Loomis NRX 895 balance

A specialized forum to discuss anything and everything about your favorite or not so favorite fishing rods.
Cfrench085
Angler
Angler
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:18 am

Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Cfrench085 » Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:07 pm

Does anyone else have this rod and get annoyed with the balance? It's a very powerful rod but it is tip heavy. It seems that Loomis (shimano) wanted to hang out with the cool kids and thought that a whole series of rods needed split grips and totally forgot that a rod should be balanced at all. If the reel seat was maybe an inch or 2 forward it would fix the issue. I've been considering making it into a full grip or adding a small lead weight in the back open end of the blank but haven't because of the warranty. Anybody have any bright ideas on how to fix this?
About as close as I've come to a temporary fix would be to wrap the split grip area with lead wire and hollow a section of split cork to fit over it?

capt1fish
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 2:54 pm
Location: Cal Delta

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by capt1fish » Mon Mar 21, 2016 2:57 pm

Rubber cap that goes on a folding chair. I think I stuffed a 2 or 3 oz lead river sinker in mine to balance at a point I liked. I don't mind the overall physical weight after the rod balances out. Give it a shot.

Cfrench085
Angler
Angler
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:18 am

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Cfrench085 » Mon Mar 21, 2016 3:13 pm

capt1fish wrote:Rubber cap that goes on a folding chair. I think I stuffed a 2 or 3 oz lead river sinker in mine to balance at a point I liked. I don't mind the overall physical weight after the rod balances out. Give it a shot.
Thank you. I'll try that.

Lucky Craft Man
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 3:20 am

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Lucky Craft Man » Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:34 pm

I wrote an Initial review of my thoughts on this rod back 2013. Being tip heavy was my main complaint. Here is a link to that thread I started and I also discussed my way of addressing the inbalance problem with this rod.

http://forums.tackletour.com/viewtopic. ... it=NRX+895

dux
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 8:55 am

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by dux » Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:41 am

tip heavy has been a problem with all my 89? NRX. The rubber chair caps filled with quarters is what I do, but with the 895 I had to use a cinder block.

User avatar
cndbasshunter
Pro Angler
Pro Angler
Posts: 4216
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:32 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by cndbasshunter » Tue Mar 22, 2016 10:49 am

i have 893 and 894 and i agree the 894 isn't the most balanced rod but the 893 feels great. Fishing the 894 it's marvelous, is 895 really that bad?

MTBF
Platinum Angler
Platinum Angler
Posts: 1128
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:13 pm
Location: ONT, Canada

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by MTBF » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:13 am

cndbasshunter wrote:i have 893 and 894 and i agree the 894 isn't the most balanced rod but the 893 feels great. Fishing the 894 it's marvelous, is 895 really that bad?
I have 2 seasons with one and a D7 Chronarch. Fished frogs well and doesn't fatigue me. Ripped heavy jig's with the same setup last year and felt some fatigue at the end of the day. Lightened the reel up to the Aldebaran for the 895 and no more fatigue ripping the jig's through the weed.

Still need a 894 and a 3rd 895 so i can run both a 1oz and 3/4oz and still keep a frog tied up on the 3rd.

Rfdong
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 3:38 pm

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Rfdong » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:39 am

cndbasshunter wrote:i have 893 and 894 and i agree the 894 isn't the most balanced rod but the 893 feels great. Fishing the 894 it's marvelous, is 895 really that bad?

IMO yes. I don't own the 894 but the 895 is night and day worse than 893. Now this is from someone who's been battling tennis elbow for 18 mos, so I'm super sensitive to tip weight. But I did the chair cap with about 2oz and when you pick it up it's noticeable weight wise (you go ugh) but once you fish it, it's night and day. Loomis I don't think has ever really cared about balance....just my opinion on all of it.

Cfrench085
Angler
Angler
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:18 am

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Cfrench085 » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:54 am

cndbasshunter wrote:i have 893 and 894 and i agree the 894 isn't the most balanced rod but the 893 feels great. Fishing the 894 it's marvelous, is 895 really that bad?
Absolutely. For me it's not a fatigue thing it's an unwieldy and less sensitive thing. I had tried to use the 895 on 3/4-1oz fooball but found myself going back to my bcr874s because the feel was better.

On a side note the rubber cap and quarters work great. Thanks capt1fish. I may pour one partially full of lead and give that a go. The attachment to the rod isn't great. I taped it on for today but tape may not be needed. I'm thinking I might try and use heat shrink tubing to attach it :-k

User avatar
Frosty
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:55 am

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Frosty » Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:50 pm

I sold my 893 for that reason. It's an unbelievable blank and had all the characteristics I wanted in deep water 1/4-1/2 oz jig rod, but even with a hefty reel on the back it was still tip heavy. All the Loomis 2 powers and 3 powers (7'1" or under) are balanced nicely...but when I need a longer rod or a heavier powered rod over 7' I've just been going the custom route. It's unfortunate they don't just move the reel seat up an inch or two. If I recall the NRX 843 has the same rear grip length the 893 does :-k curious to say the least

capt1fish
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 2:54 pm
Location: Cal Delta

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by capt1fish » Tue Mar 22, 2016 1:51 pm

Cfrench085 wrote:
cndbasshunter wrote:i have 893 and 894 and i agree the 894 isn't the most balanced rod but the 893 feels great. Fishing the 894 it's marvelous, is 895 really that bad?
Absolutely. For me it's not a fatigue thing it's an unwieldy and less sensitive thing. I had tried to use the 895 on 3/4-1oz fooball but found myself going back to my bcr874s because the feel was better.

On a side note the rubber cap and quarters work great. Thanks capt1fish. I may pour one partially full of lead and give that a go. The attachment to the rod isn't great. I taped it on for today but tape may not be needed. I'm thinking I might try and use heat shrink tubing to attach it :-k
I wrap the rod butt with plastic or non tacky tape like blue painters tape, place the cap on, then wrap up the entire end with black electrical tape. Works great for cheap.

DavidSA
Pro Angler
Pro Angler
Posts: 2298
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: Northern Kentucky

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by DavidSA » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:35 am

I read one post that indicated the butt length on the 895 was shorter then his 894. Shocking but if remotely true explains the balance issue.

To the post about Tennis elbow. Had it for 6 months last year. I lift weights 4 days a week for nearly 40 years and can't pick up a cup of coffee without pain :( The longer rods in general hurt more, unbalanced was much worse.

On the 894, the chair leg protector with quarters in it has worked wonders. As I added butt weight, I reduced my reel weight by 1.5oz which more the reduced total rig weight. Massive difference on pitching and tip up applications with the 894.

DavidSA
Pro Angler
Pro Angler
Posts: 2298
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 5:04 pm
Location: Northern Kentucky

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by DavidSA » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:36 am

Frosty wrote:I sold my 893 for that reason. It's an unbelievable blank and had all the characteristics I wanted in deep water 1/4-1/2 oz jig rod, but even with a hefty reel on the back it was still tip heavy. All the Loomis 2 powers and 3 powers (7'1" or under) are balanced nicely...but when I need a longer rod or a heavier powered rod over 7' I've just been going the custom route. It's unfortunate they don't just move the reel seat up an inch or two. If I recall the NRX 843 has the same rear grip length the 893 does :-k curious to say the least
So sad. on the 893 the single chair protector and a single quarter totally cure the problem and your rig is still very light and amazing sensitivity.

KP Duty
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 5:52 pm

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by KP Duty » Wed Mar 23, 2016 12:01 pm

All I know is my recently received 894 feels dynamite. Reminds me more of my old bcr893 than the 893nrx that I ordered with it. I only have a couple of concept ak's at the moment to mount on them to get a feel, but I didn't think they needed any chair protectors, but I understand when folks like David want to achieve 782glx balance in all their sticks. It is nice to know it's achievable if you so desire. Anyway...I honestly was thinking of ordering that dreaded ;) 895 when I get paid because I thought my 894 felt great. I have been eating my Wheaties lately though, so I may have an advantage in wrist strength.

Unimog
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:06 pm
Location: Kansas City

Re: Loomis NRX 895 balance

Post by Unimog » Wed Mar 23, 2016 12:59 pm

DavidSA wrote:I read one post that indicated the butt length on the 895 was shorter then his 894. Shocking but if remotely true explains the balance issue.
I posted that, and would appreciate if anyone with both would check theirs as well. I bought these rods as soon as they came out and wondered if they were early versions but the reel seats came apart and I sent them in for replacement. I'm not looking at my rack right now but I think the 873crr and 894 had the longer butt and the 852, 854 and 895 had the shorter. That's just going by what models I have. Makes no sense I realize but it's how mine are.

If I remember right that post was someone asking if there was something that balanced better than the 854 with a steez. I found the balance point with a steez was virtually the same between the two.

Post Reply