It is currently 28 Mar 2024, 03:59

Forum Guide


These discussions MUST stay on the original topic.
Please be courteous and considerate.

Only Commercial Forum members and Staff may initiate discussions here - everyone may reply


Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
Post 08 Apr 2014, 09:30 • #26 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3080
Location: Orygun
I can't speak for anyone else on the Sylk lines, but I really like a couple of things about them. They have very little memory, even in the cold. Their diameter is smaller than pretty much any other floating line I've ever used. Finally, I like how they ride a little bit lower in the water (makes them "grip" the water making roll casts a breeze ... IMO). The thing I don't like is that the coating seems to be pretty soft (an issue I have with the vast majority of Rio lines as well) but perhaps this is why it possesses some of the qualities I like, such as zero memory.

Cheers


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 12:29 • #27 
Master Guide
Joined: 12/29/11
Posts: 510
Location: US-CA
Though there are a lot of Sylk fans, I'm not one of them. There are tradeoffs in line manufacturing, so you can't have everything in one line.

  • Sylk lines definitely have less memory and a nice soft, limp feel. The tradeoff is the very soft coating that makes those qualities possible, but
    which retards shooting, especially in hot weather.

  • Sylk is said by many to have smaller diameter, but smaller diameter for a given weight means higher density and lower float.

I also question whether Sylk diameters are significantly - enough to make a difference in casting - smaller. A Sylk marked as a 4 wt., but weighed out as actually a 5 wt. had a belly diameter of. 047". Two other Cortland 5 wts. had belly diameters of. 049", so the Sylk is. 002" smaller. Other brands are around 048". The usual difference between a 4 wt and 5 wt. is. 005". Does a one or two thousandths of an inch difference show up in casting? I can't notice it.

The Sylk lines do have low memory and a longer, more gradual taper for gentle presentations. I think those are their advantages, not necessarily a smaller diameter.


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 16:05 • #28 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 02/10/07
Posts: 1632
Location: The Netherlands
Jeez, I've jumped on this topic quite late. Hope not too late?… :)

Before I start about my view on what's 'wrong' (?) with current lines on the market I'd like to focus on the everlasting myth of DT lines being so well suited for slower actioned rods like fiberglass and bamboo.

Up to 30 ft there is no difference between a DT and WF.
Considering we're talking here about fiberglass (and bamboo has basically the same 'problem'), long(er) casts are rarely the case. So I'm wondering what this 'magical' thing is considered with the DT being more delicate, better or what ever it's called?…

Here's a very well documented article at bamboo rod maker Chris Carlin's site:
http://carlinbamboo.com/Essays/wfdt.htm

Now, back to the topic about making a line that suits glass rod because current lines are too much designed with fast graphite rods in mind.

There are three issues that comes with this:
1) Line weight
Weight of many lines are on the upper range of what the AFTTA recommends. Basically many lines are 'heavy' lines as being at least a half weight heavier or even past the range of the line weight.

2) Taper or weight distribution.
And here is the real innovation that could be used in favor of fiberglass fans.

The three most important recent (past 15 years) innovations in fly line design are:
Image
Lines with a long front taper with the right line weight matched to the rod's action and/or fisherman's preference will deliver the goods.

3) Finally, a little thing that is forgotten: diameter of the line.
Many lines are made to float well. You know, the water repellant chemical treatment bla bla.
But most of the floating capacity is done with lowering the density of the line by simply adding more air bubbles in the outer coating of the line.
This has one effect that is rarely mentioned => the diameter of the line increases.

Here's a thought:
How does the the larger diameter of the current high riding lines come in play since the line will have more (too much?) air resistance for the slower actioned fiberglass (and bamboo) rods?
Turn this around => would a line with a smaller diameter (like Cortland Sylk, real silk lines) help fiberglass rod to cast the line rather than 'fight the wind' of the modern obesity lines?


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 16:17 • #29 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3080
Location: Orygun
with regards to diameter. That's something I do notice with the Sylk when casting in a decent breeze (such as I regularly see on the Deschutes). It's noticeably easier to punch through wind than any other line I use regularly. whether or not it really is only a small difference or a larger difference (when I can visually tell, that's probably a relatively large difference), who cares? I just know it works better for me in windy conditions. All that said, I have yet to find the perfect line. I've been playing around with an Airflo Super-Dri Elite on my 4wts and so far, really like it (even in the wind) but it's too early to really give a strong opinion on it.


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 16:57 • #30 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 02/10/07
Posts: 1632
Location: The Netherlands
Well, it's simple physics:
Air resistance (or drag) increase as velocity (speed) of the line develops by a square.

So even the slightest larger diameter will add more force (= air resistance) which will make a cast less efficient.

Or the other way around => the caster must work harder to get the line speed to achieve (any!) distance and/or line speed for casting a tight loop.


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 17:27 • #31 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 04/20/07
Posts: 8920
Location: US-ME
The article is good in its choice of Cortland lines for the DT WF comparison. This info has been around since Cortland's plastic lines have, and very similar info from S.A. and others. I don't see much myth being dispelled.

What is explained is casting loads on the rod, but this doesn't address the usefulness of DT lines for at least 3 reasons: (1) the convenience of reversibility, (2) the way fiberglass accepts a load and stores/releases energy, which is different than either bamboo and graphite, and (3) fishing performance (not just casting), particularly physical handling of the line when it is extended past thirty feet and mending of line through pulsed rolls when it is extended past thirty feet. There are lots of little details and reasons for the DT preference in the latter two points as well as in various styles of revtrieving a fly.

WF lines can and do work fine on 'glass rods and some anglers prefer them. But DT lines are favored by more anglers with 'glass rods, and that is not a myth either.

Why? Without even knowing the points above, one can cast and fish a WF and then a DT on the same 'glass rod and feel the difference. Many prefer the feel of a DT line. It is just that simple, charts or no charts.

As to bulk density, right on; it is the reason one can whistle a sinking line relatively easily compared to a bulky high floater. Silk or silk-like lines are finer diameter and lower floating, and thus have this "speed" characteristic also. Trade offs go to the higher floaters. Typical specific gravities of floating lines range from. 75 (very high floating/bulky) to. 99 (low floating). I love the low floaters, and not just for their casting ease, but if someone is going to market an all-around floating line, its specific gravity should probably be "average" or about. 85.

Here is a little more on how and why DT lines suit fishing fiberglass rods: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11157&p=70641&hilit=double+taper+more+than+any#p70641 The absence of thin running line after the first 30' is at the heart of their fishing and handling adapdability.


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 18:06 • #32 
Guide
Joined: 01/22/10
Posts: 112
Location: Montana
Wow - this has turned into a fascinating conversation. This is what I had hoped for when this thread was started. Believe me all the ideas and comments, both objective and subjective, will be digested and gone over in my head a hundred times. I'm working with the engineer at the manufacturer and hope to have some castable results by late summer. All the effort everyone has put out on this thread is deeply appreciated and will be used.

You have given me a lot to think about.

Tom


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 18:46 • #33 
Master Guide
Joined: 09/21/13
Posts: 704
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Adding to whrlpool's list of reasons to use DT:

I fish in saltwater most of the time and here in Perth, it's windy. Very windy. Shooting significant line into wind is not usually viable, so I shoot into my backcast if I'm fishing into the wind. That's fine for distances up to the length of the head of a WF line, but get beyond that (say, 45') and the running line of a WF line doesn't carry enough energy to complete the front cast. The length of the head in a WF line is the practical limit on fishing distances in windy conditions. With a DT line, I can carry 60 to 80' and cast that far into a wind without shooting forward.

The huge grain envelope of my glass rods allows me to carry that much DT line, which is why glass and DT lines are a good match for my situation.

But to disagree on one of whrlpool's points: true silk and silk-like lines do not "float lower" in the water. They actually ride the surface tension and float higher than any other line because they never fall below the surface. They have a specific gravity that is more than 1 and will sink as an intermediate line once they break through the surface tension. (I've got 3 artificial silk lines from Terenzio and they cast and fish better than any line I've ever had, but that's another thread's worth of discussions.)

cheers,
Graeme


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 20:28 • #34 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 02/02/09
Posts: 1585
Location: People's Republic of Austin
Another metric to keep in mind is that many of the 'glass fishermen like vintage style reels that often hold much less line and backing compared to modern reels. A 3" beaudex, for example, will nicely balance a 7' 6wt, but doesn't have the line capacity for modern lines.


Top
  
Quote
Post 08 Apr 2014, 20:59 • #35 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 10/12/06
Posts: 1184
Location: US-CA
tabrods,
I am a huge fan of the early textured, mimics of silk fly lines and have been since the early 70's. They generally had longer front tapers and were thinner through the belly, making for a longer line. Presentation was the game at which these lines excelled. The English manufactured "Master Lines" where the first I encountered. They were imported by Sunset Line and Twine in Petaluma, CA. Later on Sunset started manufacturing the line stateside, as the Sunset Ultimate or Formula. I am unsure of the line pedigree but I believe the Ultimate was the equivalent of the Master Line "Chalk Stream", a fine floating dry line. I would seriously consider contacting Hal Janson, as he has a great deal of experience in design and fishing with these lines. Hal is a great guy and very forth coming with his ideas.
Respectfully rvreclus

One last point I would like to make is that the Master Line "Chalk Stream" lines floated in or just on the film, I have always thought of them as "low floaters", mostly I think this is the result of their thin diameter profile.


Top
  
Quote
Post 09 Apr 2014, 02:34 • #36 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 02/10/07
Posts: 1632
Location: The Netherlands
This is an interesting topic indeed!

A note on Kalgrm's post:

It's interesting to see that you prefer to aerialize a long line above shooting line when going for distance in windy conditions. That's actually perfectly okay, but demands a lot from one's casting abilities and fly rod. Here's why.

To keep it simple, here's the AFFTA specs of the 5 weight line, this is how much much grains (ideally 140 grains) a 5 weight is recommended.

Image

As you can see aerialising a DT (or a long belly, which is basically a WF with a much longer body) past the 30 ft mark means the line weight outside the tip gains considerably. The rod slows down due to the additional weight of the fly line. Some rods can handle that, while rods without the strong butt section will collapse with the overweight.
Same goes the other way around, casting less than 30 ft.

So, if you manage to do this with your delicate fiberglass, I'd like to know which wonder rod that is! :)

So does this sound like an ideal line for glass rods?
  • Long front taper for subtle presentation.
  • Longer belly but not as long as a DT so the line can fit smaller capacity reels.
  • Slightly thinner diameter for easier casting.
  • A light texture to mimic older silk line as well as easier shooting.


Top
  
Quote
Post 09 Apr 2014, 06:39 • #37 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 04/20/07
Posts: 8920
Location: US-ME
Fiberglass accepts and carries a load differently than the other materials (a wide grain window, as Kalgrm put it). It is not delicate at all in this regard. It releases the stored energy differently as well--essentially more gradually. Thus, it takes advantage of the momentum of the continuous body of a DT line. For this reason, "line speed" is less important. It is, essentially, the same concept as in ballistics, where a larger projectile at a moderate velocity, delivers energy more consistently with more stable flight than a smaller one at higher velocity.

The moderate speed and continuous delivery affords better control and accuracy, especially once the cast is into the area that would be thin running line in a WF. WF lines are thrown; DT lines are cast. This is probably the source of the "delicacy" of presentation as well. As a material, fiberglass is more rugged than graphite.

Noticing the innovations of the last 15 years, mostly not central to the discussion, I have to wonder what makers of lines of these types, all available in the 1970s, would think. But possibly the chart is from 1990.

Such as they are, these "innovations" are mostly in marketing, some to suit quasi fly fishng methods such as heavily weighted rigs, and some to suit the more one dimensional loading-store-release properties of graphite.


Top
  
Quote
Post 09 Apr 2014, 09:55 • #38 
Master Guide
Joined: 09/21/13
Posts: 704
Location: Perth, Western Australia
ibookje wrote:
So, if you manage to do this with your delicate fiberglass, I'd like to know which wonder rod that is! :)

Sorry, I don't own any delicate fibreglass rods. Do they exist? (I've got a few delicate graphite rods though! ;) )

My glass rods are all Epics at the moment. The 580 will allow me to cast a full 90' DT line, carrying about 70'. The 686 will allow me to cast a full 6wt DT line, again carrying ~70' and shooting the rest.

Cheers,
Graeme


Top
  
Quote
Post 09 Apr 2014, 22:54 • #39 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/25/09
Posts: 2319
Graeme,
The epics are the fastest glass rods that I have ever cast, but it sounds like you are casting pretty far distances. I would advise finding a softer 7' 3wt to 7 1/2 4wt. You will enjoy the difference when fishing smaller waters. Delicate fiberglass is why I prefer glass to graphite rods.

Dusty


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 01:10 • #40 
Master Guide
Joined: 09/21/13
Posts: 704
Location: Perth, Western Australia
I fish saltwater almost exclusively (I just added a signature line to state that, since I don't want to lead people astray here). I have never "fished smaller waters" and I'm not likely to do so anytime soon. I won't be taking your advice. :)

By delicate fibreglass, I assume you're talking about delicate casts, rather than delicate rods? Graphite is delicate, in that it is fragile by my standards. Glass is tougher. ...

Delicate presentations are a function of the caster's skill, line taper and leader design, but I will concede they are easier with a slow rod. They are also nearly impossible fishing at distance into a headwind. ...

Cheers,
Graeme


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 01:35 • #41 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/25/09
Posts: 2319
Since you fish Saltwater primarily I'm curious to whether you have tried the Epic 9' 9wt and your opinions on that rod. It sounds like your casting distances are much further than us freshwater trout guys, where even on a big river like the Yellowstone (which I have to deal with 20-40mph winds) most of my casting is done within 40 feet.

Dusty


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 02:23 • #42 
Master Guide
Joined: 09/21/13
Posts: 704
Location: Perth, Western Australia
I've had a 990 blank on order for over 2 months: they are out of stock. :(

When I've built it up and fished it for a while, I'll certainly post a report. There's precious little information about them anywhere.

I don't often cast those distances unless it's just blind casting for pelagics, but if the wind is up, it requires a cast that may have reached 90' in calm conditions to keep fishing at 50' to 70' distances. A DT line in those conditions helps.

Cheers,
Graeme


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 13:18 • #43 
Master Guide
Joined: 08/06/09
Posts: 620
Location: US-WA
I will say when you talk about Epic rods, I have talked to a few fisherman that have them, I would not say all the models are fast. They recover fast but the action isn't fast. I have the 8' 4wt and I think it is a med. action rod. I am going to get the 8'6" 6wt here this year and have been told that it is a faster action blank. That said it does depend on what kind of fly line a taper you use. It was so simple when I first started, DT or WT, Cortland or Scientific Angler. All sink or floating.


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 13:27 • #44 
Guide
Joined: 01/22/10
Posts: 112
Location: Montana
John,

Exactly right on simplicity. My intent is to restore that simplicity using modern materials. Nothing fancy, no space age gooblygook, just lines that work.

Tom


Top
  
Quote
A Reminder
Post 10 Apr 2014, 14:29 • #45 
Administrator
Joined: 01/10/06
Posts: 7811
Location: Holly Springs, NC
Gentlemen, This is a What's New on the Market thread and it should stay on topic. It is not about Epic Rods or the best rod for saltwater. The posts should be about tabrods proposed fly lines and any information to support the subject. Please, don't wander off.

Tom


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 14:30 • #46 
Master Guide
Joined: 08/06/09
Posts: 620
Location: US-WA
I am waiting for them, cause I will be buying a few. Thanks for you hard work and time in this effort.


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Apr 2014, 21:32 • #47 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/25/09
Posts: 2319
Getting back on track, I am excited for these lines ... I need a new DT3 anyways since I lost mine that was on my Made in England Hardy Bougle. Hope I find that reel.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Apr 2014, 09:07 • #48 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 3080
Location: Orygun
I'm looking forward to seeing this come to fruition ... I could use DTs in 4,6, & 7 wts

are you planning on going up to 7 or 8wt?


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Apr 2014, 19:06 • #49 
Guide
Joined: 01/22/10
Posts: 112
Location: Montana
Clarkman,

Yes for 7 and 8 wt. Seems to me there are a lot of 7 and 8 wts. out there that need lines. Working on the business plan - hope to have something to trial by late summer. It always takes longer than you think. The interest is there - all input by Forum members is very much appreciated. Colors - probably white and at least a pale olive or some such shade of green.

Tom


Top
  
Quote
Post 16 Apr 2014, 16:04 • #50 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/23/05
Posts: 4966
Location: US-MT
Late to the party ...
For me, lines should have little memory. I'll throw em out if they coil. It's cold up here in NW MT, maybe in a warmer climate they work better.
Line should be visable. A green line is not my fav. That said I have a hot pink Fenwick line that is not my fav either. Orange or yellow. White aint bad.
I probably have more WF lines spooled up than DT. I don't believe most glass user use DT, but that is for a diff poll/thread.
Hard to build a line that does everthing, but I would rather have a line that will turn over a #6 weighted bugger than delicately deliver a #18 midge.
Lots of fly lines out there already, wish you the best of luck.
Keith


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next New Topic Add Reply



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 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