Fenwick HMG Triggerstik: Dave
The rod comes with a full grip, what that means is the reargrip is not split but one piece, and the forgrip is present and full. Most rods now come with a split rear grip and a shortened or nonexistent forgrip so the angler can contact the blank with his finger before it touches the cork. Even though the HMG does not have these features, it has a blank through handle design. This enables the angler to touch exposed blank on the backside of the handle for more sensitivity. So the rod is very aesthetically pleasing, but to most people that is not as important as to how it’s going to fish.
Testing Conditions:
I decided to test this rod over several days in the swamp. Being it is a 7 foot MH rod, I decided to match it up with a Shimano Calcutta 250 that has been overhauled by me for more casting distance and spooled with 50 lb. braid. The lure of choice was an original Scum Frog. The weather was nice most days, with one day being cloudy with rain.
Casting:
After the casing controls were set on the reel, a few short casts were made to get used to the load up of the rod. The HMG Triggerstik GT70MH-F handled the light frog with ease, and when I was comfortable; making further casts were no problem.
Sensitivity:
As the frog was slowly worked in, I kept my finger on the exposed blank feeling for the overall sensitivity. It was not very sensitive, but I could still feel structure as the frog made its way over thicker areas. When the fish hit, feeling the weight before the hookset was kind of tough. With that said, for rods in its price range, the sensitivity was on the mark.
Power:
The fish love to bite in the swamp, and within no time I was hooking up. The HMG Triggerstik GT70MH-F had enough backbone to take a solid hookset and enough leverage to get them moving away from the thick stuff. I made sure to get my hands extra wet to test the TAC handle and it was always easy to grip all throughout the day. After catching a bunch, I decided to fully test the backbone of the rod and go into the really thick cover. After the hookset, the fish would bury themselves, even with a tight drag it was hard getting their heads above the weeds, and when they buried themselves, it was even tougher to get them out. It seemed a little light for a medium heavy compared to other rods I have fished. So it performed ok, not enough backbone to fish the heavier stuff, but enough to fish around the sparse cover. The results were duplicated each day.
Durability:
Fenwick makes a durable rod; I still have one from 1996 that gets used. It performed very well with no problems.
Design/Comfort:
The design is different than the norm out there. Like I previously stated, if this was back before the short grip got popular, it would have been the norm. So there is nothing really new or revolutionary about the design, it just works.
Applications:
I like this as a light topwater rod for throwing lighter baits.
Overall Thoughts:
Overall I like the rod. It handles very well. The swamp did not destroy it like other rods I have tested which is nice. If you have $100 dollars and want a good bang for your buck, this is your rod.
| Ratings | |
| Construction/Quality | 8.00 |
| Performance | 7.00 |
| Price | 8.00 |
| Features | 8.00 |
| Design/Comfort | 7.00 |
| Application | 7.00 |
| Total Score | 7.50 |
