How much fly line?

Ken Fortenberry typed:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I don't intend to prove anything.

You can not prove anything at all, ...

Your theories are so far beyond the pale as to be ridiculous
parodies when it comes to real life fishing and for most folks
it is about real life fishing and not some nonsensical physics
exercise in distance casting. It is sufficient to label your
"articles" as nonsense for the benefit of those who don't know
any better because arguing with you is an exercise in futility.

You two can fight about anything, probably because you're so much alike.
;-)

Here's the important consolidated newbie information (remember who started
this thread?): If you travel 100 miles to fish and then discover all you
brought was your 3wt rod and your 8wt line, you can still fish using Mike's
suggested rig. But, as Ken will surely tell you, plan ahead and don't get
yourself in that situation in the first place. The best fish always keep
just beyond the reach of your cast - no matter how far the cast.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Tom Littleton wrote:
wrote:
Well now dumbo, it will doubtless be extremely interesting seeing how
you manage to prove that particular bit of idiocy.

shoot, he's proven greater bits of idiocy than that, over
the years I have read his stuff.

Do you really believe the *only* thing that matters is the weight
of the flyline ? Talk about idiocy.

Stand 20 feet away from a piece of glass and try to break it
by throwing 4 ounces of something at the glass. Are you going
to throw a four ounce piece of lead or four ounces of feathers ?
Why ? They both weigh the same, consult the chart dumbo. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

Tim J. wrote:
Ken Fortenberry typed:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I don't intend to prove anything.
You can not prove anything at all, ...
Your theories are so far beyond the pale as to be ridiculous
parodies when it comes to real life fishing and for most folks
it is about real life fishing and not some nonsensical physics
exercise in distance casting. It is sufficient to label your
"articles" as nonsense for the benefit of those who don't know
any better because arguing with you is an exercise in futility.

You two can fight about anything, probably because you're so much alike.
;-)

No need to be insulting.

Here's the important consolidated newbie information (remember who started
this thread?): snip

I would offer the following consolidated newbie info:

1. You don't need a tape measure, a caliper and a scale accurate
to the grain to choose a flyline for your fly rod. If you buy a
3wt fly rod buy a 3wt flyline.

2. When someone talks about casting 90 ft of 3 wt flyline with a
3wt fly rod they're talking about a circus act, not fly fishing.

3. Take a lot of what you read here with a healthy dose of salt.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Mar 20, 12:07 am, wrote:


The rod action, taper, composition, or anything else, is completely
irrelevant. The ONLY thing that carries flies anywhere when fly-
casting is the momentum of the fly line.


Mere mortals as myself will continue to depend upon fly rods to
aerolize the fly line to move the tippet to deliver the fly.

On 20 Mar 2007 10:21:49 -0700, "Wayne Knight"
wrote:

Mere mortals as myself will continue to depend upon fly rods to
aerolize the fly line to move the tippet to deliver the fly.

Amen. And I can cast a #2 10x Grey Ghost 60 feet with my 4 weight
Sage. No problem whatsoever. Back to lurk, hoping this is the end
of a useless thread.

Dave LaCourse wrote:
"Wayne Knight" wrote:
Mere mortals as myself will continue to depend upon fly rods to
aerolize the fly line to move the tippet to deliver the fly.

Amen. And I can cast a #2 10x Grey Ghost 60 feet with my 4 weight
Sage. No problem whatsoever. Back to lurk, hoping this is the end
of a useless thread.

But to cast a fly that size you must be using a cut down 12wt flyline
on that Sage 4wt. Right ? ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

Ken Fortenberry typed:
Tim J. wrote:
Ken Fortenberry typed:
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I don't intend to prove anything.
You can not prove anything at all, ...
Your theories are so far beyond the pale as to be ridiculous
parodies when it comes to real life fishing and for most folks
it is about real life fishing and not some nonsensical physics
exercise in distance casting. It is sufficient to label your
"articles" as nonsense for the benefit of those who don't know
any better because arguing with you is an exercise in futility.

You two can fight about anything, probably because you're so much
alike. ;-)

No need to be insulting.

You're right. Sorry Mike.

Here's the important consolidated newbie information (remember who
started this thread?): snip

I would offer the following consolidated newbie info:

1. You don't need a tape measure, a caliper and a scale accurate
to the grain to choose a flyline for your fly rod. If you buy a
3wt fly rod buy a 3wt flyline.

2. When someone talks about casting 90 ft of 3 wt flyline with a
3wt fly rod they're talking about a circus act, not fly fishing.

3. Take a lot of what you read here with a healthy dose of salt.

I agree with all three. Hey, maybe *we* are a lot alik. . .eeeewwwww!
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:04:32 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

But to cast a fly that size you must be using a cut down 12wt flyline
on that Sage 4wt. Right ? ;-)

Who da hell would cut down a perfectly good 12wt line to toss a size 2
10x Grey Ghost? I use a 4 wt sinking line (on an Orvis...gasp
reel). No problem casting 60+ feet. If you're standing on the rock,
ya gotta cast *across* the two currents dontchaknow, and dats more
than 60 feet.

BTL

On 19 Mar 2007 19:58:58 -0700, wrote:

A whole bunch of **** showing he doesn't know what the hell he is
talking about...

On Mar 20, 3:31 am, "Wayne Knight" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

There are only very very few people who will be able to cast a full
#3DT line. Indeed, the vast majority will never even get close to 65
feet. But there are plenty who can quite easily cast thirty feet of
#10 line on a #3 weight rod quite a long way.

There's your problem with generalizations, many three weights don't have the
taper to not get overpowered by 30' of #10 line, but without resorting to
name calling I would have to agree trying to cast 90' of 3wt is different
than trying to cast 30' of 10wt, regardless of the rod.

Furthermore, there is NOBODY who can cast a weighted #6 woolly bugger
60 feet, or even close to it, using a #3 weight line and a #3 weight
rod.

"NOBODY?" Really? And you know this how?

I'm not a particularly accomplished caster and I would take that bet.
Regardless I know several who could make that cast.

Between you and Tom, I'd trust Tom's claim that he knew people who could
cast 6 miles with a broken, rotten broomstick and sewing thread over
your claim that you knew people who had once heard the term "fly rod"...

This involves double hauling the thirty foot head ( or however long
the matched piece happens to be), and shooting the backing. It is not
even particularly difficult.

The weight is the same, merely the length of the weight has changed.
This has no affect at all on the rod.

Disagree again, The weight of the line is but one factor. The length of the
aerolized line is but one component of the process, that's why people who
try to back cast with 30' of WF line often loose it because the
combination of rod load, line speed, and taper get all shot to hell when the
fatter "head" portion is dependent upon the skinnier running line to support
the flight path. There were specific rods made to aerolize line but they
tend to be softer action than the medium fast to fast action rods in vogue
on this side of the pond.

The taper and other factors are irrelevant. If the rod can cast 200
grains, then it can cast 200 grains of anything. The length of that
weight is also quite irrelevant (within certain limits and dependent
on technique) whether it is a one inch piece of lead, or a thirty foot
piece of line.

A thirty foot piece of line weighing 200 grains can carry a very much
heavier fly that a 60 foot piece of line weighing 200 grains.

Um...are you actually reading what you are writing, Herr Dokter
Schitzenpacker?

I know a couple of the worlds best casters. Not one of them

Unless you intend that the group of "the worlds best casters" is the
entire group of people who have ever been a caster, past or present, you
could have no idea if you knew this couple or not; you might know, at
least in the carnal sense, the winner of last year's Hamburg Homo
Invitational Casting Tournament or the Nazi Drag Queen Fly Throw-off.

But even if someone could somehow determine that they actually knew "a
couple of the worlds best casters," it would be "neither of them," not
"Not one of them," and the importance of that distinction is, again,
based on the number in the overall group consisting of those you don't
_claim_ to know...IAC, your knowing any of them would be not relevant to
the gibberish you've written...

can cast a
weighted woolly bugger sixty feet using a #3 weight line, and
regardless of the rod.

Then yer buddies ain't, in objective terms, all that great of pack of
casters...you limpwristers better stick to sashaying around and boring
'em at the local drag queen events...

With regard to carrying heavy flies the weight of the fly-line in use
is the only relevant factor.

Well, whaddayaknow...

Unless

THERE ARE NO OTHER POSSIBILITIES!! Haven't you heard? Mike Connor has
spoken on the subject, and he and two - that's right, _TWO_ of his
fly-tossing, ice-water swimming bunghole buds have...ACHTUNG
muthaflockers...spoken: the weight of the fly-line in use is the ONLY
relevant factor!!!

In the end (pardon the pun), you're a ****in' dip****...now go drag yer
ass back under the trainstation porch...when you learn a little
something about casting, come on back and bore me some more, ya hear...

Dickie

I still say the trees keep the line aloft as often
as the casting..........
Tom