Bamboozle
Well-known member
Only if you are clumsy with a 6wt.
caddisflyer
Well-known member
Very interesting. i have never even tried my 7 wt for dry fly fishing but may in future. Any suggestions on a 6 or 7 wt that would be a good dry fly rod?
pcray1231
Well-known member
See, and since then, they discontinued several of the "standard" weight tapers and added a few overweighted ones. Because they sell better. That's how they move in that direction.
I don't have any issues with using a 7 weight for dries. The drawback isn't presentation I don't think. It's that when you do a lot of false casting, you're swinging a bigger stick all day long. Fatigue. And it maybe just isn't really needed when throwing a size 16 dry fly to rising trout 20 feet away. A sledgehammer does just fine at hitting tack nails. It might be more enjoyable to use a smaller hammer, but the sledge isn't less effective...
I don't have any issues with using a 7 weight for dries. The drawback isn't presentation I don't think. It's that when you do a lot of false casting, you're swinging a bigger stick all day long. Fatigue. And it maybe just isn't really needed when throwing a size 16 dry fly to rising trout 20 feet away. A sledgehammer does just fine at hitting tack nails. It might be more enjoyable to use a smaller hammer, but the sledge isn't less effective...
Bamboozle
Well-known member
What don't you understand about the "ideal target rate?" All of us know about the AFTMA "range."^ Fly-fishing conspiracy theory. The fly line manufacturers are not conspiring with the rod companies to change specs and over-weight all their fly lines. Just about all fly line manufacturers offer half weight heavier lines. Their regular weight lines meet AFFTA specs.
View attachment 1641227313
Buy one of these and you will verify this to be true >
The point and the ONLY point I am making is only until recently did the latest & greatest/shootout crowd have to talk about a "range" to defend their definitions while the rest of the world calls heavy fly lines what they are...
...heavy.
I wouldn't necessarily call it a conspiracy, but why the heck would a fly line manufacture describe one of their lines as "one size heavy" yet still put the "one size heavy" line in a box marked for a line "one size smaller?" Ironically they don't do that with their "ideal target range" lines so why do they do that with their heavy lines?
Conspiracy, I'm not sure but what it means is the "non conspiring manufacturers" considers one 140 grain line a 4wt while they call another 140 grain line a 5wt...
So which is it?
Does the box it comes in make one 140 grain a 4wt while a different box makes it a 5? I don't need no stinking scale to tell ME that a 140 grain 4wt is heavier than a 120 grain 4wt. All I have to do is put it one one of MY 4wt rods and in an instant I can tell the rod is overloaded.
The bigger problem is if the line manufacturers stop calling the 140 grain line "one size heavy" and instead put it in a box marked 5wt, the rod manufacturers would have to label their 4wt rods as 5wts so the line size shy fast, faster, fastest crowd buy the right size line for their newer is better rods.
But the problem with that is the Internet and fly shop experts have brainwashed them into believing a 5wt line isn't delicate and technical enough for fussy trout and the rod manufacturers sell more 3 & 4wt rods than 5 & 6 weights...
Hmmm, sounds like at least a little bit of collusion to me...
You can call it anything you want, fish anything you want and defend it anyway that floats your boat...
...in the meantime, allow me to
pcray1231
Well-known member
My only issue is that the marketing makes me dig deeper to figure out what I want.
I know from experience, on the tight little brushy streams, what works best on my 4/5 wt is a 7 weight line when I'm throwing 10 foot casts, doing bow and arrows, etc. And on my big stream 5 wt rod I like to throw a 5 wt line. On my 7 weight steelhead rod I like a 7 wt line.
Now, I can't go just grab a 5 weight or 7 weight line. Because some 7 weight lines are labeled as 5 weights and some 9 weight lines are labeled as 7 weights. I have to dig into the specs. Then write down that for that brookie rod I could do a 7 weight double taper, a 6 weight MPX, or a 5 wt Anadro. Do the same for the other rods. Then go looking for what's available in the store, only to find out none of them are, see what is available, go home, do the research on those lines to see what size I should buy, go back to the store and buy. It adds a layer of confusion for sure.
Like bamboozle says, if it has the weight of a 5 weight line, it should be labeled as a 5 weight. Simple!!! And if people want to put a 7 weight line on their 5 weight rod, I've got no issue with that at all. I do it all the time. If I wanted to get into some distance casting competition I'd underline the rod. Krayfish and I could both have and love the exact same rod, and he's using his to bomb out 50 foot casts in windy conditions while I'm snap casting a size 16 dry under that rhodo branch 10 feet away. We can and SHOULD use different lines. There's no "right" line for a rod, it depends what you use it for. But what should be important to both of us that there is a standard, that when we buy a 5 weight line we know what we are getting. They aren't fully lying yet, as bamboozle says, they advertise it as "2 sizes heavy" or whatever. But I gotta be on my toes and look kinda deep to catch that, and do some math to figure out what I want. The marketing made it harder, not easier.
I know from experience, on the tight little brushy streams, what works best on my 4/5 wt is a 7 weight line when I'm throwing 10 foot casts, doing bow and arrows, etc. And on my big stream 5 wt rod I like to throw a 5 wt line. On my 7 weight steelhead rod I like a 7 wt line.
Now, I can't go just grab a 5 weight or 7 weight line. Because some 7 weight lines are labeled as 5 weights and some 9 weight lines are labeled as 7 weights. I have to dig into the specs. Then write down that for that brookie rod I could do a 7 weight double taper, a 6 weight MPX, or a 5 wt Anadro. Do the same for the other rods. Then go looking for what's available in the store, only to find out none of them are, see what is available, go home, do the research on those lines to see what size I should buy, go back to the store and buy. It adds a layer of confusion for sure.
Like bamboozle says, if it has the weight of a 5 weight line, it should be labeled as a 5 weight. Simple!!! And if people want to put a 7 weight line on their 5 weight rod, I've got no issue with that at all. I do it all the time. If I wanted to get into some distance casting competition I'd underline the rod. Krayfish and I could both have and love the exact same rod, and he's using his to bomb out 50 foot casts in windy conditions while I'm snap casting a size 16 dry under that rhodo branch 10 feet away. We can and SHOULD use different lines. There's no "right" line for a rod, it depends what you use it for. But what should be important to both of us that there is a standard, that when we buy a 5 weight line we know what we are getting. They aren't fully lying yet, as bamboozle says, they advertise it as "2 sizes heavy" or whatever. But I gotta be on my toes and look kinda deep to catch that, and do some math to figure out what I want. The marketing made it harder, not easier.
Last edited:
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
There it is.
Bamboozle
Well-known member
Not a rod suggestion but my first store bought fly rod was a graphite 8'6" 6wt Orvis Limestone Special that I used for decades. The other rod I considered before I bought the Limestone Special was an 8"3" 7wt that Orvis offered called the "All Rounder."
The irony in that name is that even when I was thinking about it in 1980/1981 with plenty of 4 & 5wts available, many dealers weren't afraid to suggest a 7wt as a ideal rod.
Speaking of 7wts; for years my go rod for winter fishing at the Little Lehigh was a 1947 8'6" 7wt Orvis Bakelite bamboo. I can't tell you how many times I spent winter afternoons fishing size 22-26 midges to fussy sipping trout with that 7wt.
Maybe not the rod I would choose on a regular basis for that kind of fishing, but it worked just fine despite being a line weight hardly anybody would consider suitable for "technical" fishing.
I would assume there are lots of decent 6 or 7wt rods out there for consideration. Just don't be surprised if you have to line them with a 210 grain line to get them to sing.
Bamboozle
Well-known member
Are you suggesting he is part of the conspiracy too...
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Yup.Are you suggesting he is part of the conspiracy too...
😂 I said I wonder if the OP sold rods in my 2nd post. I mean why roll your eyes at others who love and stand by their older gear?
Having worked for manufacturers has possibly caused Nystagmus, I suppose. Probably from repetitive squinting at grain weights and then suddenly looking up and to the side trying to determine AFTMA range.
Last edited:
redietz
Well-known member
And if you're clumsy with a 6 wt, you're just as likely to be clumsy with a 4 wt. And with the 4 wt, you may need faster line speed to turn over the same length of leader, making it that much more likely that you're going to slap the line down hard of the water.
caddisflyer
Well-known member
Was just thinking, if you are struggling to get distance on those big waters, then your presesntation will suffer whereas if you are easily getting distance you can focus more on how the line and leader land etc. Starting to make sense.
The_Sasquatch
Well-known member
Man-how do you guys even find this stuff!?
Kray I had a Sage RPL and it was like, my favorite graphite rod. It broke. I would love to find another one some day.
Kray I had a Sage RPL and it was like, my favorite graphite rod. It broke. I would love to find another one some day.
pcray1231
Well-known member
Of krayfishes shootout results. It's 6 years old and it's gotten worse since then.
43 different 5 weight line entries.
0 are below the target weight
1 is exactly on target weight
42 are above target weight
- 0 are below the AFFTA standard.
- 13 are within the AFFTA standard
- 31 are above the AFFTA standard.
- The median and average 5 wt lines are actually 6 wts. It's 100% accurate to say the average fly line is a size larger than what it is labeled. I'm not claiming dishonesty, many of them openly say it's 1 size larger or whatever. But they're still slapping a 5 wt sticker on a 6 wt line, then turning around and saying it's sized up to balance modern fast action (read, underlabeled) rods as a selling point, as if we couldn't have just bought a 6 wt line to begin with.
- 6 of the 43 lines rated as 5 wts are actually 8 wts or above and getting into ridiculous territory.
Including Cortland 444, btw. It is sized up 1 size.
43 different 5 weight line entries.
0 are below the target weight
1 is exactly on target weight
42 are above target weight
- 0 are below the AFFTA standard.
- 13 are within the AFFTA standard
- 31 are above the AFFTA standard.
- The median and average 5 wt lines are actually 6 wts. It's 100% accurate to say the average fly line is a size larger than what it is labeled. I'm not claiming dishonesty, many of them openly say it's 1 size larger or whatever. But they're still slapping a 5 wt sticker on a 6 wt line, then turning around and saying it's sized up to balance modern fast action (read, underlabeled) rods as a selling point, as if we couldn't have just bought a 6 wt line to begin with.
- 6 of the 43 lines rated as 5 wts are actually 8 wts or above and getting into ridiculous territory.
Including Cortland 444, btw. It is sized up 1 size.
Last edited:
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Conspiracy fact?
pcray1231
Well-known member
I don't think it's a conspiracy. Rod sellers are just trying to sell rods. Line sellers are just trying to sell lines.
And the truth is people like faster more powerful rods but they WANT to like delicate little things. And they do their test casting at hero lengths. So you make a 5 wt rod and slap a 3 wt sticker on it and people eat it up. They go bomb out a 60 foot cast in the yard and say this is the best 3 wt rod ever!!!!
Till they get on stream and struggle to load it at 20 feet with an honest 3 wt line from an honest line maker. So that line maker doesn't want these people reporting that their lines suck. So they take a 5 wt line, slap a 3 wt sticker on it, and say, here, try this, it's a 3 wt line made for YOUR kind of rod. And it works great. Almost like the 5wt rods and 5 wt lines of old did, lol.
But it's a 3 wt. And thus, better, see. Your using a 5 wt on the LJR. Pfft. I can do just as good with my 3 wt.
And the truth is people like faster more powerful rods but they WANT to like delicate little things. And they do their test casting at hero lengths. So you make a 5 wt rod and slap a 3 wt sticker on it and people eat it up. They go bomb out a 60 foot cast in the yard and say this is the best 3 wt rod ever!!!!
Till they get on stream and struggle to load it at 20 feet with an honest 3 wt line from an honest line maker. So that line maker doesn't want these people reporting that their lines suck. So they take a 5 wt line, slap a 3 wt sticker on it, and say, here, try this, it's a 3 wt line made for YOUR kind of rod. And it works great. Almost like the 5wt rods and 5 wt lines of old did, lol.
But it's a 3 wt.
And thus, better, see. Your using a 5 wt on the LJR. Pfft. I can do just as good with my 3 wt.
JGR
Active member
The most popular Orvis bamboo rod for decades was the 8-foot, 13/64-ferrule, medium-action model that Manchester recommended be used with 7 & 8-wt lines. They promoted it heavily as an all-around fly rod for the fisherman who could only own one rod.
I use mine mostly in the early & late seasons and have fished it with #18 BWOs and large woolly buggers on the same day. I've caught 6-inch brook trout and 6-lb steelhead with it, and it does just fine.
It's one of those rods you mentioned in an earlier post. Dealers frequently sell it as a 5 or 6-weight rod, which turn it into a pool que--or maybe a graphite rod.
Bamboozle
Well-known member
It is getting harder & harder to find what we grumpy old men USED to call a "true to weight line." As an example, I believe everything Rio sells with the exception of the Lightline (that's an ironic name) is heavier than the target AFTMA line weight.
I use SciAngler Mastery DT's on most of my trout rods because they are true to weight lines and what I like on my true to weight clunky rods. Others I know like 406 lines which are also true to weight and of course there is the venerable 444 Peach.
An interesting side note is I have a 7'0" bamboo that I purchased new that was marketed as a dreaded slash rod, which in this case was a 4/5 weight.
I call slash rods "after thought rods" because I believe the builder had a taper in mind for a specific line weight but didn't get it right. Instead of abandoning the taper they sell it with two different line weights suggested instead of one.
I own two slash rods, love neither and neither in my opinion likes EITHER suggested line weight. For that reason with the bamboo rod since I use real silk lines on my bamboo rods, I had maker of the silk line fashion me a 4.5 wt fly line. In my mind that means it is half size heavy.
The funny thing is, despite how badly I wanted a 7'0" 4wt bamboo rod at the time I pulled the trigger, both the line maker and the line user (me) call it what it is, a 4.5wt fly line.
I use SciAngler Mastery DT's on most of my trout rods because they are true to weight lines and what I like on my true to weight clunky rods. Others I know like 406 lines which are also true to weight and of course there is the venerable 444 Peach.
An interesting side note is I have a 7'0" bamboo that I purchased new that was marketed as a dreaded slash rod, which in this case was a 4/5 weight.
I call slash rods "after thought rods" because I believe the builder had a taper in mind for a specific line weight but didn't get it right. Instead of abandoning the taper they sell it with two different line weights suggested instead of one.
I own two slash rods, love neither and neither in my opinion likes EITHER suggested line weight. For that reason with the bamboo rod since I use real silk lines on my bamboo rods, I had maker of the silk line fashion me a 4.5 wt fly line. In my mind that means it is half size heavy.
The funny thing is, despite how badly I wanted a 7'0" 4wt bamboo rod at the time I pulled the trigger, both the line maker and the line user (me) call it what it is, a 4.5wt fly line.
pcray1231
Well-known member
So underline it. We're arguing that they should label things what they are, and we're right, but ultimately it's not that important. The average fisherman, who they are selling to, doesn't know a thing about grains. You do. So if you know your old rod fishes best with a 120 grain line, buy a 120 grain line. And who cares if it's a true to weight 4 wt line or if they slapped a 2 wt sticker on there and called it 2 sizes too big. It's 120 grains.
sixfootfenwick
Well-known member
Why are Fly Lines Getting Heavier? - Fly Fisherman
The majority of fly lines on the market today no longer conform to industry line weight standards.
www.flyfisherman.com
It looks like the 30' rule is out the window and everyone knows it.
Swattie87
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,820
The same thing has happened with golf clubs over the last 20 years. My circa 2002 Armour 845s 7 iron is lofted at 36 degrees. I hit it 155 yards. My buddy’s new Taylor Made something or other 9 iron is lofted at 36 degrees, he hits it 155 yards. (The 7 iron in his set is 28 deg, same as my 5 iron. You get the idea.) My set stops at a 3 iron, lofted at 21 degrees, his stops at a 5 iron, lofted similarly.
Give him my 7 iron, you guessed it, he hits it 155 yards. But now he’s two clubs longer than me and gets to feel better that he’s holding a 9 iron from 155 yards, as opposed to a 7 iron, when in reality they’re essentially the same tool with a different number etched into them. See what happened there?
Club manufactures aren’t idiots and they’re in business to sell clubs. Distance sells, and over time iron sets have been de-lofted throughout the set to make them “seem” longer. I’m sure I can hit a new set further, club for club, but it’s all a gimmick. I’m not opposed to buying a new set of irons, but I’m yet to find one I can hit any straighter than my 20 year old set. I don’t care if the club I can hit 155 yards has a 9 or a 7 on it.
The same thing is happening, and is what’s being described in this thread with rods and line weights. It’s all about sales. And us dummies keep buying new ones. I don’t care what weight the rod says on it or what line I put on it…does it do the job I’m asking it to do (limited by my ability/skills), and do I enjoy fishing with it? If yes, then I don’t need a new one.
You want to stop this nonsense, golf with your 2002 845s’s, and fish with your 20 year old Clearwater.
Give him my 7 iron, you guessed it, he hits it 155 yards. But now he’s two clubs longer than me and gets to feel better that he’s holding a 9 iron from 155 yards, as opposed to a 7 iron, when in reality they’re essentially the same tool with a different number etched into them. See what happened there?
Club manufactures aren’t idiots and they’re in business to sell clubs. Distance sells, and over time iron sets have been de-lofted throughout the set to make them “seem” longer. I’m sure I can hit a new set further, club for club, but it’s all a gimmick. I’m not opposed to buying a new set of irons, but I’m yet to find one I can hit any straighter than my 20 year old set. I don’t care if the club I can hit 155 yards has a 9 or a 7 on it.
The same thing is happening, and is what’s being described in this thread with rods and line weights. It’s all about sales. And us dummies keep buying new ones. I don’t care what weight the rod says on it or what line I put on it…does it do the job I’m asking it to do (limited by my ability/skills), and do I enjoy fishing with it? If yes, then I don’t need a new one.
You want to stop this nonsense, golf with your 2002 845s’s, and fish with your 20 year old Clearwater.
Last edited:
