• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Sending a rod .

Mike Thompson

Senior Member & Supporter
Hi all,
Just seen a new advert on Facebook for Parcelforce. It shows a fishing rod and a length of up to 2.5mtrs. So I thought I would just have a look at prices. A two piece rod in a cardboard tube would be 1800 x 100 x 100mm and weigh about 2kg. The quote was a staggering £36 for collect from home or £35 for drop off at post office.
It's good they are offering a long parcel service, but that's a lot of brass !
 
....and so it's all the more amazing that Club 2000 (Dudley) can and will supply you with 2 Korum 2.5lb/12ft rods for £80 + £9.99 p/p.
 
Personally I think it’s criminal. The fact you can send heavier parcels for substantially less money is utterly bonkers. I would really like to know what it is about a long parcel that incurs such stupid fees.
 
I believe it's because the parcels cannot be put on a conveyor system to trundle through the factory to get processed.....it becomes a manual job incurring labour ...incurring costs.
 
We've only recently had a thread on this. Don't book Parcelforce online, go to a place where the Post Office counter is part of another store, like the COOP - unlike a 'proper' Post Office there's a chance they'll take a long tube without measuring it (mine just weighs it). I send 12ft 2-piece rods from my local COOP, with Parcelforce 48, insured for up to £250.00, for £13.95.
.
 
Last edited:
With regard to insurance , read the small print very carefully , most couriers will not insure for damage to rods in transit . May be useful to read the previous thread on this topic .
 
Could have changed Kevin , but last time I did a bit of research on this many excluded fishing rods , something about the material they were made of , or something along those lines

The Parcelforce link is live, Mike - not sure how it can have changed. As for people being worried about the materials rods are made of, I think that was because resin is excluded:
  • Resin items – including amorphite, amber and composites
But rods are not made of resin and if 'Resin items' excludes fishing rods, I think it would have said so. Very few fishing rods are 'composites'.

And if that isn't reassurance enough, Angling Direct are featured under the 'Customers' page of the Parcelforce website. I think they sell and ship fishing rods. ;)
.
.
PS. I might sound like a Fanboy, but I have no affiliation with RM, the Post Office or Parcelforce.
.
 
Could have changed Kevin , but last time I did a bit of research on this many excluded fishing rods , something about the material they were made of , or something along those lines
The new advert actually shows a fishing rod as the example of a long object. So if insurance is included, they would find it difficult to exclude them.
 
Surely all rods are made of composites?

Sort of, but not really, which is why I used quotation marks. Sort of, in that anything made with several different materials can be described as composite, whether it's a kettle a mobile phone or a fishing rod, but not really, because, well.... here's an interesting link.


I doubt that we've any more idea than they have as to Parcelforce's definition of a composite. Can of worms. I probably shouldn't have opened it. 🤪
.
.
 
I wouldn’t say a kettle etc is made from composites; yes it’s made from different materials and parts but that’s not a composite. Something that’s fibres or particles in a matrix most definitely is.
 
I wouldn’t say a kettle etc is made from composites; yes it’s made from different materials and parts but that’s not a composite.

Yes it is. Look up the definition of composite. Another example: I used to be designer and a photographic image made from several originals was a composite (probably still is, even in the digital age).

And that's my point... everyone knows what they think of as composite, but there is no no singular definition of what it is.
.
 
Back
Top