Short casts won't load as well, but good presentation will be easier to accomplish with a DT.

 

I found moderate action 2wts to be pretty slow. I have Sage XP 2wts and I can cast them pretty well with both WF and DT lines. When I cast a soft 2wt, I just had to slow down and wait for the rod to load and unload. I don't know if the taper would have made a lot of difference, it was the timing that was critical. Don't plan on making any heroic long casts or accomplishing much in the wind. They are really fun close in tools.

Jerry

 

Thanks Jerry. It will be a full-flex 8' 2wt. Not concerned about heroic long casts.
I understand the structural difference between the two lines, it is the functional differences that I am not sure of.
I have never had a DT and for a slow 2wt I thought I better think about it before I purchase something.

 

Mike, I'd lean toward a nice weight-forward rather than a DT. The old saw about DT lines is that once they get worn out, you could switch the ends, but who "wears out" a line these days? I'd think a two-weight would be used for precise, relatively short casts.

 

I have a silly question on fly lines. If a 5wt line is 90 " long and a 2wt line is the same. Why does the 2wt have to be 90' long? Since a 2wt is used on small streams, one shouldn't need 90' of fly line. I use a 3wt in the summer time and I have a small reel on my 3wt it is loaded with my 90' of fly line and 20 lb backing. I believe all that line is over kill.

I never throw out more than 30' of line including the 7 1/2' leader with my fly of some kind. It just seems to be a waste to carry that much line when you don't have to. Maybe I should just cut it down and answer my own question.

Jim

 

Great point Jim.

 

I love DT for lighter rods. I'll buy a 2wt DT, cut the line in half, load one half up on the reel with extra backing, and store the other half for later. And lines last me maybe a year or two with the amount I fishing I do.

Currently my 2 wt set up is half a 2wt DT on the reel, and half a 3Wt DT on a spare spool. I find the the 3wt casts best when you only have about 15-20' of line past the rod tip.

 

I've never taken a micrometer to a 2. It would be interesting to me cuz the running line on most WF lines mics out around the same as a 3 or 4 wt level line that I've bought to use as running lines. I wonder what they use for the core on 2 wt lines, especially if there is any taper in a WF2.

Sg

 

Thanks Bloom. That is a great idea.

 

Diameters, the double taper will have a larger diamater throught and will allow it to ride a bit higher in the water than a wf, and will load a bit quicker regardless of how much out of the tip of the rod. you will get probally the same delicate presentation with either, I would mabye consider a 3wt dt vs a 2 if the rod is more moderate than slow and increase the diameter a bit more, 2wt lines regardless of dt or wf are both very small in diameter and will struggle in choppy or broken water to stay up, the bigger the diameter the better if your rod will allow. Its a valid point on why they make them 90ft but the thickness of 2wt running line is thicker than 20lb, 15lb or 12lb backing and creates a larger arbor therefore quicker line retrieve, and I don't know if cutting it down is a good idea and replacing w/more backing you might get core saturation and cause the line to start sinking at an earlier age.

 

I'd say buy your line based on the taper, regardless of WF or DT. It's not like you're going to get well into the body of a DT or the running line of a WF with that kind of rod, so it really shouldn't matter. So if you need any distance, don't fish a 2wt rod!

 

So if you need any distance, don't fish a 2wt rod!

Agreed, not the reason I am building one.

 

bring your rod to to the pro shop, try both tappers, buy the one you like better. If they don't have a 2wt (which is very possible) ask them to have their Reps bring a couple in for you. Personally, on my 4 wts and lower I like the level, or DT lines. More control and mend like a dream, - though level lines are harder to come by.

 

[QUOTEfIts a valid point on why they make them 90ft but the thickness of 2wt running line is thicker than 20lb, 15lb or 12lb backing and creates a larger arbor therefore quicker line retrieve, and I don't know if cutting it down is a good idea and replacing w/more backing you might get core saturation and cause the line to start sinking at an earlier age.[/QUOTE]

Even at 45', I've never seen the backing while casting on small streams, and only seen the backing once when fighting a fish...no worries about saturation. The tip gets more saturated, and I'm really not too worried about the last 6'' of a 45' 2wt line getting saturated and sinking.

 

Mike if you go to the Rio site and look at their new LT lines I think you will see why some like the DT better on light slow rods. The DT gets to it's maximunm diameter (weight) in about 28 feet. This will load the rod effectively for the average cast on a rod of that weight. The WF doesn't get to its max untii nearly 40' so the rod is not loading fully with only 25' of line out. I think that is why some people will use a heavier WF on a light rod so it will feel like it is loading. I know that 4wt rod that I got from you feels the same with a DT peach as it does with a 5wt WF at 25-30 feet. If i get 40 feet of line out with the WF it seems overloaded but the DT still feeels right.
I also think the DT will give a more delicate presentation at close range.
I want to be there when you hook one of those 19" Westslopes on the NFCDA with this new 2 wt.
Blessings
jesse

 

I want to be there when you hook one of those 19" Westslopes on the NFCDA with this new 2 wt.
Blessings
jesse

A few more weeks Jesse and let's go...I know where a couple live!:thumb:

 

It doesn't have to be an either/or question....I don't have a 2wt rod but for my 1wt, I use a DT2F when I know I'll be fishing in close and tight but I'll bring another reel with a WF1F if I get to water where say a 20-25ft or longer cast is required. You may want to get both and use them in similar fashion depending on condition. And both lines are super light landing on the water and I can't say one is more delicate than the other in terms of presentation. You can some great deals on Ebay for light lines, if you're patient. Both my 1wt and 2wt lines are Orvis Wonderlines and I got them each for $10 including shipping.

 

Wow, those are great deals.

 

I'm with Brookie, why not have both? I fish a 3wt and absolutely love it. I don't have the perfect finesse [actually I'm a crappy caster] to lay out a WF on a glassy eddy in broad sunlight so I use a DT. It's easier for me. Even my roll casts are somewhat delicate [sometimes]. But when the wind picks up I have to bump up the load. When the hatch stops and I need to go with a heavier wet fly the WF also makes it easier for me. I'm not sure if you want to confine your view to only casting 25-30 feet. Though that will most likely be your "RED ZONE" most of the day, there might be that day that you need to punch a fly upstream 40 feet because you can't get closer without being spotted by the fish. But like my issuesare most likely a technical flaw.

 

Well just to update...I have decided to go with a DT2wt.
Thanks for all the feedback. Most of it made perfect sense.
Mike

 

Get a DT!!!! You will like it better. It will roll cast smoother. It will land more softly. I have been using a DT for years on my 4 wt. I switched for no reason last Fall on a fishing trip. Sloppy sloppy sloppy. I switched back to a DT. It you want a nice presentation to a wary trout in soft water or wherever. I promise you won't regret it. A 2 wt isn't a "distance casting contest". Think about it. I think the big push came a good number of years ago with the idea of "oh, you can cast farther"..... so what. Makes no sense, but it's a good sales pitch for a beginner I suppose. What ever happened to finesse??? Forget sloppy, get finesse...Get DT.

 

Thanks Larry. As I said earlier, distance casting was never part of the equation when I decided to build a two weight.
Thanks for reinforcing my decision.
Mike