WF or DT ?
I know this is not a new question but there are alot of conflicting opinions on the subject of weight forword vs. double taper fly lines. I have always been a weight forward guy since I fish some larger warm water flies and have to contend with the south Texas winds. But I also fish some smaller flies at shorter distance and a good presentation is needed. Some say the double taper is the only way to go. What do you perfer and why?
I think there is probably still a good article in the archives here by Leon Chandler, who was Cortland's ambassador to the fly fishing world. See if you can find it.
The gist of it, as I recall, was that you will normally have no difference in your casts until you get to a distance where the weight forward's running line (the thin part) comes into play. I fish streams, so runnig line never comes into play for me. If I tried to fish at a distance where I was into my running line, I would not be able to get a good drift. So I buy DTs as they have the advantage of being able to be turned around on my reel when the first end gets worn out, thus doubling the effective life of my fly line.
Many catalogs will show you the profile of the lines they offer. If the line profile looks about the same for WF and DT at the distances you cast, I think DT is your best bet.
Weight Forward here. But they are the same at 30'...I cast farther than 30'..LOL
I also know a lot of people that cut a DT in half and attach Amnesia so they get two lines...but, I prefer the thinner running line and like buy new line once in awhile. How else do you get to try out the new stuff.
I prefer double taper. Never actually did a scientific comparison to settle the argument within my own mind, so my opinion is just that. An opinion with no real basis for its existence.
Allan
Since I see no difference in how they cast, I prefer DT lines, so that when I wear out the business end, I can turn it around and fish it some more. I get twice as many fly lines as if I bought WFs.
I do see a difference in how they cast. Big difference for me. I prefer the smaller diameter running line, plus all the specialty lines are WF. Windcutter, Grand, Bass taper, Trout taper....etc.
Almost all of my lines are Weight Forward, either a standard WF fly line or a heavier WF nymphing line, plus some bass lines and spey lines, shooting head lines, sink tip lines, etc.
I do use a double taper line on my dry fly rod. I most likely don't have to but in theory you get a better presentation for a dry fly with a double taper. Naturally, a lot of the presentation is determined on how I cast and I am not an expert caster, so like I said, it most likely doesn't make a difference, but why not go with the double taper for dries.
Larry ---sagefisher---
I would love to go fishing and do so with just dries. Sadly, on every outing I do end up adding a nymph at one point or another.Originally Posted by sagefisher
DT on the little mountain streams I fish here in the east; can't remember the last time I had (or needed) more than 20' of line out. I like the fact that once one end wears out I've got another line ready to go just by swapping; also like the way it roll casts. Out west I normally use a WF; bigger water, bigger flies, more wind. Last summer, I was playing around on the Madison one evening with a DT 4wt, wind stayed down, little caddis/epeorus were coming off, casts were short, so I stayed with it; ended up fishing it the whole week in the mornings & evenings, and the WF 6wt during the day with hoppers and bigger attractor dries.
Regards,
Scott
Out to 40 feet or so I find very little, if any, difference. 40 to 90 feet (pretty much my limit), WF is an absolute advantage. especially in shooting line. Some extreme distance casters like DT because they use the entire line as a shooting head. I have never seen this but I have heard it can be done. Only my small stream 4 and 3 wt have DT. I really don't know why brcause I usually just buy a new line rather than switch ends. A new gizmo or a differend color, maybe. Maybe tradition too, I guess.
Bob
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote