Over lining a rod

[k-bob]

pat: "if you have double the line weight, but throw half the distance, the weight you are throwing is what the rod was weighted for."

right, that's the issue. I usually fish very small streams, and overline rods by one or two line weights.

 

[krayfish]

Waiting for first hand report from KeithS. At newbie jam,showed how under / over lining a rod changes things.

 

[pcray1231]

On any given fishing trip, you may be casting 20 feet or casting 60.

True, but we have different rods for that.

On big streams, I absolutely agree. You may be casting short or long. You don't overline the rod.

As was said, it's rated for 30 ft. Of fly line, NOT COUNTING the leader. And off the tip, not counting what's sitting in your guides. i.e. the rating is more like a 40ish foot cast. Now, it's true that if you're rod is rated a 5 wt, a 6 wt may be more ideal for those 20-30 ft casts, and a 4 wt for those 50+ ft casts. That said, a decent rod will do both with a 5 wt just fine. And a 5 wt is probably what you should have on there as the best at average distances and still pretty good at just about any distance you're going to encounter.

But there are streams where your 20 ft or 60 ft comment becomes 3 ft or 20 ft. You will never cast beyond about 20. And most will be in the 10ish ft range. And many of us have rods for this very purpose, that won't get used on the big stream. Ever. Because when you go to the big stream you use a different rod.

I'm not claiming you can't get it done by matching the rating to the line weight. You can. But in those particular situations overlining does make more sense than matching. I tried it, and became 100% convinced of it. I can do more on small, tight waters with an overlined rod. People look at me funny when I tell them I have a 7 wt line on for the tiny little brookie trickles. And then I go to a big stream with big fish and have 4 wt on! But it works.

 

[KeithS]

kray,
I'm flattered.
RichFishbelt,
I casted kray's 5 wt. Legend Elite ( I need one now ) at the jam with both a 5 wt and 6 wt line. The 6 weight line emphasized the feel of the rod loading at a shorter distance and improved my accuracy at those distances.
I also tried the 5 wt line on my 4 wt. Orvis Clearwater and had the same result.
Just don't expect to go up one line weight and have it feel the same at distances over 30 feet. But, you may like the way it feels then, it will just be different.

 

[outsider]

In years past, several rod manufacturers labeled rods for two lines sizes (i.e. my Thomas & Thomas 7'-6" Supra Lite is labeled no. 4 or no. 5 line). The choice, as I and others always saw, was personal preference, and the normal distance that a particular fly-rodder fished. The 80-20 rule. If you expect to make 80% or greater casts with your rod less than 30', why try to make it one size fits all? Concentrate on the 80%.

 

[JoeE]

It is a loaded question that said I talked to Walton Powell several years ago and he always designed rods and his theory was always one up and two down. To me, I always found that it depends on the design, taper of the rod and the difference in modern line manufactures. IMO not all 4wt lines per say are created equal not to be confused with distance fished and the added weight and stress with the line fished. I have always found that 90 percent of the circular rods I’ve fished and cast need to go up a line weight and probable 40 percent of the bamboo rods and older bamboo rods a crapshoot. I would have no problem putting a 4wt line on a small 3wt rod fishing 30’ or less (agree with other posts). I would have a problem putting an 8wt line on a 7wt rod fishing a full line.

 

[paragon]

I don't know if you have already made a decision on the line yet, but I have the same rod. I can tell you from personal experience that the 3 wt line is plenty. The action on this rod is so slow, it would probably load with a 2 wt line. Hope this helps.

 

[gfen]

paragon wrote:
I don't know if you have already made a decision on the line yet, but I have the same rod. I can tell you from personal experience that the 3 wt line is plenty. The action on this rod is so slow, it would probably load with a 2 wt line. Hope this helps.

So, one could say...

gfen wrote:
It's not a rod that needs slowing down.

 

[mt_flyfisher]

I fished a Sage XP 9' 4 wt all year a couple years ago with a 5 wt weight forward floating line on it without knowing that's what weight line I had on it, and I thought it did just fine, in all the conditions I fished with it. In fact, I think I kept that rod set up that way all year last year, and probably preferred fishing it over my 5 wt rods.

John

 

[RCFetter]

Lefty Kreh article:

How To Choose the Right Fly Line Weight

In addition to using heavier line he gives some examples on when you should use a lighter line.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

Is the CGR the green blank or the red one? The red glass rod Cabelas came out with is not slow, at least by glass standards. I overlined a 2wt with 3wt line for a weekend of small stream fishing, and it was still too fast for my liking.

 

[thesmayway]

It's the green blank 50th anniversary rod.

Lots of good input here all. Thanks

So if I take lefty kreh's advice I should try a 4wt line

 

[The_Sasquatch]

Okay. That is a slow rod.

 

[johnstevens5462]

Tossing around rod tapers to define the performance of a rod is misleading. Unfortunately it's not the fly fishermen who created this problem but the rod mfgs.

Rod taper defines the flex profile - not stiffness - so a fast action taper does not necessarily mean the rod is stiff just as a slow action taper does not mean the rod is soft. Recovery rate and power define the stiffness or softness of the rod. Action simply defines the bend profile.

The problem stems from the fact that in today's terminology, action is used to describe the overall performance of the rod, lumping flex profile, recovery and stiffness/softness all into one generic term - fast, medium or slow - based on a specific line rating.

Example, in today's terms you can have two "fast action" 4wt rods. Rod #1 has a soft, flexible tip, followed by a medium stiff mid section followed by a stiff butt section (a traditional fast action design) and rod #2 has a medium stiff tip followed by a stiff mid section followed by a super stiff butt section (modern fast action design). Both rods have the same flex profile (fast action) but rod #1 will feel softer than rod #2. Irrespective of line, rod #1 provides an advantage fishing in close because it has more tip flex. A specific example would be comparing the 8.5 foot 4wt Winston BiiiX and Sage ONE rods. Both are fast action but both are distinctly different rods.

Before the introduction of super stiff graphite rods designed for high line speeds and shooting the entire fly line, slow action rods were the rod of choice for casting longer distances (50-70 feet) and slow action rods were generally heavier line sizes. Tips and mid sections were somewhat stiff and the flex was predominately in the butt section so the overall design provided the power and backbone to carry the heavier line and get the distance. The stiffer tip and mid sections kept the rod from excessive deflection during the cast, which helped maintain accuracy and power. Because the rod flexed in the butt section, the rod was "slower" to respond so the casting stroke needed to be smoother and slower but this did not mean the rod was soft.

Fishability is the key characteristic completely overlooked by everyone. By taking rod #2 above and overlining it you can change the casting feel (i.e., flex profile during casting) to the same as rod #1 using a lighter line but it won't change how rod #2 responds to a load (a fish) under fishing conditions.

Softer tips are better suited when fishing in close quarters, as it help protect lighter tippets and also helps prevent the fishermen from ripping the fly out of the trout's mouth if using heavier tippet. Putting it point blank, "slowing" a rod for casting sake by using a heavier line does diddly-squat when fighting a fish. A twelve inch brookie in current applies the same force to a softer fast action 2wt rod with 2wt line as it does to a stiffer fast action 2wt rod overlined with 4wt line to make it easier to cast. In this instance the softer rod is much better suited for fishing especially in close quarters and when buying a rod this is what you should be considering.

The bottom line is there are more rod configurations available today than ever before so there is no need to overline or underline a rod, especially for trout fishing, if you bought the right rod in the first place. If you bought a 3wt rod but need to overline it in order to cast it at short distances or handle larger flies, you bought the wrong rod.

 

[sandfly]

Thank You Johnstevens !

 

[k-bob]

"there is no need to overline or underline a rod, especially for trout fishing, if you bought the right rod in the first place. If you bought a 3wt rod but need to overline it in order to cast it at short distances or handle larger flies, you bought the wrong rod."

OP was about overlining a 5'9" rod for small native trout in places like the smokies. For very small streams, I fish with less expensive rods and use heavier tippets to retrieve more flies from trees and brush. Of course a heavier fly line makes no change in handling the small fish you catch on small streams.

I personally like to overline one and two weight rods with three weight lines, but there are a lot of issues ... how small a stream/how short the casts, dry or nymph, fly size, do you bow and arrow cast?, etc.

What I do may not work for others.

But overlining for very small streams makes sense when rods are rated to cast the weight of 30 ft of fly line. Considering the leader and rod length, that's much more line than I usually cast on a very small native trout stream.

 

[pcray1231]

johnstevens, that was a good write up.

Speaking specifically to a small stream rod.

- I'm typically casting with anywhere from 3 to 15 feet of fly line off the tip, rarely will I ever go farther than that. Average is probably 7 or 8 ft of fly line, with another 5-7 ft leader beyond that.

- I'm catching primarily 5-9 inchers. A 12 incher is a true trophy.

- I'm typically using 3x-5x tippet on short leaders. I almost NEVER break the line unintentionally. Tippet protection doesn't enter the equation at all.

- I don't really care about the fight.

- The goal is to be able to cast as long a distance as is possible in often very tight surroundings.

So, my main priority is generating high line speed with little or no backcast. I need a very tight loop to get through small windows in the brush, under branches, etc. There needs to be some momentum behind it too, for if you do hit a leaf or two you can actually power the fly through it. It is not a finesse game. It's more like a sledgehammer approach.

After trying many, my current thinking is that my ideal rod would be a fast but still progressive action 5 wt at about 7 ft in length, with a 7 wt line loaded on it. The progressive action is because the tip does need to be on the soft side to load for the really short casts. But you need to get into the stiff part pretty quickly.

But I'm open to suggestion.

 

[k-bob]

I agree on a lot of the "tiny native stream" conditions pat mentions. small fish. heavy tippets. short casts: foot to fly = 20ft, + or -. casting through windows. sidearm casts under down trees. no backing

 

[pcray1231]

no backing

hehe. Well, I do have backing on mine. That said, I've never seen it. And that's despite only having half a line on there. (I use a DT and cut it in half, the other half stays in my basement so I KNOW I'm going to get use out of the 2nd half).

I always laugh in back yard casting. "Look, I can cast a whole line!!!"

 

[gfen]

thesmayway wrote:
So if I take lefty kreh's advice I should try a 4wt line

I'd take the advise of the three people in this thread who own, or have owned, this rod and just fish it with a 3wt line.