It is currently 29 Mar 2024, 03:35


1, 2  Next New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 09:47 • #1 
Sport
Joined: 12/15/17
Posts: 59
Location: SW Idaho
I hear, and read this often. I'm not the type that goes to a fly shop to ask for guidance, because my experience with fly shop personnel is you only hear what is currently popular.
What is "an aggressive taper" fly line?
What do you mean when you use the term "aggressive taper "?


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 09:58 • #2 
Master Guide
Joined: 01/21/12
Posts: 462
Location: US-NY
Aggressive taper means a short head. Good for turning over bulky wind resistant flies or weighted flies. Not so good for dry flies.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 10:18 • #3 
Sport
Joined: 12/15/17
Posts: 59
Location: SW Idaho
Well that brings up another question. What is a short head? For example I looked at the Elite Rio Gold: taper 5'6" (I consider this as very short), head length: 47'.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 10:53 • #4 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3081
Location: Orygun
I dunno how it is for others, but for me, anything in the 30' range (think shooting heads) would be considered short. To really make it basic, aggressive head essentially equates to short front taper. As noted above, great for turning over meat. Those of us who enjoy fishing larger streamer patterns frequently (or even indicator tactics) often use these types of lines. That's how I've always thought of it.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 11:04 • #5 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/10/09
Posts: 1651
Location: US-OH
I think of an aggressive taper as a line where the weight distribution of the first 30 ft is heavier than normal (whatever that is nowadays) toward the front part of the line. Which results in the ability to turn over larger flies and fight wind. When you combine this with a line that is a half weight heavy, like so many are, the difference between that and a "true" weight line with a delicate front taper is huge.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 12:31 • #6 
Sport
Joined: 08/26/19
Posts: 97
Location: US-MI
It’s unfortunate the folks that make fly line can’t just spit out the truthful facts instead of smoke and mirrors . I’m just not sure what we did to deserve this deceitful treatment.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 12:32 • #7 
Master Guide
Joined: 01/21/12
Posts: 462
Location: US-NY
Clarkman did a better job explaining it than me and gave better details. He nailed it.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 16:38 • #8 
Master Guide
Joined: 07/21/21
Posts: 447
Location: Florida
Cortland Peach 444 DT. Makes my life so simple …


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 04 Dec 2021, 19:22 • #9 
Sport
Joined: 12/15/17
Posts: 59
Location: SW Idaho
That's exactly what I thought. I like a long taper, 8'-10', and if it's a WF then I want a long belly also. I fish mostly with a DT, and if the wind is blowing I'm casting shorter.
Don't need, don't want an aggressive WF.
Thanks everyone for your time.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 07:09 • #10 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/24/11
Posts: 1144
Location: Belgium
I have the impression aggressive tapers are popular with vendors because they are often"crutches" - and flattering - for the less skilled caster. Downside is loss of versatility and that they make it difficult for the less skilled caster to progress beyond the basics. This is because while they might facilitate the average 30' straight cast they will make all other casts harder to execute.

That said they do have their niche but I find using a "one dimensional" fly line very boring. The beauty of fly fishing is that it's varied and nuanced. Learning new presentations and line management techniques and when to use one or the other is part of the exploration. Relying on one trick ponies really detracts from that experience.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 10:02 • #11 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/09/05
Posts: 2524
Location: US-CO
Cyguy wrote:
Cortland Peach 444 DT. Makes my life so simple …


My favorite line was the tan SA Ultra 4 which I can no longer find. Based on recommendations here I have now bought a Cortland Peach and Tom’s 406, both of which I like.

I keep coming back to the AFTMA standards which adds needed “first 30 feet” weight consistency but allows taper options by manufacturers. Once they add overweight lines to the equation, you have a performance polynomial with too many variables and I am unwilling to spend $70 on a “hope I like it” experiment.

The good news is that you can usually find the specifications for the lines regarding their taper before you buy. Other than “half a line weight heavier” I generally find less detail in how the manufacturers have decided to ignore the AFTMA standards.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 10:28 • #12 
Guide
Joined: 09/05/17
Posts: 305
Location: On a Stream
Line tapers if used properly do help for specific conditions. I notice there has been no mention of leaders which are equally important to match a line taper, fly size/weight and type, and wind conditions.

I have reels rigged with DT, WF lines which would be considered aggressive to mildly aggressive person dependent, single hand spey and long fine taper lines for specific conditions and fly types. That being said as a DT needs to be replaced I have been choosing a WF line due to it's versatility.

Also keep in mind if fishing fairly short, a WF line given the weight and front taper is essentially the same, is a DT line until you get to the back taper.

Longbelly lines are nice if your rod and skills can keep all that line in the air until you get into the taper then shoot it, for most folks if your needing to reach out, it's easier to consistently shoot line with a WF line. Just adding my 2 cents to this thread.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 11:59 • #13 
Master Guide
Joined: 06/07/12
Posts: 865
Location: US-CA
Besides modern graphite rods which require heavier-than-AFTMA-standard lines to load, I think one driver of aggressive tapers is the emergence of heavy fly rigs - weighted multi-fly indicator setups, bead head nymph under a chubby Chernobyl, etc., over the last decade or two. These kinds of rigs are much easier to motivate on a breezy day with a heavier line, and an aggressive taper is basically a heavier line.

I do have a couple nymphing-specific reel/line setups that I use for that purpose. This last year I think I finally realized that I should be fishing dry-droppers with a 6wt - it’s not like I’m trying to achieve a delicate landing off of a 14-foot 7x leader…


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 14:35 • #14 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/06/17
Posts: 2498
Location: South of Joplin
A sinker of the appropriate mass on 3# mono meets the AFMTA 30' standard and that is kinda what the line makers do with aggressive heads, putting most of the mass out front for quick loading; I use level lines or lines a couple weights heavier to do the same thing. As mentioned above it's sorta a crutch for guys like me that don't have masters licenses in casting. I build my own and others buy "gimmick" lines. Guys that can cast only leader 30' or shoot 70' with a single backcast and a 2/0 fly won't need to use either.
I see a few reasons for the changes, a) many new to fly fishing folks don't understand that the line mass is the key to fly delivery or how to get the mass needed for close fishing or oversized flies by uplining or cutting back the taper point, b) it has become the nature of people to want to be told "the right magic" rather than experiment and learn for themselves c) also as mentioned many new rods appear to need some extra mass to load them and that leads to why are rods marked as #3 when they fish better as #5
I say that is because the consumers want them that way, there is the vanity of using the most ultra light tackle to catch big fish, so I can take my rod marked as #4 that has the characteristic of a #6 and put a line that weighs as much as a #8 but is labeled as #4 and it lets me have the #4 bragging rights.
There are also a great many more good long distance casters out there now than there were fifty years ago, with many more fly fishers paying for instruction and teaching guides. I suspect that if the AFTMA standards were first written in today's market that they would use 50' as average casting distance rather than thirty, and to cast those longer distances a lighter mass per foot is necessary to have the total line load on the rod be be similar. This means that if someone evaluates
a rod with 50' casts rather than with 30' casts that he will chose a lighter line number for that rod, then all us 29' casters will have to go two line numbers up to achieve good performance, and that the guys casting 70' regularly may need to use a lighter line.
From reading on other forums, I'd guess that most fly anglers today make each outing an event to a destination water, rather than the local tiny to small streams many more are fishing in larger streams or salt where the longer casts are standard.
I can get a 210 grain load with 30' of #8 line or about the same with 63' of #3 line or with about 16' of #12 line and the rod will load to the same point. The rod only reacts to total mass not the number on the box the line came in. This is what the "aggressive" lines take advantage of and they put that 16' of #12 out front on a running line and call it a #3 to to be used on a rod that was evaluated as a #3 at 70' by the rod company's world champion caster/rod designer.
Most companies post profiles of their lines and it's pretty simple for us to see where the weight is placed on the line, only lines I can't find profile pictures of are Wulff.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 16:15 • #15 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 05/19/14
Posts: 3925
Location: USA - Illinois
Wulff line profiles are on the boxes





Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 05 Dec 2021, 16:37 • #16 
Master Guide
Joined: 03/20/07
Posts: 849
Location: US-TX
“ I am unwilling to spend $70 on a “hope I like it” experiment.”

One of the cool nuances I’ve really enjoyed being a part of this forum is buying vintage reels that happen to have a line on them. Aside from a rough guess, it’s hard to know for sure exactly what weight/taper it was originally labeled as. (And not that the current labeling system lingo would help much anyway.). I’ll cast the line with various rods until I find which taper/length/weight of rod it works best with. I’m often surprised at how an abandoned line becomes a real gem on a particular rod.
Abandoned lines on old reels are like a box of chocolates, you could say.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 11:31 • #17 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/06/17
Posts: 2498
Location: South of Joplin
@jhuskey yeah I have a few of those boxes laying around, but I had to buy the line to get them. That was fine when Lee only offered one taper, but their site now has so many new and improved or renamed items on it that I'm not ever sure I'm even finding the old TT line or some fifth generation offspring hybrid. They are cheaper now at the current $80 than they were when I bought them for $25, but I'm still not wanting a "pig in a poke".


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 12:22 • #18 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 12/05/06
Posts: 2087
Location: US-PA
Trev wrote:
...there is the vanity of using the most ultra light tackle to catch big fish, so I can take my rod marked as #4 that has the characteristic of a #6 and put a line that weighs as much as a #8 but is labeled as #4 and it lets me have the #4 bragging rights...

Ain't that the truth!!

Excluding old fashioned bass bug tapers, I remember one of the first of the "aggressive taper" lines marketed was the Rio Clouser line advertised for "big nasties" probably more than 20 years ago.

I bought a few for my smallmouth rigs (all graphite) and hated the lines as they were one trick ponies. I found it much easier to go from a 6 or 7wt combo to an 8wt, or just use a stouter tippet & shorter leader on whatever OTHER line I had available.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 15:23 • #19 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3081
Location: Orygun
At the risk of straying too far off topic here, I'll probably never understand the attitude of various new lines being a "crutch". I guess I've always approached as just another tool in the toolbox.

If it's distance one is after, and reasonably competent caster would understand that greatly overweighting a line (e.g. shooting heads) isn't the most efficient way to do it.

Personally, I consider myself a decent caster who can cast most or all of the standard weighted fly line on its corresponding rod (some better, some not the full thing). I sure as hell am not doing that with a shooting head because that's not why I use them (which has already been discussed ad nauseam).

Regarding the graphite comment about them all being not rated properly, generally I do believe this to be true, but also there's a ton of gray area there as well. With my best (distance casting) graphite rods, it's less about actually feeling the load and more about specific timing (I know I didn't explain that very well, but that's how I think if it).

Apologies for continuing the thread drift, but there were a couple of blanket statements that I felt it worthwhile to hopefully dispell any myths.

Hopefully none of you are tax accountants who still use an abacus for complex calculations....if so, my apologies....better tools for the job.

Cheers!


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 15:33 • #20 
Sport
Joined: 12/15/17
Posts: 59
Location: SW Idaho
I'm still reading all replies to my poorly worded original question. I have always had double taper lines since I began way back before a lot of the fly shop employees were born. It just stretches my tippet to hear nothing but the latest marketing jargon when I'm browsing the merchandise. I'm definitely not a great caster, but I can get the fly where I want it. I have recently started fishing with a weight forward on a moderate to fast 8'6" TFO, but with a 10' taper it is far from aggressive.
I am not a believer.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 16:30 • #21 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/24/11
Posts: 1144
Location: Belgium
Quote:
I'll probably never understand the attitude of various new lines being a "crutch".


I have come across some lines where the heads are so short and heavy it's almost like casting a sinker on mono....I am of course exaggerating but you get the picture. I am referring to a 4wt line not something for chucking huge streamers to pike. I think these lines were created to make life easy for beginners to get a very basic straight cast out. However when I think of fishing a 4wt I think of having to make sometimes challenging slack line and/or curved presentation casts - which are near impossible to do with the short heavy head and for which a DT is just fine.

So yes, my point of view is that some of these specialty lines are indeed crutches for the absolute beginner that make it more difficult to eventually learn to walk or run. I cannot see a good caster ever needing or wanting a line like that. Frankly I don't see the utility for the beginner either beyond the first half hour of casting.

If the objection to my criticism of these lines is that the heavy, short line is great if you are only casting a few feet of line - I will come back and suggest going one weight up but sticking to a conventionally tapered DT or WF - because it will be useful in a lot more situations.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 18:33 • #22 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3081
Location: Orygun
Ah, so you're alluding to something like a Commando shooting head, right? that's what it sounds like (to me). In which case, sure, they're great for beginners to learn sustained anchor casting techniques, but their utility isn't the same as a standard WFF line. It's all about sustained anchor casting (often employed with a two hander, but exceptionally fun with a single hander as well). All of that said, if by making it easier to employ such a technique for smaller trout sized fish for people who love that style of casting, then I guess you could call it a crutch. But, it takes a far higher level than "beginner" to become really proficient at it....hence my blanket statement comment.

edit: it would actually be far more difficult to do a slack line or curve cast that you mention with this type of line. I'm not sure how that would make it a crutch when it makes that more difficult. Then again, they weren't designed for that.

This is all based on the assumption that you're referring to something like the short light(er) weight skagit heads that are all the rage now. If not, then maybe you could be more specific?

like I alluded to, I rather have a tool box with a hammer, some nails, a screwdriver (both kinds), some screws, a drill, skill saw, chain saw, tape measure etc....not just a single standard screwdriver and maybe a hammer and nothing else. But, to each their own. I mean, even the two saws are designed to do two different things well.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 19:42 • #23 
Master Guide
Joined: 01/21/12
Posts: 462
Location: US-NY
I don't really agree that fast action graphite rods don't cast well with their designated line weight. I way have too many 6 weights. This summer from my boat I fished the following 9' 6wts: original Scott g, ********* traditional graphite, sage tcr, sage rpl, original loomis glx, Thomas and Thomas traveler. I fished them all the exact same way (single dry fly) and with the exception of the loomis I used the same line (444sl dt6f). On the loomis I used a dt5f because I prefer it with a 5.

I dont know that you'll find a slower rod than the ********* or a faster one than the tcr. I can cast the whole line with either, but the tcr is better in the wind.

I kind of agree with what clarkman is saying as far as different tools. But I can't stand fishing a gpx type taper unless I'm throwing streamers. I also prefer not to fish ambush or obs type lines either, but they do have their purpose.

It's not uncommon to have other people in my boat that grab one of my rigs, they usually hate them lol.

Also I tried using a 444sl dt7f for streamers a few years ago and it sucked so I went back to GPX.

I think I'm good on lines for a while...



Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 20:20 • #24 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3081
Location: Orygun
"I don't really agree that fast action graphite rods don't cast well with their designated line weight"

It's funny, I have this ultra fast action Dan Craft 7wt. I can absolutely bomb a standard 7wt line out with it. I can also absolutely bomb a standard 9wt line out with it. I usually treat it as a 7...Between it and my Orvis H3 8wt, they are my two favorite graphite rods. Both have a pretty wide range of what works with them.

thanks for calling me out on a blanket statement of my own....lol. I needed that.


Top
  
Quote
Re: Fly Line Mumbo-jumbo
Post 06 Dec 2021, 22:12 • #25 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 07/11/14
Posts: 1784
Location: urban Colorado
paveglass wrote:
My favorite line was the tan SA Ultra 4 which I can no longer find. Based on recommendations here I have now bought a Cortland Peach and Tom’s 406, both of which I like.


I'm still fishing a tan Ultra DT5, from the 90s sometime.. the one end is hopelessly cracked, the other end still fishes..
The Barrio DT is the closest thing to the old Ultra I've found. Looking at their website now it appears they aren't made anymore,
"Following the collapse of the UK fly line manufacturing industry (OEM) in 2020/2021, the following products are currently not available."
Dang. Should have bought more.
The Hook & Hackle "Classic" branded lines are also good. The Peach is a good line but I prefer a subfusc color.

'aggressive' is one of those marketing terms that entirely evades meaning. I don't want an aggressive line anyway, a nice quiet biddable line is much more my preference.


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

1, 2  Next New Topic Add Reply



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group