Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 2 (3)


Re: Overlining or under?
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22213
Offline
I read enough posts to realize I'm not real interested in defining a right or wrong. But people saying that overlining does not make a rod "softer" (or underlining does not make "faster") are telling only a half truth.

Rod flex and action cannot be separated from line weight differences in the way a rod reacts and flexes. Give me any weight line and any weight rod, and I bet I can throw a cast that is servicable, regardless of the combination. The key is that a certain weight of line and rod and rod action will require a certain casting stroke in order to cast a particular distance, under any given set of particular circumstances. If you are using too much effort to make necessary adjustments to cast your combo effectively in the situation you are in, then you have "improperly" lined your rod, period.

I regularly use a soft 5 weight to cast a three weight line. I like the feel of that sometimes as much as my faster 3 weight with the same line.


Posted on: 2012/3/2 16:47

Edited by JackM on 2012/3/4 16:13:57
_________________
I don't like scrambled eggs, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked them, I'd eat them, and I just hate them. --Hank


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2010/6/9 12:35
From down the block from the Letort.
Posts: 902
Offline
Quote:
That paragraph is one big major contradiction. I DO use a rod thats designed for the task. But wanting a rod designed for a specific task (specialist), and wanting a rod that'll handle multiple tasks (jack of all trades) are competing desires. Jack of all trades means master of none.


Nope, sorry, gotta disagree with you here. Firstly, because if you're overlining a rod to make it 'work', then no, that rod is most definitely not designed for the task at hand. You shouldn't have to load a 4wt with a 6 to make it work. If so, then you've got the wrong tool in your hand and that rod is most definitely not designed for the task, otherwise it would be labeled and sold as a 6wt. Either that or you're saying that you know more about rod design and intent than the guys who are actually doing the design and manufacturing and they've mislabeled their entire line...

Having a 'specialist' rod to me doesn't mean one that's not suited for casting beyond 20'. I don't see a rod that's able to comfortably present a fly in the 5-40' range a 'master of none.' Personally, if I come to one of those larger hidden pools on a brookie stream, I'd much prefer to be able to comfortably stand from afar and make the cast I need up to the head than have to crawl into position and go thru a bunch of contortions because I wasn't expecting to have to make a 'long' cast, or run back to the car for my other rig.

I have a few 'specialist' small stream rods, a one piece 5'er, a sweet little 6'/3wt and a few in the 7' range in 2, 3 and 4wt's, all cane and they all easily cover the need to throw a tight loop in close with the flick of a wrist, or reach out to 40ish feet if needed. Will they bang out 60+ on Penn's or the Little J, will I fish 'em on the Letort where I might tangle with something truly trophy sized? No, I have other more 'all around' type rods for that....but even those rods will perform relatively well in close if asked.

I guess I just have a thing for respecting the rod designer's intent. If he designs a taper for a 4wt and specs it as such, then I'll try it with a 4wt to see if it agrees with me. If it does, great, and if it doesn't work at the distances I have in mind for it, then I'll look for another rod that will.

Posted on: 2012/3/2 17:03


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2011/5/3 12:22
From South Lebanon Township, PA
Posts: 1925
Offline
Quote:

GreenWeenie wrote:
So I do think it is incorrect to say overlining causes a fast action rod to slow down, it doesn’t, it simply causes the rod to flex more per foot of line and more flex will translate to better feel, within reason.


I think this is the basic point I was trying to make. There is a difference between rod action (slow/mod/fast) and the load that is placed on a rod. A fast rod is still a fast rod, regardless of the load placed on it...just make a casting stroke with it with no line on it...watch how it bends and rebounds and compare that to a mod or slow rod.

The distinction that I think pcray and myself are trying to draw is that no matter what the action of the rod is, it will take a certain amount of line to load it with a given casting stroke. Even slower action rods were not necessarily designed to be loaded properly with 10 feet of line out. Knowing that, if a faster action rod (or whatever action) suits our casting style better, then it makes sense to add weight to the line to be able to load the rod to its designed specifications with less line out.

Tomi - I get what you're saying 100%. The instances where I have room to make a cast of say 20 or more feet on the Brookie streams I fish are few and far between though. Do they happen, sure, and would I probably be better off having 4 wt line on my rod for those, probably. But the infrequency with which they occur versus the shorter casts where I want the rod to load with less line out doesn't justify me using the 4wt. I'd rather adjust my casting stroke to compensate on the fewer long casts, than the infinitely more frequent short ones.

I don't claim to be a good caster...completely self taught, and unorthodox to some degree I'm sure...but hey it catches fish, and that's good enough for me. I'm not looking to win any casting distance contests or any style points. If a 5 wt line, on a 4 wt mod/fast is what works and feels the best for me and for the kind of fishing I like to do, that's what I'm gonna use...regardless of what the rod was "intended" to be lined with. I'm sure the rod manufacturer is happy I spent my money on their product either way.

In short, I don't think a slower action rod necessarily loads to its designed specifications with any less line out than a mod or fast rod. All depends on the individual rod. For me the discussion isn't about rod action at all...it's simply about load. The fact that I like the feel and balance of a mod/fast versus a fast or a slow, or whatever is a separate discussion.

This is the epitome of different strokes, different folks, folks.

Posted on: 2012/3/2 18:03


Re: Overlining or under?
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 8911
Offline
Quote:

JackM wrote:
I read enough posts to realize I'm not real interested in defining a right or wrong. But people saying that overlining does not make a rod "softer" (or underlining does not make "faster") are telling only a half truth.

Rod flex and action cannot be separated from line weight differences in the way a rod reacts and flexes. Give me any weight line and any weight rod, and I bet I can throw a cast that is servicable, regardless of the combination. The key is that a certain weight of line and rod and rod action will require a certain casting stroke in order to cast a particular distance, under any given set of particular circumstances. If you are using too much effort to make necessary adjustments to cast your combo effectively in the situation you are in, then you have "improperly" lined your rod, period.

I regularly use a soft 5 weight to cast a three weight line. I like the feel of that sometimes as much as my faster 5 weight with the same line.



I agree with Jack 100%! Best post in this thread. Ready to throw away your Hack license Jack?

I’m getting lazy so I copied and pasted my posts from a past thread on this subject instead of rewriting it:


Here's my take. A 4wt rod is built by the rodmaker to cast a 4wt line which weighs (the line) 120gr @ 30' (30' is the standard measurement used weigh the line and rate it - not necessarily the optimum casting amount of line!). With that being said, 30' of 4wt line is roughly equivalent in weight to 25' of 5wt line (which weighs 140gr @ 30'). If you are making a lot of shorter casts on a smaller stream, you may find a 5wt line works better for you to load the rod and cast well.

Now, given the same set-up, if you are casting 30 or more feet of line (remember that's 30' of fly line, add in the length of the leader/and and the length of the rod and your close to a 50' cast) on your 4 wt rod, the 5wt line may be a little heavy for that purpose and not cast very well. It really depends on the rod.

For real long distance casting some may even chose to underline the rod to achieve distance.

With some rods or in some situations under or overlining works best.

The long and short - give it a try and see how it casts.

I hate most fast action rods...but I'm a fast action afishinado!?! Most FA rods suck (especially the cheaper ones) and are only suitable for longer casts or tomato stakes. Pick up a rod and peel off a length of fly line equal to the length of the rod and cast it. Keep casting and lengthening the line until you get out at least to the running line. If the rod doesn't cast well at all those distances, put it back in the rack.

Anyway, rod choice (and action) is a personal choice but many guys think fast-action rods suck because they never cast one that was designed well using high modulus graphite, or they just don't really like faster rods. Each to his own.

I will say there are many more choices of decent medium action rods out there if you prefer that type of action.

No doubt many of us have casting "issues"....lol. Proper casting technique is a prerequisite choosing the right rod. I agree that poor casting form causes many FFers to overline or underline a rod to compensate. Also, your rod preference may change after you develop or change your casting stroke and become more proficient.

The other side of the coin is many of the rods built today, especially the faster ones are often underrated. The CCS ratings used by rod builders bear this out. In other words a 4wt is really more like a 5wt. BTW, I'm talking "power" not action. Back in the day, most rods were had multiple ratings like 4/5 or 5/6. Rod mfgs should go back to those type of ratings IMO.

Think messing around with different fly lines and line weights is like tuning a bow using this arrow or that arrow, or this fletching or that fletching until you dial in the right combo to make your arrows fly well.

Most times I use the recommended line weight, but I do have rods that cast better for me over or underlined. Don't let the number on the rod stop you from messing with it. That dog rod in the closet my end up being you pet stick with some tweaking.....but don't expect miracles....lol

BTW, I agree with Pcray on the overlining of rods for small stream/short cast fishing. If you cast a fly with a lot of weight or a larger wind resistant fly on a short line, the heavier line is a great help to propel you line / fly to it's intended target Also, he made the point that many times you cannot get a proper or full backcast in tight quarters, and the heavier line helps in that case too.

Hey....just put a little tape over the line weight label on your rod and have fun!

Posted on: 2012/3/3 8:23

Edited by afishinado on 2012/3/3 8:47:26


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2012/1/9 19:50
From Etters,Pa
Posts: 723
Offline
I just aquired a 6'6 old glass rod that im gonna use for small streams and wasn't sure what weight the rod was so I went to Bass Pro today for a sale on Cortland line. At 9.99 a line I picked up 7 lines from 3-6wt WF,DT and sink tip for the price of one line. These lines are "Factory Seconds" ONLY because the colors aren't perfect not performance defects. Now im gonna cast a few different lines to see what casts the best in that 10-20ft range most offen found on smaller streams. Im gonna let the ROD tell me what it is not the MFG.

Posted on: 2012/3/3 13:00


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2006/9/13 10:18
From LV
Posts: 7587
Offline
My 9 ft 4 wt rod simply casts better with a 5 wt line, since I use it on big water and have plenty of room to cast and I want the line speed to make long casts when needed, I choos to use the 5 wt. line. Going to a different rod isn't the answer. The rod in question probably be rated for 5wt. lines.
I cannot speak for the others, but I cast a couple dozen rods before making a purchase, even trying them with different lines.
On my 4 wt 7'6" rod I use a 4 wt. line and it prforms great casting up to 60 ft with no trouble on small brookie streams.

Posted on: 2012/3/3 17:35
_________________
It's time to stop stocking all wild trout streams no matter what Classification they are, and time to eradicate brown trout in some of our limestone streams and re-establish brookies in them.


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2007/1/30 10:05
From Jersey Shore, PA
Posts: 471
Offline
Hmmm...

Some interesting stuff here.


Posted on: 2012/3/3 20:47


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2010/6/19 16:43
From Clinton County, Pa.
Posts: 1795
Offline
Quote:

OldLefty wrote:
Hmmm...

Some interesting stuff here.

Hey! Do you have your leg elevated? You just get back to healing that leg. Don't make me come over there and twist your good one Hope your feeling better WTT

Posted on: 2012/3/3 20:52
_________________
"Even the thousandth trip to the same familiar stream begins with renewed hope and unfailing faith." ZANE GREY


Re: Overlining or under?
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/11 8:26
From Chester County
Posts: 8911
Offline
Quote:

OldLefty wrote:
Hmmm...

Some interesting stuff here.



Not fair, Dave! Teaser post!

I'm sure everyone would love to here your take.



Posted on: 2012/3/4 6:42


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2006/11/2 8:50
Posts: 6083
Offline
I have a Redington 7 1/2 foot 4 wt that I use for small stream fishing, that has a "moderate" action, i.e. you can feel it flex on short casts.

If anyone has a Sage or Loomis, etc. 7 1/2 or 8 foot 4 wt they think is "too fast" action, let me know and maybe we can work out a trade.

I think much of this is about preference. Some people prefer a rod that has more flex, others prefer the "fast" action fly rods.

Posted on: 2012/3/4 11:38


Re: Overlining or under?

Joined:
2007/1/30 10:05
From Jersey Shore, PA
Posts: 471
Offline
I've learned a long time ago not to attempt to express my understanding of a subject such as this on a forum. Way too much potential for omission of critical info and too much potential for someone to misunderstand what I mean.

I will say that, when it comes to the rod itself, there are two (2) factors to consider: action and stiffness. They are not one and the same.

Further, I believe personal preference in rod choice is very heavily influenced by the caster's level of proficiency. None of us are "perfect" casters - that is, we all have casting faults. Mastery of good casting mechanics by the caster can have a real impact on results whether casting a particular rod with the recommended line weight or a heavier or lighter line weight. Style, on the other hand, doesn't come into play here as long as it is not a style which would restrict the caster, such as casting only with the wrist.

FYI, I routinely fish a 2 wt. line on a 4 wt. rod later in the season. This is on a 9' rod.

I've demo'ed with a 6 wt. rod and a 2 wt. line and I would have no problem fishing this combo when conditions are o.k. for casting an ultralight line wt.

I've probably expressed too much already.

Posted on: 2012/3/4 13:28


Re: Overlining or under?
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22213
Offline
Since afish liked my post, and in light of Lefty's admonishment regarding leaving too much out when we try to simplify for communication, I want to acknowledge that it is true that a "fast action" rod, even when overlined, will not flex in the same manner along the length from butt to tip as would a soft, properly matched rod. But, it will definitely flex more overall, that is, "feel softer." The soft matched rod will curve more along the whole shaft, whereas the overlined rod will flex more than typical (when properly matched, thus feeling softer) even though the flex will be more pronounced toward the upper 3rd or so.

The point for me is that your casting stroke will need to adjust to these subtle variances, and I believe thay are often very subtle, and most of us, including me, will probably be unable to appreciate the difference and know what particular combination is most useful for a given casting circumstance. This is why except for my enjoying the soft-5-weight rod with a 3-weight line, I typical match line weight to recommended rod weight.

Posted on: 2012/3/4 16:25
_________________
I don't like scrambled eggs, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked them, I'd eat them, and I just hate them. --Hank



« 1 2 (3)



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Do you keep a fishing journal?
Yes
No
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll will close at 2014/8/22 12:38
1 Comment





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com