Spey Pages banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
#&%*@^# Caster
Joined
·
3,058 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Been playing with this lately and will have to say I really like it. A little shorter than the comparable old 6/7 but I really like the way the new line picks up off the water. A very clean casting line. I had it on my guideline 13'7" 7wt and the rod handled it pretty well although it did buckle a little if you were not careful on the lift. Not a problem with the line though and when I got it right it was very east to throw 125 which for me is great on a 7 weight rod. A very nice line and 80' in my mind is a great fishing length. Looking forward to fishing it next summer.

I have not had much of a chance to pick up the other weights but will need to soon to see what line will now match up with my T&T 1510. It used to be the 7/8 but am thinking it will now be the 9.

Anybody else have any experience with the other line weights? What are your thoughts? Anyone have a chance to cast the competition line?

-sean`
 

·
BULL DOG!!!!
Gaelforce
Joined
·
2,184 Posts
For the same line as the old 7/8 the new 8 is the one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
Sean,

I am not raving over the new 8 on the 1510. Have not cast the new 9 but according to the grain wts it looks like that is the one that should mesh.

William
 

·
Here we go again!
Joined
·
620 Posts
Well, I've got to admit that I was pretty dissapointed in the 7 on the 7141 Burkheimer. The line felt ok weight-wise as far as loading the rod, but man it sure felt short compared to the old 6/7. Felt like a longer midspey than an XLT. The old 6/7 felt nice and long and was perfect on this rod. I just saw on Bachman's site that the listed spec on this line is a 90 foot belly not counting the 20 foot rear taper. I'm thinking that's not quite right. Also had issues with the last few feet of line not wanting to turn over (just lost it's energy and dumped the leader on too many casts), and it wasn't just me, that was sort of the consensus among a few casters. Also, this line didn't have enough weight to load up the 7133 Burkie like it should have, a quicker rod than the 7141, but the old 6/7 matched up very well with it. I too am interested in other folks comments on the new lines.

Anyone else think that the original was an enigma, a line so good it shouldn't have been screwed with just to force it to conform to some notion of standardization that the line itself preceeded?
 

·
#&%*@^# Caster
Joined
·
3,058 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Jim I think the head is listed at 80 so 5 shorter than the old 6/7 which was a kick butt line. I was using a really fast tip action rod compared to the burks so maybe that accounts for the diff, turning over was not an issue for me.

-sean
 

·
Here we go again!
Joined
·
620 Posts
Specs

Taken from Bachmans site, link listed in this weeks newsletter.

http://www.flyfishusa.com/lines/sa-spey-line-specs.htm

XLT * * * * * * * *

Line/head/grains------length/rear taper/total weight
7----90----787-------120-----20-------892 *
8----90----876-------130-----20-------993 *
9----90----988-------130-----20-------119 *
10---92----1049------140-----20-------1186 *
11---102---1233------140-----20-------1378 *

Note: the head length is specifically listed as not including rear taper. On the 7 this would leave only 10 feet of running line. I'm thinking the head is more like 70 feet. Wasn't the old XLT an 85 foot head not counting the rear taper?
 

·
Junkyard Spey
Joined
·
7,114 Posts
According to info furnished by Bruce Richards the "new" XLT 7wt is targeted to weigh 42.20 grams (651grains) at 80'. At 65' the line measure .070 where it starts tapering to .035 at 85' where the running line starts. There is 30' of .035 running line.

http://www.redshedflyshop.com/XLTSPECS.html
 

·
Here we go again!
Joined
·
620 Posts
MJC said:
.... At 65' the line measure .070 where it starts tapering to .035 at 85' where the running line starts. There is 30' of .035 running line.
http://www.redshedflyshop.com/XLTSPECS.html
65 foot head. Sounds like a midspey to me. I could be wrong, but how much shorter is the head than the old 6/7? I believe it was 85 feet plus a 14 (?) foot rear taper.
 

·
Junkyard Spey
Joined
·
7,114 Posts
The "head" includes the rear taper (at least to me) which would make it 85'.

There is the possibility I have read something wrong in which case I would be happy to be corrected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
889 Posts
Moose,

You are right on. The new line is in the 65' neighborhood before it tapers down. The old line was in the 85' range.

Definite midspey or Wulff arena. But a nice casting one.

William
 

·
Here we go again!
Joined
·
620 Posts
So it's a longbelly without a long belly.

To be fair, I've only tried the 7 and want to play with the others before having a blanket opinion on the lines, but to me taking a long belly line, making it a mid belly and still calling it a long belly, well, what the hell is that? OK, I get it that the company wants their lines to conform to standards (why this line I don't know, it's a different animal) but if in doing so this is what you get, well, bad idea there then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Hi Moose,
Though I have not cast the new xlt's I would think that you would normally be able to cast the line with most of the rear taper outside the rod making it 80' to 85' of line you are picking up - which then qualifies for a long belly?
 

·
Pullin' Thread
Joined
·
4,694 Posts
Unless the line tapers very abruptly say in 5' or less from the belly to the running line or is a shooting head, the rear taper is in effect part of the belly. The MidSpey has a front taper, belly, rear taper that when added together equals 65'. Why should long-belly lines by any different? As Rick mentioned, you can cast it with all but a little of the rear taper out the rod, which means you can cast 80' or a bit more of line (add leader and you are casting 95' or more) without shooting any line at all. I'd call this a long-belly spey line.

William,

I'd use the 9 wt XLT on your 1510 T&T. I have used the new 9/10 GS (which I consider to be a 9 wt) on the 1510 I had before I sold it and it is 900 gr and 80' belly/backtaper and it was a very good match. Just like the new 10/11 GS is a good match on the 1611 T&T, the combination you cast last spring when we fished together.
 

·
Here we go again!
Joined
·
620 Posts
To clarify, it is SA that lists their line bellies as measured "Minus rear taper", so the 85 foot head is you speak of is a 65 foot belly plus a 20 foot rear taper for a total of 85 feet according to SA. When casting this line the ideal holding point is between 75 and 80 feet on a 14 foot rod (again, the Burkheimer 7141 was used and yes the line was marked at 80 feet) so the rod was carrying 60 to 65 feet off the rod tip. The rear taper is 20 feet and hanging all of this outside the tip doesn't work as then you have lighter mass trying to carry a heavier mass and this simply doesn't work. On lines with a shorter rear taper some overhang is a good thing, but on these long bellies more than a little is detrimental (IMHO). I have found in general, on lines like the XLT and Grandspey, that you need to have most of the rear taper inside the guides unlike a midspey or delta; so on a midspey you can throw most of the line forward of the running line/rear taper junction outside the rod tip whereas with the long belly only the belly minus the running line is outside the rodtip, thus you are carrying the same length of line off the tip of the rod. Because of this I disagree and say no, the new XLT 7 is not a long belly line. This, of course is my opinion based on performance I get and what I've observed of others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
I really dig the new XLT's. Great line for fishing. The line comes off the water super smooth so it is easy to get nice straight anchors. High line speed, tight loops and great turn over. Even on a low line speed cast the line just keeps going and turns over really nice. Very smooth user friendly line. I have been playing around with 7,8 and 9 for a couple of months but have not got the 10 yet. I am casting the 7 wt. on a 13' rod so there is a big difference between the midspey 6-7 @ 59' casting with a foot of over hang to make it 60' outside the rod tip and holding the 7 XLT at 85' with 73' out the tip. The new lines are quite a bit different so those that really like the old ones will want to hunt down some closeouts. I really like the new lengths because i like to shoot at least a few feet of running line and to do that with the old lines you had to be fishing 125' foot to fly which is more then i need to cover the water in most situations. I measured my lines and they seem to be different then the specs that Mark B. has. I am not sure what that means. The specs that Poppy has on his site are really close except for the diameter measurement at 85' on the 9 wt. is way off and might be a typo.

GP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
I recently received a XLT 9/10, that was back ordered, from Kaufmann. Am I to understand that this is an older line - that is, do the new lines have a single line designation?
 

·
Junkyard Spey
Joined
·
7,114 Posts
I believe the new lines have a single digit number. I also should note that I have not been able to get any 9s or 10s as yet so what you have may be all that is available.
 

·
not as gullible as most
Joined
·
47 Posts
Moose said:
Anyone else think that the original was an enigma, a line so good it shouldn't have been screwed with just to force it to conform to some notion of standardization that the line itself preceeded?
I completely agree with this statement, especially in reference to the 7/8 XLT. It's a shame to see it go.

Zo2
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top