Over lining a rod...

Pennkev-

I don't think overlining a rod by one or two lines in normal fishing situations will cause you to break your rod. It is fairly common for competition distance casters to blow up rods while casting though. I've never blew up a rod casting but i can't cast 110' either. I can barely get into my backing.
 
As referenced by my post I also underline and overlined rods depending on situations. It's a common thing to do really, not once did I say not to and not once did I mean to say it will always damage your rod. I just threw out an experience of mine where I believe it did damage a rod in the real world. In his situation I believe he would be fine, my caution was general and did not relate to the OP. I think trying to analyze what happened from a computer screen without being there is more geeky than talking about it but IMHO of course.
Don't take it so seriously.

I agree that using the 2 wt mentioned would even be fine with 4wt. The best thing to do is take it out and test it with what ever line and use what feels best.
 
moon1284 wrote:
Pennkev-

I don't think overlining a rod by one or two lines in normal fishing situations will cause you to break your rod. It is fairly common for competition distance casters to blow up rods while casting though. I've never blew up a rod casting but i can't cast 110' either. I can barely get into my backing.
Click to expand...

My fly lines are 100 feet, I'm sure as hell not casting to my backing. Impressive moon.
 
Mine are 90 and I don't get into my backing in normal fishing. Plus I'm talking about 6 or 7 weight rods. I'm sure many guys here can put me to shame in the casting (and fishing) department.
 
I don't over-line rods because I typically cast them before I buy them, or on occasion read reviews about a rod. I made one mistake: in the 80's I bought a Sage 586 RPL sight unseen. I bought into the hype (faster is better). I hated that rod, IMHO it was an absolute tomato stake. However, I did find that some of the bamboo rods I bought in the 70's responded well to a line lighter than the manufacture"s recommendation.

Recommendation: Cast the rod, then buy it if you like it.
 
One problem I have with over lining and under lining a rod is the PRICE needed to experiment! I use cheaper fly lines but the average price of line is $50 I bet now. I can't spend $50 on a line and then find out I should have gone up or down a weight. It takes a lot of money to experiment with different lines. Most of the time this means extra spools which means more $$$. I can't afford these newer $800 fly rods which seems the average price of the higher end ones now. That's why I go into rod building. I have found blanks that perform as well as the high end rods for the fraction of the cost. The Baston Eternity2 series blanks that I am going to build after this small 2wt got reviews conparing it to the higher end Sages. The blanks run about $160. This fishing sport used to be affordable but in the last 10 years wow has the price gone up!
 
bigjohn58 wrote:
One problem I have with over lining and under lining a rod is the PRICE needed to experiment! I use cheaper fly lines but the average price of line is $50 I bet now. I can't spend $50 on a line and then find out I should have gone up or down a weight. It takes a lot of money to experiment with different lines. !
Click to expand...

Ehh, I've gotten some great deals on end of year sales or on discontinued colors/styles of lines. You just have to keep your eye on all the big on-line retailers and also places like Sierra Trading Post and Madison River Outfitters. Between these sites, I snagged some Airflos for about $15 each and a pair of Sharkwave GPX's for under $30 each in the past year or so. Granted, starting from scratch and buying a selection of lines is still going to be expensive, but once you have just one line of each weight from 4 through 7 you have enough lines to start to figure out what works best with which rods for a given situation. You don't need two or three lines in each weight to play around with over/under lining.
 
One thing I've noticed with the premium lines sold at a discount is that they are kind of old and have lots of memory. It doesn't seem to matter the brand. Any line I've bought of stp has needed a "break in period". The same with cortland 444 bought from hook and hackle.

I spent a lot of time this spring untangling running line or dt line 50 ft into the spool. A lot of times I cursed myself and wish I spent the extra 10 or 20 bucks so I wouldn't be untangling the line I'm trying too shoot every other cast.
 
bigjohn58 wrote:
One problem I have with over lining and under lining a rod is the PRICE needed to experiment! I use cheaper fly lines but the average price of line is $50 I bet now. I can't spend $50 on a line and then find out I should have gone up or down a weight. It takes a lot of money to experiment with different lines. Most of the time this means extra spools which means more $$$. I can't afford these newer $800 fly rods which seems the average price of the higher end ones now. That's why I go into rod building. I have found blanks that perform as well as the high end rods for the fraction of the cost. The Baston Eternity2 series blanks that I am going to build after this small 2wt got reviews conparing it to the higher end Sages. The blanks run about $160. This fishing sport used to be affordable but in the last 10 years wow has the price gone up!
Click to expand...

So just don't do it. I've never over or underlined a rod. And back in the 1970s and 1980s I never ever even heard discussion of that. It's only about in the 1990s, when companies began making some very fast action graphite rods, which were also their most expensive rods, that you began hearing a lot about overlining rods.

People would buy the most expensive rods made by Loomis, Sage, and Orvis, which were very fast action, not like how they cast with the rated line. So buy a higher weight line to make it cast with a slower action which they preferred.

It's madness. You can just buy a much lower priced rod, that has a more moderate action than those rods, put on the rated line and just fish.
 
PennKev wrote:
salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
This post is great!
I would also caution on adding high stress to old graphite blanks by overlining, fiberglass holds up much better here IMO.
Click to expand...

No.

This is completely untrue.

By that logic, long casts over-stress graphite also as it requires more line out of the tip, thus "overlining" and stressing it.

The stress of overlining is literally nothing compared to the stress of landing a good fish, coming tight to a snag, hooking a tree, etc.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are getting at, but I am not completely disagreeing with either. You both have merit.

The longer the cast, the more stress on the rod. We all probably agree with that. Over-lining can add to that. Or not. Depending on your casting stroke, and whether you change it depending on the line. It's simple physics.

Plus, the only way there is more stress on a rod while landing a fish or during snags is if you are abusing the rod.

I've never broken a flyrod while landing a fish, good, bad, or otherwise. As far as coming tight on a snag, or hooking a tree, I don't recall ever breaking one that way either. But then, I am careful not to double over the rod.

On the other hand, I have broken a few fly-rods while simply trying to get a few more feet out of a cast by muscling it. It always involved heavier old production bamboo rods. They usually broke at a ferrule.

Was I using too heavy of a line? Probably not.

A large part of that is a result of cheap ferules, which probably is consistent with PKs point about older graphite. The rest is, I was overpowering the rod with my massive arm. ;-)

My point was that with all else the same (same general casting stroke), heavier line absolutely means more stress on the rod when casting. Then again, using a line that is too light, could cause you to muscle it even more, causing excess stress as well.

What I am really saying is that it depends on the sucker on the end of the rod.;-) If the reason you are over-lining is simply to get more distance... you probably shouldn't do that.

The only reason to over-line is for shorter casting. IMO of course.

 
As PK posted earlier, at some point you may accumulate different line weights for the rods you own. Don't be afraid to experiment with 1 or 2 line weights heavier or lighter on your rod to match conditions. I do it all the time and it expands the usefulness of the rods I own by being able to fine tune my rod to work best for the conditions and/or fishing I plan to do.

The concept to overlining or underlining your rod to match conditions is not new and is quite common among many fly anglers that fish for different species of fish under all types of conditions both in saltwater and freshwater.

Here's a good article on the subject written by Lefty Kreh:

How To Choose the Right Fly Line Weight
BY LEFTY KREH

Let me begin by saying that rod manufacturers design rods for the average person to use under average conditions. So unfortunately, most fly fishermen use only one weight of line on their favorite rod.

Written on the rod blank or handle is a code number which indicates the line that the rod manufacturer suggests is best for most customers; i.e., 6 line. To most fly anglers, this means that they should use nothing but a 6 weight line with this rod. But to get the full potential from different fishing situations, you may want to consider using several line sizes on your rod — perhaps varying as much as two line sizes from the one suggested on the rod.

Manufacturers know your rod may be used in a host of fishing situations, but they can’t judge your casting style and fishing skills. So when they place a recommended line number on your rod, it is implied that it’s for average fishing conditions. First, understand that you’re not going to damage a fly rod using fly line a little lighter or heavier than is recommended. Certainly, at times, the rod will fish better if different line sizes are used.

Match line weight to conditions
Let me cite several examples of when you might want to use various line weights on the same rod for different fishing conditions you may encounter.

First, if you fish a swift, tumbling mountain brook, you can use a rather short leader with a dry fly. A leader of 7-1/2 feet in length would probably do the best job. But if you fish for trout with the same outfit and dry fly on a calm spring creek, beaver pond or quiet lake, that short leader could prevent you from catching many fish. While many fishermen automatically know that on calmer water they have to use longer leaders, many of them don’t really probe any deeper into “why” they need a longer leader.

It isn’t the leader’s length that’s so important. In calm water, what frightens the trout is the line falling to the surface. The longer the leader, the farther away from the fly is the splashdown of the line.

But with a longer leader, the more difficult it is to cast and there is a reduction in accuracy. Thus, a 9-foot leader is more accurate and easier to turn over than a 15-footer. Considering this, plus the fact that the splashdown of the line is what is frightening the trout, there is a simple solution. Use a fly line one size lighter than the rod manufacturer recommends. Jim Green, who has designed fly rods for years and is a superb angler, mentioned to me more than three decades ago that he almost always used a line one size lighter when fishing dry flies where the trout were spooky or the water was calm. I tried it and have routinely followed his advice. So, for example, if you are using a six weight rod, you can drop down to a five weight line with no problem. In fact, in very delicate fishing conditions, I often drop down two sizes in line weights. There is a reason.

Weight and speed need to vary
Fly rods are designed to cast a particular weight of line — with a good bit of line speed. If you drop down a line size, you benefit in two ways. One, the line is going to alight on the water softer than a heavier line. Two, because it is not as heavy, it doesn’t develop as much line speed. A line traveling at high speed often comes to the water with a heavier impact than one that is moving slower. Even with a line two sizes lighter, you can still cast a dry fly or nymph far more distance than what is called for in delicate trout fishing situations. So you don’t hamper yourself at all by using a line lighter than the rod suggests. Best of all, you can now use a shorter leader, since impact on the surface has been lessened.

There is a second situation where a lighter than normal line will help you if you are a fairly good caster. The wind is blowing and you need to reach out to a distant target. Many try to solve this common problem by using a line one size heavier. The usual thinking is that a heavier line allows them to throw more weight and, they hope, get more distance. Actually, going to a heavier line means that they complicate the problem.

On a cast, the line unrolls toward the target in a loop form. The larger the loop, the more energy is thrown in a direction that is not at the target. When fishermen overload a fly rod with a line heavier than the manufacturer calls for, they cause the rod to flex more deeply, which creates larger loops on longer casts. Overloading the rod wastes casting energy by not directing it at the target.

If you switch to a lighter line, you may not have enough weight outside the rod tip to cause the rod to load or flex properly — if you hold the normal amount of line outside the rod during casting. But if you extend this lighter line about 10 feet or a little more outside the rod than you normally would for this cast under calm conditions, you can cast a greater distance into the wind. By extending the additional amount of lighter line outside the rod, you cause it to flex as if you were false casting the normal length of the recommended line size.

Since the rod is now flexing properly, it will deliver tight loops, but the lighter line is thinner. This means that there will be less air resistance encountered on the cast.

If you are forced to cast a longer distance into the wind, switch to one size lighter line and extend a little more line outside the rod tip than you normally would. This means, of course, that you need to be able to handle a longer line during false casting. But the line that is lighter than the rod calls for will let you cast farther into the breeze.

Heavier line is often necessary
There are situations where using a line heavier than the rod calls for will also aid in casting and catching fish, such as when fishing small streams for trout. Where pools are short and casts are restricted in distance, a heavier line can be just the right answer. For example, on many brook trout streams, the pool may be only 10 or 15 feet long and you are forced to use a leader that is at least 7-1/2 feet long. That means that only a few feet of your fly line — the weight that loads or flexes the rod — is outside the rod tip. When fishing where distance is very short and only a few feet of fly line are outside the rod tip, it is important to switch to a line that is heavier. For example, if you were using a rod designed for a four-weight line and had to cast most of the time at targets less than 20 feet, placing a five- or even a six-weight line on the rod would let you load the rod, and casting would be much easier.

This same principle applies when you are bass fishing in the southern swamps. Often, you are casting in small, winding creeks, or where there is a lot of brush immediately behind you. This also holds true when fishing the backcountry of Florida for snook, where you are close to the target and backcast area is limited. If you are using a rod designed to throw an eight-weight line and you’re fishing at 30 to 40 feet from the target area and the backcast area is less than that, a nine-weight line will permit you to cast much better because the heavier line will load up the rod and let it flex.

Heavily weighted lines, like the Wet Cel III or Uniform Sink +, can and should often be used in one to two sizes heavier than the rod calls for because, for some reason, a line one size heavier seems to improve distance casting. Try one and you’ll see what I mean.

Use shooting TAPERS for greater distance
Finally, consider shooting tapers (also called “heads”), which are generally used to obtain greater distance. When casting with normal line, if you cast well, you never hold just 30 feet of line outside the rod tip to get distance. Instead, you false cast with considerably more than 30 feet of line outside. When using a shooting head, try using one that’s a size heavier than you usually do and you’ll be pleasantly surprised at the distance you gain.

So don’t limit yourself to the standard guidelines given by rod manufacturers. Experiment with different line weights for special fishing conditions. You will be pleased with the results.

Copyright © 2017 - Scientific Anglers

Link to source: http://www.scientificanglers.com/choose-right-fly-line-weight/


P.S. Hey FD....If your rod breaks, just wrap it back up in it's blister pack and take it back to Wally World to get your money back!.. :p
 

I like bucking the system in just about everything in fly fishing but I gotta agree with troutbert on this one id just use the rated line it calls for.
 
For those arguing against over/under lining a rod, what mathematical or scientific evidence can you offer to support that position?

Note - I'm not attempting to be a yakker here, and would sincerely like to know and would be open to a change in opinion on the subject if it can be demonstrated. The case in favor of over/under lining in certain circumstances has been laid out previously in the thread. I'd like to know if there is a sound line of reasoning based in science/math/physics/etc that opposes that idea. Not just that it says "5wt" on it so that's what I use, or that someone who alters line weights on their rods can't cast. Clearly Lefty Kreh can cast.

As it sits now, in my mind, altering the line weight becomes a matter of efficiency. If I can more efficiently cast at short distances with a heavier line, and longer distances with a lighter line on a given rod, and science supports that, aside from the cost of additional lines, why wouldn't I do it? If you're gonna be all over the board for cast length on a given outing, then yeah, the middle of the road suggested line rating is probably the way to go. But a lot of the time, I'm either making a lot of short casts on a smaller stream, or longer casts on a bigger stream on a given outing. Again, I'm sincerely open to being convinced otherwise, but show me.
 
troutbert wrote:
bigjohn58 wrote:
One problem I have with over lining and under lining a rod is the PRICE needed to experiment! I use cheaper fly lines but the average price of line is $50 I bet now. I can't spend $50 on a line and then find out I should have gone up or down a weight. It takes a lot of money to experiment with different lines. Most of the time this means extra spools which means more $$$. I can't afford these newer $800 fly rods which seems the average price of the higher end ones now. That's why I go into rod building. I have found blanks that perform as well as the high end rods for the fraction of the cost. The Baston Eternity2 series blanks that I am going to build after this small 2wt got reviews conparing it to the higher end Sages. The blanks run about $160. This fishing sport used to be affordable but in the last 10 years wow has the price gone up!
Click to expand...

So just don't do it. I've never over or underlined a rod. And back in the 1970s and 1980s I never ever even heard discussion of that. It's only about in the 1990s, when companies began making some very fast action graphite rods, which were also their most expensive rods, that you began hearing a lot about overlining rods.

People would buy the most expensive rods made by Loomis, Sage, and Orvis, which were very fast action, not like how they cast with the rated line. So buy a higher weight line to make it cast with a slower action which they preferred.

It's madness. You can just buy a much lower priced rod, that has a more moderate action than those rods, put on the rated line and just fish.
Click to expand...

Hook_Jaw wrote:
I like bucking the system in just about everything in fly fishing but I gotta agree with troutbert on this one id just use the rated line it calls for.
Click to expand...

Everyone can do as they please. All I'm trying to do is put out as much factual information as possible on the subject and let everyone decide for themselves.

With the same rod.....I have fish it with one and sometimes two line weights heavier for all the reasons in Lefty Kreh's article and not because the rod is too fast, because I also am just as likely to underline the rod by one and sometimes two line weights. If we only used the line weights stamped on the rod I'd have to buy four rods or just make do with how the rod performs under certain conditions.

Why wouldn't I overline a rod when my casts are very short and why wouldn't I underline when I need to carry more line in the air for longer casting. LOL....the long and short of it is I'm casting the same amount of weight, just at a different length of line.

Ten minutes of casting on the stream or river or lawn with different line weights on the same rod is a real eye-opener. It opens up a whole new world and expands the utility as well as the pleasure of casting just about any rod.

If you talked to the rod designers, they will tell you that a rod with a 5wt designation is the midpoint, or average weight for the line and depending on the caster and how it is to be fished, and going up or down a line weight or two will help them optimize the performance of the rod under certain conditions making it a more versatile tool.
 
Everyone has their own thoughts on things if you catch fish doing it more power to you. I have always fished with a 5 weight and 6 weight rod with the same size line.
 
Afish, thanks for the Lefty comments. makes sense.

I enjoyed this thread. I know I have a two weight that I never used that I figured would be a good small stream rod. I will likely load it with a 3 after reading this thread.

P.S. I didn't buy that one at Walmart, but since I bought it used, it was in the same price range. ;-)



 

A old friend always told me it depends on the quality of the rod if you could over or under line it.
 
One thing not addressed here is choosing the best fly line that fits the flex profile of your rod or the type of fishing you are doing and THEN overlining/underlining.

Anotherwords, from the RIO smallmouth line description:
"The weight distribution and powerful front taper easily casts typical Clouser and Bass bug flies, while a unique handling section at the back of the head allows anglers to mend and control the fly effectively."

So here you have added a powerful front taper to the line and added a heavy fly. There should be no reason to overlined your rod here but you could likely with a stiff graphite rod. I'm not sure why you want to but you could. Now overline this with a fullflex fiberglass rod and you can watch your tip collapse and have tailing loops.

There are lines today specialized to certain applications and even rods.
If you purchase a line specialized for a rod, you shouldn't need to over or underline it in normal situations.



Some interesting info:
http://www.tongarirorivermotel.co.nz/matching-lines-to-rods/

https://north40flyshop.com/blog/how-to-choose-fly-line-for-a-fiberglass-fly-rod/
 
Swattie87 wrote:
For those arguing against over/under lining a rod, what mathematical or scientific evidence can you offer to support that position?

Note - I'm not attempting to be a yakker here, and would sincerely like to know and would be open to a change in opinion on the subject if it can be demonstrated. The case in favor of over/under lining in certain circumstances has been laid out previously in the thread. I'd like to know if there is a sound line of reasoning based in science/math/physics/etc that opposes that idea. Not just that it says "5wt" on it so that's what I use, or that someone who alters line weights on their rods can't cast. Clearly Lefty Kreh can cast.

As it sits now, in my mind, altering the line weight becomes a matter of efficiency. If I can more efficiently cast at short distances with a heavier line, and longer distances with a lighter line on a given rod, and science supports that, aside from the cost of additional lines, why wouldn't I do it? If you're gonna be all over the board for cast length on a given outing, then yeah, the middle of the road suggested line rating is probably the way to go. But a lot of the time, I'm either making a lot of short casts on a smaller stream, or longer casts on a bigger stream on a given outing. Again, I'm sincerely open to being convinced otherwise, but show me.
Click to expand...

I..I..I don't like overlining rods. :-D
 
Wow. You guys put a lot of thought into this .
To me it's kind of like" omg,should I wear basketball shoes or running shoes to ride my bike to the store?"

If a decent bamboo or fiberglass rod is ,say,a 5 wt, it will work with 4/5/6. If it is a six weight it will work with 5/67.

If all you have is a four weight rod and a six weight line,slow down your cast and enjoy fishing.

I routinely use a line weight simply because it is on the reel I feel like using .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top