Big streamer rod - 7wt vs. 8wt

jimbo wrote:

Over and underlining can really improve rod performance if it is done with
some thought. I often use a 6wt line on a 3wt rod when fishing mountain
streams with small pools and thick vegetation. The rod loads quickly and I
am only making 10-15 ft casts. On the other hand, if most of my casts are
expected to be on the long side, dropping a line weight or two can really
speed up a rod. I think the current trend by line manufacturers to make
certain lines "a bit heavier" for the faster rods has fouled up the whole
line selection process though. At least Rio reports the actual line weight
in grains (on their web site, haven't checked their packaging lately), and I
seem to recall that at least one manufacturer now offers lines in half
weight increments.

Yep, Cortland has their "precision taper" series oflines that are
available in half weights. I put a 3.5 on my TFO 3-wt. for my NC trip
in June and was really happy with it. I'm guessing I could have even
gone higher, but that worked well for close range fishing and I could
still handle longer casts when needed (or possible).


Chuck Vance

Conan The Librarian wrote in news:dgeh1c$27re$1
@news.swt.edu:


Yep, Cortland has their "precision taper" series oflines that are
available in half weights. I put a 3.5 on my TFO 3-wt. for my NC trip
in June and was really happy with it. I'm guessing I could have even
gone higher, but that worked well for close range fishing and I could
still handle longer casts when needed (or possible).


Chuck Vance



SA has a line (I think the Mastery series) where the line is actually a
half weight above what it says on the box. Makes you wonder if rods are
being underweighted.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
Conan The Librarian wrote in news:dgeh1c$27re$1
@news.swt.edu:


Yep, Cortland has their "precision taper" series oflines that are
available in half weights. I put a 3.5 on my TFO 3-wt. for my NC trip
in June and was really happy with it. I'm guessing I could have even
gone higher, but that worked well for close range fishing and I could
still handle longer casts when needed (or possible).


Chuck Vance



SA has a line (I think the Mastery series) where the line is actually a
half weight above what it says on the box. Makes you wonder if rods are
being underweighted.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

I don't think rods are being underweighted. I think what threw the line
designations off was the fast action rods.
-tom

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in message
...

"jimbo" wrote in message
...

Snippage

Over and underlining can really improve rod performance if it is done
with some thought. I often use a 6wt line on a 3wt rod when fishing
mountain streams with small pools and thick vegetation. The rod loads
quickly and I am only making 10-15 ft casts.

Wow, over-lining a 3wt rod with 6wt line???
-tom

Yep. I can't say it was my original intention the first time I did it
(grabbed the wrong reel when I left the house, it was either use the 6wt, or
go home), but it worked great. Think about it: a 3wt line is rated at 100
grains for the first 30 feet, and a 6wt line is rated at 160 grains for the
first 30 feet. When my longest cast will be only 15 feet, the rod is
probably seeing just 70 grains or so of the line, well below the design load
for the rod. In fact, for such short casts, you could probably go to an 8wt
line (at 210 grains) and still be fine, except that most 8wt lines are a bit
short on delicacy. The amazing thing was that I tried extending my casts at
a later date, and I could not believe how well the little 3wt handled a 6wt
line - out to about 40-45 feet (but it r e a l l y s l o w e d down the
action, predictably). Modern rods have a lot more in reserve than I ever
thought.

Jim Ray

"jimbo" wrote in message
...

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in message
...

"jimbo" wrote in message
...

Snippage

Over and underlining can really improve rod performance if it is done
with some thought. I often use a 6wt line on a 3wt rod when fishing
mountain streams with small pools and thick vegetation. The rod loads
quickly and I am only making 10-15 ft casts.

Wow, over-lining a 3wt rod with 6wt line???
-tom

Yep. I can't say it was my original intention the first time I did it
(grabbed the wrong reel when I left the house, it was either use the 6wt,
or go home), but it worked great. Think about it: a 3wt line is rated at
100 grains for the first 30 feet, and a 6wt line is rated at 160 grains
for the first 30 feet. When my longest cast will be only 15 feet, the rod
is probably seeing just 70 grains or so of the line, well below the design
load for the rod. In fact, for such short casts, you could probably go to
an 8wt line (at 210 grains) and still be fine, except that most 8wt lines
are a bit short on delicacy. The amazing thing was that I tried extending
my casts at a later date, and I could not believe how well the little 3wt
handled a 6wt line - out to about 40-45 feet (but it r e a l l y s l o
w e d down the action, predictably). Modern rods have a lot more in
reserve than I ever thought.

Jim Ray

Jim, I did think about it....actually thought about you breaking the tip off
using a 3wt rod with 6wt line...but you must be a very skilled caster. I'm
sure the rod was bending pretty well with that heavy line on there, talk
about loading the rod. I have over and underlined rods before, but only
going up or down one weight.
I cast a 5, 6 and an 8 rod with matching lines.
-tom

On Fri, 16 Sep 2005, Jarmo Hurri wrote:

Conan ... but if dealing with wind and big bulky flies, the 8-wt. is
Conan the ticket. It's not as much fun to fight a fish on a rod that
Conan big ...

I've given serious thougth to this fighting issue, and I wonder if the
situation would be a bit better with a medium-action rod.

Not sure what sort of streamers you want to throw but if they are wind
resistant (like bass bugs) then a fast action rod will be better. For
trout I throw plenty of streamers using my 4 wt and 6 wt rods without any
difficulty.

Mu

I've given serious thougth to this fighting issue, and I wonder if
the situation would be a bit better with a medium-action rod.

Mu Not sure what sort of streamers you want to throw but if they are
Mu wind resistant (like bass bugs) then a fast action rod will be
Mu better.

Agreed. I guess that from the point of view of casting, a fast 7wt
_might_ be as good as a medium-fast 8wt. But I currently think that
from the point of view of fighting the fish, a slower 8wt would be
better than a faster 7wt. For me, that is.

Full-sinking and sink-tip lines make the equation even more
complicated. On the other hand, my two-handed rod is very slow, and
I've learned to use it quite effectively with a type IV fast-sinking
shooting head.

Mu For trout I throw plenty of streamers using my 4 wt and 6 wt rods
Mu without any difficulty.

Me too. For example, the rod that I use on most local streams is a
6'6" 3wt, on which I use a 4wt DT line. Most of the streams are not
what you would call a 'small stream', so I need to do some actual
casting with the rod. And I use - for example - heavily weighted
Woolly Buggers with no problems.

But with large flies that are very wind-resistant and/or absorb a lot
of water, using lighter gear is just not fun - especially when there's
little or no room for backcasts, and the line is just too light to
lift the fly off the water in a switch or spey cast.

--
Jarmo Hurri

Commercial email countermeasures included in header email
address. Remove all garbage from header email address when replying,
or just use .

I've given serious thougth to this fighting issue, and I wonder if
the situation would be a bit better with a medium-action rod. For
me, in the lower line weights, the action of the rod does affect
how "big" a fish feels. Might be just psychological, but I used to
have a fast 4wt, with which the smaller fish felt smaller than with
the medium-action 5wt that I'm using now.

Conan There's probably some merit to that idea. My 8-wt. is a
Conan Fenwick HMG bought back in the early eighties. Its action is
Conan closer to fiberglass than graphite, and it does make a
Conan difference in how big the fish feel.

It's intersting that some of the top rod manufacturers - most notably
Winston, Scott and T&T - no longer offer high-end medium-action rods
in 8wt. Sage still has the SLT, but otherwise I feel like I'm swimming
against the current here. One of my dealers said that "it doesn't make
sense to pay a lot of money for a medium-action rod". I don't really
understand why.

Maybe I'm just an outlier.

--
Jarmo Hurri

Commercial email countermeasures included in header email
address. Remove all garbage from header email address when replying,
or just use .

The problem isn't coming from the line companies, it's the rod companies.
The majority are underrating the rods weight so it will hold more line in
the air and the average rod buyer thinks he's buying so boomer when he could
have done the same thing underlining the rod he has now. The Sage TCRs are
all rated at least 1 line light in the lower weights and starting with the 8
wt 2 lines light. Have tested quite a few rods and a bunch more are all
listed at www.superbob.org/cc.htm. There are no required specs for rod blank
ratings, there has only been specs for fly lines.

wrote in
nk.net:

The majority are underrating the rods weight so it will hold more line
in the air and the average rod buyer thinks he's buying so boomer when
he could have done the same thing underlining the rod he has now.

Then how come the line companies are creating lines a half class heavier??

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply