Got in. Overwiegted for switch rods and shit casters. I’m not going to like it.
Cheers, Paul
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!
Long belly #6 WF lines
Moderators: Viking Lars, Magnus
-
Paul Arden
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19579
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
- Location: Belum Rainforest
- Contact:
-
Lasse Karlsson
- Posts: 5780
- Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
- Location: There, and back again
- Contact:
Long belly #6 WF lines
Just drop a linesize and you'll love it 
Cheers
A shitty caster
Cheers
A shitty caster
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger
Flycasting, so simple that instructors need to make it complicated since 1685
Got a Q++ at casting school, wearing shorts
Flycasting, so simple that instructors need to make it complicated since 1685
Got a Q++ at casting school, wearing shorts
Long belly #6 WF lines
So for discussion purposes, here are the weights of this SA anadro line
WF-4-F 150gr / 9,7g
WF-5-F 175gr / 11,3g
WF-6-F 200gr / 12,8g
WF-7-F 225gr / 14,5g
WF-8-F 260gr / 16,8g
WF-9-F 305gr / 19,8g
WF-10-F 355gr / 23,0g
So, am I correct to think that for a 7wt fast action saltwater rod (presumably designed to throw 185gr), if I want to cast with 40+ feet of carry presumably a "5" wt line (175gr + say an extra @ 50 gr of carry), or even a "4" (150gr + say @40gr extra) would be what I would want..............BUT the turnover of the leader and saltwater streamer would suffer because as the line unrolls at the end of the cast the momentum of the fly leg diminishes faster than a heavier line where the weight is concentrated in a shorter distance???
WF-4-F 150gr / 9,7g
WF-5-F 175gr / 11,3g
WF-6-F 200gr / 12,8g
WF-7-F 225gr / 14,5g
WF-8-F 260gr / 16,8g
WF-9-F 305gr / 19,8g
WF-10-F 355gr / 23,0g
So, am I correct to think that for a 7wt fast action saltwater rod (presumably designed to throw 185gr), if I want to cast with 40+ feet of carry presumably a "5" wt line (175gr + say an extra @ 50 gr of carry), or even a "4" (150gr + say @40gr extra) would be what I would want..............BUT the turnover of the leader and saltwater streamer would suffer because as the line unrolls at the end of the cast the momentum of the fly leg diminishes faster than a heavier line where the weight is concentrated in a shorter distance???
Long belly #6 WF lines
No, that's wrong.George C wrote: So, am I correct to think that for a 7wt fast action saltwater rod, if I want to cast with 40+ feet of carry presumably a "5" wt line, or even a "4", would be what I would want ... ?
The rod is designed to carry much more weight than the first 30' of a line. It's designed to carry as much line of the "standard weight" as you want to carry. If you can carry 80' of a DT7, the rod will handle that.
If I want to cast 5wt line a long way, the 7wt rod will work well. But I can also do most of that same distance with a 5wt rod and the same line.
All the standard really tells me is that if I put a 5 or 4 wt line on that 7wt rod, the rod is not going to give me a lot of feedback when I'm only casting 20' of line. It's going to feel too light for my tastes.
Cheers,
Graeme
FFi CCI
Long belly #6 WF lines
Interesting (and thank you for the insight), although the idea is a bit counter-intuitive to me.Graeme H wrote: All the standard really tells me is that if I put a 5 or 4 wt line on that 7wt rod, the rod is not going to give me a lot of feedback when I'm only casting 20' of line. It's going to feel too light for my tastes.
I've built many rods for spinning/conventional casting in my life and I am used to thinking of a rod rating as a range (say 1-4 oz) with a "sweet spot" where the rod performs best (say 2-2.5 oz) for the peak casting force (weight x velocity) most typical casters will generate.
If I understand you correctly the weight rating of a fly rod is better viewed as a recommended minimum weight where the rod will start perform as intended.......rather than necessarily the ideal weight where the blank performs best for some targeted/designed peak rod velocity? In your opinion is there any such thing as the latter for a fly rod.........or do the physics and mechanics of fly casting create such a wide range over which a blank will perform well that the concept of a "sweet spot" becomes too fuzzy (or individually variable) to be useful?
Thanks,
George
Long belly #6 WF lines
The difference between ratings on fly rods and spin rods is that the range of mass being cast (in fly) is variable within a single casting cycle whereas with a spin rod, you'd need to change the lure to change the mass being cast.
With fly, a short cast = small mass, a long cast = higher mass. There's still a range of mass to cast.
The "weight" of the rod give us an indication of where the "middle" of the range might lie. To use the analogy of spin gear, a 3wt rod might be like a 0.5-1 oz spin rod while a 10wt rod might be like a 2-2.5oz rod (I'm making up numbers here.) Both spin rods will cast lures outside that range, but they won't necessarily feel good doing it.
For me, the rod rating is sort of like the minimum mass it works nicely with. I would not like to cast a 0.25 oz lure with a 2-2.5 oz rod and I would not like to cast 30' of 3wt line with a 10wt rod.
Cheers,
Graeme
With fly, a short cast = small mass, a long cast = higher mass. There's still a range of mass to cast.
The "weight" of the rod give us an indication of where the "middle" of the range might lie. To use the analogy of spin gear, a 3wt rod might be like a 0.5-1 oz spin rod while a 10wt rod might be like a 2-2.5oz rod (I'm making up numbers here.) Both spin rods will cast lures outside that range, but they won't necessarily feel good doing it.
For me, the rod rating is sort of like the minimum mass it works nicely with. I would not like to cast a 0.25 oz lure with a 2-2.5 oz rod and I would not like to cast 30' of 3wt line with a 10wt rod.
Cheers,
Graeme
FFi CCI
-
Paul Arden
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19579
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
- Location: Belum Rainforest
- Contact:
Long belly #6 WF lines
Hi George, I agree with Graeme. There is a video here on SL rods explaining what I look for. https://youtu.be/d2AR5PGzJHI
Cheers, Paul
Cheers, Paul
Long belly #6 WF lines
Hi George
Anadro lines are 1.5 line number oversized. They have been created for “fast rods”, which are also basically oversized. This subject comes regularly on the board; it started likely with the TCR 590 which was also 1.5 line size higher than expected.
Originally, the fly line /rod rating was aiming at fishing, not casting, but some kind of race took place and some casting rods were sold for fishing, with the consequence described above.
There is unfortunately no official rod rating (see here) , whilst it should be based on the stiffness of rods to comply with the physics of the cast. The role of this technical characteristic is also valid for spinning rods. One of the most important point for casting is the loaded frequency of the rod, which depends on rod stiffness and something called the “equivalent mass” of the rod (an action parameter). Take the line carry on board and you have the loaded frequency which should correspond to your casting timing. The system is however tolerant and it is not so easy to qualify a rod with a line size, unless you measure its actual stiffness. The difference in between fly rod and spinning rods is in the fact that the loaded frequency of the spinning rods varies within a smaller range than the one of the fly rod, because of distance considerations: for a fly rod, you necessarily increase or reduce the weight of the carry. Since you made spinning rods yourself, what was your reference for tuning their casting weight? Did you use a particular scale? I know that some blanks have been used for both type of fishing, spinning or fly.
Single hand fly rods are tuned at about 1.35 Hz (loaded frequency) on average, fastest ones correspond to something like 1.45 Hz. The best performance would be achieved with something like 1.8 Hz, but this is out of the design range. Double handed fly rods are tuned close to 1 Hz, it could be the same or even lower for double hand spinning rods (surf), and loaded frequency may reach 2 Hz for short spinning rods and light lures (I have no reference here). For bait casting this is another story.
It is easy to measure the small deflection stiffness of rods, a #7 should be 1.1 N/m stiff (order of magnitude: take the mass in grams and multiply by 0.093), and if rated 1.5 line size higher, it should be just above 1.3 N/m. Now the best line/rod fit for fishing is one thing, and the best for distance casting is something different. You can cast a MED 5 with a # 5 rod, but for distance most casters take stiffer rods, up to #10. This is one one side a question of physical capacity and preference: a #10 rod is significantly more difficult to rotate at high speed by comparison to a #5. On the other side it is also a question of loaded frequency with a high load (the carry and not 30 feet).
Merlin
Anadro lines are 1.5 line number oversized. They have been created for “fast rods”, which are also basically oversized. This subject comes regularly on the board; it started likely with the TCR 590 which was also 1.5 line size higher than expected.
Originally, the fly line /rod rating was aiming at fishing, not casting, but some kind of race took place and some casting rods were sold for fishing, with the consequence described above.
There is unfortunately no official rod rating (see here) , whilst it should be based on the stiffness of rods to comply with the physics of the cast. The role of this technical characteristic is also valid for spinning rods. One of the most important point for casting is the loaded frequency of the rod, which depends on rod stiffness and something called the “equivalent mass” of the rod (an action parameter). Take the line carry on board and you have the loaded frequency which should correspond to your casting timing. The system is however tolerant and it is not so easy to qualify a rod with a line size, unless you measure its actual stiffness. The difference in between fly rod and spinning rods is in the fact that the loaded frequency of the spinning rods varies within a smaller range than the one of the fly rod, because of distance considerations: for a fly rod, you necessarily increase or reduce the weight of the carry. Since you made spinning rods yourself, what was your reference for tuning their casting weight? Did you use a particular scale? I know that some blanks have been used for both type of fishing, spinning or fly.
Single hand fly rods are tuned at about 1.35 Hz (loaded frequency) on average, fastest ones correspond to something like 1.45 Hz. The best performance would be achieved with something like 1.8 Hz, but this is out of the design range. Double handed fly rods are tuned close to 1 Hz, it could be the same or even lower for double hand spinning rods (surf), and loaded frequency may reach 2 Hz for short spinning rods and light lures (I have no reference here). For bait casting this is another story.
It is easy to measure the small deflection stiffness of rods, a #7 should be 1.1 N/m stiff (order of magnitude: take the mass in grams and multiply by 0.093), and if rated 1.5 line size higher, it should be just above 1.3 N/m. Now the best line/rod fit for fishing is one thing, and the best for distance casting is something different. You can cast a MED 5 with a # 5 rod, but for distance most casters take stiffer rods, up to #10. This is one one side a question of physical capacity and preference: a #10 rod is significantly more difficult to rotate at high speed by comparison to a #5. On the other side it is also a question of loaded frequency with a high load (the carry and not 30 feet).
Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
-
Paul Arden
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19579
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
- Location: Belum Rainforest
- Contact:
Long belly #6 WF lines
Hi guys,
It’s a very strange trend indeed this stiffer rod/ heavier line business. I suspect that for casters who can’t double haul that a heavier line will suit them best. But the reality is that if your line weighs one rating higher then that is the line weight you are holding and not the number on the tin.
It becomes a problem the other way too. For example I make my rods suited to the AFFTA scale. If you buy an overweiggted fly line you are not going to get top performance from SL rods because the line is going to feel heavy and you will need to slow your casting Stroke.
Also apart from the Comp rods they are made for fishing ie leader only casting right through to a respectable casting distance and roll casts. Roll casts really are a big test because when the rod is stiff for the line it’s the roll cast that suffers first.
It’s at the stage nowadays where I have to recommend the line itself which the whole purpose of the AFFTA rating was to avoid this.
I’m not sure however that we can blame competition casting for this trend however! We are a very niche group which by and large are overlooked by the industry. That’s why we have a market dominated by heavy short brick of a lines. I can only surprise that the average US stream fisher would have been better off with 6 weights and not fives because that’s what they are doing! That is precisely what we did for a long hime in Europe or recommend that beginners start off with 9’ #6
Cheers, Paul
It’s a very strange trend indeed this stiffer rod/ heavier line business. I suspect that for casters who can’t double haul that a heavier line will suit them best. But the reality is that if your line weighs one rating higher then that is the line weight you are holding and not the number on the tin.
It becomes a problem the other way too. For example I make my rods suited to the AFFTA scale. If you buy an overweiggted fly line you are not going to get top performance from SL rods because the line is going to feel heavy and you will need to slow your casting Stroke.
Also apart from the Comp rods they are made for fishing ie leader only casting right through to a respectable casting distance and roll casts. Roll casts really are a big test because when the rod is stiff for the line it’s the roll cast that suffers first.
It’s at the stage nowadays where I have to recommend the line itself which the whole purpose of the AFFTA rating was to avoid this.
I’m not sure however that we can blame competition casting for this trend however! We are a very niche group which by and large are overlooked by the industry. That’s why we have a market dominated by heavy short brick of a lines. I can only surprise that the average US stream fisher would have been better off with 6 weights and not fives because that’s what they are doing! That is precisely what we did for a long hime in Europe or recommend that beginners start off with 9’ #6
Cheers, Paul
Long belly #6 WF lines
Anything can be used by marketers, Paul, so the issue is not linked to the influence of competition casters, but only to the one of marketers. The lifetime record of graphite rod series is the original G from Scott I think, nearly 30 years on the market, and some are still in use.
Merlin
Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life