Jump to content
Fly Tying

SilverCreek

core_group_3
  • Content Count

    2,834
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SilverCreek

  1. Store them in zip lock bags in a cabinet so they are out of the light.
  2. I hope Jim Smith is still monitoring the forum. He had a method of making a tool to cut zonker strips from double edged razor blades sandwiched between business card magnets. The fur pelt was stretched and held using a needle point ring.
  3. Take a look at the reviews of "Designing Trout Flies" by purchasers on Amazon. All are 5/5 stars https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews//0962839213/ref=acr_dpx_hist_5?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=five_star&reviewerType=all_reviews#reviews-filter-bar You might be able to pick up a copy here: https://www.amazon.com/Designing-Trout-Flies-Gary-Borger/dp/0962839213
  4. Unless you are going to tie a Turle knot to skate a fly, there are no differences in the hook eye position as to effectiveness in hooking the fish. You can still find articles that say up eye hooks should be used on small flies because the down eye narrows the hook eye but this is false. As to the direction of pull on the fly being affected by the hook eye direction, that is also false. The hook eye will not effect how the fly move in response to the direction the line is pulling. I'd like to discuss hooking angle and penetration angle because many fly fishers think they both depend on the position of the hook eye. Hooking angle is the angle of pull on the hook by the leader at the hook set. The common perception is that an upward angle is best to drive the point into the fish because it rotates the hook point into the fish. If this is true then an up eye hook should give the best hooking angle. However, the angle of pull is not determined by the angle of the eye. It is determined by the relationship of the rod tip to the hook eye. For example, one would think that a down eye hook would cause the angle of pull to be "down" on the hook, but the angle of pull is actually up if the rod tip is above the level of the hook when the hook set occurs. See pg. 178 of Designing Trout Flies by Gary A. Borger. So eye angle has no effect on hooking angle. Since almost all hook sets occur when the rod tip is above the fly, all hooking angles are in an upward direction. Penetration angle is the angle of the hook point as it penetrates the flesh of the fish. A steeper angle should drive the hook deeper. When you place an up eye hook against a flat surface, it will have a steeper angle with respect to the surface than the down or straight eye hook because the eye end of the hook rests on the surface a bit closer to the hook point. But I believe this is a false analogy. I think any effect of the hook eye on penetration angle is very, very minor. The reason is that the penetration angle does not stay constant as the hook on flat surface illustration would suggest. Once the hook point penetrates flesh, the hook pulls on the flesh deforming it and simultaneously the hook rotates in line with the angle of pull of the line. The eye of the hook no longer rests nicely at a 90 degree angle to the flesh as it does on the flat surface. The angle of pull on the shank and the hook point are pretty much equal when the hook eye does not rest on a flat surface. I believe that this angle of pull drives the hook point further into the flesh at pretty much the same penetration angle which is determined by the angle of pull on the eye rather than the angle of the eye on the hook.
  5. I will try to answer your questions but I first have four observations about your fly. The first is that it is a very good first fly. Having said that, there can be improvements. So my second observation is that the end of that marabou tail does not look even or lined up. I don't know if that is real or just the angle of the photo. Try to get the ends of the fibers lined up before you remove them from the plume. My third observation is that the hackle is large for the fly. It extends too far around the body of the fly. It should measure about 2 hook gaps in length at the front of the fly. My fourth observations is that the hook is too short. I understand that you probably do not have the right hook but the hook sets up the "proportion" for the fly. Consider tying a fly like dressing a mannequin with the hook being the mannequin. Now on to your questions: Throw the scraps away. Life is too short to keep scraps you will never use so keep a clean tying desk and toss it. The exception is if there is left over material you will sue on the very next fly, then use it. "how do you keep the material on the shank so straight" Use the pinch wrap method below. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJkzYY9L3QE Here's the deal. Most of my criticism have to do with the fly's "proportion". Proportion is the right amount of material placed in the correct location. http://www.derekspace.net/prop.htm Edit - I noticed that Flytire posted a set of instructions for a Wollybugger on this thread:
  6. Yes but not in detail. There are 3 major things to remember about trout vision. compared to our vision, 1. They see ONLY 1/14 the detail we see because we have 14 times the density of cones and rods in the macula of our retina. Trout do not have a macula for fine vision. This lack of fine detail is the major reason our flies can fool trout. So to see more detail, they have to get CLOSER to the object. That is why we get "late refusals" to our dry flies. They have to get close to notice details including microdrag. 2. They have a round lens that CAN NOT change shape like the human lenses. So everything underwater is in focus for trout from 2' to infinity. To focus on objects closer than 2 feet, the are able to bring their round lens closer to their retina so they can focus on close objects. 3. They see the colors we see with minimal differences. The 3 types of color receptors in their retina have sensitivity peaks very close to our 3 types of color receptors. This previous thread has a discussion on trout vision.
  7. With all due respect, yes they do. If fish had no lateral lines to feel vibrations, wounded minnow patterns would not attract them. The more we know about our prey, the better we will be at catching them. That is why we use imitative patterns during a hatch. If fish did NOT care, all we would need is one pattern in one size. The fact that you carry multiple patterns in several sizes is proof that you realize that fish "care". QED.
  8. I have not looked into other fish.
  9. The way trout vision is measure is by examining the retina of trout. Form leads to function. They have rods and cones just like humans have rods and cones. Adult trout have 3 types of cones and they are centered on about the same color frequencies as human cones. If they were not, we could not actually match the color of the food they see. In other words, if we matched the color of a blue winged olive fly with dubbing, the only way we could match the color the trout see is if the cones of the trout were centered at the same color frequencies that humans see. Human blue cone is centered on 437 λ, trout is 434 λ. Human red cone is centered on 533 λ, trout is 531 λ. Human green cone is centered on 564 λ and trout is 576 λ. There is excellent correspondence between the color hues that a human sees and a trout trout sees. Similarly, the density of the cones in the retina determine the detail that trout can see. Humans have a macula for detail vision that has 14 times the density of cones that trout have so we see 14 times the detail that trout see. That is why we can fool them with patterns that "simulate" the natural and are not exact duplicates of the natural. Even when trout are extremely selective, they can be fooled because the see detail poorly BUT the lack of detail does NOT affect the ability to see motion. Cone and rod density does not affect the ability to see whether there is motion or not. So they see drag very well and when they are closer to the fly that we are, they can see "micro" drag that we cannot see from farther off. So trout essentially "see" the shape and colors that we see but we see it in greater detail.
  10. I think you could use them to tail nymphs in the place of pheasant tail fibers. You could also use them for wing cases on nymphs. If the nymph were a small enough size like an i6, you could tied the entire nymph just like a PT nymph.
  11. There ya go, denduke. Redietz got you the info. I guess in this case you get what you pay for or more correctly, you get LESS than you pay for.
  12. You should post the question on the link below for fly fishers in the United Kingdom. https://www.flyfishing.co.uk/
  13. I think it has been quite a while since you could buy the McMurray ant bodies. Then you have to paint them. Foam is so much easier and with a cork borer, I can punch out 10 bodies shapes in a minute out of red or black foam. I still have to thread them on mono though and glue them in place with. I can make cinnamon, red, black or combination colored bodies as well. Another way of making these types of bodies is with dimensional fabric paint.
  14. Sunken terrestrials are one of my secret methods. Rarely do fly fishers fish sunken terrestrials so when a fish sees a sunken (drowned) hopper, ant or jassid; they are likely to take it. The fly below is made with my UV resin over glass beads. As you can see, I like my UV resin ant flies, You can also make some caddis pupa the same way, Here's food for thought: "Terrestrial insects are not designed to float," said George Kesel, who owned Missoula's Four Rivers Fly Shop until it closed this spring. "When they hit the water, unless the surface film catches them, they go straight through. Whereas caddis and stoneflies and mayflies, they've all evolved to float...... And Kesel has another unique - at least to me - suggestion. He likes to fish grasshoppers, as well as ants and beetles, beneath the surface, like a nymph…. Cox has tried the same tactic. "I've done that in the swirlies quite a bit, in the foam eddies, and it's pretty effective," Cox said. "When I move into food collection areas, it can be very good." There are hopper patterns that are tied specifically to be fished beneath the surface, like the conehead drowned hopper. Kesel ties his own, but has suggestions for those who don't. "Buy a grasshopper without a post, without any strike indicators to it," he said. "Make sure it's a low floater, coat it with something to make it sink and then fish it just like you would a nymph." http://www.ravallirepublic.com/lifestyles/recreation/article_65f0d374-ca14-11e0-9650-001cc4c03286.html "In truth, trout probably eat more sunken crickets and grasshoppers than they do floating ones..... Over the years I have had similar experiences on other rivers and have many times converted the fishless floating grasshopper and cricket patterns to deadly sinking patterns by letting them get soggy." See Pg 3 of the article below. http://www.fieldandstream.com/articles/fishing/trout-fishing/where-fish-trout/2012/07/use-grasshopper-and-cricket-patterns-catch-y?page=0%2C2 Gary Lafontaine wrote about sunken hoppers in The Dry Fly New Angles pg 289. "That night I devised a submerged hopper pattern. We took fish all morning next day."
  15. Ed Sutryn's McMurray ant did use balsa wood which was then painted. But foam cylinders threaded and then glued on mono are much faster and just as effective. Most of you probably have never heard of a cork borer. They are used in chemical labs to make holes in cork or rubber stoppers for reagent flasks so that glass tubing can transfer volatile gases from one reagent container to another. My premed major was Chemistry. But they can also be used to bore out cylinders from foam to form cylinders for ant bodies. You can get different types of foam from mats to even the soles of cheap foam sandals at a dollar store. That is how I use my cork borer set. I got mine on Ebay from India for about $12 many years ago. The top item in the photo below is a cork borer sharpener. If you buy a set which includes larger bores, you can cut out cylinders of foam for tying foam bodied bass or panfish plugs. Or you can use the larger borers on thin sheets of foam to tie Harrison Steve's Disco Beetle pattern. You can tie them using loco foam for an attractor beetle pattern. https://globalflyfisher.com/patterns-tie-better/the-locofoam-story
  16. Nope. I think it is the fact that the Royal Wulff is heavily hackled and uses a bunch of hair for the tail. Look at the fly below. The clump of tail hair at the back of the fly keeps the hook from sinking. Ir you think the white wing is keeping it floating, explain it to me in scientific terms. You may be misinterpreting the palmered hackle as wing but they are not. The wings are the white calf fur which can be from from the body or tail. The fly below uses the body fibers. Now as to why the EHC catches fish, it does so for two reason. The first is that is is a good fly for riffles and faster water because of the palmered body hackle. The second reason is that is the caddis pattern that is most often fished by a huge margin over other adult caddis patterns. So naturally it is the caddis pattern that catches the most fish.
  17. If you use hollow elk or deer hair for a "typical elk hair caddis" then you are tying it wrong. In fact, Gary Lafontaine PURPOSELY did NOT include the EHC in his book "Caddisflies" because every commercial EHC and pattern guide used hollow elk or deer hair. Did you know that Al Troth, the inventor of the EHC specified that NON hollow (solid) hair should be used for the wing on an elk hair caddis? Caddis flies have FLAT wings folded over their bodies. Al Troth knew that and therefore he specified solid hair for his EHC so it would not flair. I have written about this before. See: http://www.flytyingforum.com/index.php?showtopic=69829&st=0&p=522278 Here is an actual EHC tied by Al Troth. Note how the elk hair wing forms a tent shape around the fly body rather than flair up over the body. Compare the original EHC to those in instructional videos Rather than Elk or Deer hair, you can use woodchuck hair which is solid in the place of hollow elk. I will form a flatter wing as in the woodchuck caddis below. Eliminate the palmered hackle and you have a more realistic caddis pattern. Compare the wing profile on the fly below to the EHC above and you decide which profile look more like a real caddis.
  18. I would then ask what is the purpose of the palmered hackle? It makes the ant pattern look less like a real ant so the purpose of the hackle is to float the fly. Of course if the fly body is sunken, the wing can help prevent it from sinking completely for a while until it gets submerged as well. Obviously, the primary purpose of the wing is NOT to "add buoyancy to the fly." That is the point I was making. BTW, for ant patterns, the best floating pattern I have found is the McMurray Ant. https://www.flydreamers.com/en/fly-tying/mc-murray-ant-vl233 The Transpar Ant is also a good pattern
  19. On the contrary. This is a common misconception. The wing CANNOT help the ant float because it is ABOVE the body of the fly. Therefore it adds mass to the fly and actually helps it sink. It reminds me of the time I read a fly tying article in which the fly tier said he used foam for parachute posts because it helped the fly float! Wrong. Parachute posts are above the water level and above the body of the fly and therefore cannot help the fly float. Think about it logically and look at the fly! It is the palmered hackle that distributes the weight of the fly on the water surface. It is the hackle that helps the fly float.
  20. Here's a simple ant pattern tied with not melt glue and a cigarette lighter.
  21. I suggest a modified one of these, LOL. I searched but was not able to find any replacement bags for the size of net you need. You could go to Frabill and see if they will sell you just the net bag. https://www.frabill.com/power-stow-knotless-net
  22. I would try a size 12 and 14 for panfish and size 8 for the bass tied on a 3XL hook.
×
×
  • Create New...