My fishing buddy of 35 years + on the Henry’s Fork still uses this pattern. He called it a “Strawberry Shortcake” and used it when there was no hatch about.
I substitute Widow’s Web for Calf Tail and Chinese Red Uni-Stretch for silk. I say Widow’s Web, but not sure if it is that or EP Fibers. They are somewhat similar.
Polywings and red tying thread here. Mine don’t look as nice though!
Byron,
Check out this RW Cripple which Rowan Nyman designed while he was at BRF…they really work well in #18 - #20…
http://www.blue-ribbon-flies.com/shop/royal_wulff_cripple/
PT/TB
Very interesting PT, but a bit too “frumpy” for me…
Steven, I doubt your comment. Post one of your Wulff’s.
Thanks,
Byron
Here’s a slightly modified Gray Wulff. Bucktail for the tail, but deer hair for the wings.
Unfortunately, I don’t have the camera for it.
I hope the comment you’re referring to was that mine aren’t as nice. My ties are OK; they catch fish, but I’m not sure they’d land a lot of fishermen.
Byron,
I like to use calf body for the wings on mine. Also, I use some super fine gold wire as a rib to protect the peacock herl and floss body.
Regards,
Alberto
Visabilty is one of the best attributes of the RW. While easier to tie, I have never found any synthetics that show up as well as calf hair.
Steven,
Yes it was. I’m sure you’re just modest.
Thanks
I use white Z-Lon for the wings in many of my dry flies, Byron, and I’m not sure I could tell the difference from your Widow’s Web wings. I can tie wings of Z-Lon on 6 flies in the time it would take me to tie just one fly’s wing of calf tail, and they have all the visibility I need to catch plenty of trout. And, we all know what a pain floss can sometimes be.
So, for me, I’d say your modifications make a fly that is superior to the original. Not knocking the original…they were undoubtedly tied with materials that were available at the time.
Okay, this comment has nothing to do with how well the pattern photo’d catches fish, how well it floats, that it’s easily visible, how much easier the wings are to tie (vs. R.W.), its durability, or other attributes due to the modification of using a synthetic material(s) for the wing on that pattern. You can call it a “Strawberry Shortcake” or whatever the heck you want but it’s not a Royal Wulff!
The ‘Wulffs’ have a specific attribute, hair tail and wings. This fly as tied, does not fit that bill. Again, and before anyone gets their bowels in an uproar, this comment has nothing to do with the quality of the pattern tied. It is only about the name. I’d apply the same logic to explain that a Royal Wulff is not a Royal Coachman. Just sayin.
Well said Allan. If names don’t mean anything communication is impossible.
Now I’m off for a drink of virgins blood! (You know, that thing that used to be called coffee!)
Cheers,
A.
While I’d be the first to argue that an “Adams” without the brown hackle and tails isn’t an Adams, I might kindly disagree on this one.
The color scheme is correct and the purpose of the white calf tail is visibility, an attribute well captured by the white poly. And of course, we wouldn’t argue that a Royal Wulff isn’t a Royal Wulff because it used calf body hair rather than the original calf-tail.
FWIW, I did lie a little. I don’t tie a poly-wing Royal Wulff, I tie a poly-wing Quack Coachman. Originally tied by Rube Cross, Cross wrote that he just wanted something white and crinkly for the wings.
My $0.02 with tongue firmly planted in cheek.
Nah. I don’t get a chance to really get the practice in to get good like you guys. I might tie a half dozen to a dozen flies a month max (usually on Sunday mornings before everybody wakes up).
I hear you Steven. I remember the time constraints!!!