Printable View
I have a container of each, size 12 & 14, Mustad up eye dry fly hooks. I bought them accidentally and have never tied on them until today. They are probably 5 years old. I'm wondering what difference the up eye configuration would make on the way the fly floats. Basically, they are identical to the standard down eye design with the exception of the eye. Other than being slightly different to tie on, they are the same. Just wondering if they float differently than the standards.
Not much difference but you will have a better gape, they just look cool.
Pete Hidy tied a lot of his flymphs on up eyed hooks. They are suppose to give a better hook up due the angle of set.
These are a couple of "old wive's tales". They have been repeated so much that we believe them without thinking about them. Modern fly fishing books have corrected the error, although the Mustad site continues to say that the hook eye position matters on angle of set. It does not.
The position of the hook eye has no relationship to the angle of the hook set. The hook set is performed with the fish's mouth closed on the hook and the angle of the set is the angle of pull between the rod tip and the hook eye. So it is the rod position that determines the angle of the hook set.
For example, one would think that a down eye hook would cause the angle of pull to be "down" on the hook, but the angle of pull is actually up if the rod tip is above the level of the hook when the hook set occurs. Once the hook point penetrates flesh, the hook pulls on the flesh deforming it and simultaneously the hook rotates in line with the angle of pull of the line.
The hook gape is the distance between the hook point and the hook shank. It is unaffected by the hook eye angle. What narrows the hook gape is the material that is tied on the fly opposite the hook point. The distance between the hook eye and hook point can vary with the eye position BUT is unimportant unless the hook is very short.
I think hook eye postion is more about the aesthetics of the fly and the ease of tying the fly than any effectiveness in hooking.
Aaaahhh... we found that in small sizes, my fishing buddy and I missed a lot more trout with turned up eyes...
and we threw/gave away all our turned up Mustad hooks in anything smaller than #14's, and I'm so cheap I still have unused tying stuff from the 70's that I "may need someday"...
just my 2 cents,
Bowfin47
My question was; "How do they float?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowfin47
You can modify those small gape hooks by offsetting the point. This exposes the point when the fishes mouth flattens the fly.
When you try this on a fly that is already tied, you risk breaking off the barb, but I think it is worth the risk to improve the hooking percentage. Of course, when you tie on these hooks, you offset the eye before tying the fly.
Better yet, buy a 2X short hook to get a larger gap to shank length ratio, and add the offset. A Daiichi J220 is an example of such a hook. It is made in sizes 20, 22, and 24.
Joe,
No, not that I've noticed and I dress a lot of flymphs on them, with size 12 and 14 being my bread and butter sizes. They have about the same wire diameter as the Mustad 98480 standard dry fly hook.
REE
Hi Lotech Joe,
You've received several well-thought posts about the hooking ability of the up-eye hooks so I won't add to that discussion. Getting to your original question: Joe, I only have a number of years of anicdotal evidence to offer but in those years I have seen no difference in the floatation of a fly tied with an up-eye hook over one tied with a down-eye. I often use the up-eye hooks to tie Up Side Down dry flies. Why? The only reason I can offer is I like the way they look while resting on my tying table waiting to go to a customer or in my fly box. I don't think the fish have noticed one way or the other but again I state I only have anicdotal evidence to offer in support of my belief. Take care & ...
Tight Lines (Gretchen &) Al Beatty
www.btsflyfishing.com
I remembered readin something somewhere about up-eyed as opposed to down-eyed hooks.
It was in Halford's first book on Dry Flies. You will note he was indifferent to either,
it's not often I agree with his opinions:lol:. The ease in tying on the fly was more important.
http://donaldnicolson.webplus.net/page510.html
Given that everything else is the same the turned up eye will make no difference to how the fly floats. What no one seams to have mentioned is that the turned up eye was to accommodate a turle knot, where the cast is tied around the hook shank.
Cheers,
A.
Good thought on the turle knot. Also kudos for not calling it the turtle knot. I wonder if tying the knot in reverse on a down eye hook would also work. I would think so but have never tried it.
http://shoreangling4u.tripod.com/knotguide/id24.html
I like the down eye hook for fly tying. I tie a lot of parachute flies and the down eye gets the eye out of the way of the parachute hackle fibers. It also allows me to use the bobbin cradle on my Renzetti without the thread unwinding when I spin the hook. A straight eye allows the thread to slip more easily over the eye as the hook spins.
I also think a straight eye allows for more crowding of the eye of the hook when beginners tie flies. The hook eye angle seems to help keep thread clear of the eye, and the angle reminds the beginning tier to keep the area free for the tie off.
Years ago I read somewhere that up eye hooks were good for spinner, no hackle or parachute dry flies where the fly body was intended to be in the film. The idea was that the eye of an up eye hook would not penetrate the film (like a down eye hook would) and would thus provide a more natural fly body impression in the film. I can't say that I have any evidence to support this position and frankly, I don't bother with up eye hooks any longer.
On fly sizes 16 and smaller, Gary Borger factors in the length of the hook eye as part of the insect length. Gary specifically discusses the hook eye in Designing Trout Flies pp. 178 :
"?.tiers have not considered the eye to be part of the representation of the food organism; rather, the eye (like the hook bend and point) is regarded as a necessary evil.
Thus when selecting hooks most tiers consider only the length of the shank (from the rear of the eye to the bend). But in fact, the eye should be considered in the overall length of the imitation especially when tying flies sizes 16 and smaller. In these smaller sizes, variations in length are more evident than in larger sizes (page 46). Time and time again, I've had highly selective fish refuse my fly only to readily take the same imitation tied one size smaller. In these situations, the length of the hook shank of the first fly I chose was the same length as the natural's body. For the fly one size smaller, the length of the shank plus the length of the eye matched the body length of the natural and thats the fly they wanted. Thus for flies size 16 and smaller, the eye must be considered an integral part of the overall length of the design.
Some designs lend themselves very nicely to hiding the eye?? In other designs the eye sticks out like a proverbial sore thumb. In these instances, consider the eye of the hook to represent the head of the insect"
I've heard other authors say many times that if you are certain about a hatch, but the trout are refusing the fly, go down a hook size. I think the eye of the hook lengthening the "apparent" body length to the fish may be a reason.
More food for thought when considering the hook eye.