Biot Body CDC Dry Fly

[tctrout]

I wanted to share a pattern that has some great features to fool difficult fish in PA. This dry fly has a biot body, cdc thorax, and easy-to-tie Realistic Mayfly Wings; all are features that help to make this Biot Body CDC Dry Fly very effective. The fly also rides low, and can resemble both a dun and emerger in the water. Finally, though I tie a BWO in the video, this pattern can be modified to represent most mayflies ouy there.

If you've used biot bodies in the past, I'd love to hear about your thoughts on them, and if you add any type of reinforcement to ensure they stay secure.

Thanks for checking it out,

TC

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgkTrtUn6q8[/youtube]

 

[pmelle]

Great tie TC. I'm still new to tying but having lotta fun with it. I've been reading a lot about hyper realistic flies being a little less effective and was wondering your thoughts on the subject.

 

[pabrookie94]

pmelle wrote:
Great tie TC. I'm still new to tying but having lotta fun with it. I've been reading a lot about hyper realistic flies being a little less effective and was wondering your thoughts on the subject.

I'll add my .02 to this pmelle. When talking about super realistic flies, a lot of the downfalls (IMO) come in terms of movement. Think about say a mayflies gills, legs, tails, etc. all moving throughout the water column. With super realistic flies this often means tying with very rigid or pre-formed synthetic materials such as nymph legs or something similar and this means less or zero movement in the water.

I believe this holds true to nymphs, wet flies, and streamers more so than dry flies because of the typical "dead-drift" on the film of the water where IMO movement isn't a trigger. Although I do tie often with biots as tails for stoneflies I do also tie similar patterns with say pheasant tail or other tailing fibers which give more movement. This is simply because I believe a "squirmy" looking nymph is much more attractive to a fish than one that looks like a non-moving pebble floating through the water column.

Again, all of this is my own opinion and I am certain some aspects of my thinking are incorrect.

JP

 

[GenCon]

Tim, nice fly. I do at times use biots for bodies. I usually add a layer of head cement over the thread base. Then wrap biot on the wet cement. It seems to help body hold up better.

As far as pmelle and pabrookie. Here is my take on this. The wings TC used I am sure are meant to show silhouette not movement. Wings on most dry flys have no movement. The key to this fly is the tail, the cdc legs. That is where the movement comes from. I do agree that movement within your fly is key to catching fish. Although that being said there are many flys we all use that have no movement. A standard EHC for example. Yet that fly has probably caught more fish than half the other patterns combined.
Again I say silhouette. So... movement on nymphs, wet flys, streamers I say yes extremely important. IMO.

Maybe TC and some others will chime in with their thoughts.

GenCon

 

[troutpoop]

Nice job as always.
I have on order the green drake Frosty fly kit. Interested to give them a try.

 

[tctrout]

Thanks, PMelle, and lots here so far in this thread. For starters, welcome to fly tying, and that's great you're enjoying it; it's an incredible hobby...and slightly addicting!

Realistic flies definitely push an edge of this, and I only slightly dip my toes in the water with them. When I go to shows and see some of the creations others have tied, I am absolutely impressed...but in most cases, I wouldn't fish with them (for many reasons). In the case of these wings, I definitely am going for significant profile it creates versus the veining that is obvious to our eyes.

As mentioned by others, some of those patterns are much more rigid, and one downside is that when the wings are oversized, there is more of a chance of the tippet twisting and becoming crazy.

Do they look realistic? Absolutely! Does it make an impact with fish? I can't say definitively because I don't fish them enough. Versus tying a complete fly tied with those materials, I tend to just pick and choose parts, like the Realistic Wings featured in my video.

I hope that helps a little and gives you some insight into my thoughts. When in doubt, try those flies, and let me know the success you have. If I can give you one piece of advice, it's that flies perform differently in various situations, thus I am positive that you'll find some in which the realistic flies outperform others. Good luck!

TC

pmelle wrote:
Great tie TC. I'm still new to tying but having lotta fun with it. I've been reading a lot about hyper realistic flies being a little less effective and was wondering your thoughts on the subject.

 

[tctrout]

Thanks, GenCon, and great suggestion on the head cement. Have you ever counter-wrapped with thread? I feel like it would be a little more secure, but have never liked the appearance. For nymphs, a thin wire works perfectly, yet I have only coated the outside with head cement (for both security and to enhance the colors underneath).

Thanks for your other comments, and I agree regarding silhouette. I have always bought into Marinaro's thoughts regarding the wings, especially in certain situations. I can't say that they're always needed, simply because the parachute dry flies I use have almost nothing as the post (which opens the argument that they could be taken as a spinner or emerger).

Finally, I absolutely agree with the notion of movement, and select materials that also suggest that (i.e. barred fibers).

Thanks again for the kind words,

TC

GenCon wrote:
Tim, nice fly. I do at times use biots for bodies. I usually add a layer of head cement over the thread base. Then wrap biot on the wet cement. It seems to help body hold up better.

As far as pmelle and pabrookie. Here is my take on this. The wings TC used I am sure are meant to show silhouette not movement. Wings on most dry flys have no movement. The key to this fly is the tail, the cdc legs. That is where the movement comes from. I do agree that movement within your fly is key to catching fish. Although that being said there are many flys we all use that have no movement. A standard EHC for example. Yet that fly has probably caught more fish than half the other patterns combined.
Again I say silhouette. So... movement on nymphs, wet flys, streamers I say yes extremely important. IMO.

Maybe TC and some others will chime in with their thoughts.

GenCon