Fly line for small rivers

Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
18
My bank account has found out that fishing up close has very specific requirements, which are generally not catered for with what is typically considered the ideal line and rod match. Case in point, I have a Sage TXL #3 and the consensus on the forums was you have to get a Rio LT DT (£55 when I bought a few years ago). I did and its terrible for short casts on small streams as it won't load the rod until a fair bit of line is aerialised (not surprising when you see how long the taper is and that it is true to weight) leading to frustration and terrible accuracy. I was intrigued by the Rio Creek but for £75 forget about it as the Barrio small stream #3 seems like a similar package. It was out of stock though so to find a solution for similar money I have just received an Airflow Super Dri DT #4 (£25 delivered). Had a play in the kitchen and I think this is exactly what I'm after, nice loading with tight loops with only a few feet of line out. If on the water it bogs down I'll get the Barrio and still be ~£25 better off than if I had gone for the Rio. I would be surprised if the excellent memory characteristics of Rio lines can be bettered though. I had the LT DT3 on a tiny flyweight reel for two years unused and the line is fine, even the back end!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
18
DT4 didn't really work out. Slowed the action down too much at distance which didn't suit the rod nor me. Hopefully the Small Stream works out.
 

ptn

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
240
Location
Dorset
Hi All,
Apologies for being pedantic but in threads like this one we see repeatedly people thinking that a weight forward line has a heavier front section than a double taper of the same weight. The weight of a fly line is based on the weight of the first 30 feet so W/F and D/T lines of the same AFTM number will have the same weight. Weight forward lines have a thinner running line to aid distance casts and hinder mending.
Regards
Bill
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
18
Of course but when one is casting with only a few feet of line out taper profiles come into play.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

kingf000

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
724
I've just started fishing a small river and I'm casting from about 10ft under trees with a bow and arrow or side cast up to about 25ft in more open water. I've been using a 7ft 3wt rod with the #3 Maxcatch real troutlite DT line, which has seems to have a nice taper and casts well, even with only about 3ft of fly line. I have been using a 5ft tapered furled leader which I think aids short distance casting.
 

Mrwayne

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2018
Messages
104
Location
London
Orvis hydros works great. It's made by SA and seems similar to their lines. Hydros has a 3ft head sinless taper, I'd also over line anyway. I'm now a convert to orvis/sa lines as they seem to just float high with minimal greasing.
 

clag

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
146
Hi All,
Apologies for being pedantic but in threads like this one we see repeatedly people thinking that a weight forward line has a heavier front section than a double taper of the same weight. The weight of a fly line is based on the weight of the first 30 feet so W/F and D/T lines of the same AFTM number will have the same weight. Weight forward lines have a thinner running line to aid distance casts and hinder mending.
Regards
Bill
Here's raising a glass to your pedantry. You are correct. I think there is a reason for this confussion. Remember when rods were not single line weights but typically 6-7 or 5-6? You'll also remember the reason for that was the rule of thumb that if you bought a DT line for it you would use the lower number and if you fished a weight forward the higher.

That is entirely logical becasue as most WF lines, tip, forward taper, belly and reaer taper are about er 30 ft that is what you will have out the rod tip and for most casters who can't manage hang all they will manage. The DT, of course meant you could lift 35, 40 or 45 ft and thus why you went for the lower number becasue you were matching the weight by choosing a lower weighted 30' but equally weighted at 40' in compensation.

If you really want a pedant discussion let's look at the biggest fly fishing rod oxymoron of all time 'Fast Action' - how can a rod 'action' ever be fast?

Games and fun.

Regards

CLaG
 

kerryjordan

Active member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
37
Here's raising a glass to your pedantry. You are correct. I think there is a reason for this confussion. Remember when rods were not single line weights but typically 6-7 or 5-6? You'll also remember the reason for that was the rule of thumb that if you bought a DT line for it you would use the lower number and if you fished a weight forward the higher.

That is entirely logical becasue as most WF lines, tip, forward taper, belly and reaer taper are about er 30 ft that is what you will have out the rod tip and for most casters who can't manage hang all they will manage. The DT, of course meant you could lift 35, 40 or 45 ft and thus why you went for the lower number becasue you were matching the weight by choosing a lower weighted 30' but equally weighted at 40' in compensation.

If you really want a pedant discussion let's look at the biggest fly fishing rod oxymoron of all time 'Fast Action' - how can a rod 'action' ever be fast?

Games and fun.

Regards

CLaG
Agreed “fast action” - an oxymoron. Tackle trade patter for stiff.
 
Top