| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 billb |
Line weight |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 1 12/19/2008 18:25 |
Is there a way of determining or at least estimating the line weight for a rod? I have a couple old bamboo fly rods with absolutely no markings of any kind on
them. I plan to repair and refinish them and would like to know what weight line to use with them. They are not of any particular monetary value, probably
came from a small town hardware store.
Thanks, Bill |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Canewrap |
#1 | |||
|
Posts: 53 12/19/2008 20:55 |
Actually, the best way to discover what might be the right line weight is to get a WF6 and try casting it. Many of the old rods were designed for the
equivalent of today's 6wt. lines. If you can feel it load with about 30-40 feet of line out, its a safe bet its a 6. If it seems underlined or overlined
only go one line wt. either direction. That's about the best way I know to figure it out.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
billb |
#2 | |||
|
Posts: 2 12/20/2008 15:59 |
Thans, Bill
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Southbranch |
#3 | |||
|
Posts: 383 12/20/2008 23:59 |
Welcome to the forum, Billb.
Matching line: starting point - weigh the rod and round up to the next
even ounce (i.e., 4 1/2 ounces, go to 5 ounces), add 1 to the number of ounces and try that line size in a WF. In the
example, a WF6.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
billb |
#4 | |||
|
Posts: 3 12/30/2008 22:59 |
Thanks Pete, I'll give it a try.
Bill |
|||
|
|
||||
|
canebreak |
#5 | |||
|
Posts: 302 12/30/2008 23:10 |
There's a method where you weight the end of the rod and measure the amount of deflection caused by a given amount of weight and then this is tranlsated
roughly to what line weight would accomplish the same loading. Now having told you that, I don't remember specifics of the method or where to find it, but
I'm sure others out there probably will, and will chime in.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
aparramoure |
#6 | |||
|
Posts: 1618 12/31/2008 04:57 |
It is called the Common Cents System:
http://www.common-cents.info/part1.pdf |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Canewrap |
Re: What line weight | #7 | ||
|
Posts: 65 12/31/2008 12:31 |
The only objection I've ever had to the CC system is the fact that its a static deflection test. With bamboo there is a certain amount of self loading that
happens with a rod during a cast. To me, its what gives bamboo that certain feel. And, because of the steps in a bamboo rod's taper it will often react
differently during a cast than it will during a static deflection test. Maybe as a beginning point, to get some idea of the line weight, it might be useful,
but to me the CC system is really better for hollow-built rods, like graphite and fiberglass.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
billb |
#8 | |||
|
Posts: 4 12/31/2008 13:56 |
Interesting read, thank you for the reference.
Bill |
|||
|
|
||||
|
billb |
#9 | |||
|
Posts: 5 12/31/2008 13:58 |
Not disputing, but curious as a novice, why would bamboo self load and graphite not?
Bill |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Canewrap |
#10 | |||
|
Posts: 66 12/31/2008 16:59 |
Because of the mass in a solid cane rod vs. the hollow tube in a graphite fly rod. That more solid mass of the bamboo loading the rod is for some of us (can
only speak for myself) the reason I prefer the feel of a bamboo rod when casting over that of a graphite rod. I've heard it said that you cast a bamboo rod
and you throw line with a graphite one. I've always felt that I had to work harder when casting a graphite fly rod that when I'm casting bamboo.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Southbranch |
#11 | |||
|
Posts: 385 12/31/2008 21:25 |
I've tested 3 glass, 4 graphite and 22 bamboo rods using the CC System. I find it helpful for comparing a new rod that I haven't handled much yet to
familiar rods. It gives you both a line weight and a "speed" or action number.
However, the line weights it generates are lighter than the rod maker's rating, ususally by 1 to 2 line weights, except for 3 of my graphite rods. For those graphite rods, it indicated that a heavier line was appropriate. For example, I have a very fast 9' Orvis Trident TL that is marked as a 5 wt rod, but the CC System rates it as a 7 weight. Whether it is glass, graphite or cane, the slower the rod, the more likely it is that the CC system will give it a lighter line weight rating. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
billb |
Loading | #12 | ||
|
Posts: 6 01/09/2009 14:21 |
Canewrap wrote:Thanks Canewrap, I'm a little slow responding, having some computer issues. When you look at the modulus of IM-7, I can see that the graphite would be a stiffer rod and therefore require more work on the part of the caster. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
glassfisher |
line weights | #13 | ||
|
Posts: 12 01/10/2009 09:07 |
It can be a challenge to match older bamboo rods to modern lines, especially given the variation in ratings between manufacturers. I've personally found
that some of my rods seem to be somewhere between 2 line weights and work nicely with a Rio Grand or similar line in the lighter weight. These lines are rated
a 1/2 size higher to "load modern graphite rods" but they can also be useful in finding the right line when a rod is between weights.
In the end, with variation between manufacturers, tapers, self loading of the rod, your casting style, how you want to rod to load and what distance you'll be fishing there's just too many variables. I like the idea of starting with the same line every time, see how it casts a WF6 then go from there. At least it would give you a consistent starting point. |
|||
|
|
||||
