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
MOW tips... gimmick?!
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: MOW tips... gimmick?!  (Read 29830 times)
riveraddict
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


View Profile
« Reply #15 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.  
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 12:17:01 PM by riveraddict » Logged

riveraddict
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


View Profile
« Reply #16 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.  
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 12:14:59 PM by riveraddict » Logged

riveraddict
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


View Profile
« Reply #17 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. 
Logged

riveraddict
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


View Profile
« Reply #18 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!
« Last Edit: August 15, 2010, 01:08:19 PM by riveraddict » Logged

seldom seen smith
Guest
« Reply #19 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???
Logged

riveraddict
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: August 15, 2010, 05:13:11 PM »

Yes, Grasshopper, this lesson is finished.
Logged

SnapT
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 46


View Profile
« Reply #21 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.
Logged

camodrifter
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #22 on: August 16, 2010, 12:24:12 PM »

any chance of MOWs made with t-17.
Logged

Whitey
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


View Profile
« Reply #23 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.
Logged

seldom seen smith
Guest
« Reply #24 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?HuhHuh??
Logged

zmbrooks
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


View Profile Email
« Reply #25 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...

-Zack
Logged

seldom seen smith
Guest
« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2010, 09:53:03 AM »

Hmmmmm

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).

Cheers
Logged

chaveecha
Guest
« Reply #27 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.
Logged

riveraddict
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


View Profile
« Reply #28 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.        
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 11:25:21 AM by riveraddict » Logged

Fish Tech
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


View Profile
« Reply #29 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.
Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Print
 
Jump to: