| Presentation Sinking Line
|
[
Presentation Sinking Line ] [ FAQ ] |
|
[Previous Message]
[Next Message]
|
|
Date: April 04, 2007 at 17:58:56
From: merch, [ip68-14-8-175.ri.ri.cox.net]
Subject: sink vs float |
|
|
|
Considering getting a sinking line to add to my arsenal. It seems like it might be a useful thing to have fishing off the boat in the daylight hours. Something occurred to me though while pondering this purchase. It has to do with the whole overlining/underlining debate that goes on daily on this site as well as many others. It occurred to me from my experience as a spin fisherman that there may be a significant difference between the physics in casting floating lines vs. sinking lines. It came down to this in my mind: If I take my 10ft surf rod and try to cast a 1oz, 7 inch, floating Redfin my cast will always be much shorter than when I cast a 1oz, sinking kastmaster which goes like a bullet. Add a stiff onshore wind and trying to cast the Redfin is almost useless but the kastmaster still hums through the air seemingly unaffected. Same mass but very different results. Of course, we all know this is due to air drag which is a function of crossectional area and the stability of the plugs flight characteristics. Simple right? Higher density + same mass = longer cast. Could this be true for sinking lines vs floating lines? All the people that say I am overlining my rod fish primarily with sinking lines. Could the same grain weight sinking lines actually cast better than their floating line counterparts on the rod they are rated for because they come in a higher density package? Having never tried a sinking line I defer to you guys. Should I follow the same philosophy of “overlining” when looking for a sinking line, or should I try a line weight closer to the rod rating? Or maybe I’ll just forget it and try out sink tips instead.
|
|
|
|
Posted with TalkShop version
2.71-8 |
[Previous Message]
[Next Message]
|
|
|
Follow Ups: |
|
|
[
Presentation Sinking Line ] [ FAQ ] |
|