.jpg)
Most come to two-handed
rods through steelhead and salmon fishing, as a practical and enjoyable
refinement toward collecting those fish from larger rivers. I’m probably fairly
unique as my entry into the world of double-hand rods came through the desire
for a better trout rod to meet the demands of my home water, the upper Columbia
Big rivers present technical challenges that might be efficiently
met by going big, and a two-handed trout rod might be the solution to covering
those waters. Or, a somewhat smaller river, for example, the Truckee, in California Truckee has a slippery, loose cobbled bottom and can be
dangerous to wade. A two-hander allows for longer casts, hence less wading for
position. The longer rod holds more line off the water, affording more control
and easier mending. With a two-hander, anybody who can execute a basic
single-Spey cast or roll cast, will be far less hindered by lack of
back-cast room. I can see the possibility of an angler taking command of the
lower Truckee employing a two-hander, swinging
a pair of nymphs or a muddler, covering the water more efficiently and with
less effort than a single-hander.
So what constitutes a Spey rod suitable for trout?
There are a lot of kilt-wearing Scots in British Columbia
My first double-hand ‘trout rod’ was a 12’6” 5/6 Spey with a grain
window of 350-550 grains, rated as a light steelhead rod, the lightest affordable
and generally available twenty years ago. I learned to cast with it, and it was
fun, yet didn’t fulfill exactly what I had in mind as a two-handed trout rod.
My home water and its trout dictated something a bit lighter, throwing a less
invasive line weight.
Once I learned Spey casts can be performed with a single-hand rod I
wondered if a shorter, lighter rod might benefit from the addition of a rear
grip – so I guinea-pigged an old fast-action, 9’ 6wt. After removing the butt
cap from the reel seat, I assembled a 3” rear grip on a 6” fitted section cut
from an old blank, then epoxied and inserted it, ferruled into the rod butt.
The result is a fun rod, no Spey cannon but certainly better at performing Spey
& roll casts than it was without the rear grip. It is a roll-casting
machine rigged with a 7wt double-taper line, a nice tool for high-stick
nymphing, and good for pot-shooting cruising trout with emergers due to its
ability to fire a quick double-hand overhead cast a fair distance without
wasting time false-casting. The conversion works well on small to medium-sized
streams, the size streams that many of us fish most of the time, places where
we seldom cast farther than forty feet and roll-casting is the preferred mode. But keep in mind that 10’ to 12’ rods designed to handle
two-handed casts, which generate considerable torque in the rod, will be better
tools than your10’ 4wt ‘far & fine’
modified with a rear grip, if you plan on meeting larger rivers
holding a larger grade of fish, throwing heavier flies.
It requires a heavier line to load a rod for Spey casts, and rods
designed for the purpose will throw a variety of lines; while a converted
single-hand rod will be more fragile, possessing a tighter grain window. A
conversion will perform best lined with the heaviest line it can possibly
handle, but such rods do have strength limitations, so I would hesitate to go
heavier than two line weights above the designation on the rod for fear of breaking
it, and one or one and a half steps over the designated weight is a safer way
to go for a conversion. The modified 6wt with handy rear
grip that I built is a fun rod for fishing lakes and smaller streams, yet
didn’t prove enough stick for meeting the larger rivers I like to fish. I found
myself wanting a rod about 11’ to 12’ in length that might throw the equivalent
of 6 to 9wt AFTMA rated lines, or a grain window somewhere between 160 and 250
grains.
I’m currently using an 11' 3" rod manufacturer-rated for 6wt
(160 grains) AFTMA lines. It is sold as a ‘switch rod’, meaning it can be
operated in either single-hand or double-hand mode. Trials revealed that the manufacturer’s
6wt designation is actually the lightest end of the rod’s grain window. After
casting it with a variety of lines I determined the rod will handle 6wt to 8wt AFTMA
lines most effectively, giving it a grain window of 160-210 grains. That covers
the spectrum of things I want the rod to do, presenting and fishing small soft-hackles
and double nymph rigs, swinging wetflies and streamers. While capable of
handling an eight pound trout it doesn’t feel like too
big a gun when fighting a twelve-incher. It is perfect for sea-run cutthroat, I’ve
taken steelhead and pinks with it, and it’s all I use anymore for fishing
barred perch in the surf.
Lining a Double-Hand Trout Rod:
The ideal length of line beyond the rod tip for performing any type of Spey or change of direction
cast is roughly equal to three times the length of
the rod – about 30’ is the working length on rods appropriate for trouting.
AFTMA line ratings are based on the grain weight of the first 30’ of line,
while AFFTA (Spey) line ratings are based on the weight of several working
lengths of line beyond the rod tip, each line designation available in several
weights. There is a vast difference between the two. An AFTMA rated 6 weight
line weighs 160 grains over the first 30’; while a #6 AFFTA Spey rated line can
weigh 350 grains and more, depending on the working length beyond the rod tip, which
may be somewhat more than 30’. Such a line might
break a rod designed for a 6wt AFTMA line. Fortunately, an enlightened minority
of rod makers print the grain window on the rod, which is most helpful,
allowing us to choose from a spectrum of lines – and that is the future, I
hope. Knowing
the grain window of your rod will cut through the confusion and open the door
to lining possibilities. When you think in grain weight, no matter
what the label says: a line is a line is a line. And regarding trout rods, our
only concerns are what purpose we have for the line and how much the first 30’
weighs. As of this writing, it is among the AFTMA rated lines that we find the
greatest variety suitable for trouting. Though
there are now builders producing light, 2/3 Spey designated rods and lines
designed with trout in mind, there are no official AFFTA
weight designations for 1, 2 and 3, the Spey weights falling into the grain
window most suitable for trout rods. For perspective, I casted a 10’6” Meiser
2/3 which casted 6wt, 7wt & 9wt lines, & casted beautifully lined with
the 8wt. Generally, the longer the rod
the wider its grain window, and a rod built to withstand the rigors of Spey
casting will handle a variety of lines fairly well, though it will have a sweet
zone, and that will vary according to casting style.
For small to medium sized streams an integrated, floating, weight-forward
line will perform fine on a two-hander. Lines selling as ‘triangle tapers’, configured
similar to Scandi heads, with the weight distributed toward the back of the
taper, are a good choice for a double-hand trout rod – and sinking leaders or
sink tips of up to 10’ can be looped to these as needed. There is at least one
manufacturer offering double-taper lines with heads designed for Spey casting
with either single or double-hand trout rods. In lining a light conversion
meant for smaller streams, to my mind, you can’t go wrong with a double-taper,
which is configured like a long-belly Spey line. A DT presents well, and the
fatter running line creates maximum drag on the water and weight in the D loop
to load the rod, particularly in tight situations when casting with less than
30’ beyond the rod tip. I offer the DT as my own preference, and that is not to
say any integrated weight-forward line of the proper weight won’t perform as
well, yet I haven’t found a line configuration that roll casts better than a
double-taper – and you still get two lines in one. And if you move on to
building your own heads, you might cut up the DT and get three lines.
There are a number of AFTMA rated shooting head systems that turn over
a variety of interchangeable tips becoming available, designed to be cast with
both switch and single-hand rods, similar to the Skagit
or Scandi systems used on steelhead/salmon rods, and I would recommend one of
this type for lining a big-water trout rod. But, now, knowing the grain window
of the rod, you can take it a step further and build your own system from a
double-taper line, as I did for the 11’ 3” switch rod mentioned earlier. After
trials with several line weights, I determined that the rod best performed
single-hand overhead casts with a 6wt line; double-hand overhead casts with a
7wt line; roll and Spey casts with an 8wt line. I was still able to work the
double-hand overhead cast fairly well using the 8wt line, and as I intended the
rod for double-hand casting, I went with the 8wt as the primary line for
building a system. I purchased a good quality DT 8wt floating line and cut the
first 30’ from one end of it, which gave me a 210 grain floating head – so
there’s my basic floating line. From the other end of the DT, I cut off 5’ of
the front taper, then measured off 20’ to create a ‘body’ which carries a
variety of 10’ sink tips – I cut 5’ off the small diameter at the end of the
taper to gain more line body diameter for turning over attached tips. A
floating head rounds out the system, so there’s rarely a need to change the
primary line body. I also cut 27’ from an old 8wt, weight-forward, fast-sinking
line to make a full-sinking head. A scale aids greatly in this process, the
investment worth it, making it possible to custom build excellent lines at a
fraction of the cost of factory lines. My reel is spooled with a good quality
low-memory mono running line that slips through the guides with less resistance
than an integrated line. The running line is rigged with a long loop at the end
so a coiled head will pass through for an easy loop-to-loop connection,
allowing quick line changes on stream without the need of a spare spool.
The Advantages – The point, really:
A two-handed rod affords casting in tight places without the need
to back-cast, greater casting distance, quicker launches without the need to
false-cast when pot-shooting roving gangs of trout puddling on emergers, great
line control with easy, more precise line mending at longer distance, and the
ability to hold line off the water when short-line, high-stick nymphing and
swinging. Also easy handling of large flies and awkward bobber set-ups. The
long rod allows the use of longer leaders and is forgiving of light leaders in
the precincts of fussy larger trout who might break them – a two-handed trout rod
is a relaxing, graceful, pure fun tool for casting and swinging a streamer,
wetfly, or a pair of soft-hackle nymphs on big water.
I met a guy who’d installed rear grips on all of his trout rods, and
they are cute on the little 4 and 5 weights. No harm done. Nice roll-casters.
There’s that, and one might have a good purpose for such rods. But I think, for
most, a double-hand trout rod might afford the most appreciable advantage as a
rod to fill the big-water/big-fish niche, while still possessing the capability
for finesse – and that is a fairly narrow slice from the spectrum of double-hand
rods available. For most practical purposes, I would say it comes down to rods
of 10’ to 12’ in length, possessing grain windows falling between 160 and 250 grains,
that serve to define a two-handed trout rod designed and built for the purpose.
Rods rated for 6wt to 8wt AFTMA lines, or 1/2/3 Spey lines will serve for most
of us. Or maybe Spey rated rods in 4 or 5 if you plan on fishing the Kenai.
Forced to compress the definition to what I consider the most useful, I’d say a
rod that performs best with the equivalent to an AFTMA 8wt line. That is, if I was forced to keep it down to only one ~
Flyfish NE Washington with Steven Bird: http://ucflyfishing.blogspot.com
