Dry Flies and Wings

[TroutRuleBassDrool 0]

Thanks for the feedback. I think i'll try to keep wings on for larger patterns (size 14 +) but i'll omit them on the smaller patterns.

[mgj 0]

while the adams isn't a hatch matcher per se, it sure does pass as areasonable imitation of a lotta mayfly species. tie the wings in spent or delta style and you've gotta caddis imitation, which is what it was meant to imitate by its originator at its inception.

 

it's an incredibly versatile fly. I tie most of mine w/ cdl tails, cree quill body and hackle and grizzly hen wings. it's a beautiful fly.

 

mgj

 

 

[Joe Hard 0]

Lot of stuf here, the adamas is not meant to be a caddis is is meant to be another type of fly alltogether. This fly hoveres about 8 to 14 feet of the water usually in groups and are well seen by the fish.

Dividing wings and wraping thread at the base of each wing makes the fly stronger, and provides a good balance. It also makes a firmer thorax to wrap hackle. Make sure you divide the wings and wrap the base of each stem. I usually divide them again after that then a dab of cement at the base.

(I have found that for smaller flies snowshoe rabbits foot, just in front of where the toes start, is a great wing material. Tie in the clump divide it, give each clump a slight twist and wrap the basses. Similar to calf tail but binds in stronger and the majority of hairs are even. tricky at first).

If the wings are not divided they will go where ever they want unless they are tied in as a post. and this can cause the wings to turn and roll on the shank. They will twirl your leader.

If you find that something is driving you nuts like tying to many of one type of fly. Put another type of hook in the vise and expermint a new fly. When you return to the pattern things will go alot smoother.

[epskinner 0]

If the wings are so important, then why do parachute-style flies work so well? Also, what about using substitute materials for wings that are easier to work with? I've started using turkey flats for wings on my Wullf-style dries and the fish don't seem to mind.

[Thibodeau 0]

With no wings there just midges. And parachute post flies do catch more fish because there more low profile. The body rides in the surface film giving it a better profile to the fish. thats from experience.

[CrustySpinnr 0]

It's an intersting topic and one that I'm sure will get alot of feedback. I however don't have the answer. I am farily new to fly fishing and tying(typing too apparently). I would think that the wings are there for the same reason that realistic fly tying is so popular now. To see if we can match the original as close to perfect as possible. Also I wonder is the trout when feeding can see the wings or not? Other than the occasional Kamikaze trout who launches himself out of the water and comes down on the fly from above screaming Banzai!!!!! I am absolutely sure I have been of no help whatsoever so far but would it hurt to tie several without wings and try them during a hatch perhaps? Maybe everyone could test this out and come back with an answer later in the year?

[moskito_01 0]

Tying wings doesn`t get me frustrated at all. It gets me motivated. Isn`t the urge to get it "just right" part of what flytying is all about?

 

If you`re just out there to catch fish, maybe wings don`t matter. But if you`re up for tying that "perfect" fly I think you should stick with what`s supposed to be there and wings apparently are.

 

To me, tying "correct" flies is fun. Sure, I also tie flies to catch fish and sometimes a nasty looking torn up fly with one wing and half ass hackle catches better than a new shiny and sharp looking one.

 

I just think there`s two approaches to tying. One is where you tie to make flies that catch fish (where wings might or might not matter) and the other is just for the sake of tying a perfect fly (whatever that is).

 

Andy

 

[TroutRuleBassDrool 0]

QUOTE (OSD @ Feb 21 2005, 03:56 PM)

You will fine the grizzly tips are a bit flimsy but if you have a cape use the pin feathers at the base of the cape the quill is sturdier OSD.

I missed this post the first time around, but i just tried it out, and it makes tying wings so much easier. I'm even able to tie them on the really small sizes. Thanks!

 

EDIT: But back on topic, i would think a lack of wings would seem more appealing to trout (or any fish) because it makes the fly more vulnerable to prey. I heard (in a book) that fish are more likely to take the flies that are stuck in the water film because they are easier to eat, so this might work in the case of wings.

[Scarface Z 0]

QUOTE (CrustySpinnr @ Feb 22 2005, 09:45 PM)

Maybe everyone could test this out and come back with an answer later in the year?

If you want more information on things like this I suggest you read A Modern Dry Fly Code by Vincent Marinaro. It's one of my favorite books, and he takes a very scientific, interesting approach to what a trout sees and how to imitate that. Plus, it's a classic and a fun read.

 

Has anyone ever tried this style of wing?

 

Origami wing

 

I thought it looked interesting, fragile and impractical perhaps, but interesting. I never got around to trying it.

[Alex C. 0]

That origami wing is awesome, I will definately be trying that out

[Guest]

Whether it's calftail, split wings, parachute posts or what have you, a wing always adds that measure of profile to the imitation that a fish becomes accustomed to seeing when feeding on that insect.

 

Jens- Great Tutorial! Thanks.

[Troutman 0]

Here is my .02 cents on wings.

First off let me say I tie them on most my patterns that call for them, even on the small ones (we're talking 28s). I feel the most important fact is what hatch will you be fishing. If you think you'll be getting into some sort of mayfly hatch then wings will play a bigger role then if you're going to be getting into caddis. Are you going to be fishing creeks or still water? On still water I think the fish have more time to examine the fly as aposed to creaks where the fish has to make up his mind pretty fast before a meal floats by. One of my biggest producers during a caddis hatch on one of my favorite rivers is a fly tied with a black boddy and brown hackle. On the water the hackle looks like the fluttering wings of a caddis thus no wings needed.

 

Parachutes are a whole different catagory. The post acts as a wing (IMO), I also feel that they pass as emergers a lot of the time. You're also crating a different silhouette then you are with a catskill style fly.

 

Well that's my thoughts and observations.

 

Jim (notclaimingtobeapro)

[kpawlak 0]

I've always approached tying dry flies with the silhouette being the most important aspect, whether it is parachutes or Catskill style. Take an adams you tied with wings and one without; go outside and hold them up to the sky and look at each one from beneath, exactly like a trout would see it. You will notice a considerable difference between the two. On the fly with wings, they will stand out as a prominent feature clearly visable through the hackle. On the one without, it will seem almost as if the fly has half a body; unless, your hackle is too thick to see through, which would give it a very odd silhouette anyway. The larger the fly the more you will notice this.

 

I don't know if there is good science or anything to back this idea up, but thats what i have confidence in. However you tie'em, you won't catch many fish if you don't have confidence that the fly will work.

 

I look at all the features of the fly too. Tails, body size or length, ect....

 

-Kurt

[Scarface Z 0]

I just remembered somthing from the book I recommended. The refraction of light, when a trout looks at an insect, actually makes the insect look more tilted forward the farther away from the trout it is. It's hard to explain without the pictures in the book, but it means the trout gets an even better look at the wings.

 

Again, if you haven't read it, read "A Modern Dry Fly Code". It's my favorite book.

[mgj 0]

as is the ring of the rise.

 

and the trout and the fly by goddard and davis.

 

to that I'll add what the trout said, by datus proper.

 

I just can't see eliminating the wing for convenience sake, especially since it's a prominent feature w/in the trout's vision cone.