Fifty-six years ago (1961) the long-defunct American Fly Tackle Manufacturers Association (AFTMA) established the line weight categories we still "use" today to match fly rods to fly lines - and to buy both. Fly lines and fly rods have greatly changed in materials and construction since then. Buying the wrong rods and the wrong blanks could boost sales and add to the mystique of fly fishing - but could just as easily frustrate and alienate people interested in taking up fly fishing and fly casting. I would welcome a committee of accomplished fly fishers/casters NOT beholding to any fly-tackle manufacturer to establish a new set of standards to select and match fly lines and fly rods, and hopefully include casting distance requirements.

Phil, a very interesting proposal!

How do you see it proceeding with today's rods and lines? Since the categories were established many new variables have been introduced, ie. rod actions, line taper designs, line coating as well as fishing techniques such as Chek nymphing. Add to that the facts that most fresh water fish are caught within 40 feet and salt water at much longer distances. Thus today we have many specialty lines.

The way I see the current ratings are, they are just a starting point, and then you adjust for the variables as mentioned above.
Do you envision a standard for every variable?

This could be an interesting discussion!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2017 01:45PM by Phil Erickson.

The AFTMA system works as well now as it ever did, which was very good. The problem is that rod manufacturers, in the quest to prove they had the "longest casting" 6-weight (or whatever) began under-labeling their rods so more line (more distance) could be carried. Because few fly fishermen understand the simple relationship between line length and physical weight, they stick lines on rods that won't load those rods at the distances the manufacturer intended, and which that same manufacturer didn't list on the rod or in their literature. For far too many fly fishermen, a "4-weight" line should work/load a "4-weight" rod at any distance, which simply isn't correct. And to make matters worse, line manufacturers are now making lines that carry line numbers that don't match the AFTMA weight parameters.

This is one of the reasons that Dr. Hanneman choose to correlate his power figure (ERN) with an equation that will match rods and lines with the addition of a simple formula - ERN = ELN. This works well with 30 feet of line past the tip. From there, the angler can easily choose to up (ERN + 1 = ELN) or downline (ERN - 1 = ELN), for distances in much closer or out much further. Of course, this doesn't do any good for the consumer if the rod manufacturers aren't going to supply a power rating, and since everyone wants to have the "longest" casting fly rods, they aren't likely to do so. I think Rajeff's Echo line listed ERN power figures, and NFC certainly did, but that's about it. It works perfectly, but manufacturers will resist adopting it for obvious reasons.

Many fly rods from earlier manufacturers carried three line weight designations. The one in the middle was for roughly 30 feet of line, the lower number for in closer, the higher number for out further. Burkheimer still does this I think. But since so few fly fishermen understand the relationship between physical line weight and length, this didn't work either.

Unlike a bass lure that weighs 1/4 ounce regardless, the weight of say, a 4-weight line changes as you move more or less of it beyond the tip. Until more fisherman understand this, no system is going to achieve what many would like it to. Commercial rod manufacturers are simply not going to give any sort of power rating for their rods, and without that, choosing the best line for the way you cast and fish is a trial and error process.

...................

The key to success or failure for the existing or any future rating scheme lies with the M in AFTMA - the Manufacturers, the majority of which seek sales and thus revenue advantage by gaming the system. Until the M types see marketing and sales advantage in strict adherence to any system it will continue to be a buyer beware knife fight (as in no rules to speak of).

For 40 years 95% of my fly fishing was on small streams where a 40' cast was a Boomer and wind was a minor consideration. For the last 20 years 95% of my fly fishing has been in salt water, where a fly fisherman with a 40' range on a calm day would have to stay home seven of ten days because of the wind. I find the AFTMA system to be of little value and often a source of confusion to new fly fishers. IMHO the actual weight of the first 20, 30, and 40 feet of a fly line, IN GRAINS, marked on fly lines would provide much more useful and comprehensible information to novice and veteran fly fishers alike. And a matching numbering system on rod blanks would make matching rods with lines and to casting conditions easier for novice and veteran alike.

But that's what the AFTMA system was - a matching numbering system. Switching to weight in grains wouldn't change anything because the rod manufacturers would simply under-rate the rods, again, so they could each claim to have long casting rods. It's exactly the same thing - AFTMA simply assigned a whole number to a specific number of grains.

...................

Phil,
Aren't some fly lines (shooting heads or spey lines) already labeled in grains instead of an AFTMA number? . . but again that is based on length of line before the running line or the AFTMA number of feet to weigh and convert to a number . .
But I think I see your point . . if each fly line had actual weight for 20 feet, 30 feet, 40 feet etc. on the label you would know that x feet of a 7wt double taper is equal to y feet of a 6wt weight forward taper etc.
So if you had a sweet spot on a favorite rod you could dial into that sweet spot with more or less line off the tip by changing the line to a different taper . . and the info on the label would help

so maybe people could cut and weight their used fly lines and someone could collect and share the data

Today a fly line marketed as a "7 weight" could weigh anywhere from 177 grains to 205 grains in the first 30 feet, but the next 20 or 30 feet could weigh between 30 and 90 grains more. Some fly fishers never back cast more than 20' of line. The AFTMA number might be ok for them. Others frequently carry 40' or even 50' of line in the air. Knowing the weight of that line between the 30' and the 50' mark could save them $99.95 - but it would mean one less line would be sold at a profit.

I would be indebted to builders of fly rods who included their observations of what weight and even brand and model of fly line casts best with a particular rod they have built. I think other fly rod builders on this site would also gladly read and use this information. It would beat shelling out $90 for a line with poor compatibility to the rod they have built, and reduce customer complaints over a fly rod's performance when the choice of fly line is the cause of their troubles.