What in your opinion is the maximum distance you would expect to be able to present a dry fly with reasonable accuracy and subtlety with a 9 foot #5 rod? Distance = feet to fly.
Assume no wind at all, an overhead cast and no obstruction to the back cast.
50-60 feet, leader = rod length, single fly, within 4 foot diameter of where I wanted it.
Good stuff guys.
Please understand this is not a competition, I just want to get some idea of what the average "quality presentation" cast would be. :D
Still water? About 40' including 10' leader! :roll: Slightly more with supporting breeze. :oops:
I can cast nane!
Running water - totally random but I believe the fish to be closer. :D
A.
As I always have a dry fly on the cast it is however far I cast on the day. As far as accuracy is concerned if it lands close to where I saw the rise then I was accurate. In a breeze up to a strong wind then it usually takes a couple of casts to get it in the right place. In a head wind I just don't bother, I'm just happy if it goes out :)
I'm going to assume this is in a park or a still water as it just has no practical application on a river, well apart from the 0.1% of the time. For me 75' or there abouts from foot to fly. Anything further and consistency becomes an issue, usually with leader turnover. I can cast much further but not with what I term dry fly presentation that I'd be happy fishing with - I think this is often forgotten about when people start talking distance.
You'll also want either a DT or a long belly wf to do it comfortably, if you are around the limits of how much line can be shot (and every length of line has a finite amount of line that it will shoot) you'll notice consistency drops off pretty badly.
Quote from: scotty9 on May 12, 2012, 08:34:41 PM
I'm going to assume this is in a park or a still water as it just has no practical application on a river, well apart from the 0.1% of the time. For me 75' or there abouts from foot to fly. Anything further and consistency becomes an issue, usually with leader turnover. I can cast much further but not with what I term dry fly presentation that I'd be happy fishing with - I think this is often forgotten about when people start talking distance.
You'll also want either a DT or a long belly wf to do it comfortably, if you are around the limits of how much line can be shot (and every length of line has a finite amount of line that it will shoot) you'll notice consistency drops off pretty badly.
Ask a simple question, get a complicated answer!
Quote from: Inchlaggan on May 12, 2012, 08:38:56 PM
Ask a simple question, get a complicated answer!
What's complicated? Let me know and I'll make it simpler.
Fred, Scott, you were on the bank when I cast to that fish I caught on the Eglinton in NZ. How far was that? Sixty feet or something?
About that distance is as far as I would feel comfortable in the accuracy stakes. Accuracy aside, I can still get good soft presentation at longer range, maybe 80 - 90 feet?
Alex
Quote from: haresear on May 12, 2012, 10:06:49 PM
Fred, Scott, you were on the bank when I cast to that fish I caught on the Eglinton in NZ. How far was that? Sixty feet or something?
About that distance is as far as I would feel comfortable in the accuracy stakes. Accuracy aside, I can still get good soft presentation at longer range, maybe 80 - 90 feet?
Alex
I was trying so hard not to watch you catch it since I hadn't caught anything :lol: (Cover up for how bad some of my memory is from NZ... too much happened during my time there!)
Reading these answers I am now thinking about either:
1. Underlining by 2 weights and using a DT
2. Getting the TCX out again
Actually these two options amount to pretty much the same thing. :lol:
Quote from: Alan on May 12, 2012, 11:20:41 PM
if you lift what feels comfortable and effortless and let go how far is it on a tape?
No idea, I have never used a tape and I am hopeless at estimating distance when casting. When I pace out - say - 10 yards (30 feet) and place a marker to aim at I am always astonished how close it seems to be.
Is anybody else reading this feeling a little inadequate? People talking of casting 70 plus feet and still doing it accurately and with good presentation! Fek me but I need some serious practise, I'm lucky if I can cast 30ft from toes to fly and get good presentation. Oh I can cast further but not effectively, seems I am going to have to make a wee trip to that pond in Glasgow for some expert tuition. Fred you need to add an embaressed smiley for me.
Daz
Law of diminishing returns Fred, 30' is close, 60' seems much more than double by comparison when you are casting!
Daz - we'd be glad to have you along. Stick up a post if you're going along, as far as I'm aware attendance rates have been hit and miss from a few to zero :D
On a river it varies, with all the currents that I have to control a fly over it's maybe about 50 feet - a bit further in a placid stretch. Beyond that and control just disappears.
On a stillwater, no obstructions, fishing a pair of dries on a 20ft leader it's about 90-100 feet with a nice left to right cross tail wind that would be to within 10ft or so.
I've stood beside Arthur Cove on Grafham a couple of times and he could present accurately with a team of three nymphs on a 24 ft leader at around 110 feet (I think) but he was very good.
Quote from: Malcolm on May 13, 2012, 12:24:36 AM
On a river it varies, with all the currents that I have to control a fly over it's maybe about 50 feet - a bit further in a placid stretch. Beyond that and control just disappears.
On a stillwater, no obstructions, fishing a pair of dries on a 20ft leader it's about 90-100 feet with a nice left to right cross tail wind that would be to within 10ft or so.
I've stood beside Arthur Cove on Grafham a couple of times and he could present accurately with a team of three nymphs on a 24 ft leader at around 110 feet (I think) but he was very good.
Indeed, he was very good, but he "cheated" somewhat, he used a severely underlined #8 weight.
TL
MC
Quote from: Mike Connor on May 13, 2012, 12:49:53 AM
Indeed, he was very good, but he "cheated" somewhat, he used a severely underlined #8 weight.
TL
MC
Any idea what the line weight/length was Mike?
He used a DT5 on a 9.5 ft 7/8 weight rod. He designed the Bob Church Arthur Cove Nymph although it was actually marked 5/6 it was at least a 7 weight (I've tried it) rather like the TCR 5!
Quote from: scotty9 on May 13, 2012, 12:59:27 AM
Any idea what the line weight/length was Mike?
a #4 or a #5 full DT as I recall. If you are very good you can aerialise the whole line and it gives delicate presentation even at distance. You are often completely buggered in a wind though.
EDIT: I see Malcolm already answered that. I was a bit too hasty again! :)
TL
MC
QuoteReading these answers I am now thinking about either:
1. Underlining by 2 weights and using a DT
2. Getting the TCX out again
Why Fred? Sounds like you are casting to fish at range?
If so, I suggest you would best advised to use a long belly and shoot some line. I struggle to aerialise a lot of line and I can probably cope with more than you :)
Alex
Quote from: Exerod on May 13, 2012, 08:50:34 AM
The streams I fish rarely call for a much longer
Same here with one exception and even then the casts are normally far shorter. I do like the sound of that Arthur Cove idea though. :D
Quote from: admin on May 13, 2012, 09:32:05 AM
Same here with one exception and even then the casts are normally far shorter. I do like the sound of that Arthur Cove idea though. :D
If you want more distance and better accuracy then use an intermediate line and "grease" it ( armorall works great, just wipe it on with a clean cloth, allow to dry, and polish if desired), repeat occasionally to retain the "floating" capability. This will cast a lot further, and a lot more accurately than any floater of the same weight. This is due to be it being a lot thinner for its weight than a floater. Works just like a silk line and floats "ON" the surface film and not "IN" it like a plastic floater. Also gives better hook ups and causes less disturbance, especially at close range, but will work better at distance as well. Once you have treated an intermediate line with armorall ( or similar) then it will float for a very long time. Unlike a plastic floater it causes less disturbance "IN" the film as it is not intrinsically buoyant. If you are heavy handed and splash it down hard then it will sink slowly of course ( "Neutral" density) and it will not rise again to the surface by itself as a plastic floater will, but it will once again float on the surface when recast.
This is what I mainly use for river dry fly fishing. But you can use it for anything requiring the properties described.
A word of caution, once treated with something like armorall the lines are virtually impossible to sink, and very difficult indeed to get clean again, ( although alcohol and soap works) so if you want to try this be aware that you will end up with a "High density floater".
These lines are also very pleasant to use, they have very little "memory" ( as there is far less plastic coating on the core), they cast much better at close range, and of course they cut the wind a lot better because they are denser for the same weight. All in all very similar to using a greased silk line.
TL
MC
Also by the way,and contrary to popular opinion, you need a great deal LESS power to cast an intermediate or a high density line, but you need to use a faster stroke because the line travels a "LOT" faster through the air. It has less air resistance and is heavier for the same # line weight.
TL
MC
That's impressive casting with the 5 DT, especially with three flies on. Was that high bank stuff?
Scott,
Part of the key is the very long leader and having the wind in the right direction. Having a long leader can add a great real of distance as long as you can get the leader to extend which it will with the right wind. Of course with an obstructive wind you can forget ultra long leaders and knock a lot off the amount of line out of the tip as well.
Using a furled leader can also add a considerable difference as the transfer of energy from line to leader is much improved. Try it and I am sure river fishers will not look back. There's a chap on the fff. ( sorry ) that sells them and they are good.
On a river I now use this with around a 16ft leader with out problems.
Maximum distance for good presentation of dry fly with a 9' 5# rod? Well it varies a little with wind direction but, generally, around 9' :lol:
Quote from: bibio1 on May 13, 2012, 07:10:11 PM
Using a furled leader can also add a considerable difference as the transfer of energy from line to leader is much improved. Try it and I am sure river fishers will not look back. There's a chap on the fff. ( sorry ) that sells them and they are good.
On a river I now use this with around a 16ft leader with out problems.
As does one of our members here
http://www.thehighlanderway.com/online_sales.html (http://www.thehighlanderway.com/online_sales.html)
First troot I caught this year was on the first serious cast of the season. It was lying mid river at a slight bend and I was kneeling on a high bank on the outside bend. It was too deep to even put one leg in so I went for the big one.
With a favourable gentle wind I cast about 50-60ft (hard to tell I measure most things in snooker tables) That cast was accurate and from the high position i saw the troot come up nice as you like first time. I was well chuffed.
Normally I go to the fish and get as close as possible, about two to three snooker tables. Any more and I find I get less offers.
Quote from: Alan on May 15, 2012, 11:01:28 PM
my conclusion...if you shoot any more than just 6', control over presentation is ebbing
I can't put a number on it but I agree. Shooting and good, accurate presentation are pretty well mutually exclusive for most casters. Logically that makes gimmicks like long bellies, long back tapers etc etc irrelevant. What you need is a good old fashioned, stable DT and improved casting ability.
Looks like Arthur Cove figured that out years ago.
Let's be honest, no matter what you do in all walks of life, that's what it always comes down to - ability. There are no short cuts. Magic bullets are for the gullible.
The effort you are prepared to put in always has more bearing on the outcome than the thickness of your wallet. You have to decide if the effort is worth the potential increased reward whatever that might be. Everything in the natural world that is successful follows that rule; a cheetah chasing a gazelle or a big trout with a full belly ignoring a fly.
No wind is truly awful for presenting dry flies at distance. There is so much air resistance that without a bit of a breeze to turn over a leader it is difficult at distance. Dead air is awful for casting generally.
Quote from: Alan on June 08, 2012, 10:02:50 PM
anyway, shock finding, the biggest problem doing this is foliage at the feet, running line catches it 9 times out of 10, on short grass its 20' further every time, based on this
I often fish streamers on the Don when the water is high. A HI D line and light streamers is better than a floater, or sink tip with weighted streamers. With a lot of vegetation behind shooting is essential. With a dense HI D line (very thin running line) shooting is a snip the main limitation being, as you say, foliage at the feet catching the line. Answer? Take a scythe with you? :D
Quote from: buster1980 on June 10, 2012, 01:48:55 AM
The foliage thing is always going to be a problem if you turn up to fish a river with no waders!!
Well, perhaps. See my above post. If wading using that method the water presents a consistent problem of heavy drag on the stripped running line. Of course you can strip and hold it in wide lose coils rather than let it fall on the water, but then you could also do that standing on the bank. This is no casting theory by the way, it's experience of actually dong it, a lot, and discovering that when using fast sinking lines the vegetation is less hassle than the water and it's better not to wade.
Quote from: buster1980 on June 10, 2012, 09:47:39 AM
With pain in the arse vegetation Berry creek springs to mind.
Indeed. The long glide is perhaps one of the most difficult place there is to catch a fish. Alex, John and I have spent many fruitless hours there. Problem there is the fish see you before you see them unless you are lucky enough to get a busy one directly up from you close into your bank. I think it's better to go there alone, fewer people the less chance of spooking.