Seems like there's several threads latley on this subject and I'm really confused about Paul Rotkis's statement of never using a slower action. I got into fly fishing and rod building a little over ten years ago and allowed "marketing" to influence my decisions I think. When they'd advertise fast or extra-fast, it makes me think I'm getting something "extra" for my money. I found out very quickly that to keep the fly line in the air, you have to move that fast/extra-fast rod tip like crazy. With a moderate action fly rod, I was able to do the same thing at a much slower pace and I could actually "feel" the rod load and unload which I really prefer. The only thing I found the fast actions would do better is mend the line. On faster actions, the bend point is further from my hands and when fighting Salmon/Steelhead, that gives a fish the advantage and tires me out alot quicker.

I would say I've lost more fish with fast action rods than I have with slower actions but I'm not sure if that was because of the rod's action or the lack of my fishing skills. Seems like any yahoo on the river can hook a fish, but being able to land it is another thing.

So when is a fast/extra-fast action more desireable versus when a slower action would work best? Thanks.

Tim,

I suspect that your fast action rods are not lined properly. You shouldn't have to move them "like crazy." There is nothing difficult about casting with a fast action fly rod, provided you have enough load on the rod in the first place. If you aren't feeling them loading, then you don't have the right line on them for the distances you're fishing.

..............

I agree with Tom on this one. I build a lot of fly rods for saltwater fishermen, and the condition you describe usually means the wrong line is being used for the particular rod. Not necessarily the wrong WEIGHT. If you find the line wants to fall out of the air behind you (on the back cast), you might have the wrong weight line, or the brand of line you are using has the wrong taper.
Most of the guys that want the extra fast actions don't do much false casting. They just want to pick up the line and fire it to the target.
My 16 year old apprentice just built a rod on the 9' for 9 wt Batson RX8 XF taper. In testing the rod with 10 wt, he found that the taper section was a bit too short, and the line was harder to keep in the air. A change of line brands resulted in the ability to pick up and fire 90' of line. This is EXACTLY what he was looking for. Once he gets used to the rod, his distances and proficiency with this rod will no doubt increase.

If you are using a rod designed for salt water fly fishing and you can not double haul effectively I believe you MUST overline by at least one line weight, and overlining two weights is probably better. However, there is no equipment, no matter how expensive or how well marketed, which can compensate for an inefficient casting stroke. Fortunately, it's not as hard as often claimed to become a competent fly caster, but it does require instruction and a fair amount of practice.

TIM:

I have absolutly no idea why you are confused-what part are you confused on? Yes, I NEVER use slow action rods and have not since I was 11 years old. I dont like them; never have and never will. Why? They lack power to deliver a long distance cast into a moderate wind. Fortunatley, I never got hung up with the marketing industry; I based my opnions on actual feel and fishing experience. And trust me, my friends and I had every major manufactuer's rep shmoozing us with their "latest and greatest" rod.

My quote:
>To answer your posted question; my preference is NEVER! Now, having said that, and in my years of fly casting instruction, it would be "personnal preference." It the same as your "preference."

You say you have to move the rod back and forth real fast to keep the line in the air. If you are moving the rod back and forth real fast you need to increase the distance of your rod stroke both on the forward cast and back cast.

It's true that fast action rods do not load (BEND) well with a short amount of line out; I think slower action rods work better in this area.

My conclusion:
1. IMHO, a slower action rod has virtually no advantages over a fast action rod and therefore would have not work better in virtually any flyfishing scenario.
2. A faster action rod casts further, roll cast better, and mends lines better. All which results in better flyline management on the water.
3. A faster action shortens the fish fighting time resulting in less mortality to the fish.
4. Fast action fly rods are just as easy to learn on than medium actions. I have seen this hundreds of times!

Comparing a slow action fly rod to a fast action fly rod is like comparing a bias-ply tire to a modern day radial...

Paul

If you have heavy enough line present, a fast action rod will bend well with a short amount of line out. I think sometimes folks mistake action with power, which are not at all the same thing. A fast action does not denote a stiff rod any more than a slow action denotes a soft rod.

Most of the comments regarding a fast action rod being harder to learn with stem from the fact that those attempting to teach with fast action rods rarely consider the ability of the student and the line needed for that student to load the rod at the distances involved.

Like Paul, I cannot think of a single reason why I would personally ever choose a slow action rod, or even what you might consider a medium action rod. I find that used wisely, a fast action rod will do everything that the other rods can, but the other rods cannot do what the fact action rods can. And remember, accuracy, presentation, etc., are functions of the person doing the casting, not the rod.

If you take the fast action rod you have now, the one you say you have to "move like crazy," and move up a couple line sizes and try it again, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. The bottom line is, you aren't comparing apples to apples. I'd wager that your slower action rods are simply less powerful than your faster action rods. What you're experiencing has far less to do with action and far more to do with the power of the rod involved.

..............

Well, I used to have my CCS data and the Umpqua fly line analyzer weights on file but lost everything when my computor crashed a few months ago. But I do remember my fly line weights pretty much matched my GLoomis 7' GLX 3wt and my Sage 8 3/4' SP 5wt. I just rigged up both and nothing has changed. I have to cast the 7' GLX alot quicker than the softer 8'9" Sage SP.

However, I don't try to keep the same amount of line out on the 3wt as I find I can't keep it in the air or make nice loops with it. Maybe this is part of my problem but I've always thought if I needed to cast further, I'd use my heavier outfit - maybe this is part of my problem. When it's cooler in the morning tomorrow, I'll set up my CCS rig and double check everything again for certain.

Note your statement "...softer 8'9" Sage SP." Soft is power, not action.

............

When I first started fly fishing I also liked a "softer" rod as it forgave my newbie technical errors. As I became a better caster I ended up switching to faster rods because I found that I was able to cast much tighter loops and be much more accurate casting into a wind. Most of my rods are fast actioned with one exception. I have a moderate/fast 2wt that loads better at the shorter distances I fish on little brookie streams. My favorite rods are Sage RPLXI's and the old RPL's.

Regards
Dave

Fishing is Life the rest is just Details

Again, "soft" is power, not action. Fast action rods can be soft just as slow action rods can be stiff. How well the rod loads is a function of the line weight against the rod's power, not its action.

...........

I love my 9' 4wt Winston B2x...it's very fast, yet very soft...though I find that once you get proficient at casting, you can adjust your stroke to fit any actioned rod...it really is personal preference...I've cast 113' with a Winston B2mx...but I don't fish that far out...so I fish with a 9' scott G2 5 wt if I need a 5 wt...what random strangers on the Internet say shouldn't affect your likes/dislikes at all...

My understanding of the terms is probably part of my problems as well. When I think of action, I'm thinking where the bend point is - soft would be closer to the butt, firm would be closer to the tip. When I think of power, I think utralight, light, medium or heavy - I need to spend more time in the glossary section. Thanks.

Wrong terms - slow would initially flex closer to the butt, fast would initially flex closer to the tip. Soft or firm are better expressions of power. The heaviest IGFA trolling rods would certainly be considered "firm" and yet they have typically have very slow actions, flexing well into the butt even initially.

But the crux of the matter is that you're putting the blame for the difficult loading in the wrong place. Fast action rods load just as easily and as well as slow action rods if the line weight is appropriate for the amount of power in the rod. The loading difficulties which you currently ascribe to the action, is actually a problem caused by having a line that is too light for the amount of power in the rod you're using. If you'll take that rod that you "have to move like crazy" and try a line that is one or even two sizes heavier than what you have now, you'll have a very pleasant experience and will be able to cast easily with little effort, feeling the rod loading just as well as your other rods do. Go ahead and upline by two sizes and do some test casting and see what a huge difference it makes.

...........

Simple, try to borrow at least two heaver lines and try them on this rod, even three. I bet you you will like it a lot better.

I had a 9' SCIV fly rod, but did not like it with a 5 wt line. A 6 wt loaded it and was nice to cast.

Bill - willierods.com

Leaving aside fly and crankbait rods.......when else would a slow action be right? For example why was it chosen for IFGA trolling rods?

FWIW I normally troll with a fast action live bait rod.

I hear some claim they prevent pullouts and broken line. I hear some say they shorten the effective lever arm and make it easily to land the fish.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

"Simple, try to borrow at least two heaver lines and try them on this rod, even three. I bet you you will like it a lot better. "

Simpler still and cheaper! Use a "Feel Fixer"® or simply add a bit of weight to the tip of your rod.

Your problem is frequency. Your PPF (Personal Prerfered Frequency) is lower than that produced by you present casting outfit ( Rod + Line). Therefore, reduce the frequency of your outfit.

To Tim's original question:
I have done some experimentation with short, light line fly rods for use on a local creek. It's quite grown over and crosses under a couple of low road and train bridges. In these tunnel-like situations, and when I need a tight loop to cast up under the bridges, I like a fast action. I also find the fast rod is better for quickly lifting the line off the surface to recast than the slow rod.

Jeff

It's not just the weight of the fly line but the speed at which it moves which loads the fly rod. The double haul adds significant speed to the fly line, and allows the angler to use a lighter line to load his rod. This increase in line speed, coupled with the smaller diameter (less wind resistance) of a lighter line, allows the angler to cast further and more efficiently.
I have coached many trout anglers who had trouble loading and casting a 9wt. rod with the rated line. Uplining was part of the solution. Learning to double haul was the other part.

PHIL:

Excellent point and very well said sir. Hauling increases the load (bend) considerably while not having to increase the stroke speed.

Paul

It is not the weight of the line that loads a fly rod it is the inertia of the line and rod. Newton's first law of motion, "A body at rest tends to stay at rest, a body in motion tends to stay in motion". In other words, inertia is the property of any mass (fly line, fly rod) that results in the mass resisting any change in position or change in velocity.

If you add mass to the rod as Bill Hanneman is suggesting you should understand that you will be increasing the rod's inertia which will reduce how far the rod/line will cast, how much effort is required to cast a given distance and you will also reduce the rod's sensitivity. Adding mass has the same affect as lowering the modulus of elasticity so in affect you will turn that high modulus rod that you paid big money for into an inexpensive standard modulus rod.

Phil,
In principle you are correct. But if I were going to be really picky I would say that it is not really the speed of the line but the velocity of the line. Speed is a scalar quanity while velocity is a vector quanity. Sorry, you are basically right and my point is a very small one.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2010 09:30PM by Emory Harry.