Steven's Furled Leader Observations

[ducksterman]

Steven posted this in another thread. I think it is interesting stuff and deserves a thread of it's own. I wonder what others think of his observations?

Today 09:23 AM #14
Steven McGarthwaite

• View Profile
• View Forum Posts
• Private Message
• View Blog Entries
• View Articles
• Add as Contact

Senior Member


Join DateAug 2009LocationWhite Bear Lake MNPosts418

Just because someone was first, does not necessarily mean that they have it correct. I have been working with David Ulmers "Big Leader Formula since about 1998, and even that formula had a problem in the numbers. Took me 3 years to figure what was wrong, and another 2 years to figure out the solution. I am now attempting to use the corrected formula for furled leaders, and there are new variables that have to be taken into consideration, such as the 1-inch diameter pegs.

1-inch pegs circumference is 3.142 inches, which is also know as pi! The peg distances are from the center of the peg to center of the next peg, so you have to take into consideration the additional 3.142 inches added to the Lent of the run length.

I have looked at the peg locations of just about all furled leader layouts, and these peg positions do not make sense. There is no consent taper reduction percentage. You many not notice it when casting, but the furled leader has a hing effect, from the runs being unbalanced.

Then there is the matter of loop sequence, I see most talking about a 6:5:4 loop sequence (talking about the "V" board layout of 5 or 7 pegs.) with the wraps starting at the two hook at the top of the board, when each of the runs half a half loop when wrapping around the pegs so it is a 6-1/2:5-1/2:4-1/2 loops sequence.

Then there is the situation where some have the first inside peg being the shortest length run, which would wipe out the butt end of the furled leader from being able to transfer the energy of the cast correctly to the tip. Leader are normally 60 percent butt, 20 percent middle, 20 percent tip.

Then there is the problem of you have to have additional length to the board peg positions to compensated for the reduction in length of the finished furled leader.

I have not even gotten into the choice of material for the construction of the furled leader or the reduction of thread counts between each of the runs. What is the denier of the material? what is it approximate diameter?, does the material stretch (Nylon)? or are you using Polyester? Maybe you are using small diameter spin cast fishing line, what is its diameter, and what is its poundage?

If the line is too limp, it will not support the cast if the fly has too much mass (weight)!

Which is better 3 loop sequence (4 runs) or 4 loop sequence (5 runs) or maybe 5 loop sequence (6 runs, if you have enough length).

Steven H. McGarthwaite
U.S. Army Retired,
Senior Instructor on NBC, Survey, Topographer, Pipeline Design, Evaluator of Land/Air & Sea Battle Doctrine (LANS), Tactical Operation Center NCOIC. Design Tech of Mechanical Apparatus.

Last edited by Steven McGarthwaite; Today at 09:52 AM. Reason: SPEEL CHEX, AND GRANDMA CORRECTIONS.

[ducksterman]

Steven, what are some of your answers to the questions you pose?

What do others of you think?

BTW I use 3/16th diameter pegs...

We also have problems discussing some of this stuff because we don't have standard definitions...e.g. stepdowns,,,runs...etc.

[JohnScott]

...We also have problems discussing some of this stuff because we don't have standard definitions...e.g. stepdowns,,,runs...etc.

Seems to me that we have problems discussing some of this stuff because people don't use simple English to describe things. Steven may have a lot of history with furled leaders and may have done some great stuff looking into the mechanics of it all, but I get very little out of what he says about them because he uses a specialized language about methods with which I am not familiar.

As I see it, there are three basic things, beyond material, to consider in making a furled leader. Length, whether you want to discuss it in terms of starting or finished length. Configuration, which is the number of strands in each section of the leader. And proportions, as in X% butt section, Y% mid section, and Z% tip section.

Those three basics can be discussed without reference to the actual system or method used to make the leader, and there are at least four or five different approaches that I can recall from prior discussions, from Kathy's method using a board, to mine using manual power on a very different jig, to Kaboom's mechanized system.

Getting back to Steven's comments quoted from the other thread, the only thing I can relate to are his comments on proportion at 60% butt, 20% mid, and 20% tip. However, where Steven says leaders are normally made in his stated proportions, when I started building leaders and then when I started furling leaders, the consensus seemed to be proportions of 40% butt, 30% mid, and 30% tip. I know others use different proportions ( without getting into nymph leaders with only two sections or the beefed up models which might have four sections ), although I don't see many people refering to their proportions in percentage terms very often.

As to the comment "You many not notice it when casting, but the furled leader has a hing effect, from the runs being unbalanced," all I can say is that if I don't notice it, so what ?? If I do notice it, and it bothers me or effects my distance or accuracy in getting the fly where I want it, then it is something that is worth thinking about and fixing.

It would be great if we could / would all talk the same basic, simple, non specialized language when discussing furled leaders. And leave the peg diameters, loop sequences, and peg positions up to the individual or discuss them in terms of a specific, identified method of furling rather than as generalities that apply to all approaches, which they don't.

Just saying ....

John

[Joel D. Popham]

I think that we get too technical about things sometimes.... Does this leader work? Yes, No, Maybe.... If you want to "over engineer" it; ok, that's up to you. I'm brand new to furled and twisted leaders, I'm anxious to try them. I have fly fished for over 35 years. I'm in the process of moving to Missoula, MT where I will be able to put them through their paces. I'm really excited to be done with this packing, moving, unpacking stuff so that I can go fishing. If we were building a bridge or an airplane, this in depth discussion about proportions, Pi, and lengths might matter in the grand scope of things.... Do they work or not? I'll decide when I walk out my back door and cast into the Clark Fork....

Best Regards...

[Ron Eagle Elk]

I usually stay out of these discussions but, I gotta say, if the leader works for me then I really don't care about the engineering part of it. If I can reproduce the leader on my little furled leader board, then that's good enough for me.

John Scott, well said.

REE

[Joel D. Popham]

Thanks REE. I agree. Best Regards...

[NJTroutbum]

I have fished 3-4 diffrent brands of furled leaders and they seem to work fine. One of which were bought on EBAY and they too seem to work as well. The only differences I notice really are the tippet terminations. I much prefer a small loop but not too small to inhibit tying on a new leader. And I don't care for the metal rings.

That being said....I also have Kathy's video (provided by a gracious friend here), and it seems pretty straight forward. Like some of you, I don't care how the board came about. As long as if I make one just like it.....it works:^) Being an engineer in another field I am used to the overcomplication by folks. But if I ask you how you like your new watch....that's what I asked. I am not really concerned with the Swiss process for machining the particular metal use to make the gears found within the watch. I do however think it's a nice watch:^))))

[aged_sage]

There are a few of us into furling leaders who have been contributing to the advancement of our knowledge and understanding of our leaders; myself included. Most of what we have done, and are still working on, is based on Steven's Big Furled Leader Formula (BFLF). Although Steven is quite capable of defending himself, I feel compelled to give credit where credit is due, and my hat fs off to Steven.

In response to the comment about there being no standardized terminology; this is not quite true! Jim Williams of the UK, created a leader furling forum some years ago where one of the early tasks was to develop a 'dictionary' in an effort to develop some standardized terminology; which many of us now use. I must confess that when I first got started furling a couple of years ago, I too was confused by much of the terminology. After finding the above referenced forum, things cleared up rather quickly for me.

Yes, it can be difficult at times to understand what Steven is saying. To coin a phrase, his very first article that I read was "all Greek" to me. However, after contacting him and re-reading the article, it became quite clear to me that the sage advice given to me years ago by one of my scholarly college professor's applied to his writings. This prof's words to me when he learned that I was about to take a reading proficiency exam in French was: "Just remember that the French are the world's worst English spellers and you won't have any trouble." (No offense, Steven. Just making a point.) You may need to read what Steven has to say a time or two to figure it out, but his contributions to the furling group have been invaluable. The comments in this post are no exception. Perhaps his most notable contribution has been his Big Furled Leader Formula (BFLF).

To those who infer that what he is saying is 'overkill', I submit that what those of us who are trying to expand our knowledge and understanding of the furling process are doing is nothing more than what the bamboo rod builders are doing: trying to create the 'perfect' furled leader; which we know is unattainable, but which knowledge should not deter us from trying. Why settle for 'second best'?

There is a very small group of us, led by Karel Gol of the Netherlands, who have been working for a couple of years now on deriving a Table for furled leaders that will lead to producing leaders equivalent to their monofilament counter-parts in density ( part of what Steven is referring to in this note).

Karel has taken Steven's BFLF and created an Excel spread sheet that enables one to enter the number of steps, the number of threads per section, the total finished length, and the desired percent slope, and with a click of the mouse, have a table that give the precise peg locations for creating that leader. He has also compiled a table giving the necessary technical specs for more threads that one can use than most of us realized were available. He has taken this to the next step by developing a formula whereby, using the specs for a particular thread, you can calculate the requisite weight to provide maximum tension required for maximum twist, without thread breakage. A couple of us have assisted in the verification of his formula; thus, making it possible to create a 'required tension table' for each thread type and strand count ( such a table has not yet been created by us, but one can create their own). Karel's latest contribution is a spread sheet table (FINALLY) by which one can calculate the number of strands of a given thread required in the butt section to produce a specific leader for a specific line weight, based on the thread density and that is equivalent to it's mono counterpart.

Some of the responses previously posted clearly infer that perhaps we should still be using braided horsehair lines, catgut leaders, and wooden rods! I like to think I have moved beyond that period.

The referenced 'dictionary' and Karel's Tables, plus a treasure trove of additional information on furled leaders, is to be found at: www.furledleaders.co.uk. Karel's tables are found under "Setups and Techniques" in the thread "My Info in One File". There are four or five tabs to his Excel spread sheet. Be sure to look at all of them.

As stated at the beginning, Steven is fully capable of defending himself, but having communicated directly with him in the past and learning what a helpful guy he is, and noting the generally negative tone to most of the responses, I felt compelled to stick my neck out on his behalf.

Cheers,
Frank

PS: I will now burn my soapbox!