Trout and Salmon Speyline review

[betanut]

So we agree then the tests need to be more, how should I put it, pragmatic? Perhaps the new editorial hand at T&S will see the light ;D

[macd]

i agree.

A lot of time is spent on the forum discussing the right combo of rod, reel and line. The tests as the stand are one dimensional.

ill be speaking to my dad about it so im sure your views will trickle through to T&S. Or I get a crack in jaw for my trouble...

Ross

[storlaks]

Ross, I've met your dad when fishing at Ness-side a few years ago. He ghillied for me when Scott Mac was away doing his casting competitions. Very nice man, very nice caster and I enjoyed his company for a day. He even gave me a wee special Mac fly which caught me 3 fish last year on the Ness.

Anyway, my point here in this thread was merely to get some discussion and thoughts on the line reviews. I wasn't trying to be controversial in anyway towards any of the reviewers. All 3 are excellent casters. However, I think we are all in agreeance that what has been illustrated this time in T&S is not what most fishers/speycasters are looking for in a Speyline review.

I'm sure it will be better next time, especially after you pass on all this wonderful constructive feedback to your Dad (:

[Fruin]

I actually enjoyed the review. I mainly fish with spey lines with bellies of 60-something feet, and shooting heads. While I like shooting heads because they allow me to fish comfortably all day in tight spots and slack water, we must remember that they are not Spey lines. The review was for spey lines. Even lines of less than 60 feet are a halfway house between spey lines and shooting heads.
I found the article very useful as I was thinking about stepping up the length of belly I use for fishing the wide open beats on the Tay, where there is ample room for the D-loop and little requirement for retrieving the line/fly.
Perhaps a more relevant point, would be to run a series of articles on the merits of different belly/head lengths and appropriate reviews of various lines within the categories. It may also be useful to explain the merits and uses of each, as well as the different casting styles involved.

[macd]

storlaks said:

Ross, I've met your dad when fishing at Ness-side a few years ago. He ghillied for me when Scott Mac was away doing his casting competitions. Very nice man, very nice caster and I enjoyed his company for a day. He even gave me a wee special Mac fly which caught me 3 fish last year on the Ness.

Anyway, my point here in this thread was merely to get some discussion and thoughts on the line reviews. I wasn't trying to be controversial in anyway towards any of the reviewers. All 3 are excellent casters. However, I think we are all in agreeance that what has been illustrated this time in T&S is not what most fishers/speycasters are looking for in a Speyline review.

I'm sure it will be better next time, especially after you pass on all this wonderful constructive feedback to your Dad (:

no probs- thats what the boards are for, had to at least pretend to stick up for the old Bug*er ;D

probably one of my flies he gave you........

[macd]

fruin said:

I actually enjoyed the review. I mainly fish with spey lines with bellies of 60-something feet, and shooting heads. While I like shooting heads because they allow me to fish comfortably all day in tight spots and slack water, we must remember that they are not Spey lines. The review was for spey lines. Even lines of less than 60 feet are a halfway house between spey lines and shooting heads.
I found the article very useful as I was thinking about stepping up the length of belly I use for fishing the wide open beats on the Tay, where there is ample room for the D-loop and little requirement for retrieving the line/fly.
Perhaps a more relevant point, would be to run a series of articles on the merits of different belly/head lengths and appropriate reviews of various lines within the categories. It may also be useful to explain the merits and uses of each, as well as the different casting styles involved.

spot on fruin

[elwyman]

There's an interesting letter in this month's T&S.

The writer suggests that modern spey lines with head lengths over 70' are a nonsense, as they limit casting distance in many situations, eg tree lined banks.

[woburn]

Yeh, I read that too. Have to agree with a lot of what he says

[williegunn]

I think I will invent a cast for fishing a fast flowing river with tree lined banks, now what shall I call it? The Spey? Oh bugger it was invented 100 years ago.
Now let us try throwing the loop away from the angler using a 16ft rod and a long bellied line wow that works.

I wish people would engage their tiny brains before typing letters and editors to think what they are publishing. What did he suggest? We go back to double tapers? Long bellied lines by any other name...........................or wait not the windcutter or 54g toby as it is called by some I respect.

[Fruin]

I've not got this months T&S yet. Is the letter by a guy called John Clark?

[macd]

I read the letter, maybe the guy that wrote it should have too.

[Fruin]

John's a lovely guy, good angler and passionate about his fishing, but has a tendency to be a little opinionated.
I met him on Sunday and he told me he had written a letter into T&S, directly after telling me that I had made a huge mistake buying a 75ft head spey line
I explained that while I like shooting heads for a lot of circumstances, longer heads are easier for fishing classic streamy water with little advantage to stripping in line.
On one side we have the purists who can't see beyond traditional action rods and long lines, and on the other we have the pioneers that wish to try everything that is new and sing it's praises to the world.
Neither are correct and neither wrong, it is just different ways of fishing and each method has it's advantages.
I wish people would stop firing narrow minded opinions at either side and just fish whatever method suits them, who knows you might learn something from each other!!!

[macd]

im with you gary.....
does that make us impurists??

Im sure John's a good guy, just having a wee dig

[elwyman]

I'm with Fruin - both types of line have their place in the tackle bag, even the "54g Toby". ;D ;D ;D.

Nice one Malcom, I'll have to remember that one!

[D-Loop]

Maybe its just me but I rarely find the conditions right to use a full floater. The majority of my early/late fishing is on a full sinker with the odd day in a Scottish summer allowing the floater. It would be nice to see a review of sunk/intermediate/multi-tip lines with reviewers standing up to their oxters in cold grue.

[Fruin]

Tom,

I know what you mean. I never used a full floater once last year. I was always on sinkers or floaters with a polyleader.

I would like to see a series, with a comprehensive review of all the different techniques and lines available for each.

Spey lines over 80ft, 70-80ft, 60-70ft, and 50-60ft could all be reviewed seperately with a brief explanation of their uses and any pointers as to how you would adjust your cast to suit each line.

Shooting heads could be reviewed - home made v factory, what the best running line, a breakdown of the different casts.

All should have the sinking and floating versions reviewed seperately. And all should be reviewed with differing fly weights on the end of the leader.

A range of reviewers from competent to expert should be used, with a range of rods for each line.

Line weights for the heads/bellys should also be researched.

This would truly give a definitive guide for buyers as to what are the best all round lines for their rods. It would also point to lines that excel for specific purposes but fall down on others.

Do I feel a T&S special coming on?