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!

rod accuracy

Moderators: Paul Arden, stesiik

WJC
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 2:02 am
Location: Fl. Keys

rod accuracy

#131

Post by WJC » Sat Dec 10, 2016 2:58 am

Paul Arden wrote:That's possible Jim. The angle will have to be from above. Maybe I'll have Ashly video from a bridge :)
Thanks, Paul! It's always fun to puzzle out whether you are engaged in obfuscation or just beverage-induced dingbattery. ;>)

Chris, thank you for the reply, but it was not necessary. Your replies to all the posts have been both thoughtful, informative and time consuming.

I will definitey post the results after I get a chance to compare the rods after reading your reasoning. I have lately been hurrying to waste time as quickly as possible, but never seem to catch up. However, I am anxious to compare the two rods after reading your posts.

I've cast neither of them in a very long time, so each will have a level casting field. Gusting winds are the big problem with light line weights here.

Though I have never intentionally cast at rings, I can't remember ever letting a line go without a specific landing spot aimed for, whether in the field out front or on the water. There is always something to aim for. Otherwise, what is the purpose?

Cheers,
Jim

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 14614
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 1
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

rod accuracy

#132

Post by Paul Arden » Sat Dec 10, 2016 3:21 am

No quite serious. I haul from the chest to straight in front in a sort of karate chop. Gordy has measured this from the side and it's plotted here. I'd like to see the haul filmed from above or below for a more accurate measurement.

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

Flycasting Definitions

WJC
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 2:02 am
Location: Fl. Keys

rod accuracy

#133

Post by WJC » Sat Dec 10, 2016 3:30 am

My apologies, Paul. I'll hunt for it. I've not seen it. Is it a video or one of those graphs?

What would be most interesting is the length of your haul, it's start relative to the pull angle on the line, and the concavity it creates in the tip path - if any. I would be surprised if there were none if you are using a relatively long haul and ending shortly after, near to, RSP.

PS: By "more accurate measurement" are you talking about length and time?

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 14614
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 1
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

rod accuracy

#134

Post by Paul Arden » Sat Dec 10, 2016 6:30 am

For the back haul in particular I think there will be a small error because of the angle. Curiously I'm finishing considerably before RSP.

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

Flycasting Definitions

User avatar
gordonjudd
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:36 pm
Location: Southern California

rod accuracy

#135

Post by gordonjudd » Sat Dec 10, 2016 5:07 pm

However I soon realized the impact on hang time whilst false casting and swapped over to the Airflow lines immediately
John,
Good point.

The impact of the line density in regards to "hanging the fly" to get a better distance estimate is something I had not considered. That could be the reason casters in the U.S. tend to favor 7wt lines for the Dry Fly game even though they could get better wind resistance using heavier lines that are allowed by the rules.

Does the higher volume density of your silk lines (1200-1400 kg/m.^3) make it more difficult to hang the fly in your accuracy games?

I don't know if silk lines could be used in the ACA Trout Fly game as the definition of "floating line" is a bit iffy. If the line is made to float because of floatant or the use of Rustoleum's Never-Wet it would float, but would not have a specific gravity of less than 1.

Gordy

easterncaster
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 12:11 pm
Location: New York, USA

rod accuracy

#136

Post by easterncaster » Sat Dec 10, 2016 5:30 pm

gordonjudd wrote:
However I soon realized the impact on hang time whilst false casting and swapped over to the Airflow lines immediately
John,
Good point.

The impact of the line density in regards to "hanging the fly" to get a better distance estimate is something I had not considered. That could be the reason casters in the U.S. tend to favor 7wt lines for the Dry Fly game even though they could get better wind resistance using heavier lines that are allowed by the rules.

Does the higher volume density of your silk lines (1200-1400 kg/m.^3) make it more difficult to hang the fly in your accuracy games?

I don't know if silk lines could be used in the ACA Trout Fly game as the definition of "floating line" is a bit iffy. If the line is made to float because of floatant or the use of Rustoleum's Never-Wet it would float, but would not have a specific gravity of less than 1.

Gordy
Hi Gordy,

While I can not speak for my ACA pals, I will for myself: Heavier lines are exactly that, heavy. Take into account the entire outfit and it would be too cumbersome to cast the game.

My two pesos ;)
Craig

John Waters
Posts: 1036
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm

rod accuracy

#137

Post by John Waters » Sun Dec 11, 2016 6:42 am

Hi Gordy,

"Does the higher volume density of your silk lines (1200-1400 kg/m.^3) make it more difficult to hang the fly in your accuracy games?"

It does but it is all relative. I cast quite fast (hand speed and loop speed) and the rod tip is always under tension when moved forward or back. Any non floating line would not be allowed in US events, if I interpret the current rules correctly. From an aesthetic viewpoint, brightly coloured floating lines look great. We do a lot of casting here at casting pools under lights and false casting these lines look great.

In respect of rods and lines being "heavy" it is not a factor when matched with the right rod and the stroke. For example, because I cast the ICSF accuracy event (T38 gram Skish), I prepare for that by training with that gear on grass, but I also use similar gear on the water. Prior to me leaving Oz, as I still want to compete in our local, on water accuracy events, I use a Loomis 36 gram fly distance rod and an 11 weight silk line. Don't know what the weight of the outfit is but it has been described as heavy by some, but only until they cast it. I have no trouble casting the Dry Fly, Skish and Wet Fly events on water with that outfit as it is only "heavy" when weighed. It is "light" when cast and it comes close to the gear I use in September. It feels light in the hand. I am now training with the 5 MED for 2018 but I do not experience any issues using these two variations of gear because the more I cast the 5 MED Trout Accuracy, the more my stroke replicates that used for the ICSF accuracy. For the water it all comes down to your trajectory and how effectively you block the forward cast hand movement. Any examination of Steve Rajeff casting fly accuracy will illustrate those key points of technique.

I think technique transcends gear and events, on either grass and water.

John

John Waters
Posts: 1036
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm

rod accuracy

#138

Post by John Waters » Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:33 am

"The impact of the line density in regards to "hanging the fly" to get a better distance estimate is something I had not considered. That could be the reason casters in the U.S. tend to favor 7wt lines for the Dry Fly game even though they could get better wind resistance using heavier lines that are allowed by the rules."

Agree completely Gordy. I visited a US National Casting Championship many years ago and saw many US casters using underlined gear and floating lines in their accuracy events. Hang time is important.

John

User avatar
Chris Korich
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:56 am
Location: Dagobah

rod accuracy

#139

Post by Chris Korich » Sun Dec 18, 2016 9:38 am

Paul Arden wrote:
Chris, I heard that you were playing with different leader configurations prior to the competition. This is one area I really believe where you guys and your US history of accuracy competitions really shine. Are there any particular formulas you can recommend? I was given one but couldn't source the right diameters in time (not without buying a vast amount of spools direct from the manufacturer!)

Thanks, Paul
Hey Paul,
Been hectic, so apologize for not getting back to this 'rod accuracy' thread sooner.

No doubt, U.S. casters have historically done a lot of leader development, especially at our famous West Coast clubs. Thankfully, a lot of knowledge was handed down to me at Maxine's age and now, after what seems like 800 yrs of testing, I pass it on to her.

Because we're exploring possibilities for the coach & kid in the tackle industry, we think it's best to not publicly disclose our specific equipment or new leader formulas at this time, but in the spirit of the holidays and all that YOU do to share our FUN sport, please message me with your jungle address (or other) and the young Jedi and I will tie up some GOLD medal leaders for you and Ashly to test in the New Year!
Happy holidays to you both! :sorcerer:

Chris

User avatar
Chris Korich
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:56 am
Location: Dagobah

rod accuracy

#140

Post by Chris Korich » Sun Dec 18, 2016 9:52 am

John Finn wrote:Thanks for your answer about glass Chris. Can I add a little to Paul's question

Do you find the junction between line and leader to be important or not ?
Regards.........................John
Yes, important Mr. Finn. We prefer well tied nail knots, especially with smaller lines, long leaders and when you can't afford to snag.

Chris

Post Reply

Return to “Flycasting”