Author |
Message |
keebranch
|
Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:15 pm • # 1 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 5497
|
It occurred to me that there are different points of view on this subject. Many here use both types for different reasons, but I would love to know based on straight numbers which one is preferred over the other.
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:28 pm • # 2 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
I prefer Triangle Taper which is a sort of combination of the two. I guess it is more like a Weight Forward, but it casts great, roll casts great, and loads a rod very well.
|
|
Top |
|
SteveGibson
|
Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:28 pm • # 3 |
|
|
Newbie |
Joined: 11/28/08 Posts: 32
|
keebranch wrote: It occurred to me that there are different points of view on this subject. Many here use both types for different reasons, but I would love to know based on straight numbers which one is preferred over the other. It really depends on the application. I use WF for most of my fishing. But with my UL fly rods and in situations where presentation is critical, I like the DT.
|
|
Top |
|
Rockthief
|
Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:32 pm • # 4 |
|
|
Sr. Member |
Joined: 11/27/08 Posts: 453 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
|
I have never noticed any difference when casting DT or WF. Maybe I am not paying attention.
|
|
Top |
|
TNSmallieman
|
Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:39 pm • # 5 |
|
|
Full Member |
Joined: 11/19/08 Posts: 104
|
Quote: SteveGibson wrote It really depends on the application. my UL fly rods and in situations where presentation is critical, I like the DT. I'm kind of the same. For my big rods, 5wt and up, I like a WF line, usually due too the longer casting distances. I use a Rio Clouser line a lot. For the smaller rods, its usually creeks and small streams and short accurate casting, I like a DT for its roll casting ability and also having a the "new" line on the opposite end when I need it.
|
|
Top |
|
jdub
|
Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:46 pm • # 6 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 3185 Location: Texas
|
Theoretically, if your casts on your UL gear average 35' or less, you shouldn't be able to tell the difference between a standard DT and standard WF line, since the weight of the first 30' of either type should be almost identical and the front tapers are very similar. And when the add the rod length and leader length to the equation, a 35' cast doesn't use more than 30' of fly line.
The times that I *do* notice is if I'm going to have more than 30' of line in the air, if I'm shooting longer casts, or if I'm attempting longer roll casts.
For my lighter rods--4 wt and below--I will usually go with a DT just because you get twice as much life out of them. For my heavier rods I'll often go with WF for their ease in "shooting" longer casts.
Special tapers like Bass, Shooting, etc., are a different story.
Last edited by jdub on Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
pearow
|
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:06 am • # 7 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 1359
|
wf is a little better in the wind; here in Texas I fish mainly lakes; my answer would have been dt if i were fishing small creeks, rivers, etc so its kinda according to the application-p-
|
|
Top |
|
bulldog1935
|
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:28 am • # 8 |
|
|
Newbie |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 22
|
Rockthief wrote: I have never noticed any difference when casting DT or WF. Maybe I am not paying attention. either that or you're not roll-casting.
|
|
Top |
|
gzacckey
|
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:47 am • # 9 |
|
|
Newbie |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 27
|
|
Top |
|
Glass Stixs
|
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:55 pm • # 10 |
|
|
Full Member |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 245
|
For me, it depends on the brand of line in question. Some brands there is little to no difference in the first 30-35 ft between a DT and a WF. Rarely (read NEVER) do I cast the complete line so a I prefer the DT lines for the majority of my fishing, plus you can turn them around for a fresh line. I try to turn them around every spring so the line lasts longer. If I find a bad spot, I mark it so that I know not to turn it around again.
Doug
Last edited by Glass Stixs on Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
janus73
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:53 pm • # 11 |
|
|
I just like DT 's feel more comfortable to me. I have no scientific explanation, just the way it is. Really like air cel .
|
|
Top |
|
HouzeHead
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:42 pm • # 12 |
|
|
Jr. Member |
Joined: 11/20/08 Posts: 88
|
I prefer a double taper, especially on lightweight shorter rods and glass rods. Where I fish, I rarely need to cast farther than 30' or so max, so presentation takes precedent over distance. In my opinion, trying to shoot 60' of line with a shorter, light weight, medium to slow action rod is kinda defeating the purpose.
HH
Last edited by HouzeHead on Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
keebranch
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:59 pm • # 13 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 5497
|
So far the opinions appear evenly divided, which could explain why DT line survives another day.
|
|
Top |
|
jkurtz7
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:26 pm • # 14 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 4828
|
I haven't voted yet, because I'm kind of still on the fence about the subject. I do have two DT lines, one is a Hook & Hackle Hi-Floater DT3 that I really like. I've been using it exclusively on my 3wt rods as I feel it casts better than either of my Orvis WF3F lines. I also have one of the Cabelas Prestige (the cheaper one) DT2 lines for my Pac Bay and I just don't like the line much at all. I'd like to try a good quality WF2F since I feel that it just may work better for me on the Pac Bay. I may be wrong though.
J.
|
|
Top |
|
keebranch
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:32 pm • # 15 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/17/08 Posts: 5497
|
J, I think those Cableas Prestige lines are good, and if I remember correctly they're made by SA. I've come to bleieve that as llong I try to keep lines clean they'll last longer and perform better. I use a WF2 made by Cortland, and it is good stuff. I tend to use the WF2 more with lighter dries, but I have yet to compare it directly side by side DT.
|
|
Top |
|
jdub
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:52 pm • # 16 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 3185 Location: Texas
|
keebranch wrote: ... I use a WF2 made by Cortland, and it is good stuff. I tend to use the WF2 more with lighter dries, but I have yet to compare it directly side by side DT. I've used both DT and WF in a Cortland 2 wt, and I can't tell the difference. But if you check out their specs it makes sense because the first approx 28' of line are identical between the 2 lines. Same tip, same forward taper, same thickness once past the taper. So again, depending on the length of your leader and rod--you'll need to be casting somewhere around 35' or more, before you should see a performance difference. Cortland line diagramI'm not sure how many lines are like this though. I know on Bill Byrd's site he says there is a notieable difference in the casting qualities of the Sage Quiet Taper II Double Taper and the Quiet Taper II Weight Forward (which has now been discontinued) and he prefers the WF. He's vastly more knowledgeable than I, so I don't doubt what he says. In fact I rooted around and found an online dealer who had one Quiet Taper II WF1F line left and I bought it. I'll try to find a deal on a DT in the same line and compare them. And just one additional point of reference. I have Cortland DT & WF 4 wt lines, and I *can* tell a difference when fishing my 4 wt, because I frequently cast 40' or more. The WF does shoot a little further for me. I rarely rollcast with 40' of line out so I can't say the DT handles it better, although it certainly should. Regards, Jerry
Last edited by jdub on Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
jdub
|
Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:50 pm • # 17 |
|
|
Administrator |
Joined: 11/18/08 Posts: 3185 Location: Texas
|
keebranch wrote: J, I use a WF2 made by Cortland, and it is good stuff. I tend to use the WF2 more with lighter dries, but I have yet to compare it directly side by side DT. Les, did you ever have a chance to try the Cortland 444SL in a WF2F? They don't make it in a 2 wt any longer, but I still have one. It works much better on my Sage 2 wt than any of the other lines I've tried on it. It's noticeably slicker than the standard 444 or the Lazerline, and goes through the guides much easier (in my experience).
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:31 pm • # 18 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
keebranch wrote: J, I think those Cableas Prestige lines are good, and if I remember correctly they're made by SA. I've come to bleieve that as llong I try to keep lines clean they'll last longer and perform better. I use a WF2 made by Cortland, and it is good stuff. I tend to use the WF2 more with lighter dries, but I have yet to compare it directly side by side DT. THe Prestige Plus lines are an SA Trout taper, while the Prestige lines are a Cortland Rocket Taper.
|
|
Top |
|
mudman
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:36 pm • # 19 |
|
|
Newbie |
Joined: 11/23/08 Posts: 22
|
I really do not mind either, in fact I use them both. I have been using triangle tapers for a long time and think they are about the best of both worlds.
|
|
Top |
|
flyflingerandy1
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:56 pm • # 20 |
|
|
Hero Member |
Joined: 12/22/11 Posts: 1602
|
That is how I feel as well! I cannot honestly imagine using a line other than a Triangle Taper.
|
|
Top |
|