How important is it, or should I ask what difference does it make, that you match your line weight to that which is recommended? It seems to me that if you go a size lighter you would load the rod the same with a little more line length and visa-versa. Am I off base here?
Sometimes I use a 4wt line on my 3wt rod when I’m fishing in the Smoky Mountains or other small streams where I’m making really short casts. It seems to load the rod better when there’s just a little line out.
I’ve never tried or needed to try to under line a rod but would assume it would act somewhat like a faster action rod. I’m just not a big fan of fast action rods. I may give a 4wt line a try on one of my 5wt rods some day just to see what happens.
Jeff
for a prior discussion of this subject.
John
No Ray, you are not crazy. A rod’s rating is simply a professional at the manufacturing company’s opinion of what line would feel best for the casting he thinks you will be doing. There is a tremendous amount of overlap and if you are casting in close you may want to upline especially if you have a very fast rod. The converse for longer casts can be true but is not done as often. If you want to get into the meat there are a number of good books on the subject. You could also look at some stuff I wrote several years ago when I was thinking along those same lines. Also get into Bill Hanneman’s stuff on Common Cents (google same). Try:
http://www.hatofmichigan.org/uploads/Mechanics_of_Fly_Casting_3.pdf
and see if it whets your appetite.
Godspeed and good fishing.
Bob
I was bluegill fishing a number of years ago with a friend. He was using a Sage 9’, 4 wt. rod (don’t remember the model). After hooking a 'gill, and it went airborne on the hook set, he (friend, not 'gill) said “I finally found something that’ll load this rod!”. Bobinmich nailed it. I don’t think I’d load a Loomis rod with the same line as Steve Rajeff, who designs and tests many of their rods. Another good reason to buy from a good local shop. You can try different line weights on a rod to see what works for you!
Chuck
We have had many conversations about this exact subject on this board. These days I tend to not buy as many weights of fly line as I use to. I think that I have 12 or 13 outfits ranging from 3 to 10 wt but only use about 5 different line weights to cover the 8 different rod weights that I use.
I also think that action type is as much of a factor and your casting style as is the number that is put on the rod. I think that many fly fisherman would be surprised to know that there isn’t a standard among manufacturers on what constitutes a rod weight designation. It is a subjective number that doesn’t carry from one manufacturer over to another.
Another aspect of this subject is that if you don’t like the action of a rod, to try different lines on it. You might feel a lot different. I almost sold a rod recently that I didn’t like, then changed lines and now it’s great.
I have not owned any graphite rods that cast poorly with the line that the rod was rated for. Nor did they cast any better with a line size up or down. With today’s graphite rods, I don’t think a rod’s line rating is just a best guess by the manufacturer. Those that feel they have to line up to get a fast action rod to cast better, IMHO need to either work on their casting, or perhaps may find a moderate to moderate fast action rod to me suitable to their casting style.
Although like Jeff when fishing tight streams, I have overlined a shorter rod to make the rod load quicker. But in those instances, I have very little fly line past the tip.
that’s a pretty broad statement. While this may be the case, it also may not be.
Personally, I like a slower action rod, It has nothing to do with how good or poor my casting ability is (I would say I’m an above average caster). For example, I have this great 5/6wt. fiberglass rod that I’ll typically fish with a 6wt line for the vast majority of my fishing…trout, bass, panfish. Now, if I’m throwing dries to trout, I’ll go with the standard 6wt line and it performs very nicely. If I’m throwing streamers where I have to really sling some line out, I’ll put on a 200 grain shooting head and that makes it very easy to throw a ton of line…now, 200 grains is just 2 grains short of the lower window for an 8wt line…quite a difference. That has nothing to do with me needing to learn how to cast, but everything to do with the style of fishing I’m doing at that time.
As a general statement, I believe that the line rating is the manufacturer’s guide as to what line weight is best when casting 30 feet of line. More than that, it is my opinion that this holds for floating line and not sinking line; since I believe that sinking line casts differently than floating line.
I also believe that the manufacturers consider the action of the rod when making that rating. For example, I think that they rate a slow rod differently than a fast rod so that they want the slow rod to bend more deeply for the 30 feet of line than the fast rod. So I think line rating is an opinion rather than a science; and considers both the absolute of 30 feet of fly line mass and also the more variable style of casting with which that the rod performs best.
I think most everyone would agree that line rating is a guide and not an absolute and that what is most important is your personal “line rating” for that fly rod.
This is generally true but not in ALL cases. It depends on how we cast and how we release the line through our fingers.
This would be true IF the velocity (V) of the different lines lengths were identical. What loads the rod is kinetic energy (KE) of the cast stored as Potential Energy (PE) in the bend of the rod. Simplifying this we can think of the line rating as the answer to the question, “What casting energy bends the rod so that it feels best with 30 feet of fly line?” The line weight (mass) that creates this feel is the line rating for that rod.
The problem is that the rod bend varies with the line velocity more than the line mass since KE = (M)(V)(V)/2. The rod rating is the line mass; but it totally ignores line velocity, which is much, much more important than mass. It is like describing a persons stature by his weight alone without giving us his height also.
For KE, line velocity is a square function and line mass is a linear function of energy. So we are using only one of the variables of casting distance to describe a specific line mass for a given distance. And that variable is the less important one.
This means that an increase in the line velocity affects the feel of a rod more than the same increase in mass. This means we can get the correct feel with a shorter amount of line with a relatively small increase in line velocity.
To shorten a cast with excess velocity, all we need to do is to scrub off some of that velocity during the final casting stroke so that the cast actual is shorter than the energy we put into the cast.
We also know that casting distance varies with loop size so that less energy is required to cast a given distance with a tight loop. But again loop size is not a variable in the determination of what line is right for a 30 foot cast. I assume that the manufacturers are using proficient tight loop caster to rate their rods so that it takes less of a rod bend for them to cast 30 feet than an intermediate caster. Again, if you are not in sync with the rod raters, the rod may not feel exactly right for you with the energy you need to make that 30 foot cast.
All of this technical mumbo-gumbo is to illustrate that the rod line rating is not an absolute but an art.
If I understand the the CCS or Common Cents System correctly, it is a static test whereas casting is a dynamic test. So the CCS system is best, I believe to compare rod blanks to each other and not to say absolutely that a given blank is a certain line weight blank for an individual caster. Nevertheless, I think is a valuable way to measure rod blanks against each other and is a reasonable way to approximate rod line rating.
Hi Henry,
How is your forey into physics coming? If you want to get really deep, Sexyloops.com is big into casting physics. Pretty strong opinions there though and many of them are distance casters which is another subject entirely. Careful though, it is an addiction.
Godspeed and good fishing,
Bob
I have asked reps from a couple of major rod manufacturers they replied this is not the case. They do not use a 30ft standard. Many rods are designed to load optimally with 40 or more feet of the rated line outside the rod tip, especially in the middle to heavier weights. For some it may be 30ft and others perhaps even less. This makes sense. When you think of it, most anglers using 8 or 9wt rods for example are not making 30ft casts most of the time while anglers using a 0 weight are probably not casting 40ft and shooting another 20ft all day.
A floating and sinking line of the same weight will feel different when casting. The sinking line will be thinner and thus offer less resistance when going through the air, making it easier to generate more line speed.
Just about every rod that I have ever cast worked just fine with the rated line in situations where you would expect the rod to be used. I’m not talking about 80ft casts with a 1wt or hitting pocket water with a 13wt. Many very experienced casters will go up a line size or even two if they are going to be making a lot of short casts. I typically use a 10wt line when bass bugging from a float tube with an 8wt rod because I am usually making 10 to 30 foot casts in this situation. I will use an 8wt line with the same rod when bugging from a boat and making 50-60ft casts. Flats anglers often go up a line size to help quickly load the rod for those situations where a bonefish, tarpon, permit, etc. suddenly show up close to the boat. Some anglers will go down a line size if they will be making a lot of long casts.
Silver Creek makes an important point when he talks about the velocity of the rod. When you think it through, you realize that you do not need a line to load the rod. When you move the rod, you put a bend in it, thus loading the rod. If you move it faster, you will put a deeper bend in it.
Absolutely true. Looking at the moment applied to the rod handle, see Figure VI. in http://www.hatofmichigan.org/uploads/Mechanics_of_Fly_Casting_5.pdf ,
nearly 50% of the work going into this rod at mid cast is going into accelerating the rod and reel.
All of the energy input for a cast comes from the casters hand. But not all of that energy goes into the line. Of that 10% or so of that energy is stored in the rod deflection as PE and much (but not all) is recovered by the line at the end of the cast. Maybe half goes to accelerating the rod and reel, and the remainder goes directly to the line by the translation and rotation of the casters hand. This is why rod weight (more specifically weight distribution or MOI) is so important.
Bob
Hi Bob and tailing loop. I welcome your clarifications and additions to how rod companies rate rods and energy transfer.
Much appreciated, indeed.