PLEASE NOTE: In order to post on the Board you need to have registered. To register please email paul@sexyloops.com including your real name and username. Registration takes less than 24hrs, unless Paul is fishing deep in the jungle!

New SW line by RIO

Moderators: Viking Lars, Magnus

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 13479
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 1
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#21

Post by Paul Arden » Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:16 am

Rod loading? Jesus, we've known it's not about rod loading for 17 years.

Be that as it may, how can you make a line one line weight heavier? That's complete nonsense.

Are we now in a parallel universe?
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions

User avatar
Graeme H
Posts: 1784
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:54 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

New SW line by RIO

#22

Post by Graeme H » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:06 pm

We know that, but the marketing team would rather sell lines than teach people to cast.

But think about it in terms of a shooting head. The original DIY shooting heads were made by getting a DT line 2 weights heavier than the rod's rating and cutting the first 30' off to make a head. According to the standard, it's two line weights heavy, but it has the correct mass for casting with the rod. Any lighter and it just doesn't work properly for long casts.

These days they are making most WF lines with heads around 35' to 37', only just longer than those shooting heads were. They've got to squeeze that mass that was previously used to cast a "long belly" or a DT line into something that's marginally longer than the 30' shooting head, so it makes sense that it's about a line weight heavier than the standard specifies. That is, it's gotta be somewhere between a shooting head and a proper line's weight because the length is somewhere between 30' and that of a proper line.

Cheers,
Graeme
FFi CCI

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#23

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:07 pm

Graeme H wrote:Yeah, I know.

"The customer is always right." What he demands, they will supply.
Nope, not the right direction either :D
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#24

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:09 pm

Paul Arden wrote:
Are we now in a parallel universe?
Again?
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Graeme H
Posts: 1784
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:54 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

New SW line by RIO

#25

Post by Graeme H » Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:09 pm

I give up Lasse. Let us know the secret. :D

Is it all Paul's fault? ;)
FFi CCI

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#26

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:11 pm

Graeme H wrote:We know that, but the marketing team would rather sell lines than teach people to cast.

But think about it in terms of a shooting head. The original DIY shooting heads were made by getting a DT line 2 weights heavier than the rod's rating and cutting the first 30' off to make a head. According to the standard, it's two line weights heavy, but it has the correct mass for casting with the rod. Any lighter and it just doesn't work properly for long casts.

These days they are making most WF lines with heads around 35' to 37', only just longer than those shooting heads were. They've got to squeeze that mass that was previously used to cast a "long belly" or a DT line into something that's marginally longer than the 30' shooting head, so it makes sense that it's about a line weight heavier than the standard specifies. That is, it's gotta be somewhere between a shooting head and a proper line's weight because the length is somewhere between 30' and that of a proper line.

Cheers,
Graeme
Are you claiming a proper line is a DT?

Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Graeme H
Posts: 1784
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:54 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

New SW line by RIO

#27

Post by Graeme H » Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:20 pm

No, just something with a decent length of line that can be cast. That's what the standard was based on, so if we are going to complain about lines not matching the "standard weight" for the first 30', we need a "standard line" to compare them with.

Lines like the Rio OBS are two line weights heavier than standard. Carrying 70' of line with that just isn't going to be a lot of fun. Carrying 60' of DT line isn't hard though.
FFi CCI

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#28

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:23 pm

Graeme H wrote:I give up Lasse. Let us know the secret. :D

Is it all Paul's fault? ;)
Man, that would be sooooooo easy, but I don't think we can pin this one on him, lots of other things though, but not this one :D

Come on, very few if any companies listen to the consumer and then delivers, they would be stupid to do so in most cases.
I want a 8 foot 3 inch purple green sage, thats a true 5 weight.....
I want a 5 weight line with a 42,1452 feet head thats unsinkable, but thinner than all others and invisble, and cast like a 10 weight....

Marketing people dont want to teach people to cast, and thank you for that! Their job is to make people think they can cast if they only spend more money on more gear. Thankfully anybody who has ever listened in physics can see right through the bollocks, sadly, we are all very very very good in turning a deaf ear to reason. Thats why most of the people in marketing of flygear still have good paying jobs, and the instructors don't....

We mostly buy gear, flyrods and lines and all the other stuff, because we create a fictive demand for it, not because we actually need it. And it's here the marketing dudes and gals step in and whisper sweet nothings in our ears :666:

I can't find a line that do not cast very well for its intended purpose in Rio's, SA's, Cortlands etc. lineup. Not one of them are specificly for someone who cannot cast, and suddenly will because of the line, regardless of what the marketing, sales or whoever reps, wrote on the box.
I want to go saltwater fishing, I need a line to throw big flies. I know I would normally upline one or two if that would be what I was doing mostly. Now take someone newer in the game, they haven't got the same base knowledge that the average sexylooper does, more like SL baseline divided by 100. They would be utterly confused as to what to buy, and since their limited knowledge are from a few shows where the demoists are shouting "LOAD THE ROD" it will do the work for you, and 30-40 year old books saying the same, they buy what is being sold, because they don't want to use their physics knowledge to question whats being said, they just want to go fishing.
So the bottom line is really the need for making a profit that drives this game. If you educate your consumer, they don't want to buy as much gear as you would like to sell. So you don't want to do that, instead you want to make them buy more than they need, just in case they should need it, you know. Why you can't cover your different fishing depths in the river with just float, intermediate, sink 2,3,4,5,6,7,8, you also need the dual density combinations of all those, and the the triple density combination of those, and in a couple of years, we'll have the quadruple and qindruple density versions, as well as the other way around, because we just remebered the washline version of fishing we did 40 years ago.... And then comes the sinking leaders, and the flies..... and of course you need more than one rod, summer and winter conditions call for that, so two sets of those lines please :D lets wait til spring to talk about spring and autumn and the need for seperate rods here :p

I so love it when absolutly newbies ask the question on online forums, "I would like to get a allround rod for this kind of fishing" and everyone will be standing on their backs to tell them that they neeed more than one, than two than three etc. for just that kind of fishing.....

Shite that was a long rant, probably not even on point :D


Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#29

Post by Lasse Karlsson » Fri Aug 25, 2017 8:36 pm

Graeme H wrote:No, just something with a decent length of line that can be cast. That's what the standard was based on, so if we are going to complain about lines not matching the "standard weight" for the first 30', we need a "standard line" to compare them with.

Lines like the Rio OBS are two line weights heavier than standard. Carrying 70' of line with that just isn't going to be a lot of fun. Carrying 60' of DT line isn't hard though.
Standard wasn't based on a headlength, just a measuring point where all kinds of lines could get measured and fit within. They didn't however take into account todays really short head lines, nobody saw that coming back in the sixties I guess :D

The Rio OB used to state it was a intergrated shootinghead, weighing more than it should. given the old fashion way of making shootingheads, 2 line sizes up, snip snip after 30+ feet and attach some mono and cast like a demon. That makes alot of sense don't it? I don't want to carry much more than my shootinghead, it's not fun unless it's an excercise in itself. Same goes for all lines, more than the needed overhang, and it doesn't become as much fun does it?
Carrying a full DT line isn't hard either, unless it's longer than your comfortable carry, then it's damn hard.

Should Rio, who does not yet make flyrods to my knowledge, sell the OB and other of their heavier than standard lines from the correct rating, and then spend time trying to educate their costumers in why, or should they just state what kind of subjective number someone wrote on a piece of burnt plastic/cut grass, they line would probably be cast on? The last fits the average consumers knowledge, so is the better option wouldn't you say?

Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

http://www.karlssonflyfishing.com

***Bring Mark back!!!!!! ***

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 13479
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 1
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

New SW line by RIO

#30

Post by Paul Arden » Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:51 pm

Yeah but what about when you've done it right and have to cast to a fish 35ft away? "Modern" flyline design seems more and more about getting people who can't cast for shit to cast to a certain point in the distance approximately 65 feet away and in a heap.

If someone brings that line to a lesson I'll cut it up into 1" strips. :p

Cheers, Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions

Post Reply

Return to “Tackle”