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!

Welcome Bruce Richards

Moderator: Paul Arden

User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19528
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Welcome Bruce Richards

#81

Post by Paul Arden »

Bruce - thank you so much for your time and insightful information. It's always a pleasure having you on the Board. Best of luck mastering the Madison. Looking forward to a pool lesson :cool:

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

Flycasting Definitions
Bruce Richards
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 3:38 am
Answers: 0

Welcome Bruce Richards

#82

Post by Bruce Richards »

Paul Arden wrote:I've had them in 6 and 8 Walter and they've been outstanding. Why do you think they don't perform well in other weights? If your average caster struggles to carry 30 feet what are the benefits gained from giving him a WF line with a 70ft head?

Cheers Paul
Walter, thanks for answering the question so well! Other sizes would perform just fine, we used to make them (up to 10 wt.). But they didn't sell enough to pay their way. We have made a LOT of lines over the years for "marginal" markets, few of them survived. And maybe "marginal" isn't a good way to describe it, maybe "high level, incredibly talented and smart, very good looking caster" market. Someone will certainly say "well, you didn't market them very well", and that would be true but marketing is very expensive, it's hard to justify special attention for niche lines, especially when the main market will already know about them "through the grapevine".
Bruce
Bruce Richards
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 3:38 am
Answers: 0

Welcome Bruce Richards

#83

Post by Bruce Richards »

You're welcome Paul, it was fun! But one more thing... I heard back from Noel, he posed 2 scenarios regarding the issue of casting a wide variety of line weights on a #5 rod. First, cast all lines with the same acceleration (assume everything else is equal). In this case, line speed would increase as line mass increases. This make sense as to maintain same rod accel. with a heavier line will require more energy. But I was more interested in knowing what would happen if the energy applied was the same so posed that question...
In this case Noel agreed that there would be some optimal line mass that would result in the most distance, lighter lines wouldn't go as far, nor would heavier ones. Noel did stress however that the "model" used to figure this out accurately would be quite complex and he doesn't have the time to do it, but I trust Noel's educated intuitions more than some people's "science". It appears that light lines wouldn't bend the rod enough to get the full speed benefit of the flexible rod. Lines heavier than optimal would certainly bend the rod, but the mass of the line would prevent it from unbending with the speed necessary to throw the line farther than the optimal line.
Thanks everybody, great discussions!
Bruce
User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Answers: 0
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Welcome Bruce Richards

#84

Post by Lasse Karlsson »

Bernd Ziesche wrote:
Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Paul Arden wrote:Well I disagree that I'm wrong :p A DT is a great distance line in the right hands and will outperform most 40ft WF lines however for a beginner who can't double haul he will do better with a short WF line, especially one that is one or two line weights heavier!
This is turning in to a bad habit, I agree with Mr. Smelly socks :)
Hi Paul, hi Lasse,
I yet have to see someone (5wt.) MEDing the fluff over 50 meters. I have seen shorter headed lines (same AFTMA rating) resulting in such casts. That was in heavy winds. Simply too heavy to get the looong MED head straight in the back cast. In the WC I saw a lot of fantastic fly casters. Most of them got into serious trouble with their back casts when the wind increased to just 4 bft. 5 bft. is (statistical) average in the Baltic area where I fish for Sea trout. Bruce was spot-on, that there is no one line. Every line (every head length) has it's perfect conditions for a certain caster.
Well, that's my experience anyway. Both of you did not make a difference here. :cool:
Seems to me like you both think, that wind doesn't effect your abilty to straighten the long MED head against it? If so, I disagree. :p :ninja:
Cheers
Bernd
Wow, 50 meters is usually the ballgame for 8wt and above shootingheads and mono shootingline, but you claim a 5wt WF does this in enough wind? Amazing :sorcerer:

;)
Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

Flycasting, so simple that instructors need to make it complicated since 1685

Got a Q++ at casting school, wearing shorts ;)
User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Answers: 0
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Welcome Bruce Richards

#85

Post by Lasse Karlsson »

Bruce Richards wrote:You're welcome Paul, it was fun! But one more thing... I heard back from Noel, he posed 2 scenarios regarding the issue of casting a wide variety of line weights on a #5 rod. First, cast all lines with the same acceleration (assume everything else is equal). In this case, line speed would increase as line mass increases. This make sense as to maintain same rod accel. with a heavier line will require more energy. But I was more interested in knowing what would happen if the energy applied was the same so posed that question...
In this case Noel agreed that there would be some optimal line mass that would result in the most distance, lighter lines wouldn't go as far, nor would heavier ones. Noel did stress however that the "model" used to figure this out accurately would be quite complex and he doesn't have the time to do it, but I trust Noel's educated intuitions more than some people's "science". It appears that light lines wouldn't bend the rod enough to get the full speed benefit of the flexible rod. Lines heavier than optimal would certainly bend the rod, but the mass of the line would prevent it from unbending with the speed necessary to throw the line farther than the optimal line.
Thanks everybody, great discussions!
Bruce
Hi Bruce

Thanks for sharing!

Would be fun to figure out where the bell curve tops, I have a feeling it might be at heavier lines than we would think. A 13 weight on a rod with a 3 on the side does go quite far, will have to try out something lighter and check. Will post results :)

Cheers
Lasse
Your friendly neighbourhood flyslinger

Flycasting, so simple that instructors need to make it complicated since 1685

Got a Q++ at casting school, wearing shorts ;)
User avatar
Merlin
Posts: 2101
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 8:12 pm
Answers: 0
Location: France

Welcome Bruce Richards

#86

Post by Merlin »

It appears that light lines wouldn't bend the rod enough to get the full speed benefit of the flexible rod. Lines heavier than optimal would certainly bend the rod, but the mass of the line would prevent it from unbending with the speed necessary to throw the line farther than the optimal line.
Yes, this is at least in line with modeling. I suspect that the test was made for a given arc size and rotation velocity timing and acceleration. Starting from a light line, the speed will increase since the input is a bit fast for a rod and line system, then as you increase the mass, the frequency fit is better and you get more speed. Now the end of the story depends on the non linearity of the rod. A linear rod (e.g. a long one) would see its maximum speed rather soon and then it would slowly decrease because the system becomes too slow, you may then need to compensate with casting arc size. Speaking of achieved distance, this loss is moderated by the ability of a heavy line to cope with air drag. A non linear rod (e.g. a short one) will see the speed reaching some asymptotic value before decreasing, so it withstands heavier lines better than the linear one. At some time, the lever arm of the bended rods comes into play in the final speed figure and represents a limiting factor for generating speed. And then all will depend on the actual stiffness of the rod.

Merlin
Fly rods are like women, they won't play if they're maltreated
Charles Ritz, A Flyfisher's Life
User avatar
Walter
Posts: 2042
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:06 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Bruce Richards

#87

Post by Walter »

Paul Arden wrote:Ps I'm surprised you haven't optimised your tackle.
I subscribe to the following philosophy:
The line rating system is 95% OK. There is no industry rod rating system and likely never will be. The better your casting skills, the less you will care about the previous two points.

-Bruce Richards-
"There can be only one." - The Highlander. :pirate:

PS. I have a flying tank. Your argument is irrelevant.

PSS. How to generate a climbing loop through control of the casting stroke is left as a (considerable) exercise to the reader.
User avatar
sms
Posts: 446
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:12 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Southern Finland

Welcome Bruce Richards

#88

Post by sms »

Bruce Richards wrote:
SMS,
Most line fly lines break at 20-40 lbs. because that is all that is needed, most lines are not used for tuna, of course. SA, and other mfgs. do make lines for tuna though, SA's Big Water Tapers have 100 lb. test cores for example. There are lots of exotic materials today that might seem like good fly line cores, but almost all of them have at least one fatal flaw, that's why none are being used... For example, GSP usually has a melting point less than the cure temp of most coatings. It also has no stretch, which is bad. Think what happens when you mix two cores with radically different properties, like GSP and Dacron. Dacron stretches, GSP doesn't. Let's say you've mixed 30 lb. of GSP with 30 lb. of Dacron.. Now pull on it. At 30 lb. of strain the GSP breaks, the Dacron has done little so far. Now all the strain is on the Dacron and its nearly at its breaking strain. It quickly stretches to about 7%, then breaks at 30 lbs. 2 +2 doesn't always equal 4...

How well the core is centered in a line is largely determined by the people making the lines and the machinery. However, some lines are much easier to center than others, depending on a number of variables including diameter, coating material and a few others I can't discuss... But mostly it's the skill of the people operating the machinery, and the machinery itself (precision, maintenance, etc.)....
Good questions..
Bruce
Hi Bruce,

Interesting. Vision has this backing called Dacspun that combines dacron and gsp. I don't know if the weave is made so that the gps would be loose so that the dacron would be under quite a lot of tension before the gps steps in. So, maybe not 2+2 = 4 but maybe 3 or 3.5? But if gsp temperature tolerance is not high enough for PVC then it is out. Except for PU coated lines I guess (that are in my opinion good sinking lines (and fastest sinkers I've come across are PU lines, but absolutely terrible floaters).

In salmon fishing good breaking strength would be nice here as we quite often use sinking heads (UST I/2/4 and 1/3/5 sinkers are great btw) and when you manage to hook the bottom, you are always afraid where the system will fail as the tippets/leaders are 0.4mm+ in diameter and with current monofilaments it can mean 45lb+ strength (a little less with knots). Diameter is needed for abrasion resistance and I would find it odd to use low quality mono to protect the fly line. So pulling from the bottom snatch can cause the line/head snap if the tippet/leader is in good shape.

High breaking strength salmon lines would also solve the issue that there are no heavy floaters with strong cores (Rio has 550gr floating head on their GT line and Air-flo has GT which is not really heavy). I tend to build lines but for big game floaters there aren't materials around to build from.
I'm here just for the chicks.

-Sakke
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19528
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Welcome Bruce Richards

#89

Post by Paul Arden »

Both my Gourami and Snakehead leaders are intentionally built weaker than necessary in order to protect the flyline. Plug fisherman here use 50lb braid for Snakehead. Having said that it takes a hell of a pull to break 30lb tyger wire!
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
User avatar
Bernd Ziesche
Posts: 3436
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:01 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Whereever the fish are!
Contact:

Welcome Bruce Richards

#90

Post by Bernd Ziesche »

In tapered lines it (line mass) decreases even more as the line becomes smaller towards the tip. This increase acceleration, resulting in greater wind resistance and greater energy dissipation.
Hi Bruce (or anyone else who can answer my question),
your SL week is over. Anyway this part made me think and check some slo-mos for a while. :cool:

I do understand that wind resistance increases squared to line speed. I also do understand that in space the lines end would speed up a lot during unrolling. Energy would be conserved, mass reduces and so speed must increase...

But here on earth in many slo-mos the lines end seems not to increase in speed during unrolling. So how can the wind resistance increase, if the speed does not? Thus how could this dissipate additional energy?

What again I do understand is that the realtion between surface (= friction) and mass (volume) gets worth for the thinner (tapered) line. Thus the energy disspates additionally due to the taper, yes...
Thanks a lot
Bernd
http://www.first-cast.de
The first cast is always the best cast.
Post Reply

Return to “A week with...”