Typical amount of line out before shooting

PaulD

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Messages
1,961
Location
South Northants
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.

What number is written on the rod butt is a 'guide' - no more no less. The rod maker doesn't know if the person who's buying the 9ft, 5wt is going to be fishing spiders at 30ft on the River Wharfe or targeting cruising, midge sipping rainbows at 75ft at Grafham.

I don't think it's a realistic expectation for rod manufacturers to build a range of 9ft, 5wts and try and label them for 'particular fishing circumstances' . . . Traditional Spiders, Chalkstream Dry Fly, Grafham Midge, Chub on the Ouse etc, etc, etc.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
42,494
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"

There is much discussion on the 30' AFTM, one thing worth bearing in mind is a cast is generally the distance from where you stand to the fish, this includes the length of the rod and the the length of the leader to the fly.
So your 30' is + 9' rod, and maybe 11' of leader which is actually 50' from foot to fly.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
42,494
So what's the answer, you big tease you?

You already know that the more line you cast, the more you can shoot, unfortunately there is no precise calculation because rods, lines, power etc. all vary, but you know you can shoot 10' on a 50' cast(30' of head)

To go further would over complicate things here.
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,197
Location
West Oxfordshire
What number is written on the rod butt is a 'guide' - no more no less. The rod maker doesn't know if the person who's buying the 9ft, 5wt is going to be fishing spiders at 30ft on the River Wharfe or targeting cruising, midge sipping rainbows at 75ft at Grafham.

I don't think it's a realistic expectation for rod manufacturers to build a range of 9ft, 5wts and try and label them for 'particular fishing circumstances' . . . Traditional Spiders, Chalkstream Dry Fly, Grafham Midge, Chub on the Ouse etc, etc, etc.
That's why we have such a large variety of different line profiles!
 

andygrey

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
3,197
Location
West Oxfordshire
You already know that the more line you cast, the more you can shoot,
No, sorry. This isn't a given. For a lot of casters, the more line aeirlised (sp?) can quite often mean the less they can shoot. Shooting line comes down to having excess energy in the line, simply carrying more line doses't automatically give it more energy and I'd go so far as to say in most situations, quite likely the opposite.
 

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
986
Location
North Yorkshire
Just buy a modern Fast glass rod and most of the above becomes totally irrelevant.
A main dealer friend of mine went on a trade rod launch day (Guide Fly. Fishing-Sage group) this Summer, where they were demonstrating how much more flexibility Modern glass has over Carbon- over lining and underlining rods by as much as #6 in both directions. The Carbon rods just couldn’t do it- where the S glass rods performed better.
He told me he was stunned at how well an 8’ #3 ‘glass rod could handle a #9 line
He admitted he was very sceptical himself until he’d spent some time playing with the offerings.
They also performed a “destruction test” loading a rod until it fails.
S Glass would take +12x the load before breaking to what a quality Carbon rod would. He said it was heart breaking watching them shatter £800 Carbon rods tied to a fork lift with a digital recorder.

I remember when rods would have #5-6-7-8 ratings and work well with all 4.
 

Tangled

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2015
Messages
5,470
Just buy a modern Fast glass rod and most of the above becomes totally irrelevant.
A main dealer friend of mine went on a trade rod launch day (Guide Fly. Fishing-Sage group) this Summer, where they were demonstrating how much more flexibility Modern glass has over Carbon- over lining and underlining rods by as much as #6 in both directions. The Carbon rods just couldn’t do it- where the S glass rods performed better.
He told me he was stunned at how well an 8’ #3 ‘glass rod could handle a #9 line
He admitted he was very sceptical himself until he’d spent some time playing with the offerings.
They also performed a “destruction test” loading a rod until it fails.
S Glass would take +12x the load before breaking to what a quality Carbon rod would. He said it was heart breaking watching them shatter £800 Carbon rods tied to a fork lift with a digital recorder.

I remember when rods would have #5-6-7-8 ratings and work well with all 4.
How heavy are they these days?
 

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
986
Location
North Yorkshire
How heavy are they these days?
Getting very close to Carbon at the better end. Swift, CTS, Blue Halo, McFarland, Barclay They’ve not really taken off here like they have in the US yet, where about half the rod sales are now glass.
when once most people try one they are smitten though.
Because it’s so tough, you can build the walls much thinner than carbon and the rods’ taper much faster, so the power just keeps yielding from further down the blank.
They actually feel lighter when casting than carbon- it’s a hard feeling to describe and you can fish with much finer tippets safely.
I started 3 years ago or so with glass and rarely pick up a carbon rod now.
This chap builds some nice ones.


This Guy has built me 3
The 3 piece green one with Burr maple seat pictured on the link for Fibre Glass rods is one he built for me.


And I’ve built a few myself too

There’s a whole culture and industry developing around glass and Cane rods, with some amazing component manufacturers springing up, with high demand
AD4BB945-8FD1-43D4-9D53-DB724BEEE780.jpeg


6A9E6105-F953-4739-A0D1-C145D661C5B1.jpeg
 
Last edited:

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
42,494
No, sorry. This isn't a given. For a lot of casters, the more line aeirlised (sp?) can quite often mean the less they can shoot. Shooting line comes down to having excess energy in the line, simply carrying more line doses't automatically give it more energy and I'd go so far as to say in most situations, quite likely the opposite.

I think in discussing it we have to assume a few things, the first thing being that there is a general level of ability, to shoot 10' of line you only need to be able to lift 30' into the air, make a forward cast and let go.
All things being equal, if they can aerilise more line, same line speed, it will shoot further.
 

ohanzee

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
42,494
They actually feel lighter when casting than carbon- it’s a hard feeling to describe and you can fish with much finer tippets safely.

Lower swing weight, makes rotating the rod easier so we can rotate faster/easier.
 

rusty

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Messages
1,427
Location
Powys
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
Shortcircuit does not say he is a novice but he has been playing with his new #4 rod, which he wants to fish at modest range. He does not say what # rating his new line is but says it has a 46ft head, which he is finding difficult to aerialise. I assume it is a #4 WF.
I wonder why he bought such a line for close range fishing? Maybe he bought it by mistake.
To answer his question I would suggest he aerialises what line he can easily handle and is appropriate to the situation and then shoot what line he wishes to. He should not get hung up about the belly length. If he is shooting using the belly of the weight forward then it will just be hehaving like a double taper. No problem.

Rusty
 

Rhithrogena

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
544
If he is shooting using the belly of the weight forward then it will just be hehaving like a double taper. No problem.

Yes - exactly!
 

matt808

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
441
No, sorry. This isn't a given. For a lot of casters, the more line aeirlised (sp?) can quite often mean the less they can shoot. Shooting line comes down to having excess energy in the line, simply carrying more line doses't automatically give it more energy and I'd go so far as to say in most situations, quite likely the opposite.
Is it not true up to the point where the casting distance starts to become uncomfortable to whoever's casting?
 
Last edited:

Hardrar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
986
Location
North Yorkshire
I have err! over 70 reels 🤭 so consequently a lot of lines, it always interests me, how very differently very similar lines of the same weight cast and handle and more particularly suit some rods and not others.
It’s not a cheap journey, but having multiple lines to try on a new rod in the stable is always useful to find that sweet pairing.
 
Top