who uses over 600 grs on a 8wt??

Discussion in 'Spey Clave' started by sandspanker, May 10, 2011.

  1. Ed Call

    Ed Call Mumbling Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    17,966
    Media:
    283
    Likes Received:
    1,833
    Location:
    Kitsap Peninsula
    T Dave, never mind. You are too sure of your own opinion that mine does not matter.


    From a trusted web source for the rod that I hold in my hands while casting a skagit line:

    Sage Z Axis 8129-4 - Kiene's Info: A favorite among the Kiene's staff. This is a great rod for winter steel head and Chinook salmon. This rod really excels with a Rio Skagit 600-650 and any amount of T-14 you want to throw.

    Clearly based on this recommendation I'm Way overlined for this rod, aren't I? Sure, there are others that agree with you in that I'm over the high line. They like less grains in the line. I think you know less about my line needs and my casting style, preferences and skill level than you know about your own. I offered my actual experience with my line and this rod. I also added that my custom line is closer to 570, a full 100+ grains lighter with a slightly longer head than my 660 skagit compact. Kiene's recommends 600-650. I started 10 grains above that.

    I answered the question. I cast the line. I put it out pretty far for someone of my experience level. I don't care what you think about my input. My input was not directed to you.

    What you've done is turned the opening question and the thread's direction into "your using too much" and many others have followed your lead. In that case, put in your answer to the question: 600 or more is too much, and leave it at that.
     
  2. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    Agreed, not sure why this ruffled some feathers:confused:- Throwing more grains than needed is like driving a dragster to the supermarket, it works, but why bother ???
    Ive cast the rod in question, and not only would I totally dis agree with kieny's recommendation of the z as king rod, but anything above 550-575 sounds very over lined to me . Today I Cast a 9/10 14' snowbee with a 630 skaj, and huge nookie flies with bullet weights. This rods a monster compared to the z 8129... And it wasn't under loaded at all -
    If you like lots of grains, great, but don't think it's the way to go over learning good casting fundamentals...
    But, to each his own, if your happy casting the way you do, great, but don't expect everyone to buy it if they have made the commitment to learning how to cast well -:ray1:
     
  3. T Dave

    T Dave Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Kelowna

    Quote - "with any amount of T-14".... ha ha, Good one. If it is posted on the web, it must be true! lol

    I am reminded of the casting demo Tim Rajeff put on at the Bellevue show about for years ago where he cast a 5 wt line on a 9 wt rod, then cast a 9 wt line on a 5 wt rod. Both times he was able to get line out, but he had to make compensations to his casting stroke and the performance of the rod(s) suffered.

    That rod with those grains is under performing and not working the way it was designed to. Sure, over lining will help compensate for your inability to load it, but is that good advice for others?
     
  4. FT

    FT Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    121
    Location:
    Burlington, WA
    I'm glad that you included the information regarding you are using a 13' 8 wt. The reason I say this is because if you had say a Meiser Highlander 15' 7-9, or Loomis Greased Line 15' 8/9 wt, you could easily cast an 800 gr long-belly line with it and not be overloading the rod. In fact, I fish my Meiser Highlander 16' 8-10 exclusively with an 800 gr long-belly 8 wt line and some who have tried it with this line think it is too light.

    That said, there are very few 13' 8 wt that could cast an 8 wt long-belly without being overloaded. The vast majority of 13' 6 wt rods were simply not designed to cast long-belly lines. Instead, they were designed to cast Skagit, Scando, short-belly lines. Some are OK with an 8 wt mid-belly, but very few can cast an 8 wt long-belly.

    Therefore, I'm glad you specified the length of rod you were using, otherwise, I would have simply said of course a 13' 8 wt can cast more than 600 grs, which would have been useless to you because I would have been thinking of the very few that can cast an 8wt long-belly.
     
  5. Ed Call

    Ed Call Mumbling Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    17,966
    Media:
    283
    Likes Received:
    1,833
    Location:
    Kitsap Peninsula
    The only good advice is yours, clearly. So what should I be casting on my 8129 Z? Perhaps my 570 grain custom from Steve Godshall? Well, that is what I'm using. But the question that started the thread is who is using over 600 on an 8wt? Some are, some have, and some may even despite your attempts to teach them otherwise. There are more right answers than there are people providing them.
     
  6. James Waggoner

    James Waggoner Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Messages:
    778
    Media:
    13
    Likes Received:
    39
    Location:
    wa
    The best way to help someone loose weight isn't to say "You're too FAT!" But, to take a personal interest, invite them out for a hike...and let them come to that conclusion. We all start somewhere, and for many of us it's overweight. I for one woundn't say 660 on an 8wt wouldn't work, when I've heard and seen otherwise. Pesonal opinion...much to heavy for myself, but thats me.
     
  7. Ian Broadie

    Ian Broadie Flyfishing is so "Metal"

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    671
    Media:
    4
    Likes Received:
    51
    Location:
    Kirkland, Washington
    Home Page:
    Yup, I agree. Even I bet as your casting improves you'll move down to a 570 and like it even better.
     
  8. Cali

    Cali New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern Ca.
    I've fished with McCune and O'Donnell, and both prefer in excess of 600 grains on the 8129 Z axis. I for one would not refer to them as hack casters. But thats just me.
     
  9. Chris Bellows

    Chris Bellows Your Preferred WFF Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,965
    Media:
    13
    Likes Received:
    1,115
    Location:
    The Salt
    What do they know... I'd rather get my fishing advice from anonymous internet posters.
     
  10. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    And there it is, mystery solved , question answered -:thumb:
     
  11. golfman65

    golfman65 Guest

    Man, this is dumb...different rods have different grain windows..so the wt on the rod is only relative to that company and even that is sketchy...Try out the 5 or 6wt z axis spey...very sweet little sticks that take lighter lines better..but very different from said rod..

    Also, Mumbles could be casting it from under the bushes or against the bank..660 with heavy tips would be the ticket for that as you want to max load the rod without much of a D loop...matter of fact if he was throwing big chickens and t 14 and not worried about a 100' cast then that might be the perfect line..

    Long bellies can be heavier or at the upper end of a grain window because you are moving that mass over a long length of line and not using tips...(in a very simplified explanation, but this is a short rod, mass argument)

    I've owned 8wts that cast anything from 540 to 650..the rod designation means nothing..the grain window and where and how your fishing does...

    I personally like whatever works..sometimes it's lighter and as such casts big distances better...which might be why Leroy and others prefers them as he's on big water and big casts with smaller flies is ideal.. but trying to turn heavy tips with to light of a head doesn't make sense.

    There are very few casters who know the stroke well enough to be able to do it all...and we are not among them...:)
     
  12. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    Agreed Golfman -
    If you need the grains, use them. If you don't, no sense overworking yourself . Fish what works for you, not everything works for everyone-
    Have fun, respect the resource, appreciate the time on the river with good friends .... Don't let differing opinions on the web piss ya off -
    'Nuff said -
     
  13. T Dave

    T Dave Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Kelowna
    I see, mystery solved with sketchy third hand info of some dudes that allegedly use 600+ grains... of course! Now is that total weight including tips? Head only? In my experienced hands, I tested skagit head weights of 550, 600, and 650, all with 120 grain tips. While I settled on and could launch the 550, I would say anything between 550 and 600 is good. Tried and tested the 650 and it was too heavy to be "good". Made the rod (most notably tip recovery) sluggish. Also tested and fished extensively the 530 grain delta, and cnd 594 grain lines. Both work and load the rod well with the cnd being a good challenge to be consistent with 65' head to a 12'9" rod.
     
  14. T Dave

    T Dave Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    56
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Kelowna
    Golfy, have you owned or fished both sticks? I do and wouldn't classify the 6126 as a lighter line rod as apposed to the 8129. Yes their flex points are different, (8129 being further up the blank) but it doesn't mean the 8129 needs to be comparatively loaded more to be effective. To me, it makes no sense to take an excellent fast action designed rod and force the load down into the bottom where it's not designed to work. If one wants to do that, there are some great deep flexing designed sticks out there that throw huge grains....


    Effective short casts (even with only part of a long belly head out) can be made by simply making a smaller stroke and not blowing the anchor. It makes no sense to overline a rod to facilitate "bank casting". IMO
     
  15. segge

    segge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    An example
    Loop Mulit 13 foot 8 weight doesn't begin to shine until you load it with a 630 compact skagit. (not including tips)
    I don't think it is standard practice to include tips in grain weight windows ... the rod doesn't load with it really on a skagit cast .... just the skagit head ... the tip goes along for the ride.

    Steve
     
  16. golfman65

    golfman65 Guest

    Just the 5126, cast the 6126 owned briefly the 9143? .. only waggled the 8 and it felt more like the 9 compared to the 5 or 6...but those little guys yes will throw anything, tim puts 15' of t-14 on the 5126..but I can't handle that..
    Not saying you have to or would want to overload it...but if up against the tree's and you needed to...that's when overlining a rod comes in handy..
     
  17. stewart dee

    stewart dee Guest

    Man I was up on the Skagit, Sauk and Stilly today. High water and looking good. If only I can figure out this 650 grain line on my 6wt? I guess we all have a different feel? I feel about 20ft. and then I count my leader, and rod and arms. Now I am out about 40ft. Maybe I need to go up to 720 gr. ??? The heck with it. I just found a nice Ugly Stick, lawn chair, rod bell and a cold 18 pack of PBR (at the local Wall Store). Going to the dark side - adios.
     
  18. Leroy Laviolet

    Leroy Laviolet Aint no nookie like chinookie

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    Messages:
    994
    Media:
    24
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    do'n it 4 the chinookie
    Dave, my comment was smart ass and facetious. I'm in your corner on this one, just for the record -
     
  19. Klickrolf

    Klickrolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    761
    Likes Received:
    288
    Location:
    Klickitat, Washington
    It's the same as the "line and rod performance" thread.
    A well lined rod is a pleasure and a less than well lined rod is a drag.
     
  20. ralfish

    ralfish Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    B.C.
    Grains and rods, it comes down to what you want to do.

    On my 12'6'' 7/8 my go to dry line is a 7/8 CND GPS. 594 grains at 65 feet. Thats pretty much the max belly I can single spey on that rod, and it doesn't feel over loaded, or bogged down. If I can count on a windless day I'll drop the line down to the 6/7 for 512 grains and have a longer overhang.

    Same rod winter set up is either a 7/8 Delta at 530 grains stock or 500 chopped to launch tips or a chopped AFS 460 grain head. Modded it comes in at 400 grains and will launch 140 grain tips if needed with 100-120 grain tips being the norm go to with heavy irons. I just have to back off the top hand that is needed for the longer belly line and go more bottom hand or fulcrum style.

    All 3 lines have different loading and casting characteristics. Same rod. The interesting thing is I'm accessing power from different areas of the rod with the different lines by adjusting my casting stroke, and most importantly certainly never feel that I'm working hard.

    Different bellies and strokes, good performance; same rod.
     

Share This Page