Does belly length effect the fly swing

[N. Percival]

The couple times that I have read spey pages there seems to a lot of debate between the short and long belly camps, but little of that debate has spilled over onto the presentation aspect. If a pool is uncrowded I like to fish it twice, once with a shooting head and once with a long belly. I do think belly length makes a difference in the presentation of the fly. The main difference I would attribute to the long length of running line out of the guides not being affected by the current close to the angler, as a long belly would. I am curious to see what other anglers think.

[fredaevans]

Most casts (effectively fished) are going to be at 100 feet OR less. Beyond that it takes a hell of a rodster to control the resulting drift of the fly. Especially if a dead drift is what takes the fish .. think the Rogue River here. Mix in a bag of conflicting current streams and the 'game is afoot!' ("A, Watson?")

Longer headed lines give you greater presentation control than the short headed ones. Once the head is on the water it's darned tough to 'mend' just a thin running line. One interesting exception I've found of late though is the new(ish?) Vision shooting heads.

That baby hunts!

Fred

[sinktip]

Ned,

Other than the mending issue that Fred mentions, I'm not sure there is much to be gained one way or another. Your point about the running line not impacting the presentation is interesting and makes some sense but for floating line work, I don't thing the advantage would be huge.

Fred is right that most fishing happens with less than 100' of line out but there are exceptions where to reach the fish requires casts in excess of the century mark. As for dead drift floats, I leave that to the Rogue guys

[JDJones]

While I agree with both Fred and Tip on fishing distance and whether thin running line is better or worse than thick belly, the dead drift issue kind of bothers me.

At least to my way of thinking, a dead drift means the fly is at the mercy of the current. Or, to put it another way, you are no longer in control. Although there are times (in order to allow the fly to sink to the proper depth) when it is necessary, the fly is not really swimming until it comes under tension. How much tension you put on the fly, how you accomplish that, how much of the swing you are able to fish effectively, and at what depth, is another matter.

But hey, whatever works for you.

Oh, I forgot. Another thing that has been on my mind concerning belly length is the speed of the swing. John Schewy claims a longer line will swing slower than a short line. Dec Hogan seems to think the opposite. I'm sure each of these guys has a legitimate claim for his reasoning here. My guess is that although a slower speed is possible at longer distances, it is at times, a bit more difficult to maintain the slower speed.

I've also heard people say that a tip will swing slower than a dry line long leader. Simply because it has more mass the current has to move. True, or false?

[SparseHairHackl]

My 2 cents worth:

The longer line swings slower if one is casting to the same place in the water from farther upstream. In other words, casting more downstream to reach the same location. The shallower angle makes for a slower swing.

The tip or sunk line swings slower because it is in slower currents, the currents near the bottom being slowed by the boundary layer caused by the bottom structure.

These are generalities, and to some extent assume a consistent current bank-to-bank, and a slowing current from top-to-bottom. These generalities are also most true with an absence of mending.

--Bill