Typical amount of line out before shooting

boisker

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
2,940
Location
Devon
I have only had one day casting the rod as yet so I still haven't tested it out fully. From my experience so far, I didn't have much hassle getting it to load with shorter lengths of line, but as I said once I had the whole head aerilised it definitely felt unwieldy.

do you usually aerialise 46’ with other rods?
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
5,610
and if a fish rises only 20’ upstream... with your 9’ rod and and 12’ leader??

I guess you walk back down stream 30’ turn around and make your cast... 😂😂😂

coz we all know the rod only loads ‘properly’ if it has the 30’ out the rod tip....

anyone who think a 4w rod only really works with bang on 30’ of line out the tip... assuming your line is bang on true to weight, which obviously the Gold isn’t... really doesn’t get how rods are rated... or the concept of the head on a line

Silly boy.

30’ is supposed to be the optimum length of line to load the rod. That does mean it won't work at all with less or more.
 

boisker

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
2,940
Location
Devon
Silly boy.

30’ is supposed to be the optimum length of line to load the rod. That does mean it won't work at all with less or more.


30’ is a reference point for the designer to ‘match’ lines too.... all of my 4 weights cast a full head absolutely fine and none feel ‘over loaded’ (as nonsensical as that term is;))... all modern rods will happily cast a line at least one or two weights either side of that written on the rod...

if they were as niche as you seem to think why would lines with longer heads be so popular... or even relevant how come some of the biggest selling lines be 1.5 - 2 times over weight...

the op isn’t a beginner, and he has said he has a decent cast

so the answer to his question isn’t limit yourself to casting 30’ of the head... the gold has a 46’ head of which all can be aerialised...
but rather aerialise as much as you are comfortable with...
and if he can’t control a 46’ head then it’s casting technique rather than him having found the only 9’4w rod in the market that can’t comfortably aerialise a 46’ head...

nothing wrong at all if he can’t, he doesn’t need to on his river...which again he referenced in his post... but that wasn’t what he asked

I’ll leave it with you... and you can keep treating everyone like a beginner who has just picked up a rod.... that’s just what a beginner needs advice from someone who didn’t even know for years there was such a thing as a double haul

ciao.... :)
 
Last edited:

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
42,723
Hi folks,

Am just playing about with my new 4# rod. The WF line I'm using has a total head length of 46 ft, and there is a colour change there. So I was thinking that for best shooting, I should get all that line out of the rod tip before I shoot. However it feels very cumbersome having that much line in the air

I know every rod is different, but in general do you get the entire head out before shooting, or would you get, say, 30 ft out and then shoot from there.

This is probably all a bit academic because I will be using this rod for river fishing where long casting is not so important

My car has an accelerator pedal that goes all the way to the floor, do I use all of it?

The answer is it depends on how far you want to cast, which is variable distances, all of it out if you want to cast far, not all of it out for less.

You might want a shorter head.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
5,610
30’ is a reference point for the designer to ‘match’ lines too.... all of my 4 weights cast a full head absolutely fine and none feel ‘over loaded’ (as nonsensical as that term is;))... all modern rods will happily cast a line at least one or two weights either side of that written on the rod...

if they were as niche as you seem to think why would lines with longer heads be so popular... or even relevant how come some of the biggest selling lines be 1.5 - 2 times over weight...

the op isn’t a beginner, and he has said he has a decent cast

so the answer to his question isn’t limit yourself to casting 30’ of the head... the gold has a 46’ head of which all can be aerialised...
but rather aerialise as much as you are comfortable with...
and if he can’t control a 46’ head then it’s casting technique rather than him having found the only 9’4w rod in the market that can’t comfortably aerialise a 46’ head...

nothing wrong at all if he can’t, he doesn’t need to on his river...which again he referenced in his post... but that wasn’t what he asked

I’ll leave it with you... and you can keep treating everyone like a beginner who has just picked up a rod.... that’s just what a beginner needs advice from someone who didn’t even know for years there was such a thing as a double haul

ciao.... :)

So can you explain what we're disagreeing about?
Just because a rod is designed to be optimum with 30’ of line doesn't mean it can't cast more line or less line.
 

PaulD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
2,009
Location
South Northants
So can you explain what we're disagreeing about?
Just because a rod is designed to be optimum with 30’ of line doesn't mean it can't cast more line or less line.

I think your use of the word 'optimum' gives reason for question, optimum is defined as 'most conducive to a favourable outcome; best.' The AFTM rating does not mean that the rod works 'best' with 30ft of line outside the rod tip. The AFTM rating of the rod - subjectively applied by the manufacturer who built it and took it outside to cast - suggests that 30ft of that rated line is what is required to get the rod working adequately to cast. The length of the head, unless you're using a WF that's effectively an imitation shooting head such as an Airflo 40plus, is no indication that that's what 'should' be outside the rod tip to cast.

Further up the thread I said, "Effectively, if you're trying to hold the full head in the air, you're effectively loading your rod with a 7wt." - not very well put. All rods will cast lines very adequately either side of their AFTM rating - some rods more so than others and very much depending upon the caster's ability to effectively hold increasing lengths of line in the air. What's the 'head length' of a double taper? Before the development of long headed weight forwards, double tapers were very popular with distance casters because they had the ability to hold long lengths of line in the air
 

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,009
Location
North Yorkshire
Hi folks,

Am just playing about with my new 4# rod. The WF line I'm using has a total head length of 46 ft, and there is a colour change there. So I was thinking that for best shooting, I should get all that line out of the rod tip before I shoot. However it feels very cumbersome having that much line in the air

I know every rod is different, but in general do you get the entire head out before shooting, or would you get, say, 30 ft out and then shoot from there.

This is probably all a bit academic because I will be using this rod for river fishing where long casting is not so important

On reflection a 46 foot head is pretty long, It’s more like what you would use for Stillwater/lake. For river use I prefer around 30 or 35 feet max. The Scierra Brook lines are not too expensive and are supple, smooth, high floating and turnover leaders really well. They have a short belly.
 

PaulD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
2,009
Location
South Northants
On reflection a 46 foot head is pretty long, It’s more like what you would use for Stillwater/lake. For river use I prefer around 30 or 35 feet max. The Scierra Brook lines are not too expensive and are supple, smooth, high floating and turnover leaders really well. They have a short belly.

Let's not forget that these are copies of American, Rio lines, where the fishing environment of often very different from what we encounter here - often longer casting, presenting small, often very small flies to fish in exceptionally clear water. These longer taper, longer head lines are excellent for maintaining control of the line in the air for mends and slack line casts etc is places like this . . .

HenrysFork.jpg
 

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,009
Location
North Yorkshire
Yes they have some pretty big rivers, with gin clear water and spooky trout, very different from our often overgrown streams.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
5,610
I think your use of the word 'optimum' gives reason for question, optimum is defined as 'most conducive to a favourable outcome; best.' The AFTM rating does not mean that the rod works 'best' with 30ft of line outside the rod tip. The AFTM rating of the rod - subjectively applied by the manufacturer who built it and took it outside to cast - suggests that 30ft of that rated line is what is required to get the rod working adequately to cast. The length of the head, unless you're using a WF that's effectively an imitation shooting head such as an Airflo 40plus, is no indication that that's what 'should' be outside the rod tip to cast.

Ok, I'm reading that as saying that the minimum line necessary to get the rod working as specified is 30’. Which doesn't seem quite right either.

Further up the thread I said, "Effectively, if you're trying to hold the full head in the air, you're effectively loading your rod with a 7wt." - not very well put.

I have no problem with that. Using #7 is just a proxy for the extra weight added by line beyond 30’.

rods will cast lines very adequately either side of their AFTM rating - some rods more so than others

Yes of course. I took the wrong reel with me in the summer and had to fish all day with a #7 line on a #5 rod. It all felt a little rubbery for a while but it worked ok when I got the hang of it.

and very much depending upon the caster's ability to effectively hold increasing lengths of line in the air. What's the 'head length' of a double taper? Before the development of long headed weight forwards, double tapers were very popular with distance casters because they had the ability to hold long lengths of line in the air

And you can load your rod with a sharply tapered WF line that's slightly over weight where most of the 30' line weight is in the first 15’ if you're regularly making short casts. (Which is what I do mostly.)

But we're always messing around with that 30’ aren't we?

btw, has anyone ever calculated how much line you need to aerialise to shoot x amount of line? Obviously it'll depend how much power you can put into the cast, but there must be a relationship. You can't shoot 60’ of line with 30' in the air.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
5,610
Let's not forget that these are copies of American, Rio lines, where the fishing environment of often very different from what we encounter here - often longer casting, presenting small, often very small flies to fish in exceptionally clear water. These longer taper, longer head lines are excellent for maintaining control of the line in the air for mends and slack line casts etc is places like this . . .

View attachment 35121

And nothing to interfere with your back cast.

I assume that that's why so many US rod are so stiff too. I never did get to the bottom of stiffness to power ratios.
 

shortcircuit

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2016
Messages
275
do you usually aerialise 46’ with other rods?

To be honest, I have not paid much heed with other rods before. I only noticed on this because of the colour change on the line.

As I said, this is more of an acedemic exercise, as 95% of my fishing is on rivers, where I would seldom be casting more than 30 or 40 feet of line anyway.

I raised this question as more of a "I would like to educate myself further" query rather than a "I need to answer this because it is affecting how I fish"
 

Rhithrogena

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
634
To put all this in context consider the following. I have a spinning rod that is 8 feet long and rated 5-25g lure weight. Now the lower end of that scale, 5g, corresponds to the weight of #2 line on the AFTM scale. The upper end, 25g, corresponds to the weight of #12 line on that scale. So if I tape a fly reel onto the bottom of the handle of this rod, shouldn't I expect to be able to cast ANY fly line between #2 and #12 on it?
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,322
Location
West Oxfordshire
... a rod is designed to be optimum with 30’ of line...
This is the statement that we keep circling back to!

To assume that a rod is designed to be optimum with 30' of line is a mistakenly literal interpretation of the AFTMA standard.
Rod designers don't necessarily set the 'sweet spot' around 30' of line outside the rod tip, they design and rate a rod using lines that conform to the AFTMA standard, which just happens to be based on the weight of the first 30'.
Think about it practically, would Sage design a 7wt rod that was at its best at 30' so is therefore compromised at lengths shorter and longer than this? Nope...
 

Rhithrogena

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
634
A
This is the statement that we keep circling back to!

To assume that a rod is designed to be optimum with 30' of line is a mistakenly literal interpretation of the AFTMA standard.
Rod designers don't necessarily set the 'sweet spot' around 30' of line outside the rod tip, they design and rate a rod using lines that conform to the AFTMA standard, which just happens to be based on the weight of the first 30'.
Think about it practically, would Sage design a 7wt rod that was at its best at 30' so is therefore compromised at lengths shorter and longer than this? Nope...
Agreed in full. The AFTM scale is the standard for the LINE. Rods have never been designed to work with only 30' of line. Makers could probably suggest a range of useful line sizes for their rods, much like spinning rods are marketed, but more specialisation means more options for sales, I suppose...
(edited to include the 2nd and 3rd sentence)
 

boisker

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
2,940
Location
Devon
To be honest, I have not paid much heed with other rods before. I only noticed on this because of the colour change on the line.

As I said, this is more of an acedemic exercise, as 95% of my fishing is on rivers, where I would seldom be casting more than 30 or 40 feet of line anyway.

I raised this question as more of a "I would like to educate myself further" query rather than a "I need to answer this because it is affecting how I fish"

yeah I realised it wasn’t something you we’re planning on doing a lot when fishing... it’s still a useful exercise to play with though as it helps develop better line control and improves casting technique...
it also gives you the option should you need to make a longer cast in not having to shoot 20’ of line into the delivery cast to make your target...

It may be that carrying the full head isn’t something you have done before (and the colour change made it obvious), in which case the rod will feel different and you would expect it to feel slightly unwieldy initially... if you practiced it a bit no doubt that feeling would soon dissipate and you would slowly notice an improvement in control...

the other benefit is it would improve you general technique and you’d have even better control with shorter distances aerialised... a benefit in challenging / windy conditions...

or you could decide you will use it so infrequently not to bother and stick with carrying 30’ of the head....:)

but.... there is no disadvantage to improving your casting technique
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
5,610
This is the statement that we keep circling back to!
I suspect there's a really good reason for that, it's all we've got to go on - the manufacturer tells us that his rod works best with this line weight and the line weight is calculated as the first 30' of line.
Rod designers don't necessarily set the 'sweet spot' around 30' of line outside the rod tip,
Then what is the relevance of line weight or rod weights? The weight marking is not a minimum for the rod, nor a median nor an maximum, nor an optimum ...

If this is mostly true - I think it is btw - the rod makers should abandon the entire system and build rods with matched lines for particular fishing circumstances.

"Some say a rod has an optimum loading point and works best with that weight of line. I can’t see how that can be possible? Who decides on what the “optimum” line loading is? Which expert caster from the many good casters in the World, should be used as the benchmark for rating a rod's optimal loading? It is a daft notion isn't it?" David Norwich, rod builder.
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,322
Location
West Oxfordshire
I suspect there's a really good reason for that, it's all we've got to go on - the manufacturer tells us that his rod works best with this line weight and the line weight is calculated as the first 30' of line.
This is a true statement, but you cannot extrapolate that the rod designer bases optimal performance on 30' of line outside the rod tip.
Rods will be designed to work with anything from, let's say 20' to 60' and a shoot to a full line and beyond. They are not necessarily designed to be optimal with 30' of line outside the rod tip.
As for rods being designed for specific lines and vice versa, the Sage TCR and Rio Grand are a good example of this.
If you start to go down the rabbit hole of a 5wt line at 30' becomes a 6wt at 40' etc. your failing to understand that a 5wt rod is designed to cast a 5wt line at a variety of lengths of line. This judgment is purely subjective but the better designs of rods tend to get it right for the majority of casters, abilities and styles.
 

Latest posts

Top