Shooting head question.

[BigBuddha]

In the past I purchase a type II, or type IV sinking shooting head for a specific weight rod. I see lines listed by weight such as 500 or 700 grains now. How do I know what weight rod will cast the line? Also is the sink rate of the line related to the weight of the line? It would seem that the line weight may not be related to sink rate.

[David Lee]

Line wt. has nothing to do w/ sink-rate .

A floating line can weigh 300 grains , so can a sinking line . The weight in grains refers to what best loads any given rod (I like 250-300 for a 7 wt. , 300-350 for an 8 wt. ....)

Sink rates are Intermediate , type 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , etc. - you can get different sink rates in different grain weights .

Clear as mud yet ??? :roll:

David :)

[BigBuddha]

That makes sense as line density would dictate sink rate. Now how do I know which line a particular rod should take? It would seem to be easier to just put it on the box instead of simply telling you how many grains a line is and having the buyer figure out what rod should be used to cast it.

[David Lee]

That makes sense as line density would dictate sink rate. Now how do I know which line a particular rod should take? It would seem to be easier to just put it on the box instead of simply telling you how many grains a line is and having the buyer figure out what rod should be used to cast it.

Yeah .... that would be easier , wouldn't it ??

The reason this isn't in play is .... rod action/styles of casting come into the picture . I like to up-line most rods . In other words , say a 7 wt. line should come in around 185 grains (I think that's the number ... someone correct this if I'm wrong please) - some can cast this effortlessy , I need at least 250 grains to get anywhere with a 7 wt. and often cast up to 350 grains on my pet 7 wt. . Since I use shooting heads , I don't false-cast a whole lot .... where as someone who does false-cast a lot w/ a 7 wt. floater would likely feel more comfey with a "light' line .

The 'best' way to sort out how much weight you're cool with is .... talk to someone w/ the same rod and fishing situation . That's what I would do .....

Hope this helps , and sorry about my weak explanations :oops:

David :D

[Darian]

As if your concern about the lack of info isn't enough, at least one line manufacturer has succumbed to the need to over-line or up-line one or two times and has produced shooting head lines that're marked for a rod of a specific weight but are heavier by one or two sizes..... ](*,)

I guess the old AFTMA standards don't apply much anymore.... :? :?

[Stevie J]

Big Buddha,
The Rule of thumb is 30 grains x rod weight = grains needed to load the rod. example 30 x 7wt. = 210grains. Since Heads are usually 30 feet long (there are exceptions) and the running line does not transfer casting energy well, overlining is the common practice. Your casting skills and rod action will determine how much you want to overline. If you purchase Rio heads check the grain weight before your purchase... they are already overlined by 2 weights, or 60 grains. The 6wt weighing 240 to 250 grains. You are correct in noticing that grain weight has nothing to do with sink rate. Hope this helps clear up some confusion. Once you get the hang of casting heads they are a blast to cast and fish. Strive for smooooth application of power and haul, and a slightly open loop to help disipate casting energy and aid turn over.
Cheers,
Steve Johnston
FFF Certified Master Casting Instructor

[bubzilla]

Big Buddha,

Linked is an article from Fly Fisherman magazine that does a pretty good job of explaining shooting heads and how to match them to your rod.

http://www.flyfisherman.com/skills/mkmlheads/index.html

A couple other quick points about sink rates. With manufacturers that employ a density rating, e.g., Type I, Type II, Type III, etc., it is true that density, as opposed to the grain weight of the particular head, most affects sink rate. But the idea that grain weight has no affect or impact on sink rate at all has been slightly overstated.

The weight of the line does in fact affect sink rate, which is of course why manufacturers provide a range for the sink rate of their lines--frequently provided as a range stated in inches per second (i.p.s.). That is to say, two lines from the same manufacturer that are the same model, but that are different weights, will not sink at exactly the same rate. The heavier of the two will sink slightly faster. Most of the time this difference is negligible, and this is not generally an issue for actual fishing, but the difference does nonetheless exist. Also, you have to remember that ratings are determined under controlled laboratory conditions; in the real world, currents and other variables will affect sink rates to a much greater degree. But the reality is that grain weight does impact sink rate--even when you're dealing with lines that are otherwise the same--and it's a mistake to have the impression that it has no impact whatsoever.

Sink rates themselves can be a little confusing, so here's a link to Cortland's technical information to use as an example of what the different "Type" references mean at least for one manufacturer. Scroll about half way down and take a look at the sink rate chart they provide to get a better sense of the different rates. Also, note that sink rates do vary by manufacturer slightly. That is, a 30' 10 wt. Cortland Type III shooting head does not sink exactly the same as a 30' 10 wt. Scientific Anglers Type III shooting head. Again, in most situations that's not that big of a deal as a practical matter.

http://www.cortlandline.com/technical/tech-general.html

Second, not every manufacturer, or every model from some manufacturers, use a density rating. Some, e.g., Teeny with his T Series integrated lines (similar to shooting heads, but they have a permanently attached small diameter floating running line), use grains only. In those cases, the lines are available in different weights, from the 130 grain T-130 to the 500 grain T-500, but are not available in different densities. They publish different sink rates for the lines, however, which reflect the fact that the heavier lines sink faster than the lighter lines. The problem here is, obviously, that a single rod loads best with a given range of grains and therefore these lines are not as versatile as interchangeable component heads in the same grain range but in different densities.

Anyway, hope I didn't confuse the issue. Suffice it to say that grain weight can in fact be relevant to sink rate, and it's a mistake to believe it plays no role whatsoever. But with component heads you can find the grain weight that loads your rod best and then just change the density of the head you're using to achieve different sink rates. As everyone pointed out, it's the density of the line that most affects sink rate.

[Darian]

Hi Bubz,.... Good to hear from you.... :) :) Glad you waded in on this with a good explanation (as usual 8) 8) ). I wasn't feeling like saying anything as I couldn't have explained it as well as you have. :) :)

[smokeater]

Thank you guys for making some sense of this. I only recently have begun to understand it (as in the last 30 seconds). That really explains a great deal. I have had questions as to why a 200 and a 300 grain sinking line could have the exact same sink rate. I have a question. When speaking in terms of liner weight or grains.......is it the total weight of the line or weight per inch, foot, of line material used?

[Stevie J]

Smokeater, The measurement for the AFTMA standard is based on the first 30 feet of the line...30 grains per line weight is built into the first 30 feet. The sink rate comes from the density of the material used in the line coating (tungsten powder). In order to meet the grain requirement, while maintaining the sink rate, the diameter of the line will be different for each line weight. And if that wasn't complicated enough...thinner line will sink faster than a larger diamater line so that has to be thrown into the calculation as well. That is why you will see a variance of sink rate for the same type of flyline on the box. Hope that helps.
sj

[Stevie J]

A great book on this and other flyline subjects is Modern Flylines by Bruce Richards of Scientific Anglers. It was part of Lefty's Little Library Series...I don't know if it is still available but a quick search should answer that.
sj

[Moose]

As a side note, a big part of the problem is the recent trend in fast action rods. Seems a lot of guys want a faster rod because so many of the so called experts tout the abillities these rods have to throw more line, generate higher line speed, lift sunk lines better, etc, etc. In skilled hands this appears to be true enough. Problem there is, the average Joe fly caster with a modest skill level still needs to feel the rod load deeper and needs the rod to unload easier, and the fast rods just aren't designed to do that (or I should say they require a very attentive, experienced and precise hand to do that) so we upline them, thereby turning a fast rod into a slower rod. Also, many of the lower price point rods (the rods many average Joe flyfishermen buy) simply don't have the design characteristics needed when a guy tries to move into a more demanding and higher performance level of casting. These changing factors have seriously muddied the waters where line and rod designations meet. Nowadays you can go through a lot of different lines trying to dial in a rod, especially the heavier rods where you are trying to push the extremes. One very cool thing I've seen recently is the shooting head with integrated running line where the head is built longer than necessary so the caster can cut it back from the tip until the weight feels right for his rod. Years ago Loop tackle began this with floating shooting heads, and I recently saw a line (I believe it was an S.A. Express?) that was a type 8 sink with integrated running line for something like 30 bucks.

[bubzilla]

And if that wasn't complicated enough...thinner line will sink faster than a larger diamater line so that has to be thrown into the calculation as well. That is why you will see a variance of sink rate for the same type of flyline on the box.

Well, yes and no. Thinner line does in fact sink faster, and the higher density lines--intended to have faster sink rates--are also generally thinner in diameter. But the reason there is a variance of sink rate for the same type of line on the box is, as Cortland points out in that thread I linked, the different rates at which the lines sink according to their AFTMA rating. As Cortland states, "[t]he following chart gives the sink rate for each type of sinking line. Variations within each rate are due to the different line sizes themselves, i.e., a 10 weight type 6 is a bit faster than a 6 weight type 6." Or, stated another way, a range of sink rates is given for each type of sinking line because lighter line weights sink slower than heavier weights--even if they are exactly the same model.

http://www.cortlandline.com/technical/tech-general.html

Probably the best way to not confuse the impact of line diameter on sink rate with the affects of line weight--or "size" if that's easier to not confuse than "weight"--on sink rate is to use the intermediate line as an example. Neutral-density, clear lines rated as "intermediates" by most manufacturers do not have air bubbles in the coating mix to keep them afloat, nor do they incorporate any kind of heavy element, such as tungsten, to make them sink fast. So, being just a bit heavier than water, they sink slowly. Also, they are relatively large in diameter as far as sinking lines go--much larger than a Type IV, for example--and they use exactly the same material to make the heaviest versions as they do the lightest.

With those things in mind, it's easy to make a couple observations. First, a 10 wt. intermediate is considerably larger in diameter than a 6 wt. intermediate--nearly twice as large in fact--because they use more material to achieve the necessary grain weight to properly load a 10 wt. rod as compared to a 6 wt. rod. Second, despite its larger diameter the 10 wt. will sink much faster than the 6 wt. Why? Weight. The simple fact is that two lines, made precisely from the same material, but in different line weights, will not sink at the same rate. The heavier of the two will sink slightly faster. And again, that is why a range of sink rates is given for each type of sinking line.

Please nobody confuse this with the best way to change your sink rate in the field. You don't change line weight, i.e., AFTMA rating, to get a slower or faster sink rate; you switch to a different line density. But on the other hand, everyone should understand that when they buy a 6 wt. sinking line it will sink on the slower side of the quoted range of sink rates on the box, while a 10 wt. in the exact same model will sink on the faster side of the quoted range.

Also, most sinking lines do have AFTMA ratings, but not all. Rio's T-14, for example, is rated by the foot (weighing 14 grains per foot). Same goes for the rating of lead-core line. And some lines, like Scientific Anglers Deep Water Express, which are generally too heavy for use in their 30' length, can be cut up and made into heads. There again you end up dealing with grains per foot in order to get the right weight. Of course in that example, they come in several densities as well which can further complicate the whole thing.

P.S. didn't mean to complicate or confuse the issue here, so I apologize if I have. The original statements everyone made about line density determing sink rate are essentially correct. Just wanted to point out that weight is not irrelevant to sink rate--even if it is a secondary consideration.

[bubzilla]

I recently saw a line (I believe it was an S.A. Express?) that was a type 8 sink with integrated running line for something like 30 bucks.

Moose,

Could you be thinking of that new Rio line that has the running line integrated to the T-14 head?

[Hairstacker]

Moose, I think you must be referring to the Scientific Anglers Custom Express Tip line, which has an intermediate running line integrated with a 33' length of T14 that you can cut off bit by bit until you achieve the optimum load length for your rod. I agree it's a great idea and, given its way cheaper price compared to other integrated lines, I bet it's selling like hot cakes. Seems to me like the way to go if you're looking for a very fast sinking integrated line.

[Hairstacker]

bubzilla, sorry, guess I was posting while you were posting. Wouldn't surprise me if RIO also has such a line, since they originated T-14.

[bubzilla]

bubzilla, sorry, guess I was posting while you were posting. Wouldn't surprise me if RIO also has such a line, since they originated T-14.

Whoa, my bad. You're totally right. For some reason I was thinking that line was made by Rio. I guess 'cause it has T-14? I don't know. Haven't seen one in person yet myself. Sounds pretty cool though if you fish a lot of T-14 and prefer integrated heads.

[Moose]

It is the S.A. line that I was thinking of, didn't know Rio had one out as well. Talked to Andy at Kiene's a couple weeks ago about this line and he said he liked it a lot on his 8 weight. I'm going to get one and give it a try.

[Moose]

It is the S.A. line that I was thinking of, didn't know Rio had one out as well. Talked to Andy at Kiene's a couple weeks ago about this line and he said he liked it a lot on his 8 weight. I'm going to get one and give it a try.

[Adam Grace]

Rio first introduced T-14 but S.A. has their own version now which you find on their "cut-to lentgh" style of line with the integrated heavy head and intermediate running line. This new line is exciting, head chuckers have been asking for a line like this for quite a while. Now we don't have to splice or loop lines together to make our own permanent striper lines. The S.A. running line is very slick and fairly tangle-free.

If you use LC-13 or T-14 now you have to try this new line. - Adam

[Darian]

I've been a devout user of shooting heads emplying mono running lines for my deep water systems. Over the last few years, have acquired several integrated backing lines and find that my flexibility restricted.... :? Not at all times but enough to have started using an intermediate running line/shooting heads. 8) I like both but use the head system exclusively when casting from a boat; whether leadcore or other. 8)

Even more recently, I tested some Frog Hair, mono running line and have decided that this stuff is magic.... I'm a decent caster but found that this running line significantly increased my casting distance, even on breezy days. Easily handled but still has some memory. :)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, while I use integrated lines, they're not my primary choice for Salmon/Steelhead or saltwater. I'm a confirmed mono running line/shooting head guy. :D :D

[Stevie J]

Darian, Was tangling an issue with the Frog hair... as far as a mono shooting line I always thought that Rio Slick Shooter (a 35# oval shaped mono) was the greatest, but even after stretching, tangles were an issue. The more line being shot the more chance of tangling it seemed as well. Has anyone else had this experience?
sj

[Darian]

I tested Frog Hair on the grass on a cool, breezy day.... :? The material takes a knot easily and, after stretching was not too stretchy, by the way. 8) 8) I cast about twenty times against the breeze and about the same with the breeze. After a few casts, the coils came back but only tangled once, in each direction, while casting.... 8) The tangles were easily extracted. :)

Frog Hair material has a slick feel to it but isn't to difficult to manage in your hands. 8) Can't say I know how it'll do at Pyramid, yet. I'll have an answer for that, soon. :?

The only drawback I see is the price as compared with Amnesia.... :? :?

[sculpin]

Darian
Did you use a stripping basket with the Frog Hair line and if so how did it do staying in the basket ? I'm thinking of giving the stuff a try.
I see Rio Slickshooter mentioned quite a bit and it makes me think I got a bad batch or something. I tried it and the memory is so bad that even after a good stretch it just boils out of the stripping basket like a slinkey. If I didn't cast every few feet walking the beach it would become so tangled in the basket it would take up to 1/2 hr to un tangle it. It ruined an evening beach fishing in Baja and I have been gun shy of it since. My basket has the fingers in it so that's not an issue. Has anyone else experienced these problems ? Perhaps I need to stretch it out on my pasture fence for a few days before using it.

Mark

[Darian]

Hi Mark,.... Iv'e never used a stripping basket at all.... :lol: Maybe I ought to look into it, tho. :? Frog Hair coils again, after being strecthed, after several casts. The coils weren't tight, tho. 8) I think they wouldn't foul in a stripping basket since they didn't often tangle while lying on the grass. 8)

Rio's Slick Shooter didn't impress me, at all. I heard the same stories about it that you've experienced and after looking at and feeling it, I decided that it wasn't my preference. Haven't used it, tho. :?

Sorry I haven't more to offer.... :?