Divided wings

[Ray Kunz]

A majority of the classic ties for mayflies call for divided wings. Yet most mayflies sitting on the water have their wings together and straight up. Am I not seeing them right or were the designers getting into aerodynamics?

Ray;
May I ride along on this? I hate wings!! Can't tie them in for love not money but I sure would like to get it right!! But you are right Mayfly's hold their wings togather.

[LadyFisher]

Try this: [url=http://www.flyanglersonline.com/flytying/beginners/part17.html:b6fef]http://www.flyanglersonline.com/flytying/beginners/part17.html[/url:b6fef]

------------------
LadyFisher, Publisher of
FAOL

[LWilliams]

Actually Chris, I believe Vince Marinaro pretty conclusively depicted that the wings are the "first" thing a trout sees.

[RonMT]

Sorry fellas you got it about half right. Mayflies do set with there wings spread. I can't tell you the number of times I have seen them in this position.
The main reason for the divided wing (In Fly Tying) is to balance the fly. If you divide the tail you do not need to divide the wing to get the fly to set right. It is up to each of us how we want to do this. I use both way's. Ron

[LWilliams]

JC:

"In a couple of weeks...done last month." I'm already confused! (j/k).

[Royal Wulff]

LWilliams, RW here,

Vince would say that, because he tied his wings extra high and large, so of course the trout would see the wings. He says as much in his "own" book.."A Modern Dry Fly Code". So does Charles K. Fox in his book "Rising Trout", but Fox and Marinaro were bests buds and fished together often on the Letort.

You have to realize, though, that Marinaro was only confirming his own preference for tying large wings, because he himself thought it was important, not that anyone else did. If it was indeed that important, then it's like saying that all the great tiers and inovators like Swisher and Richards with their no-hackles, the Variants ala Art Flick, the parachute flies, etc. etc. were no good because Vince Marinaro said large, tall wings were the only way to go. I think he might have been a little predjudiced about his own flies, doncha think?

All these flies work well at times and not at others. I'm of the opinion that the trout really don't give a da#m about anything other than size and reasonable silloute with possible shade and color occasionaly thrown into the mix. That's my theory and I've spent over 50 years proving it to myself. FIRE AWAY!!!!

Later, RW

------------------
"We fish for pleasure; I for mine, you for yours." -James Leisenring on fishing the wet fly-

[LWilliams]

RW: I am referring to the Slant Tank experiments. In general the first part of a mayfly that comes into a trout's view is it's wings--how the tier chooses to represent them is up to the tier.

I'm with George Harvey on this though: most of the tiers I know who are against adding wings to hackled dries cannot tie them properly to begin with.

[eaustin]

Well, now we embark on the old wing debate. I guess if you are Royal Wulff, who we know CAN and DOES tie great wings, you are entitled to your opinion that wings don't matter. However, if you're a tier who doesn't like them because he can't tie them, that's another thing. It's hard for me to believe that a good way to imitate an insect that's MOSTLY wing is to leave them off, but one can argue that the trout don't ever see them from underneath. I don't really buy that myself, but one can argue that. I see all sorts of theories put forth all the time, including the one where a fly that doesn't look like anything at all is just the ticket. But go back to what it is we're trying to do here. Are we or are we not trying to imitate insects with our flies? Or in the case of impressionistic flies, imitate insect activity?
The reasons wings are split are aerodynamic. In addition, there are great numbers of mayflies whose wings are split, though many have them together as stated. I tied a fly for the Henry's Fork half spent because I saw so many PMDs with their wings like that. Banged 'em big time.
Eric

[LWilliams]

Eric: The fish may indeed not see them from underneath, but in order for the fish get under your fly, the fish needs to see it coming.

I don't necessarliy want my mayfly imitation to "surprise" a trout as I would say, a hopper or beetle. I want the fish to see it ahead in it's feeding lane.

I feel a trout may ignore your fly at the last moment, but will rarely elect to eat it on a whim. Rather, I feel most show they are interested far before the fly is directly overhead. This is where I feel wings are critical as they appear to a fish well ahead of the body or footprint. During a hatch I just do not think trout "suddenly" eat anything.

That said, "how" wings are imitated is up for discussion and may blur the line between angling and tying a bit. I like upright divided wings on my hackled flies, but there is no arguing the effectiveness of Flick's Variants.