Thanks Thanks:  1
Likes Likes:  16
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: Weighted Flies

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Portland and Maupin, Oregon

    Default Re: Weighted Flies

    I like the more natural appearance of the fly without a bead or cone. But, that's just for me, I doubt the fish care. I've been applying uv resin to the thread wrap of my Seal bugger heads.

  2. Likes trout trekker, hairwing530 liked this post
  3. #12

    Default Re: Weighted Flies

    One of my most effective flies in both streams and lakes has been a very simplified version of this fly tied using Simi-seal dubbing.

    And many of my friends have had success on those flies. I tie it on size 14 3XL hooks either unweighted or with a small tungsten bead. The bead head seems to be better in moving water. A small thread hotspot at the head is optional.

    I either tie it as a matuka with about 4 clumps of dubbing tied in and then pulled back or as a leech with the dubbing pulled back as a tail and then a dubbed body up to the head. Can be fished with motion, on the swing or dead drift. For big fish running out of lakes or such I do a bigger version with dumbbell eyes on a size 8 hook with a sink tip line.

    If I wasn’t so addicted to fishing dries and soft hackles, this would probably be my most effective fly ever.


  4. Likes hairwing530 liked this post
  5. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    North Central Indiana

    Default Re: Weighted Flies

    First off, good on you for donating time and effort to the aforementioned cause. While tying is fun, it can be laborious and require dedication if filling slots or piling-up numbers. You deserve “extraordinary catch karma” when out fishing from now on, you earned it and have it coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by dillon View Post
    Bead heads vs lead wrapped bodies? What's best, does it make a difference?

    I’m a beadhead guy most of the time although I do find some use in weighting a bit further back for certain applications. Some heavy ties can “sled” better without digging in to substrate or weeds when dropping weight and balance a bit back on the shank versus what beads or eyes do.

    I get the Rickards notion, but even on an intermediate I found the bead/head weight patterns with jigginess to be quite a bit more provocative to fish. The also fall nose down and sink better per weight than body weighted ties. Personally, a falling bodyweight tie looks kinda strange versus a dying minnow or other forage as the materials tend to waft upward in a odd manner as the fly sinks. Marabou tails also can look weird on a flat fall here, but a when they follow a beadhead down, they just look plain alive and edible. Undeniably leechy, as they say.

    Sometimes a bit extra action, though seemingly unnatural in some theory, is far more effective in practice. I have a strong bias against horizontals in the water column, especially those which might be mistaken for a minnow. Much prefer a preoccupied and active presentation which may be looking away (or up/down) thus making it an easy target. Nature is nature and fishing is fishing, sometimes they overlap nicely in our trickery. However, we're not really trying to be one of the edibles, we’re trying to be the most edible one.

    Go with the bead, not only for tyer convenience, but also for general usefulness across a wider variety of settings. Even just for quicker/more efficient sinkrates of a given weight, it’s a justifiable switch.

  6. Thanks dillon thanked for this post
    Likes karstopo liked this post
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-21-2012, 12:10 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2012, 04:50 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-04-2012, 08:40 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-05-2012, 10:40 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-2011, 08:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts