Over and Under-lining your rod

[ts47]

I found the below article about over and under-lining your fly rods to be rather interesting and thought I would post it here.

What do you guys think?

A Grain of Truth - On The Water

 

[silver creek]

What I think can be found in this 3 page discussion:

Up lining or Down lining a fly rod

 

[ts47]

What I think can be found in this 3 page discussion:

Up lining or Down lining a fly rod

I agree with you Silver. There is a rod or two I’ve purchased that just did not fit my stroke. Until I replace one rod in particular, i will use it with a heavier line to make it feel more comfortable for me to cast. This is the only rod I own that is intentionally uplined. And you are correct. I purchased the wrong rod.

The other situation where I upline a rod is when casting short distances in small water. The heavier line makes this cast much easier. I think you do this too.

Why this article struck me as interesting is all the excitement about things like OPST Comando heads and other lines that tend to be so heavily weighted. It made me wonder if using an intended weight range like they used to with fiberglass rods back in the day and do currently with two handed rods, might be an idea with some merit. Knowing the group here, I assumed someone would have a few intelligent comments to make.

I will admit that while typing this response, I realized that I could have chosen a better title for this thread. I did not mean to drag out the old over lining conversation. It was really the idea suggested in the article that a fly rod could have a fly line weight range where it might best perform. Does this idea have merit? Is it just a way for a less experienced caster to cast farther by using a heavier line? Or... Am I simply missing something in the science or dynamics built into a rod or cast?

 

[dr d]

hi,


underlining can make your day when you must go under branches /deep bushes + trees with

small dries(f.e.tlt-technique)and small loops.


thomas

 

[karstopo]

I think it was a good article. I use the very rod series he mentions towards the end, the G.Loomis Short Stix, in much the same way with similar linings.

I think the article is just trying to point out not all fly rod fishing resembles the way it was once primarily focused on, coldwater trout types in flowing water. Vastly different circumstances and settings might actually demand a different approach to lining rods. Well, duh, right!?

 

[sweetandsalt]

I have no problem with the viewpoint of the article's author. Intellectually, we all know...and feel, the difference between having 20 or 50' of line out the tip-top. Last autumn, fishing for false albacore and stripped bass I fished a stout 10-weight rod with a 350 gr. (11.5 wt.) intermediate/floating combo head. I was NOT holding line in the air, I was loading and shooting. One false cast and drill the feathered bait fish imitation to the fish busting anchovies 90' away, no problem and all fine. And this is but one example of appropriate over-lining to address the angling circumstances; adjusting to perform very short casts in a mountain brook by putting a 4-wt. on a #3 rod could be another.

However, when I write about "line matching" a floating line to a given rod, be it a 4-wt. or 8-wt., I'm talking about pure casting within the range of angling distances that rod would be intended to perform. I've been lawn casting though have yet to fish, Douglas SKY-G 9'/#5. With a true weight 140 gr. 30' fly line (with an extended head and rear taper) though under lined at 20', by adjusting your stroke shorter and casting off the tip, it forms as very presentable, usable loops. Lengthening your stroke to "normal" it is totally at ease and with very little effort casts smoothly in the 30 to 50' zone while optimally loaded. Add a haul and more tip travel and you then are calling upon lower and deeper points in its taper where it, as do most all well designed rods, possesses the reserve power to cast to 80' and beyond false casting the now equivalent to an 8-wt. or more line mass in the air...but one is then not casting using the top third of the rod but the thicker stronger mid to lower taper. Thus one is dialing the section of the rod called upon to execute the cast by the movement of the variable amounts of line being cast. It remains a 5-wt. rod though.

 

[silver creek]

I think it all gets back to being able to cast a rod before buying a rod PLUS the test casting simulating how you are going to cast the rod when fishing.

I think mistakes are made even when you test cast the rod but don't really evaluate where it will fit into your quiver.

I also think you cannot go by what someone tells about a rod they own and even what the rod company says about the rod. The Sage VPS is an example. Both my Madison River fishing buddy (Gene) and I bought 9 ft 5 wt VPS rods when they went on close out.

Sage advertised them as a fast action rod. I thought they were medium fast and and so did my fishing buddy Gene. Several months later we were at a TU meeting and one of the members mentioned that he had bought a the same rod, a 9 ft 5 wt VPS. He said it was a such a fast action rod that he had to use a 6 wt line on it.

Same rod, 3 fly fishers. One had to overweight the rod because it was super fast action for him. None of us thought it was a "fast" action fly rod.

We are all individuals and when we cast a fly rod, perception IS reality for each of us. The problem is that sometimes what is reality for us does not match the reality that is published by the rod company or that another fly fisher tells us about the rod.

 

[sweetandsalt]

Reality is a moving target and Sage is wrong that rod is medium fast. And you and your friend are right it casts a 5-wt. line best (on the Madison R.). And the TU fellow needs a casting lesson...or another rod that suits his "style". Buying a rod on close-out because one gets a price discount is not the best way to select a rod unless you already have tried and like it.

 

[JoJer]

Sometimes, with new casters, if they don't seem to "get" feeling the rod load, I'll overline, say, two line weights. That can help get the idea across. It also gives a better visual if you have them turn to watch the line on the back cast.

 

[Rip Tide]

8wt rod, 11wt line

 

[redietz]

I found the below article about over and under-lining your fly rods to be rather interesting and thought I would post it here.

What do you guys think?

A Grain of Truth - On The Water

Nothing there to disagree with.

 

[redietz]

And the TU fellow needs a casting lesson...or another rod that suits his "style".

I would assume the latter. For most experienced fishermen, there are rods that they can cast but don't enjoy. And there are other factors that come into play when fishing rather than just casting (like hook setting ability) that influence whether you think as rod is too "fast". (In this case, I mean stiff, not where it flexes.)

 

[Gerard]

Each person has a different casting style.

Two weeks ago I was fishing in Cuba with someone who underlines his rod by 2 weights. Suits him and he is the one catching the permit. Agreed by all on the trip his casting is superlative in style and substance.

Rods...just cheapies... Shakespeare I think and they cast well. He spends money on reels, but said he was fed up of his son breaking expensive rods.

I have to say I have moved away from overlining rods as I'm not so convinced they can all take it, let alone the presentation to spooky fish. The problem is I think manufacturers are naturally increasing the line at, calling it an 8wt when in reality it is ( or is nearer) a 9wt. Therefore the increase when over lining is actually 2wt increase.

Tied this on one of mine 9 wts chasing permit. Windy, they were spooky, droped the line (tropical punch) from a 9 to 8 and hey presto. Even the guide who tried both thought it was a transformation.

However another one of the guys used and old Orvis ( TLS I think) 10wt with 12wt line and was very pleased. Really thought the rod had improved ( he considered it a broom stick).


Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Tapatalk

 

[trev]

I think the article said the same thing I've said for many years, it's not the line in the box or on the reel that counts, but the total line in the air as you cast that is applied to the rod.

Rods should not have line numbers on them at all but rather be marked with grain/gram windows or ranges.

If you never try to pick up or hold in the air greater mass than the upper range of the rod, it is not overlined. The mass of 30' of heavy line might be equal to or less 60' of lighter line.
If the line suggested has too little mass at the chosen fishing distance it is under lined at that distance.

Many of the old fiberglass rods of the '60s and "70s were completely over lined with the suggested line at <50', I still own a couple that are that way. Very nice tools at the 3040' range with the suggested lines, but max out suddenly. On the other hand I've had a couple of graphite rods that to me were pretty useless with the suggested line at 25-30' and cast well with that line if the distance was 30-60'. Point being that in each case, using a line that at the desired distance had mass that fit the rod's sweet spot made fishing more fun.

Broadly stated my view is that until the rod fails to support the line cast it is not over lined, and that unless the rod loads and casts with a single back cast it is under lined at the distance involved.

As far as I know there is no standard way to rate a rod for a line, the CCS has sorta aimed at that but has limitations and is not fully accepted; maybe the tackle manufacturers should get together on something.

 

[80302]

Interesting read and I had no problems with the content.
I learned early on about matching grain weight to rod weight because I make my own integrated shooting head lines. So test casting, cutting, weighing and matching a head to my rod and how I feel they should cast has been the norm for me.

Slightly off topic, but I do believe there is some merit to figuring out what makes a rod tick even though it may not suit your casting style at first. Applying different techniques like drifting, shooting line on your back cast or just having a tighter loop could give the fly caster the correct load they are looking for rather the adding more weight to your fly line. I know not everyone wants to or has the time to go this route but if you can it will help to broaden your casting style and the rods and fly line weights you will be comfortable with.

 

[Gimmeslack]

I was recently talking to Jim Downes (bamboo rod maker) and asked him what his favorite line was for a particular rod. Seemed like a logical question since he made the rod and knows 1000x more about cane than I do. Of course - duh - his reply was immediately 'my favorite is whichever one you like'. I mean, it's not an earth-shattering revelation or anything, but good to be reminded that ultimately, it's up to the individual to take rod stated wt and experiment with diff lines/wts to suit their fishing and their casting.

 

[sweetandsalt]

I would assume the latter. For most experienced fishermen, there are rods that they can cast but don't enjoy. And there are other factors that come into play when fishing rather than just casting (like hook setting ability) that influence whether you think as rod is too "fast". (In this case, I mean stiff, not where it flexes.)

Well, redietz, I don't assume much but agree that most any experienced caster can cast near any rod. Merely adjusting stroke length, acceleration and timing will get any line on any rod to move back and forth. Depending on the environment, I fish rods of diverse actions from deep flexing to very fast...they all fit my malleable casting technique no problem. But, of the many rods I cast at Shows and other venues, only a tiny % make it into my kit. A rod must perform especially well for the habitat I would use it in be it a little spring creek or a wind swept oceanic flat or I'm not going to enjoy it. My point above remains; either the TU guy bought the wrong rod for how he fishes because the price superseded his intent or he needs a casting lesson...or both.

 

[Unknownflyman]

The article had some good stuff I guess, its all subjective really, it seemed to try to make a case for over lining rods which really doesn't exist.

It makes the argument that "fast" rods are really larger in weight class therefore over line them. That Isn't really accurate which we already discussed in the taper language thread.

The author pulled the purist card and that is a turn off.

I like my rods lined around the wt of the rod or under lined, I just feel for me that it kills the sensitivity of the rod and makes the rod seem working too hard just to cast the line much less catch and land a fish.

While I like fishing many different speeds and tapers, they all end up feeling the same in an over line situation, overly heavy and sluggish and dead.

Shooting heads for single hand and spey lines for single and two hand rods are a different animal and feel a little heavy for water load and live line touch and go.


Most of this is what you like and what you are used to, when we talk about grain window, that language is for spey rods, I have not seen a chart for grain window for single hand rods.


It is also debatable the 30` interpretation for weighing fly lines, it really has nothing to do with casting 30`I could cast a 1wt line on a 5wt rod 30` it has to do with having a standard in weight class, lines can be heavier out from there or lighter.

I opt for lighter lines after 30` and 50- 70` after that because the rod starts getting too sluggish at those long distances, the rods start to feel like always under performing for the amount of energy expended.

Buying a faster expensive light rod and then over lining it just doesn't make sense at all! Find a different taper and action.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter, if you are happy how you are fishing and how everything works and feels.

 

[bonefish41]

I can buy any fly rod, new or used, and make it work for me in any situation by varying the line profile and weight; however, it is easier when you can get the 900 dollar rod for 450 then 100 bucks on sale lines makes the medicine go down rather than a 150 dollar rod and 100 bucks for sale lines. IMHO rod is a distance second to fishing the fly for the fish...presentation, location, what next after presentation

 

[sweetandsalt]

There is an aspect of this discussion that Flyman touched on as well regarding the degrading of tip responsiveness...sluggishness... when over weighted...be it via a heavier line or by having a lot of line out for a long presentation. There is a vital key to this whether the rod is of moderate or fast taper...tip integrity. In a good design the tip just does not collapse within the range of reasonable distances for fishing that rod. You just can not turn your leader over in-air with authority if the tip losses its sharpness. And you can not present a dry fly lightly nor control line and leader in-air or on-water with a tip that goes soft on you. In a smaller stream environment a purpose designed 4-wt. Scott GS or Sage T LL will maintain it tip composure from in close out to 50 or even 60', further than you would normalcy cast in such habitats. Beyond that, outside its intended application, yes, the tip starts to loose its firmness. Conversely, a big waiter 5-wt., NRX, Truth, Igniter, not too adroit until you have 30' or more line out, will keep its tip responsiveness and directness of feel out to the far bank...it's supposed to. Too soft tips that get floppy too soon can not execute articulate presentations regardless of line mass or angler skill, why make t worse via overlining.