On another post someone asked about the new fly lines out there. I did not want to hijack that post with a different subject so....Since I recently spent some time at the Scientific Anglers booth at the Edison Show I would like to impart some acquired knowledge and observations.
We all seem to have our pet fly line loves. I often read folks bemoaning the fact that this line or that is no longer available, or that the manufacturer has changed it for the worst. The other common missive is , why are there so many speciality lines and of course the cost.
During the show I cast a bunch of different lines while with clients which I have not had experiences with. It is obvious that some manufacturers are varying from the AFTM line rating weights without indicating as such. There is new line being touted lately that I was quite surprised with how underweight it was for the designated line weight it was labeled for. Of course this made a difference in the rods we cast with it.
SA has a seemingly confusing stable of lines they offer, there is the Amplitude textured, Amplitude smooth, Mastery series, Sonar, Frequency and Ari-Cel. The cost range from $130 to $40. SA is very specific on the taper design of each of these lines. They are formulated for specific tasks, because fly fishing today is being done over an ever widening number of fish species, in an ever increasing number of environments with a newer variety of flies. They tell you in their specs what the line weights are and are out right about some being 1/2 or a full size heavier and the why. There are more expensive surface treatments on some than others both in composition of the surface and the core, as well as, the surface itself. I believe we are seeing an evolvement of fly lines as materials, processes and fishing techniques improve/change. Improvements occur all across the board. Now it is reasonable the more of these attributes associated with a line the higher the cost and again SA breaks this done quite clearly.
It is very clear, and the SA folks note, the vast majority of these lines have no business being on a bamboo rod. Of all of the lines only three are designated for bamboo and/or fiberglass rods. I was intrigued by them and being not stone set in my ways I am ordering a couple up just to see what is new in this world and perhaps find an improvement to replace my favored tried and true lines.
Carl
The Scientific Anglers Lines
Moderators: czkid, Whitefish Press
The Scientific Anglers Lines
#2Fly lines are probably the biggest scam in fly fishing industry. Nobody will tell what a fly line actually cost for the manufacturer. Probably a few bucks.
But yes there is all the R&D done in dream destinations like in Patagonia, Iceland, Bahamas and the Seychelles. These ‘R&D trips’ aren’t free obviously.
Why the hell do we need seven line models with each model having 28 different types. Of course we need a different fly line if we want delicate dry fly fishing or tossing bobbers & nymphs. And all fly shop owners agree that everyone needs a dedicated fly line for every spieces we target.
By the way, what fly line models are we bamboo lovers supposed to buy according to SA?
But yes there is all the R&D done in dream destinations like in Patagonia, Iceland, Bahamas and the Seychelles. These ‘R&D trips’ aren’t free obviously.
Why the hell do we need seven line models with each model having 28 different types. Of course we need a different fly line if we want delicate dry fly fishing or tossing bobbers & nymphs. And all fly shop owners agree that everyone needs a dedicated fly line for every spieces we target.
By the way, what fly line models are we bamboo lovers supposed to buy according to SA?
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#3In general, does any product venue tell you actually what it cost to manufacture a product?
If one is testing to perfect a fly line for hot tropical climate it's kind of difficult to do this right now in the backyard of SA in Midland, Michigan. Why is it a problem to test materials in the conditions they are going to be used in. Seems to make sense. Also, why is it not appropriate to be compensated for R & D. We compensate many industries for their R & D in the price we pay for a product.
We do not need seven line models and 28 different types. That is what we all know and SA does to, and it seems the fly shops I have dealt with understand also. There are folks willing to pay for the best performance they can get and others just want the least expensive line to do the job, disregarding quality, longevity and the like. Would one pay 20% more for something that last twice as long?
SA has a very good and informative web site. If you go to it and educate yourself on the different models and types in that model line one will understand the attributes of each one, which one they may prefer to have for their style of casting, fishing and pocket book. Choice is good.
Best,
Carl
If one is testing to perfect a fly line for hot tropical climate it's kind of difficult to do this right now in the backyard of SA in Midland, Michigan. Why is it a problem to test materials in the conditions they are going to be used in. Seems to make sense. Also, why is it not appropriate to be compensated for R & D. We compensate many industries for their R & D in the price we pay for a product.
We do not need seven line models and 28 different types. That is what we all know and SA does to, and it seems the fly shops I have dealt with understand also. There are folks willing to pay for the best performance they can get and others just want the least expensive line to do the job, disregarding quality, longevity and the like. Would one pay 20% more for something that last twice as long?
SA has a very good and informative web site. If you go to it and educate yourself on the different models and types in that model line one will understand the attributes of each one, which one they may prefer to have for their style of casting, fishing and pocket book. Choice is good.
Best,
Carl
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#4SA may have an informative web site, but I just did separate searches for lines recommended for bamboo and fiberglass rods. Nothing for bamboo, and one for fiberglass, the Mastery ART, which is "slightly over weighted". This not from SA but a "Pro" whatever that means.
The Scientific Anglers Lines
#5I prefer SA made lines myself. The diameter (core + coating) and the ‘hardness’ of the coating I like best. Tried Rio a few times and the coating feels much softer and more vulnerable to damage. Cortland seems to be dead or alive depending on the season. Cortland’s diameter always were so much thicker than SA and made my rod feel different (more wind resistance) so I never cared for Cortland lines.
My ‘rant’ was a meant as a tongue-in-cheek comment. I wrote a post on my blog about the immense amount of fly lines these days.
Before Rio was bought by Far Bank from Jim Vincent, the fly line landscape was a much different vista. Just a few models, floating lines were usually a DT and a WF and some kind of distance line and usually also a budget model. Two or three sinking lines with different sink rates. Well we all know what happened afterwards.
However the price lines made a jump from around $60 for many years and now we’re at $130 for the high end models. Now someone told me that employees of fly shops were allowed to buy a few fly lines at ‘pro pricing’ and that was like 15% of the retail price.
My ‘rant’ was a meant as a tongue-in-cheek comment. I wrote a post on my blog about the immense amount of fly lines these days.
Before Rio was bought by Far Bank from Jim Vincent, the fly line landscape was a much different vista. Just a few models, floating lines were usually a DT and a WF and some kind of distance line and usually also a budget model. Two or three sinking lines with different sink rates. Well we all know what happened afterwards.
However the price lines made a jump from around $60 for many years and now we’re at $130 for the high end models. Now someone told me that employees of fly shops were allowed to buy a few fly lines at ‘pro pricing’ and that was like 15% of the retail price.
-
Hellmtflies
- Bamboo Fanatic
- Posts: 8071
- Joined: 01/14/12 10:27
- Location: Bozeman, Montana
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#6Well, when I was working for a local FF shop, we sold SA lines and each year SA aloud us each to purchase 5 lines at cost per year. I was able to by 5 lines each year, all DT's, for a whopping $35.00. Yup, $7.00 per line. I purchased 5 every year. Still have new old stock coming out of my ears. The thought of paying over a hundred bucks for a line is just silly to me.
-
kevinhaney1
- Master Guide
- Posts: 642
- Joined: 11/11/19 22:11
- Location: The mountains of Maryland
- Contact:
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#7Unless that line is a handmade silk line, that is. Which is the only kind of line that should really be used on bamboo rods, as it is what they were designed for.The thought of paying over a hundred bucks for a line is just silly to me.
Kevin Haney, Vintage Anglers
http://www.vintageanglers.com
http://www.vintageanglers.com
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#8This popular belief from some that bamboo rods should only be used with silk lines is frankly hogwash perpetuated by an elite. Originally lines were made of horsehair. An improvement came with the ability to braid lines from silk, first straight untapered and then tapered. Improvements were made to float the lines. For many years silk was all we had and that it is what rods of that time cast. There was no choice of line materials, silk was it. Uniformity came as standards were set to the lines and soon fly rods (still bamboo) started receiving line designations associated with their tapers. After WW2 the polymer coated nylon lines started to be more competitive and replace silk and gradually as technologies improved so did these lines into the variety we have today. I would have to say no bamboo rod built since the late 1960's was specifically designed to cast only silk. They were/are designed to cast a specific weight line. If that line is made out of silk, polymer or whatever the weight is what the rod taper is working on (one could also include the line profile and suppleness affect the casting too). One nice attribute of silk is the line was textured an allowed a line to shoot through the guides easily. The current trend of some line makers to texture their lines comes from this observation.
How many current makers on this forum and actively working test their rods and design them only for braided silk fly lines? What is the price of those new silk lines?
In general we all have worked in some business where employees receive a trade discount for the materials or work that business preforms. To apply this perk to the entire retail operation of a business and its pricing is severely flawed. No mention was made how long ago this SA perk was granted, or does it even apply anymore to the current production of lines. Should a farmer think it is silly that we pay for our food? Should a rod maker consider it silly that other makers have people pay them to build a rod at a cost way higher than they can make one for themselves? And why are some quality rods only $1,000 and others $6,000? Are the higher priced builders sticking it to the public?
The commercial retail market sets a price for a product, it is based on production costs, advertising, R & D, market research, etc. etc. The market responds to the item by purchasing it or not. SA is not making lines for someone sitting on a pile of old inventory or someone who believes in only historical applications. SA is filling a researched need in the marketplace. If you do not have that need why criticize those who do and those attempting to satisfy it?
If one really believes a quality fly line can be made and retailed for $7.00 in 2023 as is implied, launch a new company and help us all out.
Carl
How many current makers on this forum and actively working test their rods and design them only for braided silk fly lines? What is the price of those new silk lines?
In general we all have worked in some business where employees receive a trade discount for the materials or work that business preforms. To apply this perk to the entire retail operation of a business and its pricing is severely flawed. No mention was made how long ago this SA perk was granted, or does it even apply anymore to the current production of lines. Should a farmer think it is silly that we pay for our food? Should a rod maker consider it silly that other makers have people pay them to build a rod at a cost way higher than they can make one for themselves? And why are some quality rods only $1,000 and others $6,000? Are the higher priced builders sticking it to the public?
The commercial retail market sets a price for a product, it is based on production costs, advertising, R & D, market research, etc. etc. The market responds to the item by purchasing it or not. SA is not making lines for someone sitting on a pile of old inventory or someone who believes in only historical applications. SA is filling a researched need in the marketplace. If you do not have that need why criticize those who do and those attempting to satisfy it?
If one really believes a quality fly line can be made and retailed for $7.00 in 2023 as is implied, launch a new company and help us all out.
Carl
-
Hellmtflies
- Bamboo Fanatic
- Posts: 8071
- Joined: 01/14/12 10:27
- Location: Bozeman, Montana
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#9I didn't say that the cost was from today's prices. All I was saying is that if they could have sold the lines to us then for that price then the markup was huge. The lines I purchased were back it 2008. But I suspect that if that same perc exists today than the amount would be relative.
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#10Having worked in the “industry” (i hate calling it an industry) for quite a few years, I would agree that fly lines have a very big profit margin. Leaders and tippets, good margins also. And flies.
But nobody is making much of a profit on rods and reels. I sometimes wonder if *anyone* , any manufacturer, whether it be bamboo, or carbon fiber, is in the black making rods and reels. The retailers have set margins that are profitable on rods and reels, but not many manufacturers are high-fiving on their ROI on rods and reels.
I’d love to be proved wrong.
But nobody is making much of a profit on rods and reels. I sometimes wonder if *anyone* , any manufacturer, whether it be bamboo, or carbon fiber, is in the black making rods and reels. The retailers have set margins that are profitable on rods and reels, but not many manufacturers are high-fiving on their ROI on rods and reels.
I’d love to be proved wrong.
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#11If fly lines have a very big profit margin I sure wish someone would tell me where it is 'cause I haven't seen it yet
.Tom
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#12-
JabaliHunter
- Guide
- Posts: 222
- Joined: 03/19/19 18:17
- Location: England
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#13There is a certain irony in the argument that there are few lines suitable for bamboo while at the same time arguing that there are too many choices of line! I doubt that there is a single trout line sold that couldn’t be used effectively on a bamboo rod. Equally, no line can do everything perfectly, whether on a bamboo rod or another material.
In my view, the biggest problem with lines is a double edged sword - on the one hand manufacturers do not give enough technical information about their products (e.g. the distribution of mass along the length of the taper); and on the other, the average customer doesn’t have the technical understanding of (or interest in) the product that they are buying.
For example, simply dismissing a line that is advertised as “half line size heavy” or “one line size heavy” as unsuitable for bamboo is to fundamentally misunderstand what the line does. Even a DT “true to weight” line must by its very design be under loading a correctly labelled rod at <30ft and overloading it at >30ft. But most bamboo (and carbon) rods are forgiving enough to accommodate this so that it mostly doesn’t matter much except at the extremes.
Another way of looking at a line that is “half/one line size heavy” is that it will do exactly the same job as a “true to weight” line with a similar taper, but just at a shorter distance. This can have advantages for fishing in small creeks where casts are short, or disadvantages in larger rivers where casts are longer.
When there were fewer choices of line and taper, all we did was over line the rod in some situations, or underline it in others. The other way is to use different rods for different types of fishing.
All these new lines are just different ways of addressing old problems. And yes they cost more than they did in the past, but so does everything…
In my view, the biggest problem with lines is a double edged sword - on the one hand manufacturers do not give enough technical information about their products (e.g. the distribution of mass along the length of the taper); and on the other, the average customer doesn’t have the technical understanding of (or interest in) the product that they are buying.
For example, simply dismissing a line that is advertised as “half line size heavy” or “one line size heavy” as unsuitable for bamboo is to fundamentally misunderstand what the line does. Even a DT “true to weight” line must by its very design be under loading a correctly labelled rod at <30ft and overloading it at >30ft. But most bamboo (and carbon) rods are forgiving enough to accommodate this so that it mostly doesn’t matter much except at the extremes.
Another way of looking at a line that is “half/one line size heavy” is that it will do exactly the same job as a “true to weight” line with a similar taper, but just at a shorter distance. This can have advantages for fishing in small creeks where casts are short, or disadvantages in larger rivers where casts are longer.
When there were fewer choices of line and taper, all we did was over line the rod in some situations, or underline it in others. The other way is to use different rods for different types of fishing.
All these new lines are just different ways of addressing old problems. And yes they cost more than they did in the past, but so does everything…
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#14Some excellent analysis here JH!
I don't need a fly line to last 12 years (if you keep the line clean and not step on them they can!). But at $130 I WANT it to last 14 years!
Why not price lines at around $50-60 and make sure they do the job well and I'll gladly get a fresh new line every 3 year.
This is so true. Most people just brag about the next new Sage (or what ever) to their buddies than understanding the fly line that takes their fly to the fish. The rod isn't the most important gear here.JabaliHunter wrote: ↑02/01/23 06:46In my view, the biggest problem with lines is a double edged sword - on the one hand manufacturers do not give enough technical information about their products (e.g. the distribution of mass along the length of the taper); and on the other, the average customer doesn’t have the technical understanding of (or interest in) the product that they are buying.
I don't need a fly line to last 12 years (if you keep the line clean and not step on them they can!). But at $130 I WANT it to last 14 years!
Why not price lines at around $50-60 and make sure they do the job well and I'll gladly get a fresh new line every 3 year.
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#15Couple of thoughts, not necessarily limited to SA. First, the price. Remember that the retail "price" includes much more than the "cost" of the line. There's enough included to (hopefully) cover the shop's cost of acquiring the line, paying a portion of the shop expenses (rent, utilities, advertising, employees' salaries and benefits, insurance, etc.) and leaving a bit of profit for the owner(s). The same applies at the distributor level (assuming the lines aren't sold directly from the manufacturer to the shops). And then there's the manufacturer. Those have to acquire the various raw materials, conduct R&D to determine which work best, which combinations, production issues, etc. And field test them. Figure out costs to produce, including equipment and its depreciation. It's no different than rod building (synthetic): which prepreg, which resin, taper, blank pattern, etc. And what market is there, how large is that market, what price will the market bear, on and on. And the more types of lines that are produced, the more mfgrs and dealers have the same problem as anglers: Which lines should I make/stock/sell/buy? SKUs can quickly get out of hand, especially for a small shop trying to compete.
Oh, the point: "Pro" pricing. Most pro prices bear no relationship to the "cost" of a line. Pro programs are there for one and/or two reasons: actual field testing (some mfgrs ask at least some pros for feedback), and/or for advertising. How many times do anglers look at what guides are using or the patches they're wearing?
Then there's the line taper issue. I won't even go there. Choose your poison. There are many great choices, and many that aren't necessarily suitable for some uses. They ain't all Model Ts in any color you want as long as it's black (Henry Ford, IIRC) any more.
Line standards: They're not obsolete, or dead, but nearly so. They were originally developed when fly lines were "simple". Instead of HCH, HDH, GBF, etc., the need was recognized that lines should be designated by their weight (the first 30 feet, not counting any level tip). That worked, for a while. Line technology continued to improve, and fly fishing horizons expanded (and casting distances lengthened in many situations). Many, many lines today have "non-standard" designs (longer/shorter heads and front/rear tapers), so the 30-ft weight standard is hard to apply. Perhaps most of all, fly rod designers (not all) realized that some (many?) anglers had trouble loading the newer, faster rods they had built. The rods weren't (necessarily) blamed, so line mfgrs had to "fudge" on line weights. A four-wt, as designated, might actually weigh one or two lines heavier. The angler was happy; unless s/he was an accomplished angler/caster, and realized the "4" weight line wasn't labeled correctly. All this has been discussed, and no completely satisfactory solution found. A partial solution is that (some) line mfgrs do note that a certain series is "overweight"
It's hard for consumers (especially those of us who are a bit wrinkled, but can remember prices from decades ago) to walk into a fly shop and look at $1,000 rods (forget bamboo), $100 - $1,000+ reels, $500 waders, etc., without sucking air. Remember, though, a fly line that cost $100 today would cost (if the inflator calculator I used was correct) $15.17 in 1973. That's the year I finished graduate school, and started working. I vaguely recall the same suck when I walked into a high end shop back then.
That (the above) is sort of like inflation - - - hot air, anyway.
Oh, the point: "Pro" pricing. Most pro prices bear no relationship to the "cost" of a line. Pro programs are there for one and/or two reasons: actual field testing (some mfgrs ask at least some pros for feedback), and/or for advertising. How many times do anglers look at what guides are using or the patches they're wearing?
Then there's the line taper issue. I won't even go there. Choose your poison. There are many great choices, and many that aren't necessarily suitable for some uses. They ain't all Model Ts in any color you want as long as it's black (Henry Ford, IIRC) any more.
Line standards: They're not obsolete, or dead, but nearly so. They were originally developed when fly lines were "simple". Instead of HCH, HDH, GBF, etc., the need was recognized that lines should be designated by their weight (the first 30 feet, not counting any level tip). That worked, for a while. Line technology continued to improve, and fly fishing horizons expanded (and casting distances lengthened in many situations). Many, many lines today have "non-standard" designs (longer/shorter heads and front/rear tapers), so the 30-ft weight standard is hard to apply. Perhaps most of all, fly rod designers (not all) realized that some (many?) anglers had trouble loading the newer, faster rods they had built. The rods weren't (necessarily) blamed, so line mfgrs had to "fudge" on line weights. A four-wt, as designated, might actually weigh one or two lines heavier. The angler was happy; unless s/he was an accomplished angler/caster, and realized the "4" weight line wasn't labeled correctly. All this has been discussed, and no completely satisfactory solution found. A partial solution is that (some) line mfgrs do note that a certain series is "overweight"
It's hard for consumers (especially those of us who are a bit wrinkled, but can remember prices from decades ago) to walk into a fly shop and look at $1,000 rods (forget bamboo), $100 - $1,000+ reels, $500 waders, etc., without sucking air. Remember, though, a fly line that cost $100 today would cost (if the inflator calculator I used was correct) $15.17 in 1973. That's the year I finished graduate school, and started working. I vaguely recall the same suck when I walked into a high end shop back then.
That (the above) is sort of like inflation - - - hot air, anyway.
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#16If we could break it down. Scientific Anglers has about 25 employees and gross revenues of about $4.8 million a year. They sell fly lines ranging in price from $40 to $130, tippet material, leaders and other small items. They supply lines to other vendors who market them under their own names. Between Cortland, Rio, Okuma,and some others they are earn the least gross annual revenue.
Remove 20% for Federal, State, and Local taxes. ($960,000)
Remove 15% for profit. ($576,000)
25 employees at an average wage of $65,000 per year including benefits, unemployment taxes, medical insurance, etc. equals $1,625,000.
Say they have capital improvements in infrastructure, furnishings, fixtures and equipment of $5 million, plus a capital improvement/replacement/maintenance/utilities budget amortized over 20 years at about $500,000 per year. Throw in advertising, marketing, retail servicing, and R & D at another $300,000 per year. Packaging, shipping and handling, materials cost and the like of about $500,000.
Throw in about 10% for all the ancillary items I missed.
Let's say they sell 100,000 lines a year and the lines make up 75% of their business gross. The average markup on many products wholesale to retail is roughly 50%. With the above rough guesstimate numbers the average wholesale cost of a line would be around $38. Therefore the retail cost by my guess would be $74 per line. Which is pretty close to their bread and butter Mastery line price.
I understand any retail business major can pick my work apart, surely there are items missed and perhaps some numbers inaccurately described. As a quick thumbnail exercise it does bear out that in today's market the pricing is not exorbitant as some might wish to imply.
I know we tend to gripe about the cost of things and to some profit and markup is a bad thing, but day in and day out our economy, our income and all the benefits we receive (retirees) come from this free market operation model.
Carl
Remove 20% for Federal, State, and Local taxes. ($960,000)
Remove 15% for profit. ($576,000)
25 employees at an average wage of $65,000 per year including benefits, unemployment taxes, medical insurance, etc. equals $1,625,000.
Say they have capital improvements in infrastructure, furnishings, fixtures and equipment of $5 million, plus a capital improvement/replacement/maintenance/utilities budget amortized over 20 years at about $500,000 per year. Throw in advertising, marketing, retail servicing, and R & D at another $300,000 per year. Packaging, shipping and handling, materials cost and the like of about $500,000.
Throw in about 10% for all the ancillary items I missed.
Let's say they sell 100,000 lines a year and the lines make up 75% of their business gross. The average markup on many products wholesale to retail is roughly 50%. With the above rough guesstimate numbers the average wholesale cost of a line would be around $38. Therefore the retail cost by my guess would be $74 per line. Which is pretty close to their bread and butter Mastery line price.
I understand any retail business major can pick my work apart, surely there are items missed and perhaps some numbers inaccurately described. As a quick thumbnail exercise it does bear out that in today's market the pricing is not exorbitant as some might wish to imply.
I know we tend to gripe about the cost of things and to some profit and markup is a bad thing, but day in and day out our economy, our income and all the benefits we receive (retirees) come from this free market operation model.
Carl
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#17I've been following this thread closely, and have learned, or re-learned quite a bit about fly lines in general, and Sci Anglers in particular, as well as business models, but I still don't know which three lines they recommend for bamboo rods.
Carl, if it wouldn't be too much trouble..............Please and thank you.
Carl, if it wouldn't be too much trouble..............Please and thank you.
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#18It seems strange to me to complain about all the variety in current fly lines. No one is forcing any of us to buy any of them, right?
It's not like fly lines reached perfection in 1965 (or whatever). I think it's cool that manufacturers continue to experiment and develop technology.
Where I would hope they go next is developing lines that are more environmentally friendly: pvc kinda sucks from that perspective.
I do appreciate that S.A. gives info about actual weights and tapers. That's all we really need to make an informed choice.
I also don't understand why a fly line would have "no business being on a bamboo fly rod." There's plenty of variety in rods and fishing situations and angler preferences. If a line works for you, it's a good line for you.
It's not like fly lines reached perfection in 1965 (or whatever). I think it's cool that manufacturers continue to experiment and develop technology.
Where I would hope they go next is developing lines that are more environmentally friendly: pvc kinda sucks from that perspective.
I do appreciate that S.A. gives info about actual weights and tapers. That's all we really need to make an informed choice.
I also don't understand why a fly line would have "no business being on a bamboo fly rod." There's plenty of variety in rods and fishing situations and angler preferences. If a line works for you, it's a good line for you.
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#19Brooks,
Tongue in cheek comment. We are more than a distributor though - we also sell retail which supports our dealer network.
Tom
Re: The Scientific Anglers Lines
#20Regarding lines specifically designed for bamboo: I am constantly surprised at how different tapers and weights affect my different rods. I am lucky to have many lines to try, and access to many lines.
For example, when I normally tend to prefer certain DT’s as a go-to, I have a Ray Gould 8 for six that has a mid-flex, that just never quite blows my kilt up. The line I discovered that works best is an underlined (labeled a 5-weight) power taper with a poly-leader set up. The power taper is a heavy-weighted line, with an aggressive turnover (short powerful front taper). The power taper makes up for the lack of line speed that the Gould rod has (I fish mostly western bigger waters, often out of a driftboat).
The same power taper is clunky on some of my other rods.
Point being, rods are just springs. Find which line loads and unloads the spring the way it suits you best.
Now that lines are often $100 (and up) I think it would behoove manufacturers to do everything they can to make it really inexpensive for fly shops to have dozens of “demo” lines, different tapers, weights, coatings, for customers to try out before purchasing. It would help wary customers, and ultimately increase sales.
For example, when I normally tend to prefer certain DT’s as a go-to, I have a Ray Gould 8 for six that has a mid-flex, that just never quite blows my kilt up. The line I discovered that works best is an underlined (labeled a 5-weight) power taper with a poly-leader set up. The power taper is a heavy-weighted line, with an aggressive turnover (short powerful front taper). The power taper makes up for the lack of line speed that the Gould rod has (I fish mostly western bigger waters, often out of a driftboat).
The same power taper is clunky on some of my other rods.
Point being, rods are just springs. Find which line loads and unloads the spring the way it suits you best.
Now that lines are often $100 (and up) I think it would behoove manufacturers to do everything they can to make it really inexpensive for fly shops to have dozens of “demo” lines, different tapers, weights, coatings, for customers to try out before purchasing. It would help wary customers, and ultimately increase sales.