Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/skagdvd/public_html/forum/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3

Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/skagdvd/public_html/forum/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Print Page - MOW tips... gimmick?!

Skagit Master => Skagit Master => Topic started by: riveraddict on July 22, 2010, 01:23:57 PM

Title: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on July 22, 2010, 01:23:57 PM
Apparently one blogger thinks so (Apocalypse Steelheader). Along with some of "his" viewers.
If you would like to see an example of some narrow-minded thinking and paranoia that the industry-is-out-to-get-ya, check it out! 

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: HOOKED on July 23, 2010, 07:38:15 PM
R A,
 I have yet to get any MOW's,but I will say they are on my short list.I have read all I can on them and it just makes sense.Quick change out ,same length,different depths.I am sure it is not for everybody,but for me I believe it is an other tool in my pack.Progression!Dont be afraid of it .Perhaps AS is still using a cane pole. :)


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: camosled on July 26, 2010, 01:41:38 PM
Great idea, the MOW tips.  We've been using modified tips like this for quite a while...If a caster can't adjust the power of their casting stroke to reduce the ripping of the anchor because there's less stick, then they might have bigger issues to take care of before ripping on MOW. 


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: bacon_to_fry on July 27, 2010, 01:08:33 PM
ed, a few of us down here in p'oregon are mighty pissed you guys let the tiny tip secret outta the bag! let's all just hope the doubters stick to gang fishing the casterbator runs and leave the schnittles to those who'd actually employ a 7, 5 or—gasp– the 3 foot tip!

hope all's well.

and nice deal you got here, Cap'n.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: seldom seen smith on July 27, 2010, 04:14:14 PM
some people judge books by there covers , others actually open them and read.
i opened a dvd last winter and my life changed

you guys are doing wicked stuff! keep it up

apocalypse steelheader just wishes he was in a movie , and anywhere near as cool as Ed.

which supermodel are you dating?

bunch o hens on that site
i'd say just go fishin!!!

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: SnapT on August 12, 2010, 02:51:48 AM
A full set of T-11's should be in the mail as i write this, couldn't be more excited, unless it was a hardy perfect on the way...


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 13, 2010, 05:03:00 PM
MOW tips, in depth.
First off, they are not the "end all, be all" in sinktip design. They ARE an additional tool to expand the horizons of angling with a fly beyond that of the "typical" 15' Type 1, 2, 3, etc., sinktip. To compare, the Type sinktips are generally fished with a standard wetfly swing, whereby the cast is made at around a 45 degree angle downstream, followed by an upstream mend to slow the progression of travel across stream. For this type of presentation, especially in the faster swingable currents, the Type tips excel. However, as one starts to make angles of presentation higher than a 45 degree line, that 15' length of Type sinktips displays enough exposure to underwater current as to cause a significant lateral bowing of that tip. For those of us that believe that "the most important aspect of steelhead flyfishing is presentation, presentation, presentation", followed by "presentation is a product of line/fly control", an 18' bow (sinktip plus 3' leader) in the line equates to loss of control (how many times when pulling on the line to free a snagged fly have you realized that the fly is snagged up farther upstream than you had thought?!?!). How to solve this circumstance? Replace the 15' Type tips with shorter sinktips - 2 1/2', 5', 7 1/2', 10' - of the fastest sink-rated material available, thus reducing cross sectional exposure of sunken line to underwater currents. This solution worked out very well in the upgrading-fly/line-control department, but it also introduced a problem in another department... casting consistency between the varying lengthed tips with waterborne casts sucked.The differences in the lengths of tips created varying amounts of anchor. No biggie, just splice in a section of floating line to equalize their lengths.    

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: Whitey on August 13, 2010, 07:07:08 PM
Well put my man!!! Well put!

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 14, 2010, 11:11:12 AM
Now then, keep in mind that equalizing the lengths of MOW tips with floating "transition" sections does not entirely eliminate a variance in anchor "stick" between the different MOW tips. What it does is minimize the difference down to a degree that is easily and viably adjusted for during on-stream angling situations, usually within just a few casts.

The same circumstance also goes for the concept of using shorter, very fast sinking tips to overcome lateral bowing of the tip - lateral bowing is not truly eliminated, but rather minimized down to a manageable level. The longest length of sinktip that displays "manageable bowing" for fishing a fly at swing angles greater than 45 degrees is around 10'. Longer than 10' and the "disconnect" of the angler to the fly is substantial enough to seriously affect angling success. This is easily "proven" for anyone out there that needs such proof - just go out on-stream with varying lengths of sinktip and and swing them as if actually fishing, but in areas where you know that you're going to snag up. Take note when snagging up as to how quickly (or slowly) the line actually straightens to the fly when "setting the hook" on the snag and how far upstream the fly snags from where you "thought" the fly was actually swinging. It is at around 10' of sunk line that lag time and line bow becomes significant enough to seriously affect angling capabilities.        

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 14, 2010, 11:41:38 AM
If 10' is around the longest length of sunk line that offers up controllable lateral bow for "high angle" swinging, then why does the RIO MOW kit include a 12' full-sink tip? Well, as in most aspects of fishing, there are "grey" areas, and in steelhead fly-swinging that would be those occasions where broad, deep runs of 5', 6', 7' depths, containing very EVEN and SOFT currents are encountered. This circumstance, because of the even and soft nature of the currents, will in fact allow the use of a longer-than-normal tip to be effectively fished with a high-angle swing. Thus, the inclusion of this tip into the MOW kit. This 12' tip can also be used in faster currents with a standard 45-down, wet-fly swing.

Hopefully, at this point of this post, a couple of implications about MOW tips have become apparent:
1 - MOW tips are meant to effectively fish a much higher angle of swing than standard Type tips.
2 - MOW tips are a shallow to medium depth water coverage angling tool.

And, not implied to this point, but of great importance:
3 - MOW tips are most effective when used with flies that sink as fast as or faster than the sinktip itself. Note that this DOES NOT dictate that flies MUST be weighted... there are plenty of fly designs that achieve high sink-rate through material use.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 14, 2010, 12:45:49 PM
Now, it's time to get a bit technical. So, this reference needs to be established... 0 degrees refers to a line drawn straight downstream or down the river, and 90 degrees is straight across the river or perpendicular to the current. Low angles are those of 45 degrees or less, while high angles are those greater than 45 degrees. So, continueing on, the objective of the MOW tip concept - combining shorter lengths of very fast sinking line with fast sinking flies - is to achieve desired depth of the fly as IMMEDIATELY as possible, while being able to maintain precise contact and control with the fly. Bear in mind that the MOW tip/fly combo will sink quickly in a zero line tension status, will maintain its depth under a light line tension status, and because of its short length (relative to standard sinktips) will rise in the water column as tension on the line increases. So, in a "standard MOW presentation, the cast is made straight across the river at around 90 degrees and allowed to drift a few feet under zero tension so that the fly sinks immediately to fishing depth. When fishing depth is achieved, light tension is applied to establish contact with the fly and guide the fly. This light tension status is maintained for as long as the angler is able through rod and line manipulation. At some point of the swing, usually just prior to the fly reaching about a 45 degree angle downstream, rod and line manipulation is "used up" and the line comes under increasing tension from the current causing the fly to rise in the water column and to speed up in its rate of swing.    

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: SnapT on August 14, 2010, 05:23:43 PM
Wow, Ed, this is fantastic, keep it coming!

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: camosled on August 14, 2010, 08:22:19 PM
We just finished shooting on the N. Umpqua with Scott Howell and talked at great length about the application of these tips...We filmed underwater sequences of the fly dropping through the water column without tension vs with tension and it was obvious the applications these tips have in pockets and runs with a lot of structure, as long as you keep the tension light or none on the fly.    Cool stuff.


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: seldom seen smith on August 14, 2010, 09:13:01 PM
ya that's wicked
thanks for the enlightenment RA
very curious though as to when the 2.5'er's  are go'in on??? would this not be h2o you could cover with a heavy fly and tapered leader??

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 15, 2010, 10:23:31 AM
If said presentation has been made in a "classic" type of steelhead run - fastest current in the middle and gradually decreasing in speed/strength towards shore, deepest in the middle and sloping up shallower towards shore -  with the fly landing on the near edge of the fastest current (not IN), then the swing "profile" of the MOW approach is for the fly to fish deepest/slowest during the first portion of the swing and shallowest/fastest during the latter part of the swing. This is substantially different from the swing profile of a standard Type-tip/standard wetfy-swing approach, which under the described scenario would fish fastest/shallowest at the beginning of its swing and then slow down and sink deeper as it swung into ever softer and softer inside currents. This example of the different swing profile of a MOW presentation from the standard Type-tip/standard wetfly-swing swing profile, should pretty well point out the circumstances where a MOW system would be more advantageous: in angling situations where critical fly speed and depth needs to be acquired in the first half of the swing, with the caveat that because the fast-sink-with-control attribute is best accomplished with sinking line portions of 10' or less, MOW's are limited to fly presentations of around 5' in depth or less.   

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 15, 2010, 11:00:25 AM
Now for a comparison... and to kill two birds with one stone so to speak, we'll compare a 2.5 MOW tip,to a floating line-long leader-weighted fly (FLWF), and a 15' Type tip of type 2 or 3. The scenario: a piece of water with a convulated or pocked bottom with depths ranging from 18" to 3 1/2', interspersed randomly with a few "obstructions" that stick up from the bottom to within a few inches of the surface. The majority of the current is pretty soft - a bit less than walking speed, but fairly "braided" due to the convulated bottom, with some significantly faster current tongues that carve in front of and then alongdside the aforementioned obstructions. I've encountered this water-type scenario on rivers from Kamchatka, Russia to Alaska, from Washington to New York to Oregon. The only change has been in what "constitutes" the makeup of the river bottom and in-stream obstructions - water carved basalt or limestone ledgework, glacially deposited rock, or sand/gravel/woody debris. This described generic circumstance of angling could be found as a wide riffle run-in to a large pool, a mid-river flat, or very commonly in a tailout. The task at hand is to swing a fly at varying depths to accomodate the convulated bottom, while being able to steer around near-surface obstructions and then drop back down to fishing depth as quickly as possible behind (downstream) of those obstructions.  

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 15, 2010, 12:03:57 PM
We'll start the system comparison with the 15' Type 2/3 tip. The major disadvantage of this approach for this scenario is in the overall length of the sunk line - 15' of underwater exposure makes any across-the-stream presentation a fly suicide mission - better have a very well-stocked flybox, along with, retying/replacing hung-up flies is NOT fishing! Employing a 45 down presentation is much more workable tactic, but will involve multiple changes in wading/casting position in order to ensure full coverage of the water because a 45 down presentation has a much narrower band of effective coverage than an across-stream presentation in this case. Also, because 15' of line is in fact sunk under the water beyond sight, plus leader, judging the actual position of the fly to steer it around near-surface obstructions, is a fairly inaccurate procedure = snagged flies = "down" time.  

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 15, 2010, 12:33:16 PM
Next, the FLWF and MOW 2.5 - compared at the same time because they are pretty similar in capabilities. Both can be used with an across-stream presentation for the widest area of coverage, both can then be effectively manipulated and steered to vary fly depth and speed to avoid near surface obstructions and quickly "dropped back into play" after passing those obstructions. The MOW tip does have a couple of advantages though having to do with the fact that it carries more line "mass" closer to the fly than an FLWF with its typical 10'+ leader. The MOW will display a bit more precision in gaging the fly's position during the swing because of less distance between the fly and the floating portion of the line (with 3' to 4' leader). And, because of this same characteristic, the casting of a weighted fly on a MOW tip is more accurate than the FLWF, along with higher capability for retaining casting capabilities in circumstances of wind. The one FLWF's advantage over the MOW that I know of is the stealth factor - in conditions of very clear water, the greater separation of fly from flyline can be very beneficial. 

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 15, 2010, 01:03:06 PM
This presentation should be enough information to get anyone started into using MOW tips. To use the other tips, "extrapolation"of the MOW 2.5 comparison example can be used as a guideline. For example, if in the exampled scenario, all factors were the same, excepting that the overall current speed was increased to a bit faster than walking speed, then the MOW 5 would have been up for consideration. Or, if the overall depth of that water was increased by a foot, etc. But, in the end one must accrue their own on-river experience in order to truly figure any angling system out. MOW tips have uses to explore beyond just the scenario exampled for the 2.5 MOW. To find them,  remember the sink profile, casting angle, and current and depth parameters described in this post and go fishing!

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: seldom seen smith on August 15, 2010, 01:29:23 PM
holy man
thats like plugging into the matrix!!
my whole body vibrated , my eyes rolled back then popped open and its like... I KNOW KUNG FU!!!

can i go home now teacher my head is full???

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 15, 2010, 05:13:11 PM
Yes, Grasshopper, this lesson is finished.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: SnapT on August 15, 2010, 05:51:34 PM
Amazing, now if I could only cast well enough to fish like Ed....but alas, perfection is hard to achieve.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: camodrifter on August 16, 2010, 12:24:12 PM
any chance of MOWs made with t-17.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: Whitey on August 16, 2010, 07:38:00 PM
I'll throw a little something into the mix here. With the 5x5 MOW Tip (and really any of them) you can walk the fly (after you cast) right into little buckets of cream and tag fish that have yet to see a "swung" fly. Next time your on heavily pocketed water...try this, it works.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: seldom seen smith on August 17, 2010, 11:51:05 PM
Thanks whitey

Can you guys be a bit more in depth on steering and walking the fly?
is this done by mending then adding tension?????????

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: zmbrooks on August 18, 2010, 03:33:18 PM
YES YES YES....I have found that this is a great tactic in pocket type water, and the typical "nymphing" pockets/chutes/ledges.  I began fishing them a few seasons ago out of default.  Most, if not all, of the "named" runs are jam packed during September and October around here (NY).  So I fished the water that was available and it happened to be faster water, not classic swing water.  And guess what?  I hooked way more fish than I would have ever thought.  And to think that all the years before that I would walk right past that type of water and head for "swinging water".  Little did I know then that ALL water is swing-able. 

Here's what it means to me.  After the cast is made and the set-up is in place the fly will begin swinging/free falling.  From this point on you can walk the fly thru any little bucket/shelf/depression, at any time you like.  However, for Steelhead I like to use this trick when the fly is in the second half of the swing, below me.  I feel like I have more precision when in this position.  As your fly begins to enter "the area", slowly take a few steps down river and walk the fly thru the target zone.  I have discovered that this can range from one or two steps, to 3 or 5 steps thru an area.  It all depends on the particular situation.  On a side note, I have always taken my token 2 steps after the cast and before the fly comes under tension.  I think it helps my rig sink a few extra seconds before things get tight.

Not sure if that's what you meant Whitey, but that's my take on it from experience.  The MOW tips are absolutely fantastic for this application of the swung fly...


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: seldom seen smith on August 19, 2010, 09:53:03 AM

Maybe pocket water doesn't  have to be so frustrating.
Not a big fan of switching to nymphing!! Not very aggressive takes!! Seems as though the fly runs right over of their noses and they snap at it where as the swung fly gets hit by a freight train!!!
Will have to try these tactics (if it ever rains again).


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: chaveecha on August 20, 2010, 04:17:27 PM
Whew! My ears are smoking, but I think I get it. Incredible how much technology is employed in modern-day steelheading.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 22, 2010, 10:49:04 AM
"little buckets of cream" - gottdam awesome description, Whitey!

Controlling the line/fly: in the general world of "Spey", Skagit lines are the shortest in the aspect of length, and this particular trait is a oft-used basis for which many Spey "traditionalists" like to criticize the abilities of Skagit as an angling approach, citing that shortheads are too limited in mending capability. While their criticism does in fact bear some merit - shortheads ARE in fact somewhat limited in mending capability - it also points out a seemingly common circumstance of ignorance as regards line control tactics: there are other methods of line control, besides the traditional approach of mending.

Shortheads can of course, be mended, but there is a point of increased distance at which the relative "weightlessness" of a runningline will not carry the energy "message" of a mend all the way out to the head. However, an attribute of shortheads that helps counterract a need for traditional mending is the very "shortness" of the shorthead - there is less exposure of "fat" flyline to the vagaries of the current. Combine this with the fact that runninglines - being much lighter and thinner than actual flyline - can be held up off of the water completely removed from effects of current, for a longer distance than regular flyline, and we now have a couple of tackle characteristics that enable effective application of shorthead systems to moving waters.        

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: Fish Tech on August 22, 2010, 12:09:56 PM
I like to use a "tapered running line" such as one of Meisers Mend Master running lines behind my Skagit Compact.  It gives me a little more ability to mend the short head and does not interfere much with the distance I can get on a cast.

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 22, 2010, 01:02:33 PM

So, keeping those two "facts" in mind, let's take a look at shorthead line/fly control tactics. Keep in mind these "terms": "tension/tensioning" refers to achieving a tight or tighter status from the rod to the line to the fly. "De-tension/de-tensioning" means the opposite - to induce a loose or looser connection from rod to line to fly. Tensioning the "system" causes the fly to rise upwards in the water column, and increase its across-the-stream swing speed, also referred to as "holding/holding back" the fly. De-tensioning causes the fly to sink and slow its across-the-stream swing speed, also referred to as "dropping/dropping back" the fly. An in-between status of just-right, light tension will cause the fly to maintain its level of swing depth. The amount of tension or de-tension that it takes to make a fly hold, drop, or maintain varies according to water speed, particular tip being used, and sinkrate of the fly. These are factors that cannot be taught "on paper", but rather are learned through on-river experience. But the fact is, this process of discovery is a large part of the "fun" in flyfishing, along with a being a major source of self satisfaction. So, continueing on...  

The primary shorthead tactic occurs before the first cast is even made... the angler makes an assessment of the water to be fished and determines the best AOA (angle of attack). Depending on current pattern and flow, in conjunction with desired presentation and wading position, the angler deduces an angle of cast that will give the most optimum fly speed/depth/length of swing while requiring the least amount of line manipulation. Being able to make a presentation through a casting angle that requires no subsequent "screwing around" with the line is the "ultimate" scenario, but of course, usually not possible. Thus, the need for secondary tactics.

Secondary Tactics:
- the "pullback" mend. At longer distances, the traditional "flip" mend is not very effective with thin/light runninglines. Instead, the shorthead angler relies on pullback mends (PM). The PM is basically raising the rod to a high altitude and pulling back to raise off the water and tighten, all of the line down to the back of the head. At this point one can then hold this position of tension for the amount of time it takes the head to straighten or "steer" to the desired angle and then continue swinging. Or, hold it under tension (steer) until the head achieves the desired angle, followed by laying the rod over into an upstream or downstream attitude to slow/sink or speed up/rise the fly even a bit more. The shorthead angler thinks much more of STEERING the line into a desired position, as opposed to  trying to "flip" it into position.  


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 22, 2010, 05:21:36 PM

- the "reach": the reach mend is a mend that is made DURING the cast while the line is STILL IN THE AIR and just prior to it touching down on the surface of the water. At that point of the cast, just before the line stretches out fully, the rod is leaned and/or "reached" either upstream or downstream, depending on desired effect. When the cast pulls all of the line taut, all of the line from rod tip to fly will have assumed a position upstream of the fly (if you reached upstream), or downstream of the fly (if you reached downstream). The advantage of the reach is that the fly/line ahieves a mended status BEFORE the current has had time to effect them. This may seem like a minor point, but believe me, if you try it out on the river, you will see that the results yielded are greater than this written description can convey. Trust me. The one caveat with the reach is that its degree of effectiveness depends on the fly/line arriving at the target with enough energy to fully straighten out the line while in the air... floppy, collapsing casts don't cut it.  

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 23, 2010, 12:06:18 PM

- feeding line: This tactic is one often used in the singlehanded rod/shootinghead arena. Basically, it consists of stripping off and retaining some "extra" line - more than is needed for the cast - and then slipping that extra line into the swing when sinking and/or slowing of the fly is needed.

- stepping with the fly: As discussed earlier by Whitey and Zach, this is a simple, yet incredibly effective method for sinking/slowing the fly. One merely has to step SMOOTHLY downstream at the same speed as the current (in order to maintain light contact with the fly) at that point in the swing when a sinking/slowing of the fly is needed. 

The use of the above listed tactics - alone or in conjunction with one another - will allow the shorthead angler to effectively fish most waters that can in fact be effectively flyfished with any other type of flyline, along with some circumstances where other line systems don't work so well. Have fun!

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: SnapT on August 23, 2010, 08:09:17 PM

Not only do you posses an extreme wealth of knowledge, but you do a fantastic job putting it on paper, it is extremely helpful to me and I have learned a great deal from your posts here and especially elsewhere (as there are far more of them). Thank you.


Also, is there an effective way to account for the water you will be missing should you choose to add steps in the middle of your swing in order to increase depth? 

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: seldom seen smith on August 24, 2010, 09:46:11 AM

think its time for a book deal eh ra or maybe another vid dedicated to presentation only!!
do such videos exist??
keep it comin!!

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: zmbrooks on August 24, 2010, 02:36:35 PM
Holy smokes.  Great stuff Ed!  I was thinking book deal as well.....

 Thankfully we have great water flows right now so I can get on the river and keep working on all these tricks of the trade....

 One thing I will try to add is in regards to the pullback mend.  I like to use my "outside" arm to do this maneuver.  Meaning fishing from river Left, I like to hold the rod nice and high with my Right arm.  Fishing river Right, I like to hold the rod out with my Left arm.  I think this helps to keep my rod closer to the middle of the river during the initial part of the swing and ultimately end up with a slower swing speed.  This, for me anyways, helps keep my mono running line off the water while keeping a tight connection to everything.  It's also more comfortable than reaching across my body, just feels more natural I guess. 

 The fun part is when you hook a fish while holding your rod with the non dominant hand, and then switching over after the hook set to start the fight and reel!


Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on August 31, 2010, 12:28:06 PM
Snap T - ideally, one should only step down with the fly as far as the required distance of optimum coverage. For instance, if the water visibility were 3', then the maximum step down should not be more than 3'. If the water were of such a speed that "standard" step down + sinktip capabilities + angle of cast + mending did not get the fly into the zone, then I would probably risk using a larger-than-standard stepdown and then fish the run a second time to account for the less than ideal coverage. I would also add however, that in most cases of steelheading with a fly that if one cannot hit the zone with a combination of the above mentioned tactics, then the probability is that that water is in fact not good "fly water".

Zack - Right on! That technique absolutely helps out. It's all those little "tricks" that add up to being a more successful flyangler! 

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: riveraddict on November 25, 2010, 11:49:25 AM
Have at this point, accrued a ton of time on the factory MOW's, under a very wide variety of circumstances. Performance in all aspects has been stellar. One feature that I was a bit iffy about were the factory loops... their durability and wider profile compared to my personally installed braided loops concerned me. Well, the durability concern has turned out to be a non-issue, and their profile versus a braided loop has actually proved a benefit via my Texas experience... these loops do not collect weeds! That's quite a feat considering that in my Texas angling sessions the fly and any leader knots catch weeds on EVERY cast!     

Title: Re: MOW tips... gimmick?!
Post by: squamish on November 30, 2010, 12:11:28 AM
Ok so had a day on the river yesterday with some MOW tips, and I will say as a born skeptic that these are no gimmick!  I will go as far to say that I will not go to the river without  them from now on.

Even being a skeptic I knew that they had to be worth a try considering the names attached to them, not that I know these three,  but from what I do know I cant see them having anything to do with anything gimmicky.

So if you do lots of fishing, especially in rivers that have lots of different conditions then I would say that you need to give these things a try. 

the set up was a 12foot 6/7 rod with a skagit short head,