Question:

Get Delorme’s ‘Topo 4′ or any of the other topographical software packages. They contain a majority of the roads and trails that exist in the U.S. and armed with a GPS receiver and a laptop computer you could more than likely cross the entire country with a minimum of pavement. Someone with savy map and compass skills could pre-select the route and go it on paper, although the lap top and GPS allow you to deviate when you want, or when necessary, as the real time conditions and choices come upon you. Bob Walker

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a dream. It is a nice dream. In this dream there is an interstate network of 4×4 trails . Imagine being able to drive from Charlotte NC to Charleston WV and have it take 2 weeks to get there. Imagine finding trails everywhere you go. Some among you say "That would be too expensive. " or " Who’s house are you going to bulldoze for your hobby?"

Response:

I have a dream. It is a nice dream. In this dream there is an interstate network of 4×4 trails . Imagine being able to drive from Charlotte NC to Charleston WV and have it take 2 weeks to get there. Imagine finding trails everywhere you go. Some among you say "That would be too expensive. " or " Who’s house are you going to bulldoze for your hobby?" My answer is: It would be very cheap. And no one’s house would have to torn down. We have this network of high voltage power transmission lines. It criss-crosses the entire nation. There are almost no houses built under these power lines. Most people don’t want to live near them.   Here is how we pay for it. Tax breaks for power companies. Every power company has at least one bulldozer.  Those same companies have the right-of-way for the land under their lines. The places that have no roads would be bulldozed one time and then left to deteriorate.  Just so the power companies would not have to face any liablility (and also so they can maybe make a buck or 2 in the process) there could be permits issued by the CO for a small fee. Anyone who leaves trash would have their permits revoked and given the proper fine for littering. Think of the backwater places that will get money from the four wheel drives going by. Think of the fun that could be had. Sure there are places that no truck will be able to cross. There could be access trails to and from those areas to the main road. Wouldn’t it be grand? Everyone get together and bug your representative about this. Let’s get that interstate trail system. Nature lovers UNITE!

Response:

I have a dream. It is a nice dream. In this dream there is an interstate network of 4×4 trails . Imagine being able to drive from Charlotte NC to Charleston WV and have it take 2 weeks to get there. I

Of course that cheap beer you’ve been drinking is bad for you.  If you’d wake up you’d discover that there are already many miles of off roading, some interstate, in the eastern US.  Try Tellico in eastern TN, over the mountains to NC.  In southern KY a network, some requiring very minor on road excursions, can take you into TN.   In the west, all you need to do is look.  Try the UT/CO border for some very good examples.   The idea of Government allowing unlimited access in this age of terrorism won’t fly.  Be happy with what we’ve got. Dick Burg

Response:

Most power lines are on private property, built using right-of-ways. Though the power company can enter the land to maintain their lines, etc., the land is still private, and subject to the owner’s restrictions. You’d have to negoiate with every land owner (and there would be many) to make this work. Good try, though! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I have a dream. It is a nice dream. In this dream there is an interstate network of 4×4 trails . Imagine being able to drive from Charlotte NC to Charleston WV and have it take 2 weeks to get there. Imagine finding trails everywhere you go. Some among you say "That would be too expensive. " or " Who’s house are you going to bulldoze for your hobby?" My answer is: It would be very cheap. And no one’s house would have to torn down. We have this network of high voltage power transmission lines. It criss-crosses the entire nation. There are almost no houses built under these power lines. Most people don’t want to live near them.   Here is how we pay for it. Tax breaks for power companies. Every power company has at least one bulldozer.  Those same companies have the right-of-way for the land under their lines. The places that have no roads would be bulldozed one time and then left to deteriorate.  Just so the power companies would not have to face any liablility (and also so they can maybe make a buck or 2 in the process) there could be permits issued by the CO for a small fee. Anyone who leaves trash would have their permits revoked and given the proper fine for littering. Think of the backwater places that will get money from the four wheel drives going by. Think of the fun that could be had. Sure there are places that no truck will be able to cross. There could be access trails to and from those areas to the main road. Wouldn’t it be grand? Everyone get together and bug your representative about this. Let’s get that interstate trail system. Nature lovers UNITE!

Peter D. Hipson NEHOG (New England Hummer Owners Group) checked monthly.

Response:

Of course that cheap beer you’ve been drinking is bad for you.  If you’d wake up you’d discover that there are already many miles of off roading, some interstate, in the eastern US.  Try Tellico in eastern TN, over the mountains to NC.  In southern KY a network, some requiring very minor on road excursions, can take you into TN.  

All well and good, but those places are far from me. The closest half-decent trail is 50 miles from here.  I have spent many a day looking for someplace around here to go off road. I have been reduced to construction sites and mudholes in parking lots.  Sure, there are atv trails galore, but atv’s require no skill to operate. Any kid can get on one and go anywhere. What is the fun in that? Every non-paved road in this area has either a gate or "NO TRESSPASSING" sign on it.  There are literally thousands of 4 wheel drive SUV’s in the greater Charlotte area.  The only place to go is Uwharrie (50 miles away)  which is lame unless it has been raining for days.  No one can make use of their 4×4 here.  Do you realise that Lake Norman has 800 miles of shoreline and 0 4×4 trails that access it? There used to be a few, on power line rights-of-way, but the snobs that live along the lake forced Duke Power to gate, post and trench every one of them. (Can’t have those poor folk fishing around their million dollar shacks, now can we?) This is a problem that needs addressing. At least in this area. I am looking for the cheapest, least difficult method of correcting this problem. It is surprising that some farmer hasn’t made a 4×4 park yet. With all this drought I would think that would be a good way to make money. I would pay $50 for a season pass, and so would thousands of others. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -In the west, all you need to do is look.  Try the UT/CO border for some very good examples.   The idea of Government allowing unlimited access in this age of terrorism won’t fly.  Be happy with what we’ve got. Dick Burg

Response:

deja.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a dream. It is a nice dream. In this dream there is an interstate network of 4×4 trails . Imagine being able to drive from Charlotte NC to Charleston WV and have it take 2 weeks to get there. Imagine finding trails everywhere you go. Some among you say "That would be too expensive. " or " Who’s house are you going to bulldoze for your hobby?" My answer is: It would be very cheap. And no one’s house would have to torn down. We have this network of high voltage power transmission lines. It criss-crosses the entire nation. There are almost no houses built under these power lines. Most people don’t want to live near them.   Here is how we pay for it. Tax breaks for power companies. Every power company has at least one bulldozer.  Those same companies have the right-of-way for the land under their lines. The places that have no roads would be bulldozed one time and then left to deteriorate.  Just so the power companies would not have to face any liablility (and also so they can maybe make a buck or 2 in the process) there could be permits issued by the CO for a small fee. Anyone who leaves trash would have their permits revoked and given the proper fine for littering. Think of the backwater places that will get money from the four wheel drives going by. Think of the fun that could be had. Sure there are places that no truck will be able to cross. There could be access trails to and from those areas to the main road. Wouldn’t it be grand? Everyone get together and bug your representative about this. Let’s get that interstate trail system. Nature lovers UNITE!

In the west a lot of the power lines are thoruhg Government land and they need trails and access anyway to maintian them.  A worthy idea and it will get you most of your western states.  Since the Eastern states don’t have as much (if any?) government land… That’s another problem.

Response:

Question:

The fates have decreed I must go to Rockport, Texas this weekend and could have time to fish Monday and/or Tuesday.  I’m not after anything specific but am *not* equipped to fish the salt.  Hell, bluegills will be just fine…..any suggestions?  No boat this trip. Frank Church

Response:

Frank, Since I don’t see much advice – I can offer my 2cents – the area you’ll be in is a tough one to come up with "non salt" unless you want to drive a long distance. If your interested I’ll post a map of the area and a few suggestions on possible light saltwater flyfishing. Gary

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The fates have decreed I must go to Rockport, Texas this weekend and could have time to fish Monday and/or Tuesday.  I’m not after anything specific but am *not* equipped to fish the salt.  Hell, bluegills will be just fine…..any suggestions?  No boat this trip. Frank Church

Response:

Thanks Gary, but that being the case I’ll just drop my load and hustle on home. I’ll work on my dispatcher to get me a run to Florida instead. Frank Church – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Frank, Since I don’t see much advice – I can offer my 2cents – the area you’ll be in is a tough one to come up with "non salt" unless you want to drive a long distance. If your interested I’ll post a map of the area and a few suggestions on possible light saltwater flyfishing. Gary The fates have decreed I must go to Rockport, Texas this weekend and could have time to fish Monday and/or Tuesday.  I’m not after anything specific but am *not* equipped to fish the salt.  Hell, bluegills will be just fine…..any suggestions?  No boat this trip. Frank Church

Response:

Question:

You want to explain this one. When did  O’Meara let Tiger’s friendship start dictating his tournament schedule? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – O’Meara respects his good friend Tiger way too much to show up at Hilton Head this week.

Response:

You missed all those NAACP folks picketing outside the Worldcom? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You want to explain this one. When did  O’Meara let Tiger’s friendship start dictating his tournament schedule?

Response:

O’Meara respects his good friend Tiger way too much to show up at Hilton Head this week. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I happened to be in line behind Mark O’Meara and 2 of his fishing friends this morning at the coffee and bagel store this morning. They were ready to head out and do some fly fishing.  Don’t know about their mental state, though.  Who would want to go wading in a freezing river in 30 degree weather with snow showers when you could be in warm and sunny Hilton Head! He has a place up here in Park City, UT. I’ve seen him around town every now and again. Kitty

Response:

I happened to be in line behind Mark O’Meara and 2 of his fishing friends this morning at the coffee and bagel store this morning. They were ready to head out and do some fly fishing.  Don’t know about their mental state, though.  Who would want to go wading in a freezing river in 30 degree weather with snow showers when you could be in warm and sunny Hilton Head! He has a place up here in Park City, UT. I’ve seen him around town every now and again. Kitty

Response:

Actually, my son got me up in Montana once and the trout were rising throughout the snow showers.  After the first bite, I didn’t notice the weather at all.  Heck, you are standing in 34 degree water all day anyhow! — regards,  RichG .

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I happened to be in line behind Mark O’Meara and 2 of his fishing friends this morning at the coffee and bagel store this morning. They were ready to head out and do some fly fishing.  Don’t know about their mental state, though.  Who would want to go wading in a freezing river in 30 degree weather with snow showers when you could be in warm and sunny Hilton Head! He has a place up here in Park City, UT. I’ve seen him around town every now and again. Kitty

Response:

Question:

Putting all that together, I gather that I haven’t broken a rod while casting because I use a roll cast or retrieve enough of a wet line to avoid that overload on the lift, and I’m never over bending the rod while casting.  The fatal errors come in the heat of battle. The more I think about it, I see what you mean about casting being the heaviest force on the rod. Thanks for your help, Chas

Response:

The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod.

If it’s done right the rod is already fully loaded and you are just accelerating the line and, more importantly, the tip of the line. — Charlie…

Response:

The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. If it’s done right the rod is already fully loaded and you are just accelerating the line and, more importantly, the tip of the line. — Charlie…

Charlie, Your analysis of hauling to increase line speed and thus increasing casting distance is correct.  If it was a matter of loading the rod as rw says the caster would only have to apply more power to accomplish this. Ernie

Response:

rw, If the haul is done correctly the rod is fully loaded and any additional speed must be imparted to the line by foreword movement of your arm and by pulling "hauling" the line through the guides. Ernie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have to doubt that additional rod loading is minimal, Mike. The only way the caster can increase the speed of the line is by accelerating it. The only way he can accelerate it is by exerting a force on the line at the rod tip. (F=ma). An equal and opposite force is exerted on the rod at the tip, which results in loading the rod.

Response:

Charlie, Your analysis of hauling to increase line speed and thus increasing casting distance is correct.  If it was a matter of loading the rod as rw says the caster would only have to apply more power to accomplish this. Ernie

I’m not saying that the *point* of hauling is to load the rod. I’m saying only that one *effect* of hauling is additional loading of the rod. It has to have that effect — there’s no way around it. Hauling accelerates the line, which generates a force on the rod tip. (F=ma) Consider three cases: 1. After loading the rod on the forward cast (with no hauling), you accidently lose your grip on the line with your noncasting hand. The acceleration of the line vanishes, the force on the rod tip vanishes, the rod straightens without appreciably affecting the line, and the line falls on the water in a bloody mess. 2. You make a normal forward cast without hauling, just holding the line tight. A force is applied to the line by the rod tip, causing acceleration of the line. An equal and opposite force is applied to the rod top, causing loading of the rod. 3. You make a forward cast while hauling. The action of the noncasting hand, pulling on the line, causes an *additional* acceleration of the line. This additional acceleration causes an *additional* force on the rod tip, resulting in additional loading of the rod. If you ignore things like friction, you could replace the effect (on the rod) of hauling by a transient additional stress in the line, and the rod would have no way of "knowing" the difference. It would simply load more. (The line would behave very differently, though.) These three cases are really just points in a continuum. Whether you consider this additional rod loading to be significant is your business, but it’s nonetheless real. This is just elementary physics. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

Whether you consider this additional rod loading to be significant is your business, but it’s nonetheless real. This is just elementary physics.

It also ignores the fact that the line is not attached to the tip of the rod and that the rod is very nearly, if not fully, loaded. There may be some additional loading, but what makes the haul work is the additional acceleration applied directly to the line. This is just elementary geometry<g. — Charlie…

Response:

http://www.mikeconnor.de You didn’t comment on my second reason.  Does this make sense to you?      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul. Thanks Chas

This is also correct.    The amount of linespeed any particular rod may generate in a flyline by direct action is limited by various things, one of which is the strength and speed of the caster. ( assuming once again perfect technique). If you haul, you do not increase the loading, as you do not use direct rod action, but your line hand, and you do not require any more strength and speed to obtain similar results to someone who does not haul. However, a powerful person with good technique will always cast better ( assuming distance casting here of course), than a weaker person, simply because he has more power per se. TL MC

Response:

– "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If it were so that hauling dramatically increased rod loading, then hauling on an already optimally loaded rod would cause it to fold up. I’ve been mean to a few rods at times, putting a #10 line in a #8 rod and casting Pike flies for instance, but I’ve never managed to break one casting.  Is this because most of my fishing has been with Graphite or Glass? I have to dig back into some old Physics books to get the details, but I remember stress and strain curves for various materials showing a linear relationship until a limit was released, and then additional stress produced excessive strain until the material failed.  Certainly with an old shoe or a fish on the line and a stout leader it’s easy enough to pass the elastic limit, but does that happen in casting as well? Thanks Chas

If you ask most people at what point a rod is stressed the most, then many of them will tell you that it is in playing a fish.  This is not the case. The basic maximum stress condition for a rod, when used correctly, is when casting. Most modern rods can stand a great deal more stress in this respect than is generally realised.  What they can not stand is shock loading under stress. If you jerk a rod when it is already loaded with a "dead weight", either played out fish, old shoe etc etc then it is highly likely to break. Solid glass fibre rods were probably the most robust rods to date.  Carbon fibre suffers from one or two disadvantages here. Even a slight nick in the surface of a blank can cause sudden massive failure, sometimes the blank will simply shatter without warning. More rods are broken by various extraneous factors than by casting.  The failure might indeed occur when casting, but is usually the result of some other fault. Car doors, falling down on the rod, excessive heat, leaning a rod on a stone and nicking it, ramming the tip into a tree, etc etc. Constantly overloading a rod by casting full lines etc, which are way over the rated weight will usually cause a blank failure as well of course. Most rods broken while actually fishing, do so for a number of reasons, the main one directly fishing related, is getting snagged, putting a good bend in the rod, and then jerking it.  This will quite easily snap a carbon fibre blank, or shatter it . The sudden extreme shock loading under stress is more than the rod can handle. The second most common reason is trying to lift a long line, especially a sunken one, without first roll-casting the line to the surface. Attempting to do this will break most rods. The sudden massive loading is once again more than they can stand. The third most common reason is attempting to land a fish by holding the rod almost vertically, and allowing it to bend over ninety degrees from the vertical. The fish plunges, and the rod simply snaps at the tip. No major exertions are required here by the way, doing the same thing while threading a line through the rings  will also snap a rod tip quite easily. What often happens here, is that the rod is bent, and then the blank "rolls" suddenly changing the stress patterns in the blank walls, and causing it to break. Occasionally rods are broken when fighting very large fish, but this is again an error on the part of the angler. It should normally be impossible for a fish to break a rod, given sufficient angling skill, and correct tackle.. Holding a rod in the fingers and bending it, is also very dangerous. Especially with fine tips. Assuming a rod in good condition, no nicks etc. And also assuming correctly matched line, and reasonable casting, and correct use, then the likelihood of breaking a rod is actually very low indeed. TL MC

Response:

"Mike Connor" wrote This is not a matter of taking sides I hope. Otherwise I will simply retire from the discussion. This is a technical discussion and nothing more.

Of course, my sloppy wording betrayed me. Apart from that, you are perfectly correct. Although the rod loading generated by hauling is inconsequential, irrespective of the current loading state of the rod.  When the rod is already optimally loaded, and as you say at its stiffest, the added loading generated by hauling is so small as to be insignificant. This is just as well, as if hauling did in fact appreciably increase rod loading, then an already optimally loaded rod would simply fold up under the added strain.

You didn’t comment on my second reason.  Does this make sense to you?      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul.

Thanks Chas

Response:

If it were so that hauling dramatically increased rod loading, then hauling on an already optimally loaded rod would cause it to fold up.

I’ve been mean to a few rods at times, putting a #10 line in a #8 rod and casting Pike flies for instance, but I’ve never managed to break one casting.  Is this because most of my fishing has been with Graphite or Glass? I have to dig back into some old Physics books to get the details, but I remember stress and strain curves for various materials showing a linear relationship until a limit was released, and then additional stress produced excessive strain until the material failed.  Certainly with an old shoe or a fish on the line and a stout leader it’s easy enough to pass the elastic limit, but does that happen in casting as well? Thanks Chas

Response:

When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out. I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip.

Your finger is playing the role of the rod tip in that case. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text —— Original Message —– Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2000 6:33 AM This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored. I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mike. It’s really irrelevant whether the line is fixed or free to move through the guides. There is a force exerted on the line, by the rod tip, that accelerates the line. There is a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the rod tip. That force has the effect of bending the rod. The greater the force, the more the line is accelerated, and the more the rod is bent (i.e., loaded). None of this force can be "ignored". The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip. The point is, that when you haul, the line moves, and the rod does not, or only slightly. Thread your rod up with a line. Lay the line out and point the rod straight down the line.  Grasp the line at the butt, and pull sharply. The rod has not been loaded in any way, but the line will spring towards you. The direct pull moves the mass directly. Do the same thing holding the rod at an angle to the line, The same thing occurs, with a relatively small proportion of the applied force bending the rod tip slightly, if at all. Progressively increase the angle until the rod is at right angles to the line. At this point the maximum possible rod loading, under these circumstances, will occur when you pull on the line, nevertheless, the majority of the energy involved still goes towards moving the line, the tip will barely move. It is quite immaterial how hard, how long, or how fast you pull. The energy is transferred directly to the line. The rod is barely affected. The angle of the rod changes the vector, and the rod loads a little, due to friction mainly, but the majority of the energy involved goes into moving the line. If it were so that hauling dramatically increased rod loading, then hauling on an already optimally loaded rod would cause it to fold up. This is not the case. The result of hauling is dramatically increased linespeed, because of the direct application of force to the line.  You dont have to believe me, just try it. This is also incidentally why striking a fish with a pull on the line is better than doing it with the rod. The force applied is transferred more or less directly, with very little loss, to the hook point. The rod does not move much,  and  is not loaded appreciably. Only the line moves. If you strike with the rod, you must first load it, before you can apply any force at all, and because of the mechanical disadvantage involved, the force you transfer will be minimal, and indirect. The principles are the same in both cases. In one case you are transferring energy to accelerate a mass using the short end of a flexible lever, and in the other case you are doing it by giving a direct pull.  The lever is in the second case quite immaterial, and may be ignored. TL MC Again, there’s no "direct" pull on the line. ALL the force affecting the airborne line is generated at the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull. Sure, but that’s not what’s happening when the line is strung though a rod. You (the caster) can exert a force on the line in your left (hauling) hand, but the only force that can be exerted on the airborne line *outside* the rod is exerted at the rod tip. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip. I’m not saying *anything* about the acceleration of the rod tip. I’m only saying that the force on the line (outside the rod) is generated ONLY at the rod tip. Where else? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/ "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de

Response:

This is not a matter of taking sides I hope. Otherwise I will simply retire from the discussion. This is a technical discussion and nothing more. Apart from that, you are perfectly correct. Although the rod loading generated by hauling is inconsequential, irrespective of the current loading state of the rod.  When the rod is already optimally loaded, and as you say at its stiffest, the added loading generated by hauling is so small as to be insignificant. This is just as well, as if hauling did in fact appreciably increase rod loading, then an already optimally loaded rod would simply fold up under the added strain. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – RW,     I have to side with Mike here, for a couple reasons.  If the haul is done right, it happens when the rod is fully loaded.  At that point it’s at it’s stiffest, and the flex isn’t increased much by the added force.  The reaction force is actually the force you apply with your line hand when you haul the line in.      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul.      Also, there is direct pull on the line, the guides are like pulleys.  If you consider an 18 inch haul, and watch the effect on the rod tip, I bet it’s drawn back less than 4 inches.  The other 14 inches were directly applied to the line. Chas

Response:

This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored.

I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mike. It’s really irrelevant whether the line is fixed or free to move through the guides. There is a force exerted on the line, by the rod tip, that accelerates the line. There is a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the rod tip. That force has the effect of bending the rod. The greater the force, the more the line is accelerated, and the more the rod is bent (i.e., loaded). None of this force can be "ignored". The force generated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip.

Again, there’s no "direct" pull on the line. ALL the force affecting the airborne line is generated at the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull.

Sure, but that’s not what’s happening when the line is strung though a rod. You (the caster) can exert a force on the line in your left (hauling) hand, but the only force that can be exerted on the airborne line *outside* the rod is exerted at the rod tip. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip.

I’m not saying *anything* about the acceleration of the rod tip. I’m only saying that the force on the line (outside the rod) is generated ONLY at the rod tip. Where else? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically. Momentum = Mass * Velocity

I have to doubt that additional rod loading is minimal, Mike. The only way the caster can increase the speed of the line is by accelerating it. The only way he can accelerate it is by exerting a force on the line at the rod tip. (F=ma). An equal and opposite force is exerted on the rod at the tip, which results in loading the rod. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically. Momentum = Mass * Velocity I have to doubt that additional rod loading is minimal, Mike. The only way the caster can increase the speed of the line is by accelerating it. The only way he can accelerate it is by exerting a force on the line at the rod tip. (F=ma). An equal and opposite force is exerted on the rod at the tip, which results in loading the rod. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

One other point.  Inertia is the direct measurement of a mass.  The only way to change inertia is to change the mass. One may not "break" inertia.  One may overcome it, ( move the mass) by applying force. Newtons laws explain this relatively simply. The first law states that:  " A body will remain at rest, or continue to move steadily in a straight line without acceleration unless it is acted on by an unopposed force. The second law states: "The acceleration of a body depends directly on the force acting on it but inversely upon its mass" The third law states: "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" Force is a measure of the rate at which momentum is changed. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically.

Response:

I sure hope you’re not breaking your wrist with this arm cast, which would be very bad form, you know. JR – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip. In fact, in a blindfold test I can’t tell the difference between a Cabelas rod and my own arm

Response:

So, In your estimation, does your wrist have a fast action or slow action and how does it affect your distance?

Well, it’s not a limp wrist I’ll tell you that much And while it *is* acting as the rod tip, it’s not loading in the same sense as a fly rod is it? Isn’t most of the line action due to acceleration because I’m pulling on it (and not wrist flip caused by the pulling)? –Steve

Response:

RW,     I have to side with Mike here, for a couple reasons.  If the haul is done right, it happens when the rod is fully loaded.  At that point it’s at it’s stiffest, and the flex isn’t increased much by the added force.  The reaction force is actually the force you apply with your line hand when you haul the line in.      A second reason that the loading is not the key is that you could achieve the same additional loading if you just applied a bit more casting force.  We know that a man of modest strength and a good haul can outcast a muscle man who doesn’t haul.      Also, there is direct pull on the line, the guides are like pulleys.  If you consider an 18 inch haul, and watch the effect on the rod tip, I bet it’s drawn back less than 4 inches.  The other 14 inches were directly applied to the line. Chas

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This would be correct if the line was fixed at the rod tip. When hauling it is not. It moves more or less freely through the guides. The force applied is applied directly to the line, independent of the rod loading.  The "equal and opposite reaction" in this case, is immediate line acceleration due to a direct pull, and is independent of the rod. Some of this force( a relatively small amount actually ) does indeed go towards the total rod loading, but compared to the force which is transferred to the line, this may be more or less ignored. I’m afraid you’re missing the point, Mike. It’s really irrelevant whether the line is fixed or free to move through the guides. There is a force exerted on the line, by the rod tip, that accelerates the line. There is a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the rod tip. That force has the effect of bending the rod. The greater the force, the more the line is accelerated, and the more the rod is bent (i.e., loaded). None of this force can be "ignored". The force gener ated by "hauling" is not "applied directly" to the line. It’s applied though the loaded, and increasingly loaded, rod. The acceleration is induced by a direct pull on the line, and is only possible because the line is indeed able to move independent of the rod tip. Again, there’s no "direct" pull on the line. ALL the force affecting the airborne line is generated at the rod tip. If you lay  a piece of string along a table top, and pull one end, depending on the force and speed with which you pull, you can accelerate the string quite easily, giving it very considerable momentum. The string accelerates immediately, simply as a result of the pull. No rods etc are involved. The only force involved is the direct pull. Sure, but that’s not what’s happening when the line is strung though a rod. You (the caster) can exert a force on the line in your left (hauling) hand, but the only force that can be exerted on the airborne line *outside* the rod is exerted at the rod tip. Before hauling was discovered, the line momentum was indeed totally dependent on the acceleration of the rod tip. With hauling, this is no longer the case.  When hauling, the extra line velocity is independent of the rod tip. I’m not saying *anything* about the acceleration of the rod tip. I’m only saying that the force on the line (outside the rod) is generated ONLY at the rod tip. Where else? — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

So, In your estimation, does your wrist have a fast action or slow action and how does it affect your distance? Paul

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out. I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip. In fact, in a blindfold test I can’t tell the difference between a Cabelas rod and my own arm –Steve

Response:

Additional rod loading when hauling is  minimal.  Most of the force used is transmitted directly to the line, increasing its speed immediately and drastically. Momentum = Mass * Velocity A very short haul of a couple of inches is sufficient to increase line speed drastically, and thus increase its momentum, allowing the mass to be thrown a greater distance. The harder(force), longer ( distance) and faster( time) the haul, the greater the resulting line momentum, independent of the rod.  The same effect may be observed without using a rod at all. Shortening line decreases the mass, and therefore reduces momentum.  As far as hauling is concerned this is more or less negligible. Shortening the line by even a couple of feet, does not reduce its mass by much. If you overload the rod, the haul will still be effective, but due to the rod already being overloaded, additional strain, even slight, due to shock loading might damage it. Otherwise the length of line ( total mass ) is irrelevant when hauling. The effect is the same with or without a rod, and with any length of line. TL MC — "Where fishing is concerned, most anglers are basically manic excessives" http://www.mikeconnor.de – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From what I’ve always been told,  the reason that hauling improves the line speed is that additional loading is put into the rod by the action of hauling. Obviously the hauling is done during the power phases fore and aft.  An immediate reaction of the hauling action is a shortening of the line,  and therefore an increase in velocity:  Is it at all significant compared to the additional loading of the rod?  Is the inertia of the line broken by the haul and therefore allows the spring of the rod to work on an already moving line? I suppose the way to test it out would be to overline a rod and cast a sufficient length of line to overload the rod.  Would hauling be effective? According to the simple haul/loading spring idea,  the haul would (perhaps) be ineffective, though the shortening of the line (derived from the haul) would still prevail?

Response:

When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out.

I agree with what you’re saying, but I can "cast" nearly thirty feet by using only my right arm as the rod (with fingers in O shape to act as the tiptop) and a lefthand haul. So there’s more to it than just the rod tip. In fact, in a blindfold test I can’t tell the difference between a Cabelas rod and my own arm –Steve

Response:

From what I’ve always been told,  the reason that hauling improves the line speed is that additional loading is put into the rod by the action of hauling. Obviously the hauling is done during the power phases fore and aft.  An immediate reaction of the hauling action is a shortening of the line,  and therefore an increase in velocity:  Is it at all significant compared to the additional loading of the rod?  Is the inertia of the line broken by the haul and therefore allows the spring of the rod to work on an already moving line? I suppose the way to test it out would be to overline a rod and cast a sufficient length of line to overload the rod.  Would hauling be effective? According to the simple haul/loading spring idea,  the haul would (perhaps) be ineffective, though the shortening of the line (derived from the haul) would still prevail?

Response:

From what I’ve always been told,  the reason that hauling improves the line speed is that additional loading is put into the rod by the action of hauling. Obviously the hauling is done during the power phases fore and aft.  An immediate reaction of the hauling action is a shortening of the line,  and therefore an increase in velocity:  Is it at all significant compared to the additional loading of the rod?  Is the inertia of the line broken by the haul and therefore allows the spring of the rod to work on an already moving line?

When you haul you’re loading the rod by making it work harder against the inertia of the line. I don’t really think "shortening the line" is a good way to look at it. A haul takes in maybe two or three feet of line, and you have maybe 30 feet or more out. Imagine what would happen if the end of the line were attached to a springy tree branch when you hauled. (An all too frequent occurence in my case.) The rod would bend even if you didn’t move it forward. By hauling, you cause an increase in the force exerted by the rod tip on the line. When you haul in the normal, more felicitous case, more or less the same thing happens, but the resistance of the tree branch is replaced by the inertia of the line. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/

Response:

Question:

You might try using a hypodermic needle to inject some epoxy between the grip and rod. — Ernie Harrison Remove NOSPAM to send E-Mail Selling my Fly Fishing Books Go to: http://users.ccnet.com/~emh – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I built a GL3  7 1/2 ft 4 wt last winter, but the cork grip was just a bit loose before epoxying it to the blank. The lower 1/2 of the grip toward the reel seat was a pretty good fit, but the upper half has developed a squeak.   The grip is not actually loose but it is starting to feel sloppy (for lack of a better word).  Any ideas about how to fix this problem?  The fellow at the rod shop just looked at me knowingly and nodded his head saying "yup, I kin fix’er fer ye".  Which means stripping off the guides and replacing the grip. I’d like to try something less invasive but can’t figure a way to get the epoxy between the grip and blank. Patrick  

Response:

I built a GL3  7 1/2 ft 4 wt last winter, but the cork grip was just a bit loose before epoxying it to the blank. The lower 1/2 of the grip toward the reel seat was a pretty good fit, but the upper half has developed a squeak.   The grip is not actually loose but it is starting to feel sloppy (for lack of a better word).  Any ideas about how to fix this problem?  The fellow at the rod shop just looked at me knowingly and nodded his head saying "yup, I kin fix’er fer ye".  Which means stripping off the guides and replacing the grip.  I’d like to try something less invasive but can’t figure a way to get the epoxy between the grip and blank.

The only sure cure is a new cork grip that fits correctly with no voids (empty space inside.) Glue is needed only in the thinnest film, to prevent the inside surface of the cork from separating from the rod blank at any point, under whatever stress, so that no void can begin.  Building with voids and filling them will be unsatisfactory in the long run.  The glues react to bending and stretching differently from both blank material and cork, and if more rigid than both will probably wear away the softest i.e. the cork, depending on blank butt stiffness and actual use. I.e. do it right or not at all, if you want to use this rod with pleasure and confidence for a long time.  A repair by injecting glue may be acceptable on a spare rod, used only intermittently, I suppose. — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

Response:

[deleted] but the upper half has developed a squeak.

[deleted] Duct tape usage #309. — TimW – Halfordian Golfer Guilt replaced the creel…

Response:

I have successfully repaired a grip by doing the following: 1) Get some 2 ton epoxy glue. Do not use the 5 minute stuff or super glue. This glue will take at least 24-36 hours to completely setup. It usually comes in 2 hypodermic syringes that are fused together. 2)I put these syringes close to a heat source like a light bulb to heat the solutions which will make them less viscous. 3) Get a 10 cc hypodermic syringe from a physician friend, dentist or vet. Be sure it is clean. You will ruin this syringe.Get a 20 gauge hypo needle at least 1 inch long. 4) Mix glue while it is warm and insert into the syringe. 5) Insert needle into the cork handle and push the glue into the space. You may need to inject in several places. Put rod aside for at least 24 hours before you flex it. I have used this technique on several rods successfully. The holes made by the needle in the cork are small and have been no problem You can repair them as needed. The first time I tried this, I used a 2cc syringe. I was unsuccessful until I used the larger syringe with a bigger bore needle. The 10 cc with the 20 gauge has worked OK, especially after the warming of the solutions. Good luck and let me know how it works out. Regards, J.

Response:

Snip 2)I put these syringes close to a heat source like a light bulb to heat the solutions which will make them less viscous.

I think Jack means "more viscous" and he’s right, warm it up slightly first. You can also use a hair dryer.

Response:

With all due respect, the viscosity of a solution is, according to physic textbooks:  " the property of a fluid which resists change in the shape or molecular arrangement during flow"  As stated in my post, we heat these solutions in order that they become less viscous and more "runny" if you will. A solution that is more viscous has a greater tendency to resist a change in its shape. Water for instance, is less viscous than molasses. My two cents worth. Jack.

Response:

More viscous, less viscous…. I got the point.  Thanks for the advice all the same.  I’m planning on giving this a try this weekend.  Will let you know how it turns out. Patrick

Response:

All the advice is good. I’d just be careful that you don’t hurt the blank itself when you do this. I could imagine having the rod splinter at the grip from a flaw you put into the blank. Of course it would happen on the 24 inch brown. FlyFisherRay

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I built a GL3  7 1/2 ft 4 wt last winter, but the cork grip was just a bit loose before epoxying it to the blank. The lower 1/2 of the grip toward the reel seat was a pretty good fit, but the upper half has developed a squeak. The grip is not actually loose but it is starting to feel sloppy (for lack of a better word).  Any ideas about how to fix this problem?  The fellow at the rod shop just looked at me knowingly and nodded his head saying "yup, I kin fix’er fer ye".  Which means stripping off the guides and replacing the grip.  I’d like to try something less invasive but can’t figure a way to get the epoxy between the grip and blank. The only sure cure is a new cork grip that fits correctly with no voids (empty space inside.) Glue is needed only in the thinnest film, to prevent the inside surface of the cork from separating from the rod blank at any point, under whatever stress, so that no void can begin.  Building with voids and filling them will be unsatisfactory in the long run.  The glues react to bending and stretching differently from both blank material and cork, and if more rigid than both will probably wear away the softest i.e. the cork, depending on blank butt stiffness and actual use. I.e. do it right or not at all, if you want to use this rod with pleasure and confidence for a long time.  A repair by injecting glue may be acceptable on a spare rod, used only intermittently, I suppose. — |  Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs,  | |        Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734         |

  Yah, Don is correct. But if you want to a better half-assed job inject one of the new polyurethane bond  glues. These glues expand in cavities and fill gaps. About 10 years ago I used this type glue for mounting grips. However, the company that mad it took it off the market because of poor shelf life problems. Now there is a new generation of these glues, one Brand Is Elmer’s Pro Bond. These glues have a good open time and a tremendous bonding ability (ask Norm Abrams). Good Luck -Doug Easton

Response:

<snip But if you want to a better half-assed job inject one of the new polyurethane bond  glues.

<rest deleted for brevity Yeah, thats me… half an ass.  My wife keeps telling me the seat of my pants look like a family of Bedouins have recently moved out. Patrick  (suffering from no-ass-itis)

Response:

got to your local pharmacy and get a syringe (disposable plastic) and then stop by your local fire station or even a vetrinarian’s office and get a GREAT BIG needle.  just shoot that grip down in there full of glue…..    At least, it seems reasonable to me… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I built a GL3  7 1/2 ft 4 wt last winter, but the cork grip was just a bit loose before epoxying it to the blank. The lower 1/2 of the grip toward the reel seat was a pretty good fit, but the upper half has developed a squeak. The grip is not actually loose but it is starting to feel sloppy (for lack of a better word).  Any ideas about how to fix this problem?  The fellow at the rod shop just looked at me knowingly and nodded his head saying "yup, I kin fix’er fer ye".  Which means stripping off the guides and replacing the grip.  I’d like to try something less invasive but can’t figure a way to get the epoxy between the grip and blank. Patrick

Response:

Go to a local woodworking store if there is one near you. They sell a hypodermic looking glue injector that is used to push glue into a joint to glue it. If there are no stores near you, go to http://www.todayswoodworker.com I believe you can order it from them. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I built a GL3  7 1/2 ft 4 wt last winter, but the cork grip was just a bit loose before epoxying it to the blank. The lower 1/2 of the grip toward the reel seat was a pretty good fit, but the upper half has developed a squeak. The grip is not actually loose but it is starting to feel sloppy (for lack of a better word).  Any ideas about how to fix this problem?  The fellow at the rod shop just looked at me knowingly and nodded his head saying "yup, I kin fix’er fer ye".  Which means stripping off the guides and replacing the grip.  I’d like to try something less invasive but can’t figure a way to get the epoxy between the grip and blank. Patrick

Response:

I built a GL3  7 1/2 ft 4 wt last winter, but the cork grip was just a bit loose before epoxying it to the blank. The lower 1/2 of the grip toward the reel seat was a pretty good fit, but the upper half has developed a squeak.   The grip is not actually loose but it is starting to feel sloppy (for lack of a better word).  Any ideas about how to fix this problem?  The fellow at the rod shop just looked at me knowingly and nodded his head saying "yup, I kin fix’er fer ye".  Which means stripping off the guides and replacing the grip.  I’d like to try something less invasive but can’t figure a way to get the epoxy between the grip and blank. Patrick  

Response:

Question:

Shad (serious snip)

Hi, The Annapolis River up here just got through it’s shad run which is still very good. had a lient down from ontario, he ot 3 fish in a couple of hours using clouser minnows. We like the chartruese ones, but others would probably work…. Bill — Bill Curry Tight Lines Guide Service Lockeport, Nova Scotia, Canada Phone or Fax :  902-656-3329 http://www.tightlines.ns.ca

Response:

Shad (serious snip)

Hi, The Annapolis River up here just got through it’s shad run which is still very good. Had a client down from Ontario, he got 3 fish in a couple of hours using clouser minnows. We like the chartruese ones, but others would probably work…. Bill — Bill Curry Tight Lines Guide Service Lockeport, Nova Scotia, Canada Phone or Fax :  902-656-3329 http://www.tightlines.ns.ca

Response:

I used to religously fish the American River (Sailor Bar/Nimbus) area in mid to late June for shad (pre-kids). Now that the kids are getting older I’m hoping to get back into it again. We used to use a fly similar to the Crazy Charlie Bonefish Fly – bead eyes, chartruese tail and silver/pearl foil bodies. Anyone out there using the latest and greatest that would be willing to share trade secrets? and/or any recommendations for guides in the same area? Thanks

Response:

Michael: I like to fish for shad along the Sacramento River at Willows and in Chico. There a fly shop in Chico, the Powell Fly shop I believe, that has good information on how the run is progressing.     The flys are fairly simple, chartruese, pink, red, white and silver are good colors and use either bead heads or bead eyes.  Mix and match the tail and body colors. The reports this year have been dissapointing, too much water that is too cold and off color for any good fishing.  If you want more info re flys feel free to e-mail me. Chis Brown – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I used to religously fish the American River (Sailor Bar/Nimbus) area in mid to late June for shad (pre-kids). Now that the kids are getting older I’m hoping to get back into it again. We used to use a fly similar to the Crazy Charlie Bonefish Fly – bead eyes, chartruese tail and silver/pearl foil bodies. Anyone out there using the latest and greatest that would be willing to share trade secrets? and/or any recommendations for guides in the same area? Thanks

Response:

: I used to religously fish the American River (Sailor Bar/Nimbus) area in : mid to late June for shad (pre-kids). Now that the kids are getting : older I’m hoping to get back into it again. We used to use a fly similar : to the Crazy Charlie Bonefish Fly – bead eyes, chartruese tail and : silver/pearl foil bodies. Anyone out there using the latest and greatest : that would be willing to share trade secrets? and/or any recommendations : for guides in the same area? I have caught them on small chartreuse and white clousers in the Merrimack River in Massachusettes.

Response:

Hello TMR, I went out to Upper Sunrise (just below Sailor Bar) a couple of nights ago: the water is still cold and I did not see any fish working.  Sahd fishing is one of the great early summer fishing opportunities along the American.  The fish fight well and they CAN be caught in numbers if conditions are right.  A Crazy Charlie will work, but there are some standard pink, green, and white shad flies that seem to be regularly used on the Sac.  Most fly shops have a good selection , but if you tie your own they are very easy.  I have heard the fish are in the river, but conditions may have to warm before they start taking flys. Good luck JR – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I used to religously fish the American River (Sailor Bar/Nimbus) area in mid to late June for shad (pre-kids). Now that the kids are getting older I’m hoping to get back into it again. We used to use a fly similar to the Crazy Charlie Bonefish Fly – bead eyes, chartruese tail and silver/pearl foil bodies. Anyone out there using the latest and greatest that would be willing to share trade secrets? and/or any recommendations for guides in the same area? Thanks

Response:

Sure wish I could give you updated info….however, I have fond memories of my younger days when I would flyfish for Shad with my dad and brother.  At that time, the Eel River had good Shad runs and we lived just fifteen minutes from the river (if you drove quickly).  We caught lots of Shad in those days.  Today, the Eel River (like many) are mere shadows of their former selves.  I suppose there are Shad runs….but I have yet to see one myself during the last several years.  The Sacramento River is still a bright spot for Shad, I’m told.  As to flies…we used sizes from tens to fours…usually with silver bead eyes and white, pink or red hackle, silver body, red tail.  We’d tie variations, but the size seemed to be the most important and the depth at which you fished. Barry – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I used to religously fish the American River (Sailor Bar/Nimbus) area in mid to late June for shad (pre-kids). Now that the kids are getting older I’m hoping to get back into it again. We used to use a fly similar to the Crazy Charlie Bonefish Fly – bead eyes, chartruese tail and silver/pearl foil bodies. Anyone out there using the latest and greatest that would be willing to share trade secrets? and/or any recommendations for guides in the same area? Thanks

Response:

Tue, 26 May 1998 in rec.outdoors.fishing.fly, T.Michael Reinhart I used to religously fish the American River (Sailor Bar/Nimbus) area in mid to late June for shad (pre-kids). Now that the kids are getting older I’m hoping to get back into it again. We used to use a fly similar to the Crazy Charlie Bonefish Fly – bead eyes, chartruese tail and silver/pearl foil bodies. Anyone out there using the latest and greatest that would be willing to share trade secrets? and/or any recommendations for guides in the same area?

Which species are these?  I caught a few Allis Shad (Alosa Alosa) in the River Wye, South Wales, last week (in from the Atlantic).  Very rare in the UK and therefore a protected species.  Caught them on all sorts of trout flies – nothing special.  What fighters!  Knowing that I had to release them I was worried about catching more – they just fought too hard… — Phil Jones

Response:

Question:

Has anyone tried fly fishing for catfish? What type of flys did you use have suggestions.

Response:

Has anyone tried fly fishing for catfish? What type of flys did you use have suggestions. Try hand grenades.  Be sure to use a tapered leader.

Response:

Question:

        I recently posted an ad for some Orvis gear I have for sale. In the ad, I  blasted some of the company’s corporate people…pretty strongly, I guess,  judging from the response….         In retrospect, I realize that my feelings towards them probably should not  have been posted in a public, albeit small, forum. I believe, therefore, that  I should make the following apologies…..         1. To the members of the group…I apologize.         2. To those few (damn few) at the company who were upfront…I apologize.         3. Finally, to M_ _ _ at Orvis, who apparently took exception to my reference  of "ratdick corporate suckups". So much so, in fact, that he took time out  from his busy schedule (of signing up guides who use live bait on their ‘fly  poles’), to call me at home and threaten to ‘kick my ass’ the next time he is  in Louisiana. My sincerest apologies to rats everywhere for any feelings of  inadequacy my comparison may have caused. Trust me, fellas, you got nothing to  worry about….. By the way, thanks to all of you who wrote expressing support and similar  stories…. Calm Seas…. Capt. Briant Smith

Response:

CaptBriant has a point.  Look what’s happening to our sport.  Before the MOVIE came out, the industry was looking for talented people, preferably college graduates, who could proficiently instruct persons in the art of fly fishing.  Folks like CaptBriant were considered the next Lefty Kreh. Along comes the MOVIE, and just about every joker who thinks he can fly cast goes out soliciting to make a name for himself.  Suddenly, the companies get this great idea: rather than deal with intellectuals like CaptBriant who think independently and want us to compensate THEM – let’s take a bunch of these baitchunking, fly fish "wannabes" put logos on their shirts like BASS pros, and have them compensate us in some form or fashion.  Or better yet, make them do as we command!   Problem is that a lot of these yahoos could care less about the aesthetics of our sport, the art, the literature, the need for conservation, the importance of passing ideals and morals that we learn from fishing on to our young people.  As a result, the "art" of fly fishing has become almost all sport. Granted there are still more good guides and instructors under these programs than bad ones, but I’m concerned.   More and more, I find myself having to reteach some of my students out of the bad habits and incorrect methods they learn from such yahoos. Go on, CaptBriant, and preach the word.  The multitudes hear your voice and it speaks the truth!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CaptBriant has a point.  Look what’s happening to our sport.  Before the MOVIE came out, the industry was looking for talented people, preferably college graduates, who could proficiently instruct persons in the art of fly fishing.  Folks like CaptBriant were considered the next Lefty Kreh. Along comes the MOVIE, and just about every joker who thinks he can fly cast goes out soliciting to make a name for himself.  Suddenly, the companies get this great idea: rather than deal with intellectuals like CaptBriant who think independently and want us to compensate THEM – let’s take a bunch of these baitchunking, fly fish "wannabes" put logos on their shirts like BASS pros, and have them compensate us in some form or fashion.  Or better yet, make them do as we command! Problem is that a lot of these yahoos could care less about the aesthetics of our sport, the art, the literature, the need for conservation, the importance of passing ideals and morals that we learn from fishing on to our young people.  As a result, the "art" of fly fishing has become almost all sport. Granted there are still more good guides and instructors under these programs than bad ones, but I’m concerned.   More and more, I find myself having to reteach some of my students out of the bad habits and incorrect methods they learn from such yahoos. Go on, CaptBriant, and preach the word.  The multitudes hear your voice and it speaks the truth!

  Good post. I agree completely. Willi

Response:

What MOVIE are we talking about??  If you’re talking about A River Runs Trough it, I agree and disagree.  You made some good points in this post.  However, so what if a beautiful movie comes along and glorifies our sport, and gets more people into flyfishing (for a little while anyhow).  While you may think it’s a bummer to see more people fishing your favorite pools and runs, I think it’s great that some medium has influenced people to get outdoors, have fun, and respect the planet. It’s like saying, "damn that man on the moon airing!! Now every Tom, Dick, and Harry wants to be an astronaut and study more in science class!"  Just my two cents. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CaptBriant has a point.  Look what’s happening to our sport.  Before the MOVIE came out, the industry was looking for talented people, preferably college graduates, who could proficiently instruct persons in the art of fly fishing.  Folks like CaptBriant were considered the next Lefty Kreh. Along comes the MOVIE, and just about every joker who thinks he can fly cast goes out soliciting to make a name for himself.  Suddenly, the companies get this great idea: rather than deal with intellectuals like CaptBriant who think independently and want us to compensate THEM – let’s take a bunch of these baitchunking, fly fish "wannabes" put logos on their shirts like BASS pros, and have them compensate us in some form or fashion.  Or better yet, make them do as we command! Problem is that a lot of these yahoos could care less about the aesthetics of our sport, the art, the literature, the need for conservation, the importance of passing ideals and morals that we learn from fishing on to our young people.  As a result, the "art" of fly fishing has become almost all sport. Granted there are still more good guides and instructors under these programs than bad ones, but I’m concerned.   More and more, I find myself having to reteach some of my students out of the bad habits and incorrect methods they learn from such yahoos. Go on, CaptBriant, and preach the word.  The multitudes hear your voice and it speaks the truth!

Response:

Question:

I’m a native of Florida and have been tying my own flies for some time now. I have an assortment of 3 that Snook/Redfish and Trout kill in the backcountry of Central and South Florida. If I get good response from this message I’ll post a photo in the and sell them my mail order. Let me know what you think. -Mark Ballard I have been flyfishing in Jenson Beach area of Florida without great results..I would be interested in information on your {hot flies and how to fish them.     Thanks, TomI plan on a "business trip" to central Florida the first part of May and

plan to fish in the Titusville area.  I would like to know more about your flies and other patterns that are successful in the area.

Response:

Mark: I am headed to S.W.Florida- would really like to have some trout and redfish flies and also the best type of places to fish them. Thanks-Alex

Response:

I would like to hear about those flies also. Jerry Virzi

Response:

For all these fish there are several types of flies that are very successful: 1)  Clouser Minnows 2)  Lefty’s Deceivers 3)  Crazy Charlies and other shrimp/crab immitations. These all work well on the Texas flats, assume they will work in Flordia or elsewhere.

Response:

I’m a native of Florida and have been tying my own flies for some time now. I have an assortment of 3 that Snook/Redfish and Trout kill in the backcountry of Central and South Florida. If I get good response from this message I’ll post a photo in the and sell them my mail order. Let me know what you think. -Mark Ballard

Response:

I’m a native of Florida and have been tying my own flies for some time now. I have an assortment of 3 that Snook/Redfish and Trout kill in the backcountry of Central and South Florida. If I get good response from this message I’ll post a photo in the and sell them my mail order. Let me know what you think. -Mark Ballard

I have been flyfishing in Jenson Beach area of Florida without great results..I would be interested in information on your {hot flies and how to fish them.     Thanks, Tom

Response:

Question:

Ron To get the best traction on a wet surface (a boat ramp) look for an all season tire with a high volume of tread surfaces.  This type of tire will have a lot of tiny cuts in the tread design.  When the tire is stressed pulling a load, this type of tread will flex and the edges of these cuts will grip the road surface.  Do Not consider the course off road tread design!  It has the worst hard surface traction. You should also be very light on the gas pedal.  A posi traction differential is also a big help if it is kept maintained and the clutches adjusted. Would you believe I pull a 3800 lb boat up steep boat ramps with a chev s-10 with no problems? Good Luck Wayne

Response:

The next time this happens, try letting some air out of the rear tires – enough to increase the footprint somewhat. Be sure to air up again at the first opportunity. (Longrigger) writes: | Have your buddies jump in the back of the truck to give it wieght. | I have stuck the floor mats in front of the tires once when I was alone | and got stuck, but sand would be alot better. | | Longrigger

    Try pulling up the anchor on the boat…  (I couldn’t resist!)     No, really…  Tire pressure helps a ton, and the start of the pull is the most important part.  Once underway, roll into the throttle, but maintain traction…  (I think that all of the answers I have read here would help.)     …Sam

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. Question: what kind of tire tread design would provide the *most* friction? Knobby, off-road type, or a smoother "pavement" type? Remember, by the way, that this is extremely low-speed operation, just barely turning, in fact, so concepts like "hydroplaning" probably wouldn’t apply here. We’re talking about pulling a load up a wet concrete surface. How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in

Well iv been towing several different boats for many years and with different car’s here’s my $.01 worth. My last boat is a 3500 -4000 lbs boat and trailer, and iv towed it with my four cylinder turbo 5 speed (not many times) it did well no spinning. But now it has posi and very good traction tires on the rear. I now use a 87 jeep cherokee with a posi and BF comp TA’s works very well. Also on thing to remember is your toung weight. My toung weight is over 250+ lbs , thats why I went to the jeep. At first the jeep was a standard rear end and there was some slipping but since the posi the only time it skips is if I jump on the gas to hard. Does any one out there remember the rule of thumb on toung weight? It’s some % of your total weight should be your toung weight. And this also helps if you have to slow your boat down real fast on the hwy. bye

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower.

. . . . Ron Morgan

Since you have more than enough horsepower – if one rear wheel starts to spin, hold the parking brake release open and apply the parking brake.  If you apply hard enough, both wheels will receive power. You can also try stabbing at the parking brake if the engine does not have enough power. Not a sure fire thing.  But it is another trick to but in your bag. Terry Dobie 83 CJ7 Hailey, ID

Response:

I use my Jeep Grand Cherokee to haul my boat.  I learned the hard way that you have to ease into the pull.  I use an awefull ramp in East Falmouth Cape Cod that is always covered in a thin layer of scum.  On one occasion, I was sort of hurried by other boaters waiting to get out of the water and I pulled to fast.  Before I knew it, my tires were spinning and I was moving backward.  OOOOPS!  Thank god I stopped on time.   I now make sure that my air pressure is a little lower (more surface space), and that I ease into the pull.  At this one particular ramp, I often throw handfulls of sand onto the algae to create a little traction.  I read a lot of others posts where sand is the enemy, but in this scenerio, it works well. Good luck David

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out. My truck can just BARELY pull the boat up the ramp under these conditions. If it’s dry, no problem, but when the ramp is wet, the tires slip and spin, sometimes even smoking. It’s a very, very marginal situation. Last night, I came very close to being stranded at a deserted ramp after dark; I could *not* get that boat up that ramp, and finally made it up after creeping about an inch at a time, before the tires would slip. God only knows what kind of wear this produced on my transmission. Question: what kind of tire tread design would provide the *most* friction? Knobby, off-road type, or a smoother "pavement" type? Remember, by the way, that this is extremely low-speed operation, just barely turning, in fact, so concepts like "hydroplaning" probably wouldn’t apply here. We’re talking about pulling a load up a wet concrete surface. How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in another couple of months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well. Ron Morgan

Ron, I have a Full size Dodge Van and have never had a problem pulling the boat up the ramp, except for one occasion. It was a really long and very wet ramp. I was having problems with wheel spin, I remember reading somthing about turning your front tires, (somthing about changing the pull ratio) and also applying the parking brake a bit. Boat pulled right out with out any wheel spin what-so-ever. Good luck. Michael

Response:

*snip* months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well. Ron Morgan Ron, I have a Full size Dodge Van and have never had a problem pulling the boat up the ramp, except for one occasion. It was a really long and very wet ramp. I was having problems with wheel spin, I remember reading somthing about turning your front tires, (somthing about changing the pull ratio) and also applying the parking brake a bit.

    You must have a non-posi rear end on your van…  The emergency brake trick worked on my ‘91 Dakota when semi-stuck in sand (I had a non-posi rearend).   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Boat pulled right out with out any wheel spin what-so-ever. Good luck. Michael

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out.

After many years of enjoying the entertainment of watching people pull boats out at a wide variety of ramps throughout the western US, I know this: The initial pull to get a boat up out of the water is substantial, if you think of how hard it is to pull a small water skier up out of the water, imaging something with 30 times the weight and surface tension and bad hydrodynamics (the trailer…not the boat!) Many people think the best approach is to try to accelerate quickly to "get the damn thing going!", so they give their rig too much throttle. Once you break adhesion on a slick surface, you cannot pull a load equivalent to before you spun the wheels.  So if it spins, let off the throttle and let the wheels catch traction.  Then, try again with less acceleration.  Don’t think that spinning your wheels faster will get you up the ramp, ’cause it will only make it harder to get out. As other posts have said, lowering your tire pressure a little will help a lot.  But I have found on most ramps I can get my boat out by just driving a little more gently and not starting the spinning.  I find an auto trans works better, since you can accelerate from a standstill very slowly without having to dump the clutch.  But I have had several trucks with 4 speeds and a couple of 5 speeds.  You just gotta take it easy, and don’t try to pull the boat out fast.

Response:

I thought friction was normal force times coefficient of friction.  Nowhere mentioning pressure or area.  Deflation is for soft surfaces where pressure does need to be reduced? …        Grasping another opportunity to be wrong!

seems you caught this opportunity nicely That’s the description you find in physics 101, but it doesn’t work well in this case.  It works for flat surfaces in contact (with a few other assumptions).  When you add rough surfaces, compressible and deformable surfaces, and weak surface features (like sand on the ramp) that can withstand only a (smallish) maximum force before breaking away, then surface area and tread play an important role.

Response:

I thought friction was normal force times coefficient of friction.  Nowhere mentioning pressure or area.  Deflation is for soft surfaces where pressure does need to be reduced? pqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpqpq        Grasping another opportunity to be wrong! [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

Response:

Man, sand on concrete can REALLY cause you to slip!

This isn’t sand on concrete (like a building site) but sand on a concrete boat ramp. All the ramps I’ve seen have been pretty slippery with weed and green gunk. If I used the same ramp every day, I’d scrub the thing clean and use Jeyes fluid or caustic soda on it occasionally to keep the gunk off. I know little about boat ramps, but I do know about silage clamps and slurry lagoons  (bleurgh !) – even for these noxious devices it’s worth doing a bit of scrubbing & hosing occasionally. Failing that, get as big a contact patch as you can. Soft rubber in small tread blocks (not great mud-plugger tread bars) and a low enough pressure to let the tyre flatten as much as is practical. — alt.flame – Making the world a safer place for postal workers.

Response:

How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in another couple of months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well.

        Er, does that imply that your current tires are rather bald?         If so, ‘nuf said.         Relative weight of vehicle and tow is important. (If the wheels         on your trailer are bigger than the wheels on your tow vehicle,         you’re in trouble. Saw a Chicago flatlander trying to tow a large         boat with his Beamer. Didn’t make it.)         In your case, the truck should have enough towing weight, but         the question is about weight on the rear wheels.         o The angle of the ramp tends to transfer more weight to the           rear wheels.         o Tounge weight of the trailer is important.         I am hauling a smaller  14′ runabout (40 horse motor) with a         Ranger pickup in a similar situation. I have no problems.         o I have a stick, so can control things better.         o When I was towing with a station wagon and automatic, I would:            o Put the transmission in second            o Step on the brake            o Give it some gas.            o Use the break as a clutch, slowly easing up so that there              was no jerk in the initial pull. Frank R. Borger – Physicist     ___      "I think medical research would show Michael Reese – U of Chicago   |___       that being a Cubs fan lengthens Center for Radiation Therapy   | |_) _    your life. Or maybe it just _seems_ ph: 312-791-8075 fa: 791-2517       |_)

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out.

[...]         have you tried deflating the rear tyres a bit?  you’d get a larger         contact area.         andrew —            work phone/fax: 0131 668 8356, office: 0131 668 8357     institute for astronomy, royal observatory, blackford hill, edinburgh                      http://www.roe.ac.uk/ajcwww

Response:

Question: what kind of tire tread design would provide the *most* friction? Knobby, off-road type, or a smoother "pavement" type? Remember, by the way, that this is extremely low-speed operation, just barely turning, in fact, so concepts like "hydroplaning" probably wouldn’t apply here. We’re talking about pulling a load up a wet concrete surface. How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in another couple of months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well.

There’s a lot coming into play. I find all terrains are significantly better than road tires.  I would assume mudders are even better.  My guess would be that the deep tread actually allows some of the edges of the tread to grip the ramp, cause there’s certainly lower area in contact.  Course that also means greater psi. Another factor is the softness of the rubber.  I would suspect that given two identical tires, the one with the lower tread life would be better. You could also get a bit wider tires.  I’ve also seen people with a bucket of sand they toss out to get a better grip.  No-one really complains about sand at a launch ramp. kevin

Response:

Well, since you’re having trouble on boat ramps with your pickup you need more weight on the wheels.  If you can’t get buddies or bystanders to sit in the bed to get more weight on the rear wheels, try some of that water in 5 gallon pails (like paint pails).  If you’re in salt water you’ll want lids to keep the water out of the bed; in fresh water that’s not a problem.  10 x 5 gal x 8 lbs/gal is 400 lbs, enough to help quite a bit.  Nice thing about this is you don’t need to drag the extra weight around afterwards, and it’s likely to be available wherever you launch your boat .   — Bart Smaalders                  Solaris Performance     SunSoft http://playground.sun.com/~barts                    2550 Garcia Ave                                                         Mt View, CA 94043-1100

Response:

he one with the lower tread life would be better. You could also get a bit wider tires.  I’ve also seen people with a bucket of sand they toss out to get a better grip.

Man, sand on concrete can REALLY cause you to slip! Sand on ICE is ok but no sand is better on non-frozen concrete. George Bonser

Response:

How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in another couple of months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well. Ron Morgan

Wide, sticky tires in my opinion. Though they spread the weight out more, there is more surface for gripping. It will reduce fuel economy somewhat though.  Also, I would worry more about hydroplaning on FRONT wheels where you could loose steering control. You might try putting some weight over that axle or letting 5lb of air out if you get stranded. George Bonser

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out. Ron Morgan

I stuck my truck in Galveston Bay this way.  My solution was to buy an old CJ5.  Now I drop into 4 wheel drive in low range.  And no problem. A cheaper alternative is to mount a trailer ball on the front which keeps those rear wheels way up out of the water. cfly — Charlie and Dorothy Fly Non-Trivial Solutions 2951 Marina Bay Dr. Suite 130-349 League City, TX  77573-2733

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out. Ron Morgan

Ron – When you buy your tires, make sure you get a better traction rating.  Talk to the tire dealer about traction ratings and wet pavement.  He may help you out tremendously. (Softer tires may wear quicker.) Other solutions to consider can make a big difference :         1. Put a couple hundred pounds of sand bags or blocks in the                 very back of the truck.  Spinning can be caused by not                 enough weight on the rear wheels.         2. Adjust your boat on the trailer to increase the tongue weight                 of the trailer (not to an extreme).  With the boat further                 on the trailer, you will get more weight on the truck tires.         3. Next truck, get limited slip differential to use both back wheels instead of one. Good luck and may all your ramps be dry ones, Joe

Response:

Have your buddies jump in the back of the truck to give it wieght. I have stuck the floor mats in front of the tires once when I was alone and got stuck, but sand would be alot better. Longrigger

Response:

Almost everybody I know has had the same problem with some combination of boats, ramps and tow vehicles. I have better traction on my jeep since I moved up on tire size. The tires are all weather radials. I can still spin all 4 tires if the ramp is mucky enough. Just having new tires will make a difference because the rubber will be softer and the thicker tread will be more compliant than on the older tires. My neighbor mounted a hitch ball on the front bumper of his 2WD truck which let him keep his rear tires high and dry. This can be particularly important at low tide, especially on ramps in estuaries that tend to silt up and/or grow moss. I carried a 20 foot heavy duty tow rope for several years untill the size of my tow vehicle caught up with my boat. I have also seen tongue extensions used for the same purpose. Many sailboaters use these because a keelboat has to be sent WAY back before it will float off the trailer. They either telescope out of the trailer tongue or are carried along side. Some of them even have their own wheels on them that will take much more abuse than a standard trailer jack wheel. My jeep has mushy rear springs and a short wheelbase, so I don’t run with much tongue weight. You can usually run much more tongue weight on a real truck like yours. 300 or 400 lbs of tongue weight, if you are not already running that much, could do a lot for your traction problems. Check with the truck manufacturer to see what they recommend.                                                 vaaler

Response:

& Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 & pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The & boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, & of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. & Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off & other boats that were just pulled out. & My truck can just BARELY pull the boat up the ramp under these & conditions. If it’s dry, no problem, but when the ramp is wet, & the tires slip and spin, sometimes even smoking. It’s a very, & very marginal situation. Last night, I came very close to being & stranded at a deserted ramp after dark; I could *not* get that & boat up that ramp, and finally made it up after creeping about an & inch at a time, before the tires would slip. God only knows what & kind of wear this produced on my transmission. You don’t say what the truck is, but does it have a limited slip differential (pozi-trac, sure-grip, etc)?  If not that would get you double the traction.  They can be added to many of the trucks out there. Hewlett Packard              (707) 794-4848 fax      (707) 538-3693 home 1212 Valley House Drive      http://web.sr.hp.com/~frankb/ Rohnert Park CA 94928-4999   KC6WUG, AMA, DoD #7566, NMLRA, I’m the NRA. U.S.A.              Dodge V8 Dakota, Yamaha IT175 XT350 YZF600R Seca 750

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out. My truck can just BARELY pull the boat up the ramp under these conditions. If it’s dry, no problem, but when the ramp is wet, the tires slip and spin, sometimes even smoking. It’s a very, very marginal situation. Last night, I came very close to being stranded at a deserted ramp after dark; I could *not* get that boat up that ramp, and finally made it up after creeping about an inch at a time, before the tires would slip. God only knows what kind of wear this produced on my transmission. Question: what kind of tire tread design would provide the *most* friction? Knobby, off-road type, or a smoother "pavement" type? Remember, by the way, that this is extremely low-speed operation, just barely turning, in fact, so concepts like "hydroplaning" probably wouldn’t apply here. We’re talking about pulling a load up a wet concrete surface. How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in another couple of months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well. Ron Morgan

    Ron I had the same ‘problem’ with my old truck (‘91 Dakota with limited slip).  I would put up a slippery ramp and one tire would spin (no posi!)…  I helped the situation by putting all of the crap in the back of the truck that was in the boat, to put more weight over the rear tires (Coolers, skis, gas cans, clothes, etc.)  This made a difference.  I don’t know what type of truck you have, or if it has posi, but with my NEW ‘95 Dakota w/posi + 5 speed I am able to pull that same boat, with all of the crap still in the boat, with no problem out of the same ramp.  I do run a lower tire pressure, as this tends to put more rubber onto the ground, giving more traction.  You might try that too…(it wouldn’t hurt).       BTW  If you didn’t already know this, when pulling out of a boat ramp with a automatic trans, and you work pretty hard to pull that boat up (any pull should be considered) the ramp, make sure you don’t pull up to the staging area and shut off your truck while securing you boat. All of the heat generated by the pull will not leave the transmission (as it didn’t get cooled yet by the transmission cooler)…and can cause a lot of wear/tear/damage to your transmission.  My bone-head friend went through 2 transmissions over 2 seasons going to the Colorado river with his boat.  Every time he got it out of the water he would shut down, secure the boat, then take off…with an air temp of about 110 F. that truck would almost boil the transmission fluid!!!  He learned.     I got a 5 speed ( no cooler needed!), and it works a lot better than a automatic (at least for me it does).     My $.02     ..Sam

Response:

Conditions: a standard half-ton truck, attempting to pull a 3,000 pound fishing boat up a fairly steep concrete launch ramp. The boat is on a 4-wheel trailer in good condition. The truck is, of course, rear-wheel drive, and has more than enough horsepower. Special consideration: the ramp is *wet*, due to water dripping off other boats that were just pulled out. My truck can just BARELY pull the boat up the ramp under these conditions. If it’s dry, no problem, but when the ramp is wet, the tires slip and spin, sometimes even smoking. It’s a very, very marginal situation. Last night, I came very close to being stranded at a deserted ramp after dark; I could *not* get that boat up that ramp, and finally made it up after creeping about an inch at a time, before the tires would slip. God only knows what kind of wear this produced on my transmission. Question: what kind of tire tread design would provide the *most* friction? Knobby, off-road type, or a smoother "pavement" type? Remember, by the way, that this is extremely low-speed operation, just barely turning, in fact, so concepts like "hydroplaning" probably wouldn’t apply here. We’re talking about pulling a load up a wet concrete surface. How about it, you guys? I need to buy new tires for my truck in another couple of months, and I’d appreciate some input. In addition, I think it’d make an interesting discussion topic, as well. Ron Morgan

Response: