ribbing wulffs

wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:


Of course, you should take everything I say with a grain of salt,
because I fish the majority of my time in warm water, and I didn't tie
my first Royal Wullf until a few years ago.

I also can't spell "Wulff".

I'm sure one of the yanquis will be along real soon with some real help.

[snip]

Thanks Conan, something I'm trying to figure out on the Wullf's is if
the tail is 'weight' to balance the fly, and therefore should be about
as heavy as the wings, but shorter, rather than supporting the fly on
the water through a smaller diameter bunch of 1 shank length as in a
normal dry fly. Appreciate the comments.

FWIW, most of the store-bought RW I've seen do have a fairly thick
bunch of hair for the tail, so your counterbalance idea might have some
merit.

The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*

The synthetic is lighter than calfhair, and creates less mass where
it's tied in. IME that makes for a fly that's less nose-heavy and neater.


Chuck Vance (who needs all the help he can get in the neatness
department)

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:28:42 -0500, Conan The Librarian
wrote:

wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:


Of course, you should take everything I say with a grain of salt,
because I fish the majority of my time in warm water, and I didn't tie
my first Royal Wullf until a few years ago.

I also can't spell "Wulff".

I'm sure one of the yanquis will be along real soon with some real help.

[snip]

Thanks Conan, something I'm trying to figure out on the Wullf's is if
the tail is 'weight' to balance the fly, and therefore should be about
as heavy as the wings, but shorter, rather than supporting the fly on
the water through a smaller diameter bunch of 1 shank length as in a
normal dry fly. Appreciate the comments.

FWIW, most of the store-bought RW I've seen do have a fairly thick
bunch of hair for the tail, so your counterbalance idea might have some
merit.

The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*

The synthetic is lighter than calfhair, and creates less mass where
it's tied in. IME that makes for a fly that's less nose-heavy and neater.


Chuck Vance (who needs all the help he can get in the neatness
department)

If I read y'alls posts correctly, and assuming y'all aren't _really_
overtying the wings, hackle, etc., the proportion between the hackle,
the lowest point of hook from the bend to the hook-point as the fly
should ride (generally, just back from the barb or trailing end of the
point), and the tail, and the imaginary line created by these three
points, with all such flies is important. IOW and for example, if
everything is alright save the tail (or hackle) being too short, it's
not gonna present properly. In such a case, you are creating a
"teeter-totter" effect.

As to material choice, use what works - it isn't an imitator and
Quackenbusch, Cross, and Wulff didn't invent flytying, fishing or
catching.

HTH,
R

wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:28:42 -0500, Conan The Librarian
wrote:

wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:


Of course, you should take everything I say with a grain of salt,
because I fish the majority of my time in warm water, and I didn't tie
my first Royal Wullf until a few years ago.

I also can't spell "Wulff".

I'm sure one of the yanquis will be along real soon with some real help.

[snip]

Thanks Conan, something I'm trying to figure out on the Wullf's is if
the tail is 'weight' to balance the fly, and therefore should be about
as heavy as the wings, but shorter, rather than supporting the fly on
the water through a smaller diameter bunch of 1 shank length as in a
normal dry fly. Appreciate the comments.

FWIW, most of the store-bought RW I've seen do have a fairly thick
bunch of hair for the tail, so your counterbalance idea might have some
merit.

The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*

The synthetic is lighter than calfhair, and creates less mass where
it's tied in. IME that makes for a fly that's less nose-heavy and neater.


Chuck Vance (who needs all the help he can get in the neatness
department)

If I read y'alls posts correctly, and assuming y'all aren't _really_
overtying the wings, hackle, etc., the proportion between the hackle,
the lowest point of hook from the bend to the hook-point as the fly
should ride (generally, just back from the barb or trailing end of the
point), and the tail, and the imaginary line created by these three
points, with all such flies is important. IOW and for example, if
everything is alright save the tail (or hackle) being too short, it's
not gonna present properly. In such a case, you are creating a
"teeter-totter" effect.

As to material choice, use what works - it isn't an imitator and
Quackenbusch, Cross, and Wulff didn't invent flytying, fishing or
catching.

I agree in principle but I was schooled differently on the Wullf...the
flies in this photograph do not have the proportions you alude to
right?

http://business.virgin.net/flyfishin...ulff-grey.html

Thanks guys, this has been bugging me, pun intended.

TBone

On 27 Jun 2006 13:22:29 -0700, wrote:


I agree in principle but I was schooled differently on the Wullf...the
flies in this photograph do not have the proportions you alude to
right?

http://business.virgin.net/flyfishin...ulff-grey.html

From the "photograph" at the site, I can't tell with certainty on this
screen. I'm not sure that is a photo, or at least, an unretouched/
"unPhotoshopped" photo. Also, it appears to be a repeated, single
image. IAC, from what it appears, yes, IMO, the proportions appear more
or less OK.

Compare that with this:

http://www.phoneflies.com/individual...wulff/1206.asp

Again, on this screen, the tail on this one appears too short. I'll,
um, just ignore the rest of the fly...

TC,
R


Thanks guys, this has been bugging me, pun intended.

TBone

Conan The Librarian wrote:


The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*

No gasping here. The man himself wrote the the single upright
winged
versions worked just as well as the more 'popular' split wing.


The synthetic is lighter than calfhair, and creates less mass where
it's tied in. IME that makes for a fly that's less nose-heavy and neater.

Try some high quality marabou for a wing if you can ... makes for
a very attractive tie for a Royal. (Dessicant rather than paste
floatants
though)



Chuck Vance (who needs all the help he can get in the neatness
department)

:-) One day I'll put up a pic of my tying bench somewhere.


Steve

Stephen Welsh wrote:
Conan The Librarian wrote:


The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*


No gasping here. The man himself wrote the the single upright
winged
versions worked just as well as the more 'popular' split wing.


The synthetic is lighter than calfhair, and creates less mass where
it's tied in. IME that makes for a fly that's less nose-heavy and neater.


Try some high quality marabou for a wing if you can ... makes for
a very attractive tie for a Royal. (Dessicant rather than paste
floatants
though)

I believe the wing is only useful for visibility (by the angler). The
fish couldn't care less because they don't see it.

The only upright wings I tie on dry flies are synthetic post-wings for
parachute patterns.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Stephen Welsh wrote:
Conan The Librarian wrote:


The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*


IJ suggests -bottom loading i hope----royal wolf is my go to and in small
mountain streams seems to do the job---strongly suggest that my friend at
Troutflies sells them for 99cents each--they may be imported but none of
the small brookies I caught this past weekend just off the Blue ridge -
seemed to be worried about " fair trade"-- they were just hungry until the
sun was able to get thru the trees and onto to the creek. and throw some
shadows.
Please do not post any thing about the western clave --my planned
unattendance is causing a evening manhatten attack --do you think that
blond from Va. [ i think Las Vegas ] will be down at the seaside
bar?

Joe McIntosh wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

Stephen Welsh wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:



The way I've been tying mine seems to help with the problem of
"nose-heavy" flies, but will probably make the purists cringe. I use
"parapost" synthetics for the wing, and I don't always bother to post
the wings separately. *gasp*


IJ suggests -bottom loading i hope----royal wolf is my go to and in small
mountain streams seems to do the job---strongly suggest that my friend at
Troutflies sells them for 99cents each--they may be imported but none of
the small brookies I caught this past weekend just off the Blue ridge -
seemed to be worried about " fair trade"-- they were just hungry until the
sun was able to get thru the trees and onto to the creek. and throw some
shadows.
Please do not post any thing about the western clave --my planned
unattendance is causing a evening manhatten attack --do you think that
blond from Va. [ i think Las Vegas ] will be down at the seaside
bar?



though warren has kept a low profile, there are rumors a fish goddess
from southern california will descend for several days.

last report from warren - the fishing was going well on the madison,
salmonflies on the lower section of the river.

jeff