Winston WT line pairing

Hunter Gathers

Well-known member
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Location
Illinois
Hi all,

I recently purchased a Winston WT 8'6" 5-wt and have been thinking of pairing a SA Mastery DT-5-F with it. Anything else I should consider? What about something like a Cortland Trout Boss DT5F?
 

moucheur2003

Well-known member
Messages
3,220
Reaction score
23
Location
Boston, Mass.
I have that rod, and I have a standard WF5 on mine. I believe the convention for rating lines when that rod was introduced was for a true-to-AFTMA-standard WF taper. I remember that some manufacturers would rate their rods with a split rating like 5/6, with the heavier rating for a WF line and the lighter for a DT, because when you have more than 30' of DT line out it is heavier than a WF shooting taper. (I also remember a common belief that Orvis's rods were rated idiosyncratically for DT rather than WF lines, although I don't know whether it was true.) The smooth "Winston feel" might suffer if you're trying to be a casting hero with a DT. On the other hand, if you're mostly casting within 40-45 feet (30-35 feet plus a 7-12 foot leader) there wouldn't be much difference between a DT and a WF.
 

jofer

Well-known member
Messages
186
Reaction score
2
Hi all,

I recently purchased a Winston WT 8'6" 5-wt and have been thinking of pairing a SA Mastery DT-5-F with it.
Just to simplify your life, the WT line-up (2 to 5#) was designed "arond" a DT line, and the line they used was a Mastery Trout DT.

From Cortland, the Peach line it's mandatory, and I like the Spring Creek too.

Thats a timeless and cool fly rod, maybe one of the coolest.

Congrats, and dont forget to pair that rod with a nice classic reel.

Jofer
 

coug

Well-known member
Messages
703
Reaction score
13
Location
Snake, Clearwater and tribs
Just to simplify your life, the WT line-up (2 to 5#) was designed "arond" a DT line, and the line they used was a Mastery Trout DT.

From Cortland, the Peach line it's mandatory, and I like the Spring Creek too.

Thats a timeless and cool fly rod, maybe one of the coolest.

Congrats, and dont forget to pair that rod with a nice classic reel.

Jofer
I have the 486-2 and used the peach DT on it for years. I use SA trout DT now, but both are great.
 

moucheur2003

Well-known member
Messages
3,220
Reaction score
23
Location
Boston, Mass.
Can you explain?
At the time, Sage had the reputation for building fast, powerful rods that performed best on big, windy rivers. In contrast, Orvis and Winston had the reputation for building more delicate, sensitive rods that performed better than Sage for finesse presentations. But between Winston and Orvis, a lot of people thought Winstons were a bit crisper and more versatile, and celebrated them for their indescribable "Winston feel". Author Tom McGuane called the Winston 8 1/2' 5 weight IM6 (as the WT series was originally named) "the five-weight trout rod against which all others are measured". The Trout Underground blog named it one of the dozen greatest fly rods of all time and called it "the 'troutiest' rod in existence".

As I said, I don't think you will notice much difference between a DT and a WF line if most of your casts are under 45', because the front tapers of the two lines will be more or less the same. But behind the front taper, the thinner running line of a WF is lighter, whereas a thicker DT line is heavier. Casting that extra weight will make the rod feel different. On longer casts, I think you can probably get better accuracy and distance from the WF. (On the other hand, if you're swinging wet flies and streamers with a lot of line out, a DT will give you more control over mending, so there's that.)
 

WNCtroutstalker

Well-known member
Messages
557
Reaction score
14
Location
North Carolina
I actually just fished my WT 8'6" 5 wt yesterday. Like several others above, in the past I've used the SA Mastery Trout DT5 (now called the Double Taper) and have liked it. But yesterday I tried a SA Amplitude Smooth WF5F and liked it a lot. Not sure which I prefer (I would need to do a side by side casting comparison), but, and I'm basically just echoing what was said above, I think the key is to go with a true-to-weight line and that for the most part there's no meaningful difference between a WF and DT (given typical casting distances).
 

Hunter Gathers

Well-known member
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Location
Illinois
Thanks for the suggestions/info everyone. As Jofer mentioned, I had heard that this one was built around a DT, which was driving my original question in the first place. It seems that within this thread there is no general consensus re: WF vs. DT lines.
 

Hunter Gathers

Well-known member
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Location
Illinois
Just to simplify your life, the WT line-up (2 to 5#) was designed "arond" a DT line, and the line they used was a Mastery Trout DT.

From Cortland, the Peach line it's mandatory, and I like the Spring Creek too.

Thats a timeless and cool fly rod, maybe one of the coolest.

Congrats, and dont forget to pair that rod with a nice classic reel.

Jofer

Jofer,

So the Peach, which I think is one of the standard/basic lines, is what you would recommend from Cortland? Do you have any opinion on it vs. SA Mastery?


Also, I had planned on pairing it with a Hardy Duchess after casting in the yard another fly rod that I have paired with one.
 
Last edited:

mike_r

Well-known member
Messages
825
Reaction score
7
Location
clinch river regular
I will add that the Peach DT is a “fatter” line than the SA Mastery DT and will occupy a noticeably larger area on a given spool. I have both and prefer the smaller body diameter of the SA DT line. It shoots and mends better than the Cortland Peach IMHO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

moucheur2003

Well-known member
Messages
3,220
Reaction score
23
Location
Boston, Mass.
I will add that the Peach DT is a “fatter” line than the SA Mastery DT and will occupy a noticeably larger area on a given spool. I have both and prefer the smaller body diameter of the SA DT line. It shoots and mends better than the Cortland Peach IMHO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cortland also makes a "Sylk" line in DT5F that imitates the silk fly lines of the old days and is much thinner in diameter. I have one paired with a bamboo rod. I've never tried it on my Winston, but if you want a DT that might be a good choice.
 

jofer

Well-known member
Messages
186
Reaction score
2
Between the two lines, I feel the SA taper suits better the 3 pcs WT. I agree with Mike , the SA shoots and mends better.
And like Moucher said, you can go with the Mastery trout wf (the same front taper).I think (my personal preference) a wf is more versatile for rods of 8,6'' and above.

The Cortland Peach works very nice, but more supple, (core & coating), ideal for those slow retro graphite, glass and boo rods.
Perfect for the old Winston IM6 and Scott G, both 2 pieces. The combos, I use for those epic dryfly days when you need a "mellow" casting and smooth landing.

I also like the Spring Creek and the Silk, but not for all the tasks.

The Hardy duchess is a perfect match, but you will need, at least 4.5oz to balance that rod right.
Go for the 3.25 with 3.9oz. You'll have more capacity for a DT line (if you chose one) and backing.



Regards
Jofer
 

edreilly

Well-known member
Messages
244
Reaction score
4
Fantastic rod. I go back and forth as to whether the WT or IM6 version is my favorite fly rod of all time. They are very close and great in a range of situations. If I am going to fish a river I know nothing about, and might fish everything from tiny tricos to stone fly nymphs, that is the rod I will take. It does so much, so well.

I have tried the SA Trout WF, DT, Gold and Peach. I find the WF Trout to be my favorite but it casts them all well. I was a bit surprised how well the Gold worked since it is 0.3 heavy but the rods handles it fine.

Enjoy your rod,

Ed






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

sweetandsalt

Well-known member
Messages
11,198
Reaction score
84
Location
-
One relevant point about WF vs. DT on this older rod. Back then WF lines had a 30' head then abruptly went to thin running line. Original SA Trout is a perfect example. Today's SA Trout (or Gold or Technical Trout or Cort. Omni-Verse) attenuates its transition from head to running line with a long rear taper thus ameliorating two things. One important one is the elimination of hinging during casting/mending once all 30' of head are out the tip-top and two, the significant addition of mass of the continuous belly of the DT is not overloading the rod on a slightly longer cast. Therefore my recommendation for this classic is a modern true to weight WF with a long rear taper like SA Trout or RIO Technical Trout. As an experiment, particularly if fishing this rod on more medium to somewhat larger rivers, I fancy the idea of a lighter, half heavy #4 like Cort. Modern Trout actually under-lining it by a little. It too has a very long rear taper so is virtually a 5-wt. in grains once you are casting 40' of line.
 
Top