Hi again!
Nice would be the weight of the complete head of WF's written in the datasheet of the line. Like it's already done for the line profile.
Bye..
Torsten
PLEASE NOTE: This is the Archived Sexyloops Board from years 2004-2013.
Our active community is here: https://www.sexyloops.co.uk/theboard/
Our active community is here: https://www.sexyloops.co.uk/theboard/
Common cents
-
Mike Connor
- IB3 Member Level 1
- Posts: 2559
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 1:32 pm
- Contact:
For years now, I have always weighed my lines. Most of the lines I have bought over the last forty odd years have been within the weight tolerances of the AFTMA scale. Rods have always varied massively, as there is no "standard" extant.
The main reason for most modern deviations is increasing skill and knowledge among anglers ( and there are more anglers!), and their desire to optimise their gear. Most especially with regard to distance, ( salt water fishing has done a lot here). The "Distance Thing" was always a bit of an obsession with some, but the special purpose lines have generally resulted as a response to specific angling needs.
In actual fact, the main problem for beginners etc, is not the complexity or relative innacuracy of the systems in use, but the massive choice, heavily backed by marketing, which drives the price up, and confuses the issue even more.
Generally speaking, most good anglers can use practically any gear, and still catch 80% of the fish they would have caught with top class perfectly matched gear. Angling skill is paramount, not the gear being used.
There are times and circumstances however when the top class gear will allow you to catch fish you would not otherwise catch.
Of course, this equipment is only of any real use to a top class angler, ( and perforce top class caster!), as only he can make optimum use of it.
Most of the time, it is like driving a Ferrari in heavy traffic! One might as well have a Ford Fiesta! Conversely, on the race circuit, "Joe Bloggs" in a Fiesta has no chance against a top class driver in a Ferrari, and giving him a Ferrari as well, will also not increase his chances appreciably, as he can not handle it or the circumstances anywhere near as well as the top class man.
Lastly, and at the risk of repeating myself, it is still true that 5% of the anglers catch 95% of the fish. This is mainly because they learn a lot, think about it a great deal, and are thus more able to apply their knowledge. Also, some are simply more talented than others, learn faster, know more, and are more skillful.
There is no gear extant, or any "quick and easy" formulas, which will compensate for this.
What we have, and are seeing, is the wish of the "average" angler, to increase his performance, and the gap between top class gear and medium quality gear steadily being closed.
There are limits to what one can do with any material, and the "edge" that the top rods now have over many others is only slight. Doubtless much the same applies to lines and other things.
Even assuming further progress, or new developments, it is not likely that casting distances, or performance of rods and lines can be much increased for "Joe Public", beyond, or even up to what top casters are now achieving. Quite irrespective of what systems are used.
TL
MC
The main reason for most modern deviations is increasing skill and knowledge among anglers ( and there are more anglers!), and their desire to optimise their gear. Most especially with regard to distance, ( salt water fishing has done a lot here). The "Distance Thing" was always a bit of an obsession with some, but the special purpose lines have generally resulted as a response to specific angling needs.
In actual fact, the main problem for beginners etc, is not the complexity or relative innacuracy of the systems in use, but the massive choice, heavily backed by marketing, which drives the price up, and confuses the issue even more.
Generally speaking, most good anglers can use practically any gear, and still catch 80% of the fish they would have caught with top class perfectly matched gear. Angling skill is paramount, not the gear being used.
There are times and circumstances however when the top class gear will allow you to catch fish you would not otherwise catch.
Of course, this equipment is only of any real use to a top class angler, ( and perforce top class caster!), as only he can make optimum use of it.
Most of the time, it is like driving a Ferrari in heavy traffic! One might as well have a Ford Fiesta! Conversely, on the race circuit, "Joe Bloggs" in a Fiesta has no chance against a top class driver in a Ferrari, and giving him a Ferrari as well, will also not increase his chances appreciably, as he can not handle it or the circumstances anywhere near as well as the top class man.
Lastly, and at the risk of repeating myself, it is still true that 5% of the anglers catch 95% of the fish. This is mainly because they learn a lot, think about it a great deal, and are thus more able to apply their knowledge. Also, some are simply more talented than others, learn faster, know more, and are more skillful.
There is no gear extant, or any "quick and easy" formulas, which will compensate for this.
What we have, and are seeing, is the wish of the "average" angler, to increase his performance, and the gap between top class gear and medium quality gear steadily being closed.
There are limits to what one can do with any material, and the "edge" that the top rods now have over many others is only slight. Doubtless much the same applies to lines and other things.
Even assuming further progress, or new developments, it is not likely that casting distances, or performance of rods and lines can be much increased for "Joe Public", beyond, or even up to what top casters are now achieving. Quite irrespective of what systems are used.
TL
MC
-
Magnus
- IB3 Member Level 1
- Posts: 12097
- Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 2:00 am
- Location: Banff, Scotland
- Contact:
Jon
"Dew Dew ti'n hen diablo... un , dau, tri, pedwar,pump, chwerch..etc.etc"
See - thats exactly what I mean.
"Dew Dew ti'n hen diablo... un , dau, tri, pedwar,pump, chwerch..etc.etc"
See - thats exactly what I mean.
Casting Definitions
"X-rays will prove to be a hoax."
"Radio has no future."
"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."
Lord Kelvin
"X-rays will prove to be a hoax."
"Radio has no future."
"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."
Lord Kelvin
-
Paul Arden
- Fly God 2010
- Posts: 23925
- Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:35 am
- Location: Travelling
- Contact:
Hi Bruce!
>I watched it turn from a nice crisp XP into a piece of crap all >in an afternoon. He put big single foot guides on it with >dental floss and half hitches.
After I have seen on his page some of his flies, I'm wondering how his rods look like. Are there any pictures existing or is there a risk that I'm getting eye cancer after having seen that?
Bye..
Torsten
>I watched it turn from a nice crisp XP into a piece of crap all >in an afternoon. He put big single foot guides on it with >dental floss and half hitches.
After I have seen on his page some of his flies, I'm wondering how his rods look like. Are there any pictures existing or is there a risk that I'm getting eye cancer after having seen that?
Bye..
Torsten
^^ Warning: The above text contains misspellings, grammatical errors and of course nonsense.
Paul:
Why would the overweighted lines be directed at the poorer caster? Is it perhaps because the rods he/she has to work with are more powerful than they used to be? Or, are these folks simply assuming that everyone can throw a 5 wt line 100 feet and that in order to be a real angler they need to throw at least 80 feet? Which came first. The chicken, the egg, or the mutation?
Rob
Why would the overweighted lines be directed at the poorer caster? Is it perhaps because the rods he/she has to work with are more powerful than they used to be? Or, are these folks simply assuming that everyone can throw a 5 wt line 100 feet and that in order to be a real angler they need to throw at least 80 feet? Which came first. The chicken, the egg, or the mutation?
Rob
-
Mike Connor
- IB3 Member Level 1
- Posts: 2559
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 1:32 pm
- Contact:
Beginners and poorer casters generally find it easier to throw a heavier line.
I think I know why Paul disagrees slightly as well!
While I admit that a poor caster will probably cast better with a better rod, it will not get him up to the same standard as a good caster.
One can not buy skill, at any price. It is mostly the result of hard work, often coupled with talent.
TL
MC
I think I know why Paul disagrees slightly as well!
While I admit that a poor caster will probably cast better with a better rod, it will not get him up to the same standard as a good caster.
One can not buy skill, at any price. It is mostly the result of hard work, often coupled with talent.
TL
MC
-
Frank LoPresti
- IB3 Member Level 1
- Posts: 6259
- Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 7:38 pm
- Contact:
Torsten,
I had a chance to cast with Paul's scarred and marred XP, It casted fine but was softer than my XP. I truly had never seen a rod that was this deteriorated, by what I am not sure. You do not want to actually see this XP as it will produce retinal burn and scarring. Really, just the ugliest condition I will ever see a rod again, in my entire life, I'm still trying to erase the image from my mind Phew!!! He must have been using it to skewer vegetable kabobs over an open fire.
Rob,
I agree with you especially in regards to the GPX line which has an added 10 grains to the head over AFTMA. It's a fine line and loads a stiff rod like a TCR, up close, really nicely. It also allows the intermediate or beginner caster to feel the rod load, and feel is really important for a caster. The GPX also has more mass so it has more momentum which is quite useful when casting into a strong wind. I think Paul's comment about poor casters is of little use, to upline or use a GPX is not necessairly a crutch, if any thing it shows the use of practical applications for many different fishing and casting scenarios. I guess Paul's above all that.
Frank
I had a chance to cast with Paul's scarred and marred XP, It casted fine but was softer than my XP. I truly had never seen a rod that was this deteriorated, by what I am not sure. You do not want to actually see this XP as it will produce retinal burn and scarring. Really, just the ugliest condition I will ever see a rod again, in my entire life, I'm still trying to erase the image from my mind Phew!!! He must have been using it to skewer vegetable kabobs over an open fire.
Rob,
I agree with you especially in regards to the GPX line which has an added 10 grains to the head over AFTMA. It's a fine line and loads a stiff rod like a TCR, up close, really nicely. It also allows the intermediate or beginner caster to feel the rod load, and feel is really important for a caster. The GPX also has more mass so it has more momentum which is quite useful when casting into a strong wind. I think Paul's comment about poor casters is of little use, to upline or use a GPX is not necessairly a crutch, if any thing it shows the use of practical applications for many different fishing and casting scenarios. I guess Paul's above all that.
Frank
I would have a major effect on how I train instructors.
Paul Arden
Paul Arden
-
Paul Arden
- Fly God 2010
- Posts: 23925
- Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:35 am
- Location: Travelling
- Contact:
Hi Rob, since poor casters generally throw using too wide a casting arc, uplining will straighten the tip path, apart from which the line which is directed in the right direction is heavier. I guess the choice is to upline and throw a few more feet and lose the benefits of fishing fine, or learn to cast properly and throw much further. Using uplined tackle isn't going to improve your technique, that's a bit like pushing the tip down after a tailing loop :glare:
Anyway that's just my opinion - if fishing is important to us then we may as well learn to cast properly.
Cheers
Paul
Anyway that's just my opinion - if fishing is important to us then we may as well learn to cast properly.
Cheers
Paul
Frank
I do hear from quite a few folks that they simply cannot "feel" their rods when lined with what I consider the right line. This goes for rods as varied as the XP, Ultra Legend, GLX and the TCR. Did we lose feel somewhere for a large part of the fly casting population or what?
The seemingly dimensionless parameter of feel is one of the parts of the CC test that Bill is working on that most intrigues me. If he truly can place a number on it that works for the upliners, downliners and the midliners on any rod, the system could make buying rods a lot like buying a shirt and pants.
Paul
Are you sure a heavier line will result in a narrower arc? My experiments with overlined rods suggest otherwise.
I do hear from quite a few folks that they simply cannot "feel" their rods when lined with what I consider the right line. This goes for rods as varied as the XP, Ultra Legend, GLX and the TCR. Did we lose feel somewhere for a large part of the fly casting population or what?
The seemingly dimensionless parameter of feel is one of the parts of the CC test that Bill is working on that most intrigues me. If he truly can place a number on it that works for the upliners, downliners and the midliners on any rod, the system could make buying rods a lot like buying a shirt and pants.
Paul
Are you sure a heavier line will result in a narrower arc? My experiments with overlined rods suggest otherwise.
Hello again everyone, I'm suffering from ellection fall-out but can just about summon up the energy for a brief post before work - which is that stuff Paul doesn't believe in and no longer does (at least not *proper* work), wish I could figure out how he manages it.
Most poor casters (most fly fishermen?) do not bend the rod anywhere near properly, you know the sort of thing, it just goes swoosh, swoosh and nothing much happens. If they manage to bend the rod at all it is just the tip, and this bounces down and up as they throw those nice tailing loops we talk about so much. To cast well it is essential to bend the rod properly and the best casters bend the rod the most, and overlining a rod will help a poor caster to bend the rod more than will using the recommended line weight. Bending the rod more will help the poor caster to cast a little bit further and also to feel better the bend in the rod and what is going on. Very fast tip action rods generally have less 'feel' than more through action rods (my observation).
Some fly fishing friends of mine - both very average casters, competent but by no means 'experts' - bought new rods a couple of years ago. They wanted Sage rods so only tried those. The TCR was immediately discarded because neither of them could bend the rod enough to make it work, the XP was tried and also discarded because although they could make it work better than the TCR they still weren't completely happy with it. They both bought SLT's because these were the rods they could bend the most easily and so they cast these the best of the three and were also most happy with the 'feel' of these compared to the TCR and XP.
Overlining a rod simply makes it easier to bend for any given caster. A really good caster may feel that the rod bends too much and is overloaded with a heavier line, a poor caster may feel that the rod works better for him/her given the same set up, it is as simple as that I believe.
Someone earlier asked if rods are getting stiffer and I would say that yes, I believe they are generally stiffer and faster than 10 or 20 years ago for a given line weight.
Cheers
Pete. (must dash).
Most poor casters (most fly fishermen?) do not bend the rod anywhere near properly, you know the sort of thing, it just goes swoosh, swoosh and nothing much happens. If they manage to bend the rod at all it is just the tip, and this bounces down and up as they throw those nice tailing loops we talk about so much. To cast well it is essential to bend the rod properly and the best casters bend the rod the most, and overlining a rod will help a poor caster to bend the rod more than will using the recommended line weight. Bending the rod more will help the poor caster to cast a little bit further and also to feel better the bend in the rod and what is going on. Very fast tip action rods generally have less 'feel' than more through action rods (my observation).
Some fly fishing friends of mine - both very average casters, competent but by no means 'experts' - bought new rods a couple of years ago. They wanted Sage rods so only tried those. The TCR was immediately discarded because neither of them could bend the rod enough to make it work, the XP was tried and also discarded because although they could make it work better than the TCR they still weren't completely happy with it. They both bought SLT's because these were the rods they could bend the most easily and so they cast these the best of the three and were also most happy with the 'feel' of these compared to the TCR and XP.
Overlining a rod simply makes it easier to bend for any given caster. A really good caster may feel that the rod bends too much and is overloaded with a heavier line, a poor caster may feel that the rod works better for him/her given the same set up, it is as simple as that I believe.
Someone earlier asked if rods are getting stiffer and I would say that yes, I believe they are generally stiffer and faster than 10 or 20 years ago for a given line weight.
Cheers
Pete. (must dash).
To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive, and the true success is to labour. R L Stevenson
"A slaves condition; not to say what one thinks" - Euripides.
"A slaves condition; not to say what one thinks" - Euripides.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 0 guests