Those weighted flies are tough on rod tips.  I broke one in 2000 and another
in 2001 because of either weighted flies or sharp hook points.

Luckily both were Sages and were repaired under warranty.  One was a
graphite 2 and took an additional $70 for an upgrade to newer generation
graphite.

Bill W

> ----------
> From:         rderedfield[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent:         Tuesday, January 08, 2002 1:36 PM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:      Weighted flies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey guys, if weighted flies aren't that effective at achieving the desired
> result (i.e. sinking), then what's up with Clousers?  Bead heads? or any
> weight at all?  Ever fished in Montana with a floating line and a heavily
> weighted salmonfly nymph or a double bunny?  They sink like rocks (and
> feel like one when you get hit in the back with it on the forward cast,
> but of course I'm just guessin on that one - grin).  Those weighted flies
> seem to be pretty effective . . . 
>  
> I bet Patrick Peterson is grinning big time about this "weighted fly"
> exchange - he's not fond of sink tips, and prefers weighted flies in many
> circumstances.  I've seen him pretty effectively fish some pretty good
> depths using a floating line, long leader, and weighted fly set up.
>  
>  
> 
>       ----- Original Message ----- 
>       From: Wes.Neuenschwander (@Home) 
>       To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>       Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 10:53 AM
>       Subject: RE: Weighted flies
> 
>       An excellent observation Tom, and in accord with what I've noticed
> over the years as well.  These observations are also consistent with
> simple mechanical analysis of the setup:  The weight - which provides the
> only "down force"  is concentrated on the far end at the fly.  "Up force"
> is generated - to varying degrees, depending on line diameter, line angle
> and current speed - along the entire length of the wetted portion of the
> line.  A more detailed analysis would be considerably more complex and
> would need to take into account factors such as line flexibility and
> aerodynamic lift, etc. as well as current speed variations along the
> length of the line, but even the simple analysis makes the point:  Every
> inch of the line (and leader) is pushing up while the only thing pushing
> down is the little gob of steel and lead at the far end.  And lest you
> tend to discount this upward push effect as trivial, keep in mind next
> time you're flying it's *exactly* this effect that's keeping you from
> falling into those fields below (only in this case it's air and it's
> pushing on the wings of the plane).  
>        
>       I think where weight really does come in handy is in slow or still
> water environments (or dead-drifted in faster water) where the weight
> imparts an action distinct from that of a weighted line, and for getting
> right on the bottom when fishing a swung fly in stronger currents.  In the
> latter case the force is applied exactly where it's required (at the very
> end) and helps avoid the nasty snagging that occurs when the entire fly
> line (or even just the tip) drags the bottom.  
>        
>       -Wes
>        
>        -----Original Message-----
>       From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>       Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 4:39 PM
>       To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>       Subject: Weighted flies
> 
> 
> 
>               Have you folks ever checked out the "extra" depth you get
> with a weighed fly in a wet fly swing? 
>               My observation has been that weighted flies create very
> little additional depth over what your sinktip provides. 
>               Suspend your sinktip in the current in front of you some
> time, and check out the difference in depth of the end of the sinktip, and
> a weighted fly. 
>               For what it is worth, I use a 15' type VI for 80% of my
> swinging wet fishing. 
>               Hey, I enjoy the comparison of techniques/ideas.  That's
> what is cool about this group. 
>               Let's all look forward to the arrival of the natives who
> will move to a fly! 
>               Tom Moore 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to