I thought I would share a few things that my OCD complex has allowed me to discover in the past several months.

There are numerous posts on the forum that relate casting distance and accuracy to guide spacing, size and blank.

When Tom offerred to condone a distance casting contest in the parking lot at High Point I went to work with the intent of getting every possible edge. My little venture into areas that I had never known about has provided information that will be very valuable to those of us who deal with customers directly. I have one reel that has thrown a lure over 800 feet - it is really something to see!

How many have been led to believe that braid makes a lot of noise when moving through guides - line manufacturers have developed new braided lines that seem to be a lot quieter - do you think the casting distance would be different and why?

What factors are really in control of distance? Just a few things that I had never considered.-

When the 3/8 oz lure weight was identified on the forum board several months ago I immediately went to Cabellas and purchased six red neoprene flat bottomed test casting plugs - I used all of these for testing my set ups. I was packing everything for the trip and decided to weigh all of the plugs I had been throwing on concrete - they were worn and had lost some weight - did not want to be at a disadvantage so I went back to Cabellas today to get some replacements. Guess what - the plugs now in the store are yellow plastic and almost 30% larger than the originals. These plugs cause additional drag and reduce the casting distance about 10%. When we talk about casting distance in the future I will attempt to tie the shape of the lure to the conversation. You can not throw a Whacky Worm the same distance as a Texas Rigged Worm of the same size.

Same thing on braid and noise. All of my test casts were done with Power Pro - the noisy stuff that many people hate.
Logged in a lot of throws intil I could locate the Berkley Fireline. I had to get Berkley Fireline 50# due to availability. I was pleasantly surprised that this line was silent on the same rods - but - this distance was almost 20 under the Power Pro. I contacted a line specialist and was told that the surface of the line had a lot to do with distance. The rougher the line the longer distance and more noise - the slicker the surface of the line allowed the two surfaces to remain in contact continually, kind of like a surface tension effect. The Power Pro seems to shoot off the reel and the Fireline can be observed to have a significant flutter between the reel and the first guide.

This is really some interesting stuff. If you would like to see it for yourself visit the Swampland Booth - pick up one of the rods rigged with both lines and go outside and give them a test fling.

This will be at a minimum cost - if you throw one it will be your responsibility to pick out any birds nest prior to returning the rod!

So having a slick braid tends to make the line adhere to the guide rings Hmmm

Always wondered why there were ball bearings in lours. Now it sounds like the bearings will on the back cast go to the end of the lure, which I would say is probably the pointed end to cut though the air and give longer distance. Does make sence

So every time I clean my fly line, I do myself a disservice because I make it wet and would tend to stick to the guide rings.

But I would think that one would need a smooth surface As guide rings.

Bill - willierods.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/06/2010 06:10PM by bill boettcher.

I built a small racing hydroplane some years ago. When the water was glass calm, the boat was slower than when there was a light chop. The reason, I assume, is reduced friction, because less of the hull is in contact with the water when there is a chop. Sounds like the same principle at work here.

All else being equal even two lures with the same weight and shape but one having a different surface will affect it some. Mythbusters recently proved that the dimpled golf ball is indeed the most aerodynamic shape escalating the theory to a life size car. This may or may not increase the air resistance for both lure and/or line. I have no idea, but in any case, it's a very intersting topic to think about Bill.

I think it is all about surface tension. The Navy developed a sharkskin coating for ships a while back

the little "teeth" had the effect of reducing surface tension on the hull - This is very similar to the high tech
olympic swimsuits...

wax the bottom of your boat and watch the reduction in overall speed, amazing i never gave the thought that it would apply to fishing line.

Drag is an interesting thing. It comes into play more often than we suspect and in ways that are not intuitive. Eons ago, my college mechanical engineering class built a
wind tunnel to play with and use in labs since our school did not have one. We spent a lot of hours playing with it and learning how things work or dont work in the fluids world.
One very interesting test we performed involved an automobile with a blunt nose. Not aerodynamic at all but we looked at ways to reduce the drag. The winner was a change in the shape of the top of the flat nose which reduced the drag by half by changing the air flow to not even touch the rest of the car. It was not intuitive that this would be the best solution but it did make
sense. Therefore, like slick line versus rough line, it is not intuitive that the rough line will cast farther--indeed, it is just the opposite until you consider that are other forces and reactions
involved that seem minor but really are not.

You will get the maximum distance by casting a material that has a very high density and is shaped so that it has the smallest frontal area like a tubular piece of lead.
You will get the maximum distance with a given input energy if you can achieve a 45 degree trajectory.
The dimples in a golf ball if the ball is rotating creates lift but I do not see how you will be able to duplicate this with a casting weight.
It takes eneregy to make noise and means that something, the guide, is vibrating. This energy is lost, reduces by a small amount the distance that the weight being cast will travel.
You will get the maximum distance if all of the mass is in the weight being cast and none in the line. So use the lowest mass, lightest weight, line possible.
You will want a reel with the lowest mass spool that rotates with the least friction possible. You should be able to find examples of reels that are designed for distance casting on the net. The first thing that you will notice is that they will not have any line guide so only the spool is rotating.
You will get the maximum distance if you use a reel that does not have any centrifugal clutch or other mechanism to reduce backlash. If you can lean to do this properly with your thumb you will get the maximum distance.

What limitations are on the rod?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/07/2010 01:19PM by Emory Harry.

And here I was going to change the Fireline that is getting "fuzzy" on one of my reels.

Guess it's really "Customized Aero-Fireline!"

Dan

Those folks who devloped sharkskin and ridge fly line are on to something.....but both lines will pick up more sediment and wear the guides over time....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/08/2010 10:49AM by Andrew Metzger.

Credit that to Berkely who invented the sharkskin type fly line way back in the early 1990s. They used it on their Fenwick lines for several years. I own several and they do cast very well.

...........

In my testing, I found the quieter lines improved distance performance with spinning reels.

Eugene Moore