[SkimmerSkiffer]

Why is it that I have noticed that the actual weight in grams for these fly lines are always more than the general number in all of the Flyline charts that I have come across to the point where it seems like we should be using a 7 weight line on an 8 weight rod, because the true weight of these 7 weight lines is actually an 8 weight grain.

Hopefully that made sense, are there people out there that go up or down a size and have a mixed match set up?

 

[hillcharl]

I’m no expert but I have been dabbling in SWFF for 12 years now. It seems the line makers have made the lines heavier to load the newer stiffer action rods more quickly. This makes them more user friendly to newbies and ideally (for rod and line manufacturers) gets more people to fly fish. I try to use bonefish and tarpon lines on most of my rods as they are close to the true line weight. Rio seem to be heavier across the board in the SW lines. I don’t under line a rod, hasn’t worked well in the past. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Jason M]

You're correct on your observation. I think everything is basically a rod and line heavier than older rods.

I have some older Sage RPLX rods and underline those with modern lines.

The other thing to consider is if you're making quick short casts versus long casts where you're carrying more line in the air.

 

[Rich11111]

Why is it that I have noticed that the actual weight in grams for these fly lines are always more than the general number in all of the Flyline charts that I have come across to the point where it seems like we should be using a 7 weight line on an 8 weight rod, because the true weight of these 7 weight lines is actually an 8 weight grain.

Hopefully that made sense, are there people out there that go up or down a size and have a mixed match set up?

I've also have noticed that fly line weights do not necessarily go by the standard classification . It does make comparing fly lines unreliable when a manufacture classifies a weight line incorrectly. I do have some rods with underweighted lines since they are mod-fast action rods that I want them to feel as a fast action due to wind needs. Another person may have said that my rod is too soft and not use it. I think the bottom line is if it feels good to cast then it is good for that person. If a rod feels soft then drop the line weight. If a rod feels stiff then up the line weight. If it is a novice time with casting will allow better cast timing and better tuning of line weight to his liking. If a beginner is casting a particular set up he may think it is balanced but in reality the rod is overloaded due to an untrue classification/weight class of line. All the novice knows is that it feels good. Hope that makes sense (it's early and coffee not taken effect yet )

 

[SkimmerSkiffer]

I’m no expert but I have been dabbling in SWFF for 12 years now. It seems the line makers have made the lines heavier to load the newer stiffer action rods more quickly. This makes them more user friendly to newbies and ideally (for rod and line manufacturers) gets more people to fly fish. I try to use bonefish and tarpon lines on most of my rods as they are close to the true line weight. Rio seem to be heavier across the board in the SW lines. I don’t under line a rod, hasn’t worked well in the past. Just my 2 cents.

Gotcha that makes sense

 

[aduca]

I own a pretty full suite of Hardy Zephrus rods and underweight each as follows:
7wt-10wt rods- Airflo Gulf Redfish underweighted 1 flyline size to rod size (i.e. 6wt line on my 7wt, etc)
11wt-12wt rods- Cortland Tarpon underweighted 1 flyline size to rod size (i.e. 10wt line on my 11wt, etc)

After much trial and expensive error testing different lines I have found the Hardy rods (and some others) like a true to weight aafta line weight and they cast so much better set up like this for me.

 

[lemaymiami]

When considering line weights for a given rod - remember that so much of our angling depends on just how far away that fish is, that you're casting at... Most fly lines are designed to load your rod with about 30 feet of line out from the rod's tip... If you're working closer distances than that you're just not able to load the rod properly... As a result I frequently will set up a rod I'm going to be handing my angler for night tarpon fishing with one line size heavier than normal - so that he (or she) can make that cast at very close ranges -many of our night fish are under bridges back in the shadows and we're fishing really close (just behind them), so close that occasionally my angler can actually reach out with that rod tip and touch the fish if desired...

 

[birdyshooter]

I own a pretty full suite of Hardy Zephrus rods and underweight each as follows:
7wt-10wt rods- Airflo Gulf Redfish underweighted 1 flyline size to rod size (i.e. 6wt line on my 7wt, etc)
11wt-12wt rods- Cortland Tarpon underweighted 1 flyline size to rod size (i.e. 10wt line on my 11wt, etc)

After much trial and expensive error testing different lines I have found the Hardy rods (and some others) like a true to weight aafta line weight and they cast so much better set up like this for me.

Yup. I’d say my Zephyrs 10wt is on the soft side. I put a 10wt BTT Short on it (all I had at the time) and it just couldn’t handle it. Recently put a 10wt Cortland Tarpon on it and it is a much better rod now.

 

[birdyshooter]

Why is it that I have noticed that the actual weight in grams for these fly lines are always more than the general number in all of the Flyline charts that I have come across to the point where it seems like we should be using a 7 weight line on an 8 weight rod, because the true weight of these 7 weight lines is actually an 8 weight grain.

Hopefully that made sense, are there people out there that go up or down a size and have a mixed match set up?

The industry is not doing the consumer any favors, that’s for sure. Just like today’s 5 iron, is yesteryear’s 3 iron. I have a mess of Cortland 333 lines that I start a new rod off on. Like @lemaymiami stated, knowing your intended target range will give you a better idea of what line you need to put on the rod. Not every situation calls for 60-80 foot cast. And not every rod that cast 60-80 feet is going to do well at 30-40 feet. I’m a bass fisherman, so having multiple rods for different situations/techniques is not new to me. I’ll sometimes have 3 different 8wts on my boat. One for short cast, one for long cast/wind, and one with an intermediate line. Getting one rod to do all three is going to be a compromise somewhere, hence the 8wt line that weighs 1/2 to 3/4 over standard. For instance, XYZ rods tells you this is the longest casting, fastest recovering, space aged 8wt ever built (in all honesty it’s a 10wt with 8wt marked on it), put a standard 8wt line on there and try to cast 30-40 feet……. It’s going to feel like a pool stick.

 

[efi2712micro]

You're correct on your observation. I think everything is basically a rod and line heavier than older rods.

I have some older Sage RPLX rods and underline those with modern lines.

The other thing to consider is if you're making quick short casts versus long casts where you're carrying more line in the air.

never thought of that and maybe why I called my RPLX softer rods in another thread. I am going to try underlining my RPLX tonight to check it out. Thanks for the insight.

 

[Surffshr]

It takes some experimentation above reading the published line weight in grains. Even published weights should be questioned. After a while you will have a library of lines to try with a new rod and can make decisions of what new line to buy based on direct observation/casting. I found it frustrating when I was wanting to start with the “right” line for a single set up. I’ve since realized that this is one of the “mysterious“ variables of saltwater fly fishing that I actually enjoy working to figure out…especially since there is plenty more to it than a line working with a rod.

One tip is that like families of rods, families of lines have the same characteristics throughout weights. This helps decision making when starting with a new weight rod.

Another tip is to buy used lines or find old stock clearance lines instead of throwing down for new +$100 lines out these days.

 

[Backwater]

 

[SkimmerSkiffer]

View attachment 224547

Yes that’s the one I have. My line shows like 235gr for a 8wt

 

[GaterB]

Love this thread. As a relative newcomer to the sport, figuring out how to match line weight, taper, rod flex and casting stroke has been one of the biggest challenges. Starting out with an 8wt rod rated as Mod-Fast, I purchased an "8wt" line initially, and it worked well for shorter, 20-30 foot casts. However, when trying to stretch out longer casts, suddenly the rod felt "mushy," and I'd often try to push it too hard with my forward cast and haul, resulting in lots of tailing loops and "bad casting knots."

As I started learning more about grain weight I checked it for the line I had and it's 240g. After switching to a true 8wt (210g Bonefish line), suddenly the rod has another gear, and I don't have to "force it."

I, too come from a history of bass fishing so now I use the heavier line for windier days or days I think I'll have shorter shots, and go with the lighter setup when I feel like I'll need to be more stealthy and take my shot at a longer distance.

 

[Backwater]

Yes that’s the one I have. My line shows like 235gr for a 8wt

Rio, Wulff and Monic are typically 1rod wt heavier than what the line is stated. Lines like SA, Cortland and a few others try to stick with a normal weighted fly line+/-. So keep that in mine. Some newer to fly casting, picking up ultra fast and or stiffer rods prefer the "feel" of a line that is 1 rod wt heavier than the actual rod. Also the same with freshwater fisherman from up north that is use to a slower action freshwater rod, that then picks up a faster, stouter saltwater rod and then prefers to over line it by 1 or 2 rod wts to get that same action they are use to in the rod. But that being said, it resembles going to a rod 1 line weight heavier than what you are holding in your hand.

The trick is to get a line fitted to either what you need for the fly, the distance and the conditions according to rod weight you want to use, or learn how to cast a true to weight fly line, and adjust your casting and the fly size to the distance and the conditions, needed.

No doubt we can spend pages of discussions on this thread about the subject in all camps, but also, there is no doubts too that their are many different rods, different styles of rods, using the "correct fly size and weight of the fly," as well as many casting styles to achieve what you are trying to target in those specific conditions. The fun comes in where you are able "through experience" to dial those things in to accomplish what you set out to do, preferable by skill and not necessarily by luck.

So, there is no do-all rod, with a do-all line, using a do-all fly, with a do-all casting technique, in a normal conditions to catch any fish that swims.

For me, after all those years throwing the buggy whip around, I've reduced it down to just the basic few outfits that cover most of what I'm targeting. Same with lines. I also have no problems throwing a slightly heavier line on a faster or heavier rod, when conditions call for it, but casting rods with some feel to it, throwing any sort of distance with true to weight lines with flies correctly size for those lines, are my preferred setup.

Ted

 

[Fergal]

This an issue that annoys me. IMHO, Rio is the worst at it. Most their lines are at least one full weight heavier than what's stated on the label.

I am using the AFTMA standard and while there are certainly flaws with that I like knowing what the first 30' weighs. Obviously, head length matters too (but less so to me).

The second issue is that many rods are really one wt higher than their stated range. IMHO(again...) Sage is a big offender here. Their 9s really seem to be 10, etc. At least in my hands. I've found Scott's Sector to be true their stated weight, same for T&T's Sextant.. I fish and like my Burks, those too seem true to their stated weight. For many of those rods, if I'm looking at a Rio product I tend to go one size down (a 9 line on a 10 rod). I find SA a little more true to their weights as well and if they're not they are pretty clear about where the line falls.

There are lots of variables here - skill level, intended use (short/quick casts vs long casts (blind or with some time) and one may want to adjust to that situation accordingly.

I'm in the NE, it would be nice if shops could let you try a line first. I (like many others) have a collection of lines that I bought and ended up not liking in one way or another. Some times I can make them work on another rod, some times I can't and I'm out a $100 or so.

 

[numbskull]

Heavier lines are easier to cast poorly, particularly when one buys a rod that is too stiff for one's skill level.
The creep in line weights reflects the market demand, which in turn is driven by guys who need a bandaid for their casting flaws.

When you can't feel your line 'loading' your rod you need a better backcast (and maybe a lighter reel), not a heavier line.
Likewise, the inability to cast a short line well on a stiff rod reflects too large a casting arc (and likely bad tracking) rather than a problem 'loading the rod'.

The whole concept of the need to "load" a rod to make a good cast is misleading. The rod acts like both a lever and a spring. The spring component contributes only about 15-25% of the energy transmitted to the line. The main benefit of "loading" a rod is that it makes the rod bend. The bend, in turn, helps keep the tip on a straight line path as the butt is accelerated in an arc.....hence transmitting force to the line directed towards a target rather than around an arc. Provided you accelerate a rod smoothly it will load itself correctly for the line that is on it. If you focus on trying to load it, however, things quickly go bad.

 

[Fergal]

Heavier lines are easier to cast poorly, particularly when one buys a rod that is too stiff for one's skill level.
The creep in line weights reflects the market demand, which in turn is driven by guys who need a bandaid for their casting flaws.

When you can't feel your line 'loading' your rod you need a better backcast (and maybe a lighter reel), not a heavier line.
Likewise, the inability to cast a short line well on a stiff rod reflects too large a casting arc (and likely bad tracking) rather than a problem 'loading the rod'.

The whole concept of the need to "load" a rod to make a good cast is misleading. The rod acts like both a lever and a spring. The spring component contributes only about 15-25% of the energy transmitted to the line. The main benefit of "loading" a rod is that it makes the rod bend. The bend, in turn, helps keep the tip on a straight line path as the butt is accelerated in an arc.....hence transmitting force to the line directed towards a target rather than around an arc. Provided you accelerate a rod smoothly it will load itself correctly for the line that is on it. If you focus on trying to load it, however, things quickly go bad.

Absolutely

 

[permitchaser]

View attachment 224547

@Backwater where you been?

 

[Vinny L]

never thought of that and maybe why I called my RPLX softer rods in another thread. I am going to try underlining my RPLX tonight to check it out. Thanks for the insight.

I found in my closet a rod tube, when I pulled it out I found an 8 wt 9’6” RPL I build back in the late 80s maybe early 90s. Anyway, knowing it’s much softer then my recent builds and or factory rods I put a true weight 200 grain line on it and it was still a little much so I dropped it to a 7wt 180 g line. Great accuracy and impressive distance for a 30 year old rod. But I still had to slow down the stroke to get the rod to work but less so with the 7 wt line.
🤔 Hope that made sense