It is currently Sun Mar 03, 2024 6:31 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Go to page Previous  1, 2   Page 2 of 2   [ 40 posts ] New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 5:02 am • # 21 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/16/09
Posts: 2123
I'm going to take the PY back on the river this evening. I''ll set up a few rods, the LST 2, my GFL 5 (I underline it with a 4), a TFO 5wt (which I overline with a 6) and a PT+ 662-2 which does just fine with a 2wt. (I hope I can get away. My chore list is out of hand.)


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 5:15 am • # 22 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 12/22/11
Posts: 2056
I forgot to add that I am a late convert to bamboo. I also didn't go through a glass nostalgia phase. So it is somewhat interesting that while I find that I really like cane and find that it suits a slow casting stroke, I am still not turned on by glass. This may be a factor in not having cast any UL glass, except for some ice blanks. I really haven't spent much time with non-UL rods in years, but I like medium action graphite over heavy cane, at least over the course of several hours. The one exception is a 5/6/7 Penta that seems absurdly light in weight, though it isn't.

I think a decent caster will gravitate towards the material and taper that best suits his natural casting stroke.

On civility, it is excellent to have these debates. I confess that without watching Jerry cast some of his graphites, I would have categorically said that cane wins. But clearly in his hands, those rods were performing exactly right. I feel the same about TXLs. I see other folks get great results with one only to find them pretty lame-o when I cast it. The exception seems to be John's 1 weight, which I need to cast a bit more and analyse. It is of course wonderful that we have any commerial sub-zeros out there, which was definitely bucking the trend. Don


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 5:49 am • # 23 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/16/09
Posts: 2123
Maybe I'm looking at this all wrong. . Perhaps, because of my casting style, slower rods seem more natural to me. Maybe I have come to believe slow rods are what fly rods are suppose to be like. The double haul cast seems to be too much for me to think about when the heat is on. I rarely double haul and perhaps it takes a different casting style to make a fast rod perform. I admit, I like the looks of big loops in the air and slow line speeds.

Perhaps, having spent a lot of years with a bass casting rod in my hands, I expect a fly rod to behave different. Fast rods seem too "flippin stick" for me. I bought a Ross Flystik thinking these new Bass fly rods were too cool. I fished the crap out of it this year and it does what it's supposed to.... haul fish from the 'salad' but it reminds me of a casting rod, but with a fly reel on it. It takes a serious line to make it work. The whole things seems foreign to me.

The LST 2wt reminds me of a UL version of the FLYSTIK. That is why I keep it, in case I need to haul a bluegill from the salad. I should put a fight butt on it. I guess, I worried that the TXL 000 would be just a scaled down version of the LST...meaning more rod than I thought it to be.

Knowing me, I'll probably end up with one anyway. I have become sick with fly rods. Back in my Gun collecting days 15 years ago, I didn't get the buying bug as bad as buying fly rods.

There it is, the perfect analogy....guns! Maybe those who like fast fly rods also like Semi auto handguns and rifles or even high performance magnum rifles. Me? I like single action sixguns shooting heavy cast bullets at slow speeds. A big gun for me is a 30-30 and I sold all my semiauto shotguns. And most of all, I hate boat tail bullets with plastic tips.

Maybe it's in my blood to like weird things.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 6:40 am • # 24 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 12/22/11
Posts: 2056
Good question. Is a TXL a scaled down LST? Not a bad thing, just curious. I have no experience with the LST.

As to guns, an over/under seems right to me, a pump familiar, since that is what I learned on. Semi-autos are too high tech and side-by-sides too old fashioned. Don


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 7:03 am • # 25 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/17/08
Posts: 4828
A nice single action six gun is something I've been wanting for about a year now. I've got my eye on one of the Beretta (Uberti) models. I'm such a big fan of old Westerns that I have to pick up a nice six shooter, and holster rig one of these days. For shotguns, give me a Winchester model 12 any day. I've got one in 16 ga. that was made in 1941.

I can't see that the TXL is a scaled down LST. The LST is so dang fast and stiff (in 2wt anyway) that it's not all that easy to cast and fish a 2wt line. I made it work, but your casting off the tip the entire time. The 2wt LST comes out as a 4wt rod when the CSS is used, and I tend to agree with the numbers I got. A better analogy is that the LST 2wt is like the Sage TCR theory. Just my opinion folks.

J.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 7:04 am • # 26 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/18/08
Posts: 3185
Location: Texas
Zenkoanhead wrote:
Jerry. What you say is definitely true about my liking a heavier line weight, but I don't know that that fact is in opposition to my hypothesis.
I agree Don, I didn't bring it up as a rebuttal to your hypothesis because I'm not knowledgeable enough about tapers and actions to rebut anything Image I only brought it up because it's one of the things we've seen that makes me realize that casting style plays a large part in which rods seem to work for each of us.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 8:50 am • # 27 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/16/09
Posts: 2123
jkurtz7 wrote:
A nice single action six gun is something I've been wanting for about a year now. I've got my eye on one of the Beretta (Uberti) models. I'm such a big fan of old Westerns that I have to pick up a nice six shooter, and holster rig one of these days. For shotguns, give me a Winchester model 12 any day. I've got one in 16 ga. that was made in 1941.



J.
There a gunsmith out in Cody Wyoming named John Linebaugh...inventor or 475 and 500 linebaugh bigbore SA handguns. 20 years ago, he built up a 45 Colt on a Ruger SBH for me. 4 3/4" barrel and a trigger, light and crisp. It doesn't seem to perform until we are talking about 300gr cast bullets or more. It is my back up in the Idaho Grizzly woods while fishing.

Like fly rods, I spent thousands on various handguns and I always went back to the old SBH 45. It has been re blued a few times and needs it again. Nothing fancy, but does it's duty everytime.

Image

The other shooter is an old Charter Arms Bulldog 44 special. It is my "fishing vest" gun. It like 250gr Keith bullets at around 700fps.

High tech stuff, rods or guns, just don't do anything for me.


Last edited by Anonymous on Sun Sep 06, 2009 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:41 am • # 28 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 12/22/11
Posts: 2056
A few years back I loaded some .45 Schofield brass for a particularly sweet 6 gun load. I only own a Ruger Vaquero but have been pining for a Colt 1971-2 open top. That is the conversion model, prior to the cowboy 1873.

Jerry, I need to meet up to bring you Rob's rod for grip conversion. Don


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:20 am • # 29 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/18/08
Posts: 3185
Location: Texas
Zenkoanhead wrote:
Jerry, I need to meet up to bring you Rob's rod for grip conversion. Don
Let's just meet up again at lunchtime sometime this week. Needs to be before Thursday though.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:25 am • # 30 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 11/19/08
Posts: 1172
Location: Fayetteville, NC
Like most industry standards designed to make sense of a previous standard, then never updated, the one we've been stuck with since the 1960's only works well for a portion of available line sizes, mostly the mid-range ones, and only for "standard" WF/DT tapers. The old letter designations didn't work very well, even when almost all lines were braided silk (presumably equal in density, unlike plastic lines), but it was superior to the current one in one regard--the letter designations told you what diameter the tip, belly, and running line were. The current one only tells you the weight of the first 30 ft and the general shape of the taper. Line sizes are all 20 grains apart in weight, until you get into the large sizes. The standard would probably have been better differentiated in the ultralight weights if anyone had actually used those sizes back when it was agreed to. 20gr per size in the small sizes is way too much down below 3wt. By the same token, I think 6gr is way too little difference between sizes (Sage QT lines). That's only a couple of feet of line, even in sub 1wt sizes. What would make the most sense for all sizes is a new standard based on a standard percentage difference in weight between sizes, and I'd vote for an additional indicator for tip diameter, in addition to our current WF/DT/ST taper designation. That would tell me more about what to expect from any given line than the current standard.
-CC
PS, please don't infer in my statements anything derogatory about Sage TXL's, SLT's, or any generation of QT lines--first rate gear in every regard.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 11:20 am • # 31 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/16/09
Posts: 2123
Interesting point, CC. I think the Spey system of grains makes more sense. Many lines are in grains already. Sage did this with their Bass rods though their method of naming rods the "Largemouth" though it is a Tarpon rod; the Smallmouth which would be suited for huge bass and Northerns and the way 'mis named' Bluegill which is really the only 'largemouth rod'. But their lines classified as 330gr, 290gr, 230gr. makes lots of sense.

I own a number of fly lines already classified in grains. A RIO 240gr Outbound works good on a number of rods I own from my TFO 5wt to my Flystik to my Sage GFL7wt. I also have several Teeny TS series lines that I used with my Spey Rods and they worked with a wide variety of other flyrods I own from 7 to 10wt.

Wouldn't it be better not to classify rods with line size but rather line weights in grains with recommendations for line grain slots for which the rod will perform best.

IMHO, 6wt, 3 wt, 0wt, 00,000 so on and so on might have been a mistake from the beginning. Would have been better to say this is a 100gr rod, 200gr rod, 80gr rod, etc. One would know that the 100gr is a recommendation from the Mftr. and a slightly lighter line or a slightly heavier line might change the performance to suit the angler and conditions better. We could put the UL 'line' at say around 100-120grs. NO more of this 00, 000 and wonder- whats up!


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 11:41 am • # 32 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 12/22/11
Posts: 2056
What's the fun of that? We like to think there is a 0, 00, and 000 weight rod, plus my 0000. Course I totally made that designation up since the rod feels lighter than a TXL 000. Too many variables. Don


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:14 pm • # 33 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/17/08
Posts: 4828
David, I like the Ruger Blackhawks too. One year I borrowed a friends SBH in .44 Mag and used it that deer season. Loved the way it shot and handled.

Don, Uberti has a line of open top convertibles. http://www.uberti.com/firearms/army_navy_conversion_and_open_top.php


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:03 pm • # 34 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/16/09
Posts: 2123
Zenkoanhead wrote:
What's the fun of that? We like to think there is a 0, 00, and 000 weight rod, plus my 0000. Course I totally made that designation up since the rod feels lighter than a TXL 000. Too many variables. Don

I guess the whole number thing is foreign to me. Other fishing is done with rods which are categorized by lure weight.

The part I agree with you is, soon I will own a rod that is unheard of...0000. The fun part is when I tell my co workers and fellow anglers on the stream that I'm using a 0000, but I'm 'over lining' it with a 000 QDT line. Can't wait for the ..."HUH?"


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:05 pm • # 35 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/16/09
Posts: 2123
jkurtz7 wrote:
David, I like the Ruger Blackhawks too. One year I borrowed a friends SBH in .44 Mag and used it that deer season. Loved the way it shot and handled.

Don, Uberti has a line of open top convertibles. http://www.uberti.com/firearms/army_navy_conversion_and_open_top.php
I don't hunt much anymore but if I ever draw an Idaho Moose tag, I will do my hunting with the Linebaugh SBH Ruger 45 Colt. I shot a Buffalo with it when I lived in Nebraska. The 320gr Hard Cast bullet went right through. It might have made it through two buffalo if they were side by side.

I don't mean to hijack my own thread with gun/huntng talk. I'll try to keep this on UL fly fishing.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 1:09 pm • # 36 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 11/17/08
Posts: 4828
David, I can talk guns all day long. I'll shut up too.

J.


Top
  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:06 am • # 37 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/10/09
Posts: 2238
Location: 208
I thought that I had read somewhere that the sage 000 line is 32 grains.


Top
  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:25 pm • # 38 
User avatar
Jr. Member

Joined: 11/23/08
Posts: 59

We've had this discussion before, so I thought I'd put in a link to that thread.

http://ultralightflyfishing.com/forum/index.php#3540#reply-3540



Top
  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2022 3:14 pm • # 39 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 01/19/12
Posts: 204
Location: Italy
I have a Sage 3/0 wt line, who is the 000 for what I know, I weighed the first 30 feet to see what number of line is according with AFFTA standards and for me it weighs about 3,97 grams then about 61 grains. Then for me it is an AFFTA 1wt.
This is my Sage line

Image


Top
  
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2023 2:07 pm • # 40 
User avatar
Newbie

Joined: 01/20/21
Posts: 45
I have the same line and its 65 grains for 1st 30 feet excluding level tip.
On my TXL-F 000, I now use the Rio light line Premiere DT0F
This is very nice and 58 grains.
I’ve tried lighter lines but they don’t load the rod properly.
So basically in Sage? There is nothing under 1wt in reality.


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Go to page Previous  1, 2   Page 2 of 2   [ 40 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


- OurBoard Support -