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!

Too wide a casting arc...

Moderators: Paul Arden, Bernd Ziesche, Lasse Karlsson

User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Answers: 0
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#21

Post by Lasse Karlsson »

The one line up has been a stable as long back as I can remember, particularly for beginners as rods are too stiff now a days....

I started with a fibreglass too, the one in the video you're afraid to do yourself 😉 and I know that B&W, had a 10 foot 4/6 weight in the non sanded, and a friend fished the hexagraph you mention for salmon and seatrout 20 years ago ☺️

BTW. Any ccs figures from your are considered invalid, you can't even measure a leader correctly 😂

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

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#22

Post by Paul Arden »

It’s actually very interesting because even 1 line number difference can be the difference between ok loops and non-loops. Basically line companies more and more are making that decision for you. What I don’t understand is something like Sage/RÍO. Owned by the same umbrella organisation. It’s very difficult to find a RÍO line that is AFFTA specs, indeed their bonefish line is exactly one line weight heavier.

In this regards it might be worth looking at the US market. 90% of the world’s fly anglers live there. The average level of casting on streams is unfortunately rather appalling and there is a huge gap between the average guy and the advanced level. If your average caster can’t double haul then a heavier line is certainly going to help.

All I can say really, is that for advanced level casters, it becomes really important to know the actual weight of the fly line. It probably matters less because he/she can make anything work. It’s a shame in some ways because for beginners looking to improve it places another hurdle in their way. They have to take their clunky unbalanced outfit and replace it with something a bit more sporty.

It does lead to other problems as well of course, namely more related to fishing and not only casting a loop. Heavier lines are less sensitive to takes, land less stealthily and quite critically in some cases require stronger leaders to avoid break-offs. A 4WT is a good example. You can fish .10mm/7X without dramas on a 4WT line. But you can’t do that with a 5 or 6WT line. So if your 4WT line is actually a 5 or a 6WT then you have problems because the resistance of the line through the water is going to stop you fishing effectively with small flies and light leaders.

At the upper end of the scale, where I spend most of my time fishing at the moment, it is also rather important. Heavier lines not only slow the shot but as you start to go above 8WT lines your distance starts to reduce. For example I (and almost everyone else!) can throw an 8WT line significantly further than a 10WT line!! So making a 10WT line weigh an 11 or 12WT is a real problem on many fronts - it slows the shot, reduces distance and lands with more disturbance.

However we are speculating from the outside here. I haven’t fished in the States for about 15 years and it’s quite possible there has been a revolution in casting skill levels. I certainly hope so! In which case the current fly line trend makes no sense to me :)

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

Flycasting Definitions
User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Answers: 0
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#23

Post by Lasse Karlsson »

I think it is both much simpler and more complex than what you outline here mate :upside:

One line weight being the difference between good loops and nonloops? Should I post that damn video again, it's basically several lineweights difference between the two rods, and no where do the nonloops happen...
Also,I seem to remember you being present in Romania for my demo, you are on the pictures at least :D three rods, lines of 9,1 gram,15 gram and 20 grams for the same length, that's basically a 5 a light 9 and a light 11 weight, all cast on as identical rods as Korea can manufacture (damn close!) With the same stroke and force input and no where in sight where there as big a difference as you outline with your 1,4 gram difference between good and nonloop bollocks :D

Which line is most sensitive, the 4 weight DT with 17% stretch or the 5 weight with 1% stretch?

You get a 8 weight, then I take the T38 and we'll cast for distance, winner gets the beer :) ;)

Beginners biggest hurdle is the overwhelming amount of well meant BS advises thrown their way by fellow anglers, and the marketing BS sold by the snake oil company reps. And then the expectation that a good cast is in the tackle, just it gets "balanced" correctly according to whatever guru whim at the day!
That and the general unwillingness to practice :D

And outside? The overweight lines originate from Europe, predominantly northern Europe! While Rio and SA where sapping in slight overweight, barstool and all the pseudo manufacturers where going 1-2-3 lineweights over what was written on the box... latest line I have, and I will get it measured completely and put in the database, says it's a 8 weight line with a 30 foot head of 18 grams...and when measured the head weighs closer to 20... the old longest casting line in its class bs lives on :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
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19528
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#24

Post by Paul Arden »

I suspect barstool started it because they had to compensate for their polyurethane lines being thicker. But I don’t know the densities involved so we would have to ask a physicist!

Tomorrow dude! :D

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

Flycasting Definitions
User avatar
Lasse Karlsson
Posts: 5757
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:40 pm
Answers: 0
Location: There, and back again
Contact:

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#25

Post by Lasse Karlsson »

Damn forgot the filter was of 🤣🤣🤣
PU isn't necessarily thicker than PVC... 😉 But an overweight line does go further for most... And since everyone buys the rod before trying, or trives with an overweight line anyway, thats what people ask for
🙈

Just read someone giving advice, and suggested the old one up, as he did this himself all the time, and the one up was a brick on a string line, already two up...

Think its time to pull the plug and just go fishing 😎

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

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#26

Post by Paul Arden »

I actually remember Barstool when they first appeared in the UK market. When they first came out the lines were not massively overweight but they didn’t cast well at all either and were noticeably thicker than other floating lines at the time. Consequently they were poor casters through the air. If anything, because of this, they felt “light”.

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

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

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#27

Post by Paul Arden »

Ok here we go... :cool:
One line weight being the difference between good loops and nonloops? Should I post that damn video again, it's basically several lineweights difference between the two rods, and no where do the nonloops happen...
You’ll have to tell this to students. You obviously haven’t tried this. Find a typical beginner struggling to cast and then switch the line weight one line lighter and stand back :D

I would actually argue that someone who can’t double haul should use a line one class heavier on any given rod. Or indeed that should really be a softer rod for the same line. Of course best would be to learn hauling!
Which line is most sensitive, the 4 weight DT with 17% stretch or the 5 weight with 1% stretch?
No idea. But I do know that there is a world of difference between a 4 and a 6WT for both take detecting and setting the hook. And finally for playing long running fish. These are things I have tried :D It has less to do with line stretch IMO and more to do with line weight and resistance through the water.

In fact the reason the HT4 was built was for fishing fine tippets in Bosnia. But it became my go-to trout rod for other reasons - both flats and top water stillwater. If they made fast sinking lines in 4WT I would use it for that too but I’m not sure that’s even possible!

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

Flycasting Definitions
nicholasfmoore
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:41 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#28

Post by nicholasfmoore »

Hi Paul,

I can't remember the convo i'm afraid :laugh:

I certainly see it at a local still water, most anglers i know use bricks on strings (no companies mentioned, but one starts with S and the company is named after a large thing in our solar system). A lot of anglers don't practice their casting, they just want to catch fish, and if they are asked to practice, they fish. This is my experience from the UK, so i don't know what it's like in the rest of the world :cool:

I think the concept of 10-2 seems to be engrained in UK fly fishing, and anglers that cast like this often get massive loops for short casts etc, until they start getting tailing loops and blame the wind. :) As Lasse said, it's a quick fix, gear before technique yet again, maybe it's down to marketing? Nobody at the local fishery really likes my rod, they say it's too stiff and can't feel it 'load' (oh no not that word again). I don't know i think theres more to it than that, perhaps it's a combo of a massive arc, loss of tension, improper force application followed by 'feel'? So basically everything :laugh:

I was having a go with a chaps outfit a few weeks ago, the line he was using was a brick on a string (company that starts with S) and it ended up slowing the rod down. He told me he uplined it, but i think the line was already over what it said it was, so in effect i think he "double up lined"

Interestingly i wrote a rod review a few months ago (it was deleted a week later!), and i said i preferred it with a #5 (it was a #6 rod). Now to me, it suited it better, you still had feel up close and it felt like it had nice bite at distance. With the #6 line, as soon as i started to carry more, it slowed it down. I really do mean slow as well, a whole ice age had passed before i was ready to make the next stroke.

I think that lady behind you wants to learn casting, Lasse. Maybe you could give her a lesson? :sorcerer:

"you need to engage the butt section of the rod (they sell) because thats where the power is, and you must let the rod do the work (with the brick on a string line they also sell) otherwise you will not cast correctly!" I like your statement lasse!

Isn't the rio gold spot on, Paul?

So, what do you think is wrong with this brick on a string situation? Apart from the points mentioned in regards to fishing lighter stuff and making a faulty stroke work? I'm more leaning towards the advanced casters that want to improve their technique, do you think it's to do with carry, tracking etc?

Theres some really good points here!

All the best

Nick
Nick M

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

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#29

Post by Paul Arden »

Hi Nick,

To me they are more like casting spinning tackle than throwing loops. All the components that you need for a good cast; tracking, casting arc adjustment, long carry for casting into the wind for example, are missing.

I have a few sinking lines - Leviathan - that as far as I can work out can only be thrown about 90 feet, neither shorter nor longer, and always collapse on roll out. The only way I can get turnover is to stand on the bloody line! (and then they tuck!)

I’m a huge fan of double tapers. All the important elements are in there and you have to learn good technique with a DT line.

Fly casting allows us to place a lightweight fly anywhere from just in front of the rod tip to 100’ distance or so, with accuracy and delicacy. We should be able to do this in any wind conditions (can certainly do so with a DT) but also we can manipulate the line and leader to create slack or mends or curves. Try making the range of presentation casts with a short heavy WF line :laugh:

So for me it’s quite a long way removed from fly casting and when it comes to fishing, a short heavy WF line is very restrictive.

I think actually they have a place. They are specialist fly lines for extreme fishing situations. Skagit for example was developed for Spey casting with very heavy flies. It just so happens that anglers with poor flycasting technique can cast further with these lines overhead than they can with a DT :D The problem is that as a consequence, beginner anglers are being given this shit to fish with and finding a decent long belly sinking line has become almost impossible!

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

Flycasting Definitions
nicholasfmoore
Posts: 508
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:41 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Too wide a casting arc...

#30

Post by nicholasfmoore »

Hi Paul,

I've never thought of it like that before, do you think it is because a lot of UK anglers in particular use streamers, so they don't really care about presentation, or rather, using smaller flies?

Ah yes, the short headed bricks on a string. What do you think the collapse is due to, is it the taper design? Have you tried a 170 cast with it? That helped me with some weird shooting heads, and the loops morph tight :sorcerer: Although you have probably tried that already.

I agree that short headed lines are restrictive, no questions there. I 'need' a long belly line for fishing, i simply have to have it. If not, i will opt for a double taper, especially if i know the day is going to be windy.

Do you mean sinking lines for DH rods? I had this discussion with an angler quite a while ago, and he even mentioned that the old full sinking lines fished far better than the 'sink tip' lines we have now. Speaking of long belly lines, i had a go with the Rio long head spey at a show, to be honest i was bored so wanted to have a cast! I think i was the only person that used it for the weekend, probably other than Simon, although i was only there for one day so who knows. A lot of people using the Scandi's and skas*it lines. I haven't even seen a double taper for a DH rod. haven't been salmon fishing for a couple of years, but i really like the mid head spey line.

All the best!

Nick
Nick M

"Memento Piscantur Saepe" :upside:
Post Reply

Return to “Teaching”