traditional nymphs vs. bead heads?

[Guy Thornberg]

????
Opinions.
Never tied them.
Weight, appearance, results, more?
G

[Stephen Welsh]

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote in news:Va-
:

> ????
!!!!

> Opinions.
Vary.

> Never tied them.
Always a first time.

> Weight, appearance, results, more?

More? Given weight, appearance and results you want more?
What more could you ask?

????

;-)

Steve

[Stephen Welsh]

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote in news:Va-
:

> ????
!!!!

> Opinions.
Vary.

> Never tied them.
Always a first time.

> Weight, appearance, results, more?

More? Given weight, appearance and results you want more?
What more could you ask?

????

;-)

Steve

[Guy Thornberg]

Yep!
"Stephen Welsh" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> "Guy Thornberg" > wrote in news:Va-
> :
>
> > ????
> !!!!
>
> > Opinions.
> Vary.
>
> > Never tied them.
> Always a first time.
>
> > Weight, appearance, results, more?
>
> More? Given weight, appearance and results you want more?
> What more could you ask?
>
> ????
>
> ;-)
>
> Steve
>

[Dave LaCourse]

Guy Thornberg writes:

>????
>Opinions.
>Never tied them.
>Weight, appearance, results, more?

In what I consider my home waters, it was illegal many years ago to add weight
to your tippet/leader/line. And, for awhile anyway, it was illegal to have a
weighted fly. The laws changed and beadheads became very popular to get the
nymph down in the water column to where the fish were feeding. I used to use a
beadhead to get the fly to the bottom, and an unweighted nymph (my intended
lure) tied to the beadhead. It worked well, but not as well as split shot
added to the leaders about 16 inches or so above the fly.

Once split shot became legal, I stopped tying beadheads and concentrated on the
same flies sans beads.

I think there is probably some flash or sparkle to them and it may or may not
attract the trout. But, prefer fishing without beads.



When

[Dave LaCourse]

Guy Thornberg writes:

>????
>Opinions.
>Never tied them.
>Weight, appearance, results, more?

In what I consider my home waters, it was illegal many years ago to add weight
to your tippet/leader/line. And, for awhile anyway, it was illegal to have a
weighted fly. The laws changed and beadheads became very popular to get the
nymph down in the water column to where the fish were feeding. I used to use a
beadhead to get the fly to the bottom, and an unweighted nymph (my intended
lure) tied to the beadhead. It worked well, but not as well as split shot
added to the leaders about 16 inches or so above the fly.

Once split shot became legal, I stopped tying beadheads and concentrated on the
same flies sans beads.

I think there is probably some flash or sparkle to them and it may or may not
attract the trout. But, prefer fishing without beads.



When

[Stephen Welsh]

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote in
:

> Yep!

Good, well that's settled then.

:-)

Try slipping a bead over your tippet followed by a traditional nymph.
(Assuming you wish to progress trad->bead)



Steve
(You'll be fishing doubled beaded brassies before you know it.)

[Stephen Welsh]

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote in
:

> Yep!

Good, well that's settled then.

:-)

Try slipping a bead over your tippet followed by a traditional nymph.
(Assuming you wish to progress trad->bead)



Steve
(You'll be fishing doubled beaded brassies before you know it.)

[Guy Thornberg]

Dave,
What you say makes sense thank you. I have always weighted my nymphs (when
needed for a particular water) but not with beads. My preference has been to
not use split shot due to the problems with casting and wind knots. I have a
heap of beads purchased the last few years but have not convinced myself
they are necessary. I guess the real question is whether the bead head, as
you say adds "some flash or sparkle" that attracts more trout to the nymph.
I know traditional nymphs catch fish as well as bead heads and bead heads
have become popular.

Have you, or anyone, experienced a definite increase with the use of bead
heads compared to traditional weighted nymphs? (Yes, a loaded question).

Wish I had a thousand hours on the stream a year to test my question. Maybe
there is no correct answer.
Guy


"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
> Guy Thornberg writes:
>
> >????
> >Opinions.
> >Never tied them.
> >Weight, appearance, results, more?
>
> In what I consider my home waters, it was illegal many years ago to add
weight
> to your tippet/leader/line. And, for awhile anyway, it was illegal to
have a
> weighted fly. The laws changed and beadheads became very popular to get
the
> nymph down in the water column to where the fish were feeding. I used to
use a
> beadhead to get the fly to the bottom, and an unweighted nymph (my
intended
> lure) tied to the beadhead. It worked well, but not as well as split shot
> added to the leaders about 16 inches or so above the fly.
>
> Once split shot became legal, I stopped tying beadheads and concentrated
on the
> same flies sans beads.
>
> I think there is probably some flash or sparkle to them and it may or may
not
> attract the trout. But, prefer fishing without beads.
>
>
>
> When
>
>
>
>
>

[Dave LaCourse]

Guy writes:

>My preference has been to
>not use split shot due to the problems with casting and wind knots.

That can be a problem when using split shot. It has a hinge effect. Best way
to do it is to make a circle cast. Lefty Kreh demonstrated it once at a show.
When your fly gets down stream, simply pick it up and cast upstream in one
motion. It ain't pretty, but it works. No false casting involved.

>Have you, or anyone, experienced a definite increase with the use of bead
>heads compared to traditional weighted nymphs? (Yes, a loaded question).

I don't know, but I really don't consider using the bead an advantage. They
probably serve a purpose in some anglers bag of tricks, but I have yet to
really see a difference.

[Dave LaCourse]

Guy writes:

>My preference has been to
>not use split shot due to the problems with casting and wind knots.

That can be a problem when using split shot. It has a hinge effect. Best way
to do it is to make a circle cast. Lefty Kreh demonstrated it once at a show.
When your fly gets down stream, simply pick it up and cast upstream in one
motion. It ain't pretty, but it works. No false casting involved.

>Have you, or anyone, experienced a definite increase with the use of bead
>heads compared to traditional weighted nymphs? (Yes, a loaded question).

I don't know, but I really don't consider using the bead an advantage. They
probably serve a purpose in some anglers bag of tricks, but I have yet to
really see a difference.

[Steve Egge]

It depends on what you are tying. on longer flies such as a wooly bugger or
leech it adds an undulating motion - the up down motion on the retrieve as well
as adding an attractant depending upon the bead color. But this can also be
done with lead wire and crystal flash. It is a good and fast solution to many
fly enhancements (flash, motion, sinking ability esp with tungsten)

On the other hand I sometime felt that the bead heads on some flies were so
common on a stream that it was a tip off to the trout that it was an artificial
and not to be eaten.

just some thoughts ....
Steve Egge

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote:

>????
>Opinions.
>Never tied them.
>Weight, appearance, results, more?
>G
>

[Steve Egge]

It depends on what you are tying. on longer flies such as a wooly bugger or
leech it adds an undulating motion - the up down motion on the retrieve as well
as adding an attractant depending upon the bead color. But this can also be
done with lead wire and crystal flash. It is a good and fast solution to many
fly enhancements (flash, motion, sinking ability esp with tungsten)

On the other hand I sometime felt that the bead heads on some flies were so
common on a stream that it was a tip off to the trout that it was an artificial
and not to be eaten.

just some thoughts ....
Steve Egge

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote:

>????
>Opinions.
>Never tied them.
>Weight, appearance, results, more?
>G
>

[Tim J.]

Guy Thornberg wrote:
> ????
> Opinions.
> Never tied them.
> Weight, appearance, results, more?

I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to switch
from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Tim J.]

Guy Thornberg wrote:
> ????
> Opinions.
> Never tied them.
> Weight, appearance, results, more?

I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to switch
from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Scott Seidman]

(Dave LaCourse) wrote in
:

> Guy writes:
>
>>My preference has been to
>>not use split shot due to the problems with casting and wind knots.
>
> That can be a problem when using split shot. It has a hinge effect.
> Best way to do it is to make a circle cast. Lefty Kreh demonstrated
> it once at a show. When your fly gets down stream, simply pick it up
> and cast upstream in one motion. It ain't pretty, but it works. No
> false casting involved.
>
>>Have you, or anyone, experienced a definite increase with the use of
>>bead heads compared to traditional weighted nymphs? (Yes, a loaded
>>question).
>
> I don't know, but I really don't consider using the bead an
> advantage. They probably serve a purpose in some anglers bag of
> tricks, but I have yet to really see a difference.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I really like using split shot, but NY banned the sale of lead shot. I
am I little concerned that the no-lead stuff is too hard on my leader.

One of my favorite methods is to use a beadhead, with a trailing non-bead
tie of the same fly. I think it doubles my chances of getting a drift at
the right level.

Scott

[Scott Seidman]

(Dave LaCourse) wrote in
:

> Guy writes:
>
>>My preference has been to
>>not use split shot due to the problems with casting and wind knots.
>
> That can be a problem when using split shot. It has a hinge effect.
> Best way to do it is to make a circle cast. Lefty Kreh demonstrated
> it once at a show. When your fly gets down stream, simply pick it up
> and cast upstream in one motion. It ain't pretty, but it works. No
> false casting involved.
>
>>Have you, or anyone, experienced a definite increase with the use of
>>bead heads compared to traditional weighted nymphs? (Yes, a loaded
>>question).
>
> I don't know, but I really don't consider using the bead an
> advantage. They probably serve a purpose in some anglers bag of
> tricks, but I have yet to really see a difference.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I really like using split shot, but NY banned the sale of lead shot. I
am I little concerned that the no-lead stuff is too hard on my leader.

One of my favorite methods is to use a beadhead, with a trailing non-bead
tie of the same fly. I think it doubles my chances of getting a drift at
the right level.

Scott

[Willi & Sue]

Guy Thornberg wrote:

> ????
> Opinions.
> Never tied them.
> Weight, appearance, results, more?
> G
>
>

I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
with added weight.

Willi

[Willi & Sue]

Tim J. wrote:
> Guy Thornberg wrote:
>
>>????
>>Opinions.
>>Never tied them.
>>Weight, appearance, results, more?
>
>
> I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
> shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to switch
> from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.


Why is that? You just cut off thew nymph and slide off the weight? Not
too hard.

Willi

[Tim J.]

Willi & Sue wrote:
> Tim J. wrote:
>> Guy Thornberg wrote:
>>
>>> ????
>>> Opinions.
>>> Never tied them.
>>> Weight, appearance, results, more?
>>
>>
>> I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
>> shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to
>> switch from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.
>
> Why is that? You just cut off thew nymph and slide off the weight?
> Not too hard.

The split shot I've used has either a tendency to slide around on the
tippet if too loose, or cause abrasion to the tippet if tight enough to
stay put. Maybe I'm not doing something right. Ideas?
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Tim J.]

Willi & Sue wrote:
> Tim J. wrote:
>> Guy Thornberg wrote:
>>
>>> ????
>>> Opinions.
>>> Never tied them.
>>> Weight, appearance, results, more?
>>
>>
>> I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
>> shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to
>> switch from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.
>
> Why is that? You just cut off thew nymph and slide off the weight?
> Not too hard.

The split shot I've used has either a tendency to slide around on the
tippet if too loose, or cause abrasion to the tippet if tight enough to
stay put. Maybe I'm not doing something right. Ideas?
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Jack Schmitt]

"Tim J." > wrote in message
...
> Willi & Sue wrote:
>> Tim J. wrote:
>>> Guy Thornberg wrote:
>>>
>>>> ????
>>>> Opinions.
>>>> Never tied them.
>>>> Weight, appearance, results, more?
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
>>> shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to
>>> switch from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.
>>
>> Why is that? You just cut off thew nymph and slide off the weight?
>> Not too hard.
>
> The split shot I've used has either a tendency to slide around on the
> tippet if too loose, or cause abrasion to the tippet if tight enough to
> stay put. Maybe I'm not doing something right. Ideas?
> --
> TL,
> Tim
> ------------------------
> http://css.sbcma.com/timj
>
>FWIW, I have started leaving one of the tag ends of the leader to tippet
>knot uncut. I then add the split shot to this tag end. It prevents abrasion
>to the leader or tippet proper, and if you want to reduce the weight, you
>can just clip it off or simply slide it off. My 2 cents.

[Jack Schmitt]

"Tim J." > wrote in message
...
> Willi & Sue wrote:
>> Tim J. wrote:
>>> Guy Thornberg wrote:
>>>
>>>> ????
>>>> Opinions.
>>>> Never tied them.
>>>> Weight, appearance, results, more?
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't notice much difference between beaded nymphs and using split
>>> shot as far as fishing goes, *BUT* it's much easier and faster to
>>> switch from beaded nymphs to dry when a hatch starts poppin'.
>>
>> Why is that? You just cut off thew nymph and slide off the weight?
>> Not too hard.
>
> The split shot I've used has either a tendency to slide around on the
> tippet if too loose, or cause abrasion to the tippet if tight enough to
> stay put. Maybe I'm not doing something right. Ideas?
> --
> TL,
> Tim
> ------------------------
> http://css.sbcma.com/timj
>
>FWIW, I have started leaving one of the tag ends of the leader to tippet
>knot uncut. I then add the split shot to this tag end. It prevents abrasion
>to the leader or tippet proper, and if you want to reduce the weight, you
>can just clip it off or simply slide it off. My 2 cents.

[detoor]

Why not various weighted nymphs... I seem yo get "wind" knots if I try using
split shot and I think its easier to change a nymph than to add a new tippet

[Clark Reid]

Bead head nymphs have been very popular in New Zealand for a number of years
now and I have had extensive experience using them.

However, I find myself rarely using the standard beads these days and am
more inclined to go with tungsten beads for a variety of reasons.

I agree 100% with you that trout do become aware of the beads and on hard
fished areas I have concluded that the bead can be a deterrent to the fish
once they've been caught on them a few times. In fact the past couple of
seasons I have seen a swing back to traditional nymphs in many areas as
anglers become aware of this.

Some observations about bead flies as it applies to New Zealand fishing.

By and large Gold beads work best on rainbows. Dark or copper beads work
best on browns.
Browns become wary of bead flies faster than rainbows do. I have a couple of
patterns where I use a tungsten bead as the thorax to get the depth without
the fat profile and not have the bead totally obvious to the fish. We rarely
use split shot in NZ.
Flies such as the prince nymph certainly seem to be more effective with a
bead added.
Tungsten beads work better... I have a theory on this and it's not just
about depth. I believe the increased density of the tungsten bead actually
helps slow the drift of the fly. The current a few feet down is often much
slower than the surface current and I believe the tungsten beads are more
inclined to ride the current they are in at the same speed, hence more
takes. My justification for thinking this has been when fishing to trout
sitting in three feet of water and making several presentations to the fish
with, say, a bead head prince and getting refusals only to get a take when
offering exactly the same fly with a tungsten bead. The depth achieved was
identical, the pattern identical the only difference the density/weight of
the bead.
It is common here to also have a small unweighted fly trailing off the bead
head nymph.
I also find a tungsten more effective than standard beads when trailed off a
dry but use large dries like Stimulators or Cicadas to hold them up.

New Zealand nymph fisherman traditionally use flies with more standard
weight than most US anglers, so beads have become a large part of the
angling culture. Are they better? Too tough to answer. Do they add another
angle and trick in the box? If used with thought I think they do. In
themselves they are another fly and I find them an essential part of my
tackle these days.

My 2 cents worth ... (Which on the current exchange rate is worth about
$1.25 US)

Clark

"Steve Egge" > wrote in message
...
> It depends on what you are tying. on longer flies such as a wooly bugger
or
> leech it adds an undulating motion - the up down motion on the retrieve as
well
> as adding an attractant depending upon the bead color. But this can
also be
> done with lead wire and crystal flash. It is a good and fast solution to
many
> fly enhancements (flash, motion, sinking ability esp with tungsten)
>
> On the other hand I sometime felt that the bead heads on some flies were
so
> common on a stream that it was a tip off to the trout that it was an
artificial
> and not to be eaten.
>
> just some thoughts ....
> Steve Egge
>
> "Guy Thornberg" > wrote:
>
> >????
> >Opinions.
> >Never tied them.
> >Weight, appearance, results, more?
> >G
> >
>

[Clark Reid]

Bead head nymphs have been very popular in New Zealand for a number of years
now and I have had extensive experience using them.

However, I find myself rarely using the standard beads these days and am
more inclined to go with tungsten beads for a variety of reasons.

I agree 100% with you that trout do become aware of the beads and on hard
fished areas I have concluded that the bead can be a deterrent to the fish
once they've been caught on them a few times. In fact the past couple of
seasons I have seen a swing back to traditional nymphs in many areas as
anglers become aware of this.

Some observations about bead flies as it applies to New Zealand fishing.

By and large Gold beads work best on rainbows. Dark or copper beads work
best on browns.
Browns become wary of bead flies faster than rainbows do. I have a couple of
patterns where I use a tungsten bead as the thorax to get the depth without
the fat profile and not have the bead totally obvious to the fish. We rarely
use split shot in NZ.
Flies such as the prince nymph certainly seem to be more effective with a
bead added.
Tungsten beads work better... I have a theory on this and it's not just
about depth. I believe the increased density of the tungsten bead actually
helps slow the drift of the fly. The current a few feet down is often much
slower than the surface current and I believe the tungsten beads are more
inclined to ride the current they are in at the same speed, hence more
takes. My justification for thinking this has been when fishing to trout
sitting in three feet of water and making several presentations to the fish
with, say, a bead head prince and getting refusals only to get a take when
offering exactly the same fly with a tungsten bead. The depth achieved was
identical, the pattern identical the only difference the density/weight of
the bead.
It is common here to also have a small unweighted fly trailing off the bead
head nymph.
I also find a tungsten more effective than standard beads when trailed off a
dry but use large dries like Stimulators or Cicadas to hold them up.

New Zealand nymph fisherman traditionally use flies with more standard
weight than most US anglers, so beads have become a large part of the
angling culture. Are they better? Too tough to answer. Do they add another
angle and trick in the box? If used with thought I think they do. In
themselves they are another fly and I find them an essential part of my
tackle these days.

My 2 cents worth ... (Which on the current exchange rate is worth about
$1.25 US)

Clark

"Steve Egge" > wrote in message
...
> It depends on what you are tying. on longer flies such as a wooly bugger
or
> leech it adds an undulating motion - the up down motion on the retrieve as
well
> as adding an attractant depending upon the bead color. But this can
also be
> done with lead wire and crystal flash. It is a good and fast solution to
many
> fly enhancements (flash, motion, sinking ability esp with tungsten)
>
> On the other hand I sometime felt that the bead heads on some flies were
so
> common on a stream that it was a tip off to the trout that it was an
artificial
> and not to be eaten.
>
> just some thoughts ....
> Steve Egge
>
> "Guy Thornberg" > wrote:
>
> >????
> >Opinions.
> >Never tied them.
> >Weight, appearance, results, more?
> >G
> >
>

[Larry L]

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote


> Opinions.


I carry two types ... unweighted ( what I mostly use ... with shot if
needed )

and a few beadheads that I use, mainly, when I come upon a sight nymphing
opportunity while fishing dries .... I snip off the dry tie on a BHPT,
BHcrystalmidge or BOP and toss it to my fish, that being visible is nearly
always in relatively shallow water feeding. With the two or three BH
nymphs I routinely use I have a good feel for sink rate and I can often get
that fish in a few casts ( I don't think pattern matters much, 95% of the
time with nymphs ) OR I spook him and go back to dries and different fish.
I pick BHs over traditional weighted flies for this simply because a glance
tells me if I have weight or not, and I want to rig and make my appeal to
the trout asap

Settiing up for nymphing the water and moving up a stream the unweighted and
shot works better, as I add and remove shot with some regularity on most
streams

[Larry L]

"Guy Thornberg" > wrote


> Opinions.


I carry two types ... unweighted ( what I mostly use ... with shot if
needed )

and a few beadheads that I use, mainly, when I come upon a sight nymphing
opportunity while fishing dries .... I snip off the dry tie on a BHPT,
BHcrystalmidge or BOP and toss it to my fish, that being visible is nearly
always in relatively shallow water feeding. With the two or three BH
nymphs I routinely use I have a good feel for sink rate and I can often get
that fish in a few casts ( I don't think pattern matters much, 95% of the
time with nymphs ) OR I spook him and go back to dries and different fish.
I pick BHs over traditional weighted flies for this simply because a glance
tells me if I have weight or not, and I want to rig and make my appeal to
the trout asap

Settiing up for nymphing the water and moving up a stream the unweighted and
shot works better, as I add and remove shot with some regularity on most
streams

[Larry L]

"Steve Egge" > wrote

> On the other hand I sometime felt that the bead heads on some flies were
> so
> common on a stream that it was a tip off to the trout that it was an
> artificial
> and not to be eaten.
>


I never use bright beads anymore, just black or "nickel black" and in
tungsten for the added sink rate

[Larry L]

"Steve Egge" > wrote

> On the other hand I sometime felt that the bead heads on some flies were
> so
> common on a stream that it was a tip off to the trout that it was an
> artificial
> and not to be eaten.
>


I never use bright beads anymore, just black or "nickel black" and in
tungsten for the added sink rate

[Tom Littleton]

Dave writes:
>I used to use a
>beadhead to get the fly to the bottom, and an unweighted nymph (my intended
>lure) tied to the beadhead. It worked well, but not as well as split shot
>added to the leaders about 16 inches or so above the fly.

I would agree with this wholeheartedly. My only argument for beadheads might be
if a certain type of action was desired, as the front-weighted nature can make
a longer bodied fly undulate in a unique fashion. Also, certain larval patterns
can be made to look (in an impressionistic fashion) like the natural with the
addition of a dark bead in front. I am thinking of caddis larval patterns
mostly in this latter example. As Dave notes, they fall, to my mind, into the
Minor Tactics category, but I use unweighted or very lightly weighted nymphs
with soft lead up the leader (8-16 inches) most of the time.
Tom

[Tom Littleton]

Dave writes:
>I used to use a
>beadhead to get the fly to the bottom, and an unweighted nymph (my intended
>lure) tied to the beadhead. It worked well, but not as well as split shot
>added to the leaders about 16 inches or so above the fly.

I would agree with this wholeheartedly. My only argument for beadheads might be
if a certain type of action was desired, as the front-weighted nature can make
a longer bodied fly undulate in a unique fashion. Also, certain larval patterns
can be made to look (in an impressionistic fashion) like the natural with the
addition of a dark bead in front. I am thinking of caddis larval patterns
mostly in this latter example. As Dave notes, they fall, to my mind, into the
Minor Tactics category, but I use unweighted or very lightly weighted nymphs
with soft lead up the leader (8-16 inches) most of the time.
Tom

[Willi & Sue]

Hooked wrote:
> "Willi & Sue" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
>>nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
>>weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
>>water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
>>success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
>>with added weight.
>>
>>Willi
>
>
>
> Then there is the always available sink tip line that will get the fly down,
> depending on the length of the leader.

Sinktips aren't very versatile in moving water and in most situation
getting a drag free drift (which is usually the most effective) isn't
possible.

Willi

[Willi & Sue]

Hooked wrote:
> "Willi & Sue" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
>>nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
>>weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
>>water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
>>success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
>>with added weight.
>>
>>Willi
>
>
>
> Then there is the always available sink tip line that will get the fly down,
> depending on the length of the leader.

Sinktips aren't very versatile in moving water and in most situation
getting a drag free drift (which is usually the most effective) isn't
possible.

Willi

[Willi & Sue]

Hooked wrote:
> "Willi & Sue" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
>>nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
>>weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
>>water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
>>success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
>>with added weight.
>>
>>Willi
>
>
>
> Then there is the always available sink tip line that will get the fly down,
> depending on the length of the leader.

Sinktips aren't very versatile in moving water and in most situation
getting a drag free drift (which is usually the most effective) isn't
possible.

Willi

[George Adams]

>From: Willi & Sue

>Hooked wrote:
>> "Willi & Sue" > wrote in message

>>>I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
>>>nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
>>>weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
>>>water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
>>>success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
>>>with added weight

>> Then there is the always available sink tip line that will get the fly
>down,
>> depending on the length of the leader.

>Sinktips aren't very versatile in moving water and in most situation
>getting a drag free drift (which is usually the most effective) isn't
>possible.

I'm with Willi on this one. I tie a few beadhead patterns, and add a little
weight to others, but I primarily depend on weight added to the leader to get
the fly down.

I find sink tips useful for streamer fishing, and sometimes use one when
fishing soft hackles, but for nymph fishing, they aren't very effective.


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

[George Adams]

>From: Willi & Sue

>Hooked wrote:
>> "Willi & Sue" > wrote in message

>>>I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
>>>nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
>>>weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
>>>water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
>>>success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
>>>with added weight

>> Then there is the always available sink tip line that will get the fly
>down,
>> depending on the length of the leader.

>Sinktips aren't very versatile in moving water and in most situation
>getting a drag free drift (which is usually the most effective) isn't
>possible.

I'm with Willi on this one. I tie a few beadhead patterns, and add a little
weight to others, but I primarily depend on weight added to the leader to get
the fly down.

I find sink tips useful for streamer fishing, and sometimes use one when
fishing soft hackles, but for nymph fishing, they aren't very effective.


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

[George Adams]

>From: Willi & Sue

>Hooked wrote:
>> "Willi & Sue" > wrote in message

>>>I think that adding weight to the leader instead of using a weighted
>>>nymph of any sort lets you be more flexible. By adding and subtracting
>>>weight as needed, it allows you to put the fly in the right place in the
>>>water column in varying conditions. That, IMO, is far more important to
>>>success than fly choice or any other factor. I prefer unweighted nymphs
>>>with added weight

>> Then there is the always available sink tip line that will get the fly
>down,
>> depending on the length of the leader.

>Sinktips aren't very versatile in moving water and in most situation
>getting a drag free drift (which is usually the most effective) isn't
>possible.

I'm with Willi on this one. I tie a few beadhead patterns, and add a little
weight to others, but I primarily depend on weight added to the leader to get
the fly down.

I find sink tips useful for streamer fishing, and sometimes use one when
fishing soft hackles, but for nymph fishing, they aren't very effective.


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller