I'm not sure if Rodinal gives huge grain, but it does give the grain a pronounced sharpness and very hight edge acutance, at least in my experience. This produces a very up-front negative, and dazzling prints on glossy. I normally used it at 1:32, and I've not done any stand techniques. I like it at 1:64 with new Tri-X, too. Again, a very sharp negative with excellent graduation and edge acutance.
I used it with ASA 100-125 grain films in medium format and 127 (which I shot quite a bit of because I had several Yashica 44s), and again, a vibrant print. I liked it in 35mm too, it was really my "go to" developer for Plus-X, my favorite medium speed film, in all formats.
If I wanted a smoother tonal gradation and a more classic print, I used HP5 in HC110, 1:64 for 11 minutes, in all formats, including sub-miniature half-frame. All this is based on prior experience in my film days (which have just returned). I see no difference in today's Rodinal from the heydeys - at all. My current films look exactly like they used to.
With medium format, grain and 8x10 prints wasn't an issue, but the excellent acutance with this developer produced crisp and beautiful prints on Plus-X. That's why I used it with this film. So really, I used those two developers (HC110 and Rodinal) because they produced a different kind of print the way I used them, and used Rodinal with Plus-X and HC110 with HP5, and with Tri-X when I used it. I didn't care for Rodinal with HP5, and I didn't like HC110 with Plus-X. So I was a happy guy and had arrived at what worked for me.
That was then, and now is now. I'm still looking for a replacement for Plus-X in 35mm and 120 so I've only shot test rolls in my recent film renaissance and won't comment on Rodinal on the Efke type films I've shot in 4x4 and developed in Rodinal, because I haven't printed them, yet. But with the films like Delta 100 or 100TMax (which is my favorite of those I've tested so far), I prefer XTol to Rodinal.
