Whose silk line and what do you think of the pros and cons of silk?
If you had to choose just one...
- Thread starter Para_Adams
- Start date
Dave, FWIW, if you ever want to line up one of your rods with silk, I have a rescued vintage silk line you could try on my front lawn. I've never fished it, I have it more as a curiosity and photo prop, but it definitely zips with ease when casting. It has a very different feel from modern lines.
Am assuming it's smaller diameter so plays well with the smaller bamboo guides.
Cliff
Steelhead
The huge con is maintenance and prep. Having to grease the line is a pain, and the bigger pain is having to dry it afterwards off the reel. I carry large paper grocery bags to off-spool my line into after fishing to dry, and I always have a spare silk line prepped and ready to go on a spare spool or reel, just in case I want to fish while line #1 is drying. I typically get several hours out of a line while river fishing before it has to be re-greased. Despite the cons of silk, its all I fish on rivers. The pros are they're easier to cast, pickup off the water is effortless, dries land with more accuracy and delicacy. On lakes I usually use a conventional intermediate line for trolling from my tube. I love fishing with silk. My main go-to line is a Cadno DT 5wt made by Stuart Todd, in Wales. My backup line is a Thebault WF 5wt line. A very fun line that I'm using more and more is a vintage level silk line that I refinished. It's an unknown maker (to me) and its a little thinner than my other 5wt silk lines so I'm guessing its a 4wt line. I had it with me in Montana last week and fished it on a small stream with a 7ft 4wt bamboo rod. Despite it being a level taper it casts just as good as a DT line over reasonable distances. My last silk line in my cabinet is one of the first Chinese lines made by Zhu, which came out on eBay about 15 years ago. They're nowhere near as nice as the aforementioned lines, but I also don't think they're as bad as people make them out to be. I refinished it years ago and I sometimes fish it. I would not buy another one, but I wouldn't kick it out of bed, either.
Last edited:
I have a couple of Terenzio “artificial “ silk lines that I like. They’re Italian lines and have a similar diameter, look and feel to real silk. They need to be broken in a bit (ie; use them) like real silk, but they require less maintenance than the real thing. I also have a couple of artificial Cortland “Sylk” lines too and they’re okay, but I like the way the Terenzio’s cast a lot better.
I use Otter Butter to dress them, and I prefer that over using Mucilin. It tends to last longer.
I use Otter Butter to dress them, and I prefer that over using Mucilin. It tends to last longer.
Cliff
Steelhead
I use Otter butter, also. I have heard about the lines your mentioning. One of these days I may try one.
Maybe the favorite rod can be the one your currently fishing? The Leonard 66H taper rod is the one I grab most often, like today.
Always the rod I’m currently fishing….unless I’m getting skunked and previously had better luck with a different rod. Like a fishing hat…. : )
Mark, the granger 8642 is a three piece. 8642 refers to the rods length (8'6") and weight (4.25 ounces I think without reel seat). The granger 9050 for example is a 3 piece rod 9' long and 5 ounces...
I can't say I notice a huge casting difference between two and three piece rods. A two piece rod can be lighter because there's one less ferrule. Three piece rods, however are much much easier to travel with. They fit in the overhead storage bins way easier than two piece rods.
Thanks for educating me. I found a 8642 taper, but it was a two piece. I’ll keep researching. It does seem like a very popular rod.
Mark, Granger never made a 2 piece 8642 rod. Perhaps the taper you found is someone's interpretation of what that taper might have been in a two piece if one was ever made. Good luck in your search, I would think the taper for the 8642 should be easy to locate as it was such a hugely popular rod. One other thought on the 8642...I've cast both the W&M and the earlier Goodwin Granger versions and I do believe there is a difference with the earlier version a bit softer and slower. I think the W&M version is a better all around fishing rod (5/6 weight) while the original Goodwin Granger version for me was a pure 5 wt and a pure joy to cast as long as the wind was low. I'd also think the W&M version is very similar to the 8-1/2' Phillipsons made around the same time.
Last edited:
Thanks Ron. I've found a couple tapers that varied pretty greatly....assuming I looked them up correctly. I've got a current project going, and then a rod for a buddy I'm making so I have time. It's good to hear feedback on which rivers or lakes a taper is used to fish and why it does or does not do well in certain situations.
Thanks again guys.
Cliff
Steelhead
I think the three piece rods cast a little differently for me than a two piece. It DOES feel ever so slightly heavier to me than a two piece rod of the same length. For me, I think the addition of a second "dead spot" where the additional ferrule is makes for a slightly different feel. I prefer them over the two piece rods, not only for portability but also because they seem a bit more traditional.
The family outing yesterday allowed me ninety minutes of pure bliss fishing the pocket water in a nearby mountain stream while my wife and daughter read their book’s in the sun.
W&M Granger 8642 Victory with an unknown modern English line that arrived spooled up with the JW Young reel I was using cast like a dream. I wish I knew what the line was… love the combo’!
Five ‘bows hooked, but just two to 10” to hand… beautiful jewels.
W&M Granger 8642 Victory with an unknown modern English line that arrived spooled up with the JW Young reel I was using cast like a dream. I wish I knew what the line was… love the combo’!
Five ‘bows hooked, but just two to 10” to hand… beautiful jewels.