Joined
·
1,273 Posts
Floating an idea here - two items that lead into one subject...
Today I inspected my flyline; voila! full of cracks in the last 25% of the belly leading to my "tips" section. I should have known that it was happening, as my casting has gone "subpar" lately despite all of my efforts to compensate. This happens about every 3 to 4 months for me - I can not get a flyline to last any longer than that. The cracking always occurs in that portion of the line that is the "wedge" that is formed as the line travels out during the forward cast. If you watch, as the line reaches near the end of the cast, the line speeds up as this wedge becomes compressed while "rolling out" into the final turnover of the fly - I am of course speaking of casting with shootingheads. In other words, this is the part of the flyline that goes through the most flexing, deformation of shape, and recovery back to the original shape. Modern flylines are made of plastic coated over a thin Dacron or mono core. In large diameter lines such as many "Spey" lines, the plastic coating has to be fairly thick. The thicker the plastic, the less elasticity that it has, and therefore the more subject it is to fatigue.
The "world record" Speycast was something in the neighborhood of 180' (I don't recall the exact figure). Even with modern-day, high-tech rods no one has bested it. Though modern-day flyrods are definitely more efficient at releasing energy into a cast, this record still stands. What up? Modern day plastic flylines stretch - compared to old silk lines, quite a bit, I have been told. This stretching probably results in a subtle, unnoticeable loss of casting energy. Also, silk lines had less diameter for their given weight, which would translate into less air resistance. These are not original conclusions of mine, but rather it was brought up last year in one of our club newsletters.
Why would it not be possible to "weave" flylines using modern day materials? If the weave was done so that the actual taper of the line was in the woven core material, one would only need to use a thin coating of plastic over the weave to finish the line. This should result in more uniform line tapers and weights, smaller diameters for given line sizes, and minimization of line stretch. Smaller diameters and reduced stretch would result in more energy efficient casting, as well as more sensitivity in fishing, and better hook-sets. Sure, the process would be more expensive, but the lines should also last considerably longer. Any comments from industry insiders?
Today I inspected my flyline; voila! full of cracks in the last 25% of the belly leading to my "tips" section. I should have known that it was happening, as my casting has gone "subpar" lately despite all of my efforts to compensate. This happens about every 3 to 4 months for me - I can not get a flyline to last any longer than that. The cracking always occurs in that portion of the line that is the "wedge" that is formed as the line travels out during the forward cast. If you watch, as the line reaches near the end of the cast, the line speeds up as this wedge becomes compressed while "rolling out" into the final turnover of the fly - I am of course speaking of casting with shootingheads. In other words, this is the part of the flyline that goes through the most flexing, deformation of shape, and recovery back to the original shape. Modern flylines are made of plastic coated over a thin Dacron or mono core. In large diameter lines such as many "Spey" lines, the plastic coating has to be fairly thick. The thicker the plastic, the less elasticity that it has, and therefore the more subject it is to fatigue.
The "world record" Speycast was something in the neighborhood of 180' (I don't recall the exact figure). Even with modern-day, high-tech rods no one has bested it. Though modern-day flyrods are definitely more efficient at releasing energy into a cast, this record still stands. What up? Modern day plastic flylines stretch - compared to old silk lines, quite a bit, I have been told. This stretching probably results in a subtle, unnoticeable loss of casting energy. Also, silk lines had less diameter for their given weight, which would translate into less air resistance. These are not original conclusions of mine, but rather it was brought up last year in one of our club newsletters.
Why would it not be possible to "weave" flylines using modern day materials? If the weave was done so that the actual taper of the line was in the woven core material, one would only need to use a thin coating of plastic over the weave to finish the line. This should result in more uniform line tapers and weights, smaller diameters for given line sizes, and minimization of line stretch. Smaller diameters and reduced stretch would result in more energy efficient casting, as well as more sensitivity in fishing, and better hook-sets. Sure, the process would be more expensive, but the lines should also last considerably longer. Any comments from industry insiders?