Testing fly rods

[Watermole+]

Dear Moley,

Your missives are a breath of fresh air and a joy to read,

Award yourself a pie, do!

[Nigel Rainton]

My thoughts on angling are featured in the latest edition of 'Fly Culture' magazine, without doubt the best fly fishing magazine in the world (yes, shameless plug). No adverts, no advertorial, just stories about fly fishing. Online subscription only :-)

https://flyculturemag.com/

[Ian]

That’s a great and informative post you have put up iasgair,I for one found it very interesting. I honestly never knew the right action for each rod,only wondering why (when purchasing a new rod) I always hold the rod up to test its flexibility. I can now say I like a fast action rod. I also now realise my guideline rod simply isn’t up to the job when it comes to distance casting my streamers. I get to cast so far out before the rod starts to feel too soft,like it can’t handle the load.
Funnily enough the orvis rod is the opposite. I can cast this out 40ft and it doesn’t feel like it’s enough to test the rod,usually resulting in a bit of spring back of the line tip,maybe either too fast action. I won’t make that mistake again now that you have gave the correct method to match rod and line.
If I was to be critical of anything of your post,then it’s that you didn’t put this up a year ago haha.
When you mentioned the boy on the Colorado river looking mismatched in all departments it totally described a young me. I made do with what I had and learned to use it,thinking that was the norm. I didn’t dare delve into the details of different rods and lines believing it to be too technical. Your advice is priceless and the next time I buy a rod I will use it as a guide.

Thanks very much

Ian

[Crucian]

What a lovely informative and entertaining thread, thanks for posting

[Iasgair]

That’s a great and informative post you have put up iasgair,I for one found it very interesting. I honestly never knew the right action for each rod,only wondering why (when purchasing a new rod) I always hold the rod up to test its flexibility. I can now say I like a fast action rod. I also now realise my guideline rod simply isn’t up to the job when it comes to distance casting my streamers. I get to cast so far out before the rod starts to feel too soft,like it can’t handle the load.
Funnily enough the orvis rod is the opposite. I can cast this out 40ft and it doesn’t feel like it’s enough to test the rod,usually resulting in a bit of spring back of the line tip,maybe either too fast action. I won’t make that mistake again now that you have gave the correct method to match rod and line.
If I was to be critical of anything of your post,then it’s that you didn’t put this up a year ago haha.
When you mentioned the boy on the Colorado river looking mismatched in all departments it totally described a young me. I made do with what I had and learned to use it,thinking that was the norm. I didn’t dare delve into the details of different rods and lines believing it to be too technical. Your advice is priceless and the next time I buy a rod I will use it as a guide.

Thanks very much

Ian

Hang on Ian. The post was about matching a rod with a line that you like because of the way it performs and other things. There's too many lines on the market these days to really keep up with, but once you found a line that brings out the soul in your rod, and I mean makes that rod cast beautifully and makes the sound of the angels singing when that line is traveling in the air ( ok, maybe not that much ) you found the right rod for your line.

There's also something else we have to think of and that's sometimes a rod that says it's a three weight may actually do better with a 4weight line or, ok, or, a half heavy or full heavy line that is marked as a 3 weight. That's one thing I never understood with lines is why they will make a 5 weight line the same weight in grams as a 6 weight line. Just buy a 6 weight line that you like, dang it. Some rods, and I find this out to be more with medium fast rods do this. I have a three weight medium fast where a true to weight line works better than a line that is in the upper range of a 3 weight. Other medium fast rods I have like the upper weight lines. Go figure? That proves all action rods in their proper family of actions are not built the same.

For example, again with the line itself, Airflo has a line called River & Stream here in the US, but it's called Lake Pro in the UK and Europe. This line is actually a 1 full weight heavy line. It's a fantastic line in my opinion, but they label it as a 5 weight when it really is a 6 weight in grams. I had a chart where it did show it in grams where it was on the lower to mid range of a true 6 weight line. I say call it what it actually is and stop confusing us, dang it.

Today I will post my fly rod formula that will help you choose the proper rod for the job. But like you stated, you like fast action rods, so this formula may not be for you.

[MWithell]

As I understand it, the weight of a fly line is in the line itself, so the load on the rod depends on the length of line out from the rod. The rod will work best when the optimum weight is in the air, so it's not quite so straightforward as matching the official line rating on the rod to the line with the same number. I haven't done fly fishing for ages, but I seem to recall that the AFTM is based on a standard length of line out from the tip ring. I can't remember the length - possibly ten yards, but it might be more.

[Watermole+]

As I understand it, the weight of a fly line is in the line itself, so the load on the rod depends on the length of line out from the rod. The rod will work best when the optimum weight is in the air, so it's not quite so straightforward as matching the official line rating on the rod to the line with the same number. I haven't done fly fishing for ages, but I seem to recall that the AFTM is based on a standard length of line out from the tip ring. I can't remember the length - possibly ten yards, but it might be more.

…and that is how I have also considered it.
Iasgair has made the complete technical analysis on this-and selecting your own perfect match in another thread, which I have to confess, find parts of rather above my own dyed-in-the-wool ways of thinking..Sorry Sir!

Will stand corrected of course, but think that AFTM meant the American Fishing Tackle Manufactures and when some kind of standards were being worked out for line weight to rod ratio, it was factored in that the average cast was about 30 feet-so yes, ten yards.

When fly lines were all solid-mostly oil dressed silk-and tapered at the ends, it is clear that weight reduces pro-rata to line diameter and since silk weight was a known quantity, a series of letters were given to set diameters and everyone knew (more or less) where they were. The letter “A” being the thickest and “J” being the thinnest. A slight complication set in when a thicker diameter bellied salmon line was required so the decided on “AA”.

Cane rods of certain lengths were matched with set tapers; for example, the average 8’ rod was usually happy with a double tapered line designated “HDH” and a 9’ one with “HCH” .
A really heavy weight-forward salmon line could be “GAAF”!

It all worked fairly well but as you say, was not set in stone and if you only made shorter casts, the rod would work better with a size bigger.

You are also quite right in saying that there was-and still is-a “sweet spot”, an optimum distance where the rod and line -not forgetting the leader length-all cast in perfect harmony. Even with the newer “#” method of matching, which replaced the letters when “ bubble “ lines became popular, there has to be this distance; it’s the law of physics, but we constantly vary our casting distance so some kind of compromise has to be found…

…which is where Iasgair’s analysis comes in.

Being an “Old School has-been fly fisher, I find the various types of carbon fibre rod taper / action, plus the innumerable permutations of fly line tapers available today absolutely terrifying and almost beyond comprehension.

It’s rather like modern coarse fishing tackle . I can honestly say that I went into a large fishing tackle shop in Launceston, Cornwall whilst visiting their garden centre last year, to buy some spools of Rio tippet material and whilst there, had a browse through the carp/ coarse tackle division. I can hand on heart say that I did not have even the slightest clue what much of it could ever be used for..!

I came away with the growing feeling that there was little if any connection between the fishing I had known and what it has developed into..

Somehow, it seems to have lost it’s way and gone from being a simple pleasure to a box-ticking scientific technical exercise.

I just cannot relate to why this is …

…but must say, I’m rather glad!

wm+

[Iasgair]

As I understand it, the weight of a fly line is in the line itself, so the load on the rod depends on the length of line out from the rod. The rod will work best when the optimum weight is in the air, so it's not quite so straightforward as matching the official line rating on the rod to the line with the same number. I haven't done fly fishing for ages, but I seem to recall that the AFTM is based on a standard length of line out from the tip ring. I can't remember the length - possibly ten yards, but it might be more.

[Iasgair]

Correct, it is ten yards. I'm glad you understand it. The same line can act differently on different rods, so find a line you like for that particular action of rod and find the rod that works the best with the line.

Problem is, if a person is a one brand name fanatic and will only buy Sage rods for example, this really messes up their minds because people like that won't always try another brand name rod. Winston fast rods are nothing like a fast rod from Sage. Winston tries to keep their rods as traditional as they can within the different actions.