Welcome to FlyTyingForum.com
FlyTyingForum.com is the largest fly tying community in the world and we hope you take a moment to register for a free account and join this amazingly friendly and helpful group of anglers. FTF has over 12,000 registered members that have made over 300,000 posts and have uploaded over 6,000 patterns to our exclusive fly pattern database!
If you are an experienced fly tier or just starting out FTF is the perfect place to call home. Click Here To Register for a Free Account
|Fly Pattern Database / Browse by Topics / Browse by Material / Fly Tying Bench Database / Fly Fishing & Tying Videos / FTFCurrent(NEW!)|
|Featured Products: Fly Tying Hooks / Fly Tying Scissors / Waterproof Fly Boxes|
Antennae / horns on caddis pupa
Posted 15 November 2017 - 03:00 PM
Posted 15 November 2017 - 03:06 PM
i'm a believer that they are not needed for the fish taking into consideration on how many hundreds of fly patterns that omit them and still catch.
Posted 15 November 2017 - 03:10 PM
Based Scottish Highlands. UK
MUSTAD The wise anglers choice.
Posted 15 November 2017 - 07:31 PM
I don't think they're necessary. At least individual ones. A soft hackle pupae would be enough to create the illusion of antenna and legs.
Posted 15 November 2017 - 10:59 PM
If you have the extra time (20 seconds?) to tie them in, it can't hurt. As deaddrifter stated, they look cool. I tie them on my flies because, from a business standpoint, it's just as important for my flies to catch the angler as it is for my flies to catch fish.
Posted 16 November 2017 - 07:21 AM
Anything that moves with little or no "jiggling" from the angler can help the fish decide to hit. Will the lack of antennae prevent the fish from hitting, probably not.
But if a fish it looking at two similar shapes in the water, and one of them shows a little movement, I'm thinking that's the one it will attack.
When you think of a big fish hitting a 20 or smaller fly ... you can't then argue that small details on a larger fly are irrelevant.
The trigger that gets you one more fish? Probably.
Barbed hooks rule!
My definition of work: Doing something in which effort exceeds gain.
Ex-Marine ... quondam fidelis
Posted 16 November 2017 - 10:40 AM
I use hair for my antennas, feathers, especially pheasant, are just too brittle and don't hold up.
Posted 16 November 2017 - 03:19 PM
Needed? I would argue no. Look cool? Absolutely.
Deaddrifter hit it on the head. Only dry pattern I use them on is the Goddard, and considering how prominent they are on the Mother's Day caddis, I like them for that hatch too. Definitely more prominent on some caddis than others.
Must confess I also use them on nymphs. Are they an effective trigger? Dunno. Do the flies work with them? Yes. Hardly a trial to add them. YMMV.
Posted 16 November 2017 - 04:16 PM
Posted 17 November 2017 - 08:42 AM
Here are caddis pupa from a trout I throat pumped.
Here are caddis pupa from Rick Hafele:
The main feature are the wings and legs folded along side the body and not the antennae. Although antennae are also folded back, imitating the wings and legs, also imitates the antennae as seen in these patterns.
"Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought"..........Szent-Gyorgy
Posted 19 November 2017 - 04:27 PM
Posted 19 November 2017 - 11:23 PM
I put the antenna / horns on my caddis pupa patterns because I think it makes them look more realistic (to me at least) and when fishing that pattern it instills an additional confidence in me. Do the flies with them result in more takes, I can't really say because I've never tied them without them. They just seem to work well with them and it doesn't take but a minute to add them. The next bunch I tie I believe I'll try a synthetic (paint brush bristle comes to mind) and see if it's more durable than the last batch I tied with moose mane.