I don't recall ever hearing someone say that a Summers rod casts exactly like the comparable PHY model.

I know what you mean, but there is so much potential variability within PHY-made rods of the same model that to me it makes sense to mention the Summers rods first. For example, the PHY "Martha Marie" model began as a 7'6" rod with 13 ferrule and 4 tip top, became a heavier rod with 14 ferrule and 4-1/2 tip top, and then in 1958 there was a cataloged lightweight version with aluminum ferrules and two different tip tapers, one of which was marked for an HEH silk line. A rodmaker who miked half a dozen PHY Martha Marie rods told me that some were single compound tapers and other were double compound tapers. So there are definitely six-weight and five-weight MM's out there, the dry tip on the 1958 lightweight is probably a four-weight, and the casting characteristics of these MM's probably vary (my Summers-built five-weight MM is a dream to cast). Other PHY models have similar histories that make it hard to decide what constitutes an exact "replica," other than a taper measured from an individual rod. So if Summers' rods are an interpretation and a further development, then to me that is OK because interpretation and development seemed to be an ongoing thing with PHY anyway. Sometimes Summers seems to directly reference a PHY model, as in the Model 260 and Model 275, which relate to the butt measurements (0.260" and 0.275") of the main Perfectionist tapers. But he seems very deliberately to have avoided the famous 6'3" Midge length or the 7'2" Driggs length in his smaller rods. The concern for expense, which was part of the original question, may rule out Summers anyway for JimP.

BTW, your brother Jon says Hi!

Quashnet's Paul H. Young Rod Database has photos and descriptions of over 1020 PHY Co. rods, plus catalogs, accessories, etc. If you have trouble viewing the Database, try logging OUT of Yuku.