# Does your line really match your rod?



## TODDFATHER (Jun 5, 2002)

Al, 

Ok I think we're finally getting somewhere, and I hope I can shed some light on it! You are exactly correct in assuming that overlining a rod will load it with less line in the air however, logic falls apart on the remainder of the assumption! 

Engineering wise, when a rod reaches an optimum load (again, based on stiffness ratio), anything further loading, is an effort of diminishing returns. Since rod itself is not an infinite generator, it can transfer no more energy unloading than that which was put into it. True, heavier line will load the rod further(backcast), but rod must then unload the additional weight also (forecast), and no appreciable gain would result. See where I'm comming from? You could force more distance, but at that point your arm begins throwing the line and not the rod! 

All of this would be much easier to understand if everyone thought in terms of overloading, and underloading vs. overlining, and underlining. Doesn't it make more sense to place more line in the air via underlining, and at the same time keep the rod in it's optimum load range? The above is true assuming distance is what you are striving for. 




I hope this was helpful! 




Toddfather


----------



## TODDFATHER (Jun 5, 2002)

Dave, 

There's nothing new about this procedure, nor is it an original idea of mine! I have several of them, although just a baby's breath away from each other, they all yield the same results! A very useful tool! 

I believe this one is by: 

Jon A. Hoffmann, Professor

Aeronautical Engineering Department

California Polytechnic State University

San Luis Obispo, CA. 93407






Toddfather


----------



## SALMONATOR (Jan 7, 2003)

Ok Todd, I'm with ya' so far. Bare with me here though. Once the rod streightens out on the forcast and the line is still in the air, wouldn't the heavier weight in the head of the line then take over, and continue to pull more line out from behind it as it shoots than a smaller line would? Kind of like using a big bell sinker on a spinning rod vs. a tiny splitshot sinker.

Al


----------



## TODDFATHER (Jun 5, 2002)

Al, 
Yes, more mass would carry farther than less mass however: It's important to consider when making a comparison such as you've suggested, that the lighter line (underlined) on a fully loaded rod would have more line out from the onset, and too has mass that will carry it! The heavier line would have a lot of catching up to do! It's again important to understand that over or under-lining is presumed a deviation from a point that is considered an optimum!




Toddfather


----------



## SALMONATOR (Jan 7, 2003)

Thanks Todd. The water's begining to clear now. Sorry for taking you out here into left field, but I seem to have a way of doing that. I guess I putt a little more muscle in my casting, rather than letting the rod do what it's designed to do on it's own. I guess that's the only way to justify the results I've had, as the principles you spoke of make perfect sense now that I understand them somewhat. I'm self taught as far as casting goes, and I guess I've developed my own thing over the years that feels perfectly natural to me. Oh well, long as I can keep catching fish it works for me.

Thanks for the lesson.  

Al


----------



## TODDFATHER (Jun 5, 2002)

Al, 

My pleasure! You're right on the money! Nothing beats success, and you've accomplished that regardless of method. I just thought the theory was a bit clouded which is why I persisted. 



Toddfather


----------



## Toddson (Jan 23, 2003)

I know some people may be a bit blown away from TODDFATHER's post. I grew up with this kind of stuff. It happened all the time. In some respects Dad has always reminded me of Doc Brown from Back to the Future. 

I don't think there has ever been a hobby my dad hasn't become a certified expert in. Took up golf, began building and fixing clubs. Got into R/C Flying and begain building and designing RC equipment. He's a violin maker and about 10 million things I've probably forgot. 

Oh and Flyfishing predates me being around so that means he started over 33 years ago.


----------



## steeldrifter (Apr 7, 2003)

Toddfather you amaze me with every post you make,i've been fly fishing for 14 years and if i can retain half of what you know by the time i cast my last fly i'll be happy!

I tried the furled leaders we were talkin about a few weeks ago and i tell ya ...i'll never use a mono leader again...thier AWSOME! 

toddson as to the comment about your dad bieng doc brown i only have one thing to say about his knowledge.......GREAT SCOTT..lol  

STEELDRIFTER


----------



## Old Steelhead Dude (Jan 5, 2003)

Thats funny I think from now on its its (Doc.Todd)

GREAT SCOTT!!! LOL.


OSD.


----------



## Sawcat (Apr 5, 2003)

This particular post was very usefull to me so I dredged it up for anyone who missed it.


----------



## kroppe (May 7, 2000)

I didn't go through all the math and experimentation, but this year I went to a 6 weight line on my 5 weight rod and it made all the difference in the world in terms of castability. I was always having to muscle my casts with 5 weight line, and the 6 weight line means I can use less brute force and more finesse.


----------



## Jackster1 (Aug 17, 2001)

The bottom line is really how the rod reacts in YOUR hands! I have the good fortune of being able to cast quite a few rod and line configurations. For the most part, especially with todays size and a half line configurations, it is very possible and quite nice to get the perfect match between them.


----------



## TheHydeGuide (Sep 10, 2002)

Everyone casts different,so as a rodmaker i will say that this will give you a general idea of what you are looking for but is by no means set in stone. Another variable is what line someone buys. Every line has different specs even within a line weight. Say take a Sa trout series and a Gpx. If you look at the specs( grains per inch and taper) these two lines will not cast alike and their the same line weight. The Trout series is more like a normal weight line and a Gpx is almost a half line weight larger. Now if you really want to get technical what line is this system for, Or is it telling you what level line that your ment to use. Because their is no standard taper in the industry then this must be for a level line because what use does it have if it doesent tell us what taper, weight, and maker of line that we should use for a certain rod and casting style. Now that we have that covered I need a good casting 5wt for all my 5wts and i have it norrowed down to about 200 different tapers can someone help.


----------



## Old Steelhead Dude (Jan 5, 2003)

http://www.flyfishingforum.com/expertise/knowledge/lineratings.htm


----------

