dubbing types and similarities

[smellycat 0]

I know a lot about dubbing but, I need help finding similariies between types of dubbing. How different is using say beaver then using rabbit. What are good substitutes, synthetic and natural for these dubbings. Im really interested what beaver dubbing is like and what types of flies it would be used for.

[riffleriversteelheadslayer 0]

beaver dubbing is usually used for dry flies due to its natural waterproof oils that the beaver has

[Johny Utah 0]

Beaver dubbing is similar to superfine as you can dub it very tight. As far as subs beaver as synthetics, no synthetic is a sub for natural fiber. Other dub similar to beaver would be otter, and various other water mammals. Wapsi beaver dub is great stuff.

[rockworm 0]

Beaver is also used in nymphs such as Poly Rosborough's Muskrat nymph but, as RRSHS says, it works very well for dries when treated with a floatant. Beaver is much like muskrat; the underfur is very soft and the fibers are extremely fine. The greatest difference between beaver and rabbit, apart from their natural colour, is in length- rabbit hair is considerably longer than muskrat. If you are thinking about buying prepackaged, dyed muskrat you might find a fair amount of guard hairs in the mix. This is great if you are tying fuzzy nymphs, but not so great for delicate dries. The guard hair is quite spiky; more so than the muskrat. (Both can be used for tailing on small flies.)

[flytire 0]

water based animals = good for dry fly dubbing (above surface) repels

 

land based animals = good for wet fly dubbing (below surface) absorbs

 

i think

[rockworm 0]

water based animals = good for dry fly dubbing (above surface) repels

 

land based animals = good for wet fly dubbing (below surface) absorbs

 

i think

 

So my Hareline rabbit dubbings are unsuitable for dry flies?

[riffleriversteelheadslayer 0]

 

 

So my Hareline rabbit dubbings are unsuitable for dry flies?

yes rockworm so send it to me so I can properly use I mean dispose of it

[flytire 0]

i dont know. you tell me. does your hareline dubbing suck up water or repel it? without floatant!

 

how many dry flies incorporate rabbir fur?

 

thats why i said "i think"

[rockworm 0]

i dont know. you tell me. does your hareline dubbing suck up water or repel it? without floatant!

 

how many dry flies incorporate rabbir fur?

 

thats why i said "i think"

 

With the exception of CdC flies, I treat all my dry flies with a floatant the night before I use them. In my experience most untreated dry flies begin to take on water after half-a-dozen casts (or after one fish!) To be honest, I have never seen a great deal of difference between the floating ability of aquatic mammal furs and terrestrial mammal furs. This may be due to the fact that, for years, my muskrat, beaver, otter and mink came from "recycled" coats. But garment-tanned skins appear to give similar results. Perhaps the oils you speak of are only found in "natural" skins?

[narcodog 0]

I use beaver and Aust possum for many flies whether wet or dry. I also mix the two with other natural materials to get the density I'm looking for. I use very little synthetic materials.

[creekhound 0]

Rockworm, I'm thinking you need natural skins for your applications. I think the the natural oils are removed in the tanning process for fur coats and such.

[deeky 0]

But does the natural oil really play a role? Or is it removed in any processing? This is much like the discussion on CDC and its natural oil. Many attibute its floatability to its natural oils, which are totally removed in teh cleaning/dying process. It is actually the structure of it that keeps it floating. Is it the same for fur? If that is the case, natural or garment-tanned shouldn't make any difference.

 

Deeky

[FrequentTyer 0]

But does the natural oil really play a role? Or is it removed in any processing? This is much like the discussion on CDC and its natural oil. Many attibute its floatability to its natural oils, which are totally removed in teh cleaning/dying process. It is actually the structure of it that keeps it floating. Is it the same for fur? If that is the case, natural or garment-tanned shouldn't make any difference.

 

Deeky

 

Deeky is correct. The "natural" furs and feathers purchased for tying have been cleaned and processed and any natural oils have been largely removed. This is obvious for any material that had been dyed as the oil would interfere with the dying process, but even the natural colors have been washed. I use rabbit on dry flys all the time, and I even use hare's mask in the thorax to add some "bugginess" I rarely use floatant.

If you think about it something will float on water for one of 2 reasons. Either it is less dense than the water (e.g. a piece of craft foam) or it has a shape that prevents it from sinking in the surface film (e.g a natural mayfly which is denser than water). The concern over the type of dubbing on a dry fly is based on the thought that the dubbing will soak up water and increase the density of the fly. This is true of any dubbing. Even synthetics will wick some water between fibers by capillary action. So it is much more important to pay attention to good dubbing technique and proper fly construction than choice of dubbing properties. Dry flys with properly constructed tails and hackle that are dubbed tightly using a minimum amount of dubbing will float no matter what fur you choose.

[Voodoo 0]

i would think your right Deeky, most of the oils would HAVE to be removed in order for the pigments to take hold. Obviously if it is natural it might have the oils but i assume they run it through a bath of some kind before selling it...we have lots of muskrats on the Bow i will try to shave one fresh for you....hope i dont get bit lol.

[FrequentTyer 0]

Beaver is also used in nymphs such as Poly Rosborough's Muskrat nymph

I feel silly asking this, but didn't Rosborough use muskrat to tie the muskrat nymph? I'm sure you could tie something comparable with beaver, but I wouldn't call it a Rosborough Muskrat nymph.