Spey (matching lines to rods) / Tailing loop

Walter & Group........

This is Rick Whorwood's (MCCI / THCI) answer to Ron Thomas' question on the relationship between the length of a Spey rod  and the choice of lines.  (Matching line to rod) :-

Hi Gordy

This is an interesting question, and not always easy to answer, Simon is somewhat right in general terms. We need to understand what the rod was designed to do ? Was it designed to be a shooting head Scandinavian Rod (fast action), or shooting skagit rod (much slower action)? All too often shop's sell rods without a true understanding of what line would best suit a rod (Spey). When we did the Loomis Roaring River project we spent three days matching lines to the 24 spey rods in the series. If Ron could give me more detailed information on the rods action, I might be able to answer the question more easly. 

Rick Whorwood's
Fly Casting School
www.flycastingschool.com
(905)-662-8999

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

COMMENT:  Rick brings up an important point here...... that the length of the rod is only one thing to consider when matching lines.  Important, also, is the design of that rod and its action.

 

Gordy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From John Breslin (via Al Crise)

 

Al:

>

> As a general rule, a longer rod can use a longer head, as it more easily

> can make a larger D loop. However, it sounds like your friend's issue may

> be too heavy a line for his rod, as well as too long a head for his

> skills. I'd recommend he go to about a 60 ft head with a line size lower

> than he is using on that TFO and see if that improves things for him.

>

> All the best

> John

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

From Paul Arden (on the tail said to be"caused" by too short a stroke length.) :-

Troy is using an increase in stroke length to prevent premature power application, the shorter stroke

length wasn't causing the tails, rather the improper application of power.

So I disagree with his vehement disagreement.

 

Cheers,

Paul

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Paul ...

 

I think you are both correct.  As I see it, the short stroke length and rod arc (short tip travel) won't produce a tail without abrupt early power application.

 

  Problem is that most casters who use this short tip travel for the amount of line out of the rod sense a, "need" for greater application of power. That is usually because they don't feel the rod load.  Sensing this, they usually apply too much power early in the cast YIELDING ACCELERATION AND ROD BEND WHICH THEY CANNOT MAINTAIN.

 

This lack of ability to maintain that much acceleration and rod bend results in a brief decrease in the amount of acceleration which in turn makes the rod bend less.  The rod tip which has been bent way down, now bounces back yielding a concave rod tip path, ergo a tail.

 

As I pointed out, yesterday, if the caster can maintain that early acceleration and rod bend, no tail will result, despite the short tip travel.  Few casters can do that.

 

In a manner of speaking, having the student use greater tip travel often does prevent that early spike of power..... because the student no longer feels the need for it.  Like many, "fixes", it doesn't always work.

 

We can argue over which came first ... the chicken or the egg ?  That won't change the physics behind the whole scenario.

 

We could look at it that we have a, "Cause-which-caused-the-cause."

 

Gordy

 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

    

 

-----