and so on. So, what's the point? Why do you only go to 5x or 6x in certain situations if you know it's better? Not trying to be offensive in any way. I just don't get why with the strength and abrasion resistance of the new material we have available now... there is still some sort of strange stigma in some circles that it is bad to fish 6x. Is it some sort of ....it's better for the fish thing? You can land them faster? Because when I am nymphing I am most of the time inside 25 feet when I catch a fish and my soft long rod can lean on 6x and get a fish in the net in 20 seconds. Yet, when I'm casting a dry fly 70 ft and hook a big fish on a #20 BWO with fast action rod I can't get that fish in nearly as fast. Yet somehow that's more acceptable. Someone help me make sense of it.

In my case I use 3x or 4x on streams with bigger fish to keep them out of structure where they can break me off. I fish several streams like this where you cannot allow rhe fish to get into fallen trees, brush piles, etc. or its will be lost. It does not seem to affect getting strikes with the right setup and allows me to land fish faster and without breakoffs. Lesson learned from many years of fishing and losing some big trout.

 

[Sneaky Pete]

In my case I use 3x or 4x on streams with bigger fish to keep them out of structure where they can break me off. I fish several streams like this where you cannot allow rhe fish to get into fallen trees, brush piles, etc. or its will be lost. It does not seem to affect getting strikes with the right setup and allows me to land fish faster and without breakoffs. Lesson learned from many years of fishing and losing some big trout.

Now that makes sense. I have fished a couple of named rivers in Michigan like that a while back. Lots of big wood and root balls that held big fat fish over 18 inches some in the 20's. So, it's a trade off. You would prob get more fish to eat if you went lighter but you would have a much higher loss rate on the big fish due to the structure in the river(s) you fish. There are only 2 rivers within day fishing driving distance that I can catch 20" fish and the only other place I fish with 20" fish is the Delaware system. On all of those 5x is the heaviest I need 90% of the time when fishing nymphs or dry fly. I do think the 5x fluorocarbon that we have available to us today is comparable to somewhere in-between 3x-4x in the older nylon we had available way back in the day when it comes to durability and abrasion resistance.

 

[greywolf]

Now that makes sense. I have fished a couple of named rivers in Michigan like that a while back. Lots of big wood and root balls that held big fat fish over 18 inches some in the 20's. So, it's a trade off. You would prob get more fish to eat if you went lighter but you would have a much higher loss rate on the big fish due to the structure in the river(s) you fish. There are only 2 rivers within day fishing driving distance that I can catch 20" fish and the only other place I fish with 20" fish is the Delaware system. On all of those 5x is the heaviest I need 90% of the time when fishing nymphs or dry fly. I do think the 5x fluorocarbon that we have available to us today is comparable to somewhere in-between 3x-4x in the older nylon we had available way back in the day when it comes to durability and abrasion resistance.

I agree that 5x or lighter makes sense for Delaware. Lots of fishing pressure and lots of water to let bigger fish run until they tire out.