Spey Pages banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
711 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Wondering if you 1509 owners have tried either of the XLTs recommended by Way Yin; he recommends the 8-9 for floating line use only, but "highly recommends" the 9-10. I'm only getting it for floating purposes. Any recs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,027 Posts
The 8/9 would be my choice.

Reason being is once you've got a lot of the 'head out' you've got a lot of grains in the air. I've used this line on three different rods that are rated as 8's, 8/9's and 9's, Traditional and Euro's. The common thread was for 'long dry line work' it was the hands down choice.
fae
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
916 Posts
I have and fish both lines (8/9 and 9/10) but think that for an all around choice I prefer the 9/10. Because, if you fish tips (or heavy flies), it's the better choice. Also,if you encounter some heavy winds, it handles them better. If, however, you're not fishing tips and there are light to moderate winds, the 8/9 works beautifully.
bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,027 Posts
Well, in the context of Bill's suggestions on tips, etc...

I'd go with his flow. My comments were aimed at straight dry line casting. Vis a vis tips, Bill's on the mark.
fae
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,732 Posts
At last year's clave (not this year's) I tried both on my Scott 1509 and thought the 9/10 overloaded the rod a bit with most of the head out - but the currents are pretty squirrly at the site. I got the 9/10 based on Way's reccommendations as I wanted a line mostly for tips. I cut it at 26' and spliced in a loop and it has performed very well. I am not generally casting beyond 70 to 100 feet with tips. However, for pure casting pleasure and especially if you are not going to use it for tips, I would opt for the 8/9. It casts beautifully on the 1509 at all distances and just requires a bit less work
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
916 Posts
Rick

I agree with your comments about the casting pleasure with the 8/9, I really do enjoy it. And at 95'-100' of belly, the 9/10 seems a bit much. But, I've also fished the 8/9 in heavy winds with double hook flies in Russia and think the 9/10 will be better in those circumstances. And it does fish tips beautifully. Incidentally, I haven't decided if I'm going to cut up my 8/9 to try tips. When fishing the 8/9 I think I'll probably just make sure I have the 9/10 with me if I need it.

Debarb, I guess a lot depends on your anticipated uses.

One other caveat: Due to a very stupid move on my part (first tip I've broken in 30 years), I had to replace the tip on my 1509. The replacement tip from Scott was actually a bit heavier than the original. At first I was concerned, but I really like the second tip. Could be that it handles the 9/10 a little better than the original.

Bill
 

·
loco alto!
Joined
·
2,979 Posts
wrke

It seems unusual that the replacement tip from Scott would be heavier, given the fanfare they place on their flex rating system. They should be able to replace the tip, tit for tat, with one of identical characteristics.

I don't own the 1509, but I've cast 4 different ones. Could've been the Cheerios vs Wheaties I had that morning, but some of the 1509 rods that I've cast did seem noticeably beefier in the tip than others. I'm contemplating purchase of this rod, and am curious to know whether Scott has anything to say about tweaks to the 1509 taper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
916 Posts
I discussed it with them, and they said it was right in spec — I had sent them the whole rod. I'm not sure that the flex was any different, but the tip top was 1/64 larger in dia (I built the rod from a blank). They said to return it if I was unhappy, but all was fine.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top