R Sealy rod

can anyone help I have an 8ft 6in tudor fly rod and have no idea what weight fly line to use can anyone help plse

Probably an AFTM no.6 would be about right,if you are going to do much serious trouting you should consider a new rod to suit the type you intend doing.

It should have an AFTM number on the rod that will tell you the line to use

AFTM (American fishing tackle manufactures)ratings came over here in the mid sixties (ish).probably the Tarantino designed Hardy's Jet was one of the first to be so marked,i'm guessing your rod pre-dates that slightly so probably not marked,the Sealy Maxfly (wristbreaker)was considered to be a powerful rod in those days but was only rated about aftm 7,Trout fishing went through many changes in that era with an explosion in popularity of reservoir fishing,,,,fly lines were marked differently so a no.3 kingfisher silk line was approx.aftm 7 ....

Chris. Take the advice to go and find something more modern; the advances in technology will justify the investment. Even the very cheapest modern fly rods will outperform anything made from glass fibre.
Don't chuck the old Sealey; find an old reel and some line, and make it into a wall hanging.

Rubbish. If it's sound use it; all the fancy modern carbon junk in the world won't make up for a lack of watercraft.

As to what line to use, here's a good way to work it out. Get a cheap number six double taper line (it must be double taper - you'll see why in a minute), put it on your reel and go and find a piece of open field (or better still, water). Start casting, extending line as you go, until you find the length of line extended beyond the rod tip which seems to work best for the rod. Measure this from tip eye to end of flyline. If it's ten yards then a No 6 line is spot on. If it's more than ten yards, add one line size for every two yards of line; if it's less, reduce by one line size.

For example, if you find the rod works really well with thirteen yards of line beyond the tip (that's why you need to use a double taper line for this test, as a weight forward only has a ten yard head) then you can safely say it will work best with a number seven or eight line, as the ideal length falls between one and two sizes larger than the six-weight you tested it with. However, if it struggles with ten yards but works sweetly with eight, it will be rated for a number five line.

I still use this test on any new fly rod as I don't trust manufacturer's ratings - and personal casting style has a lot to do with it.

That's all well and good fred,but whats the point of him buying a no.6 line even a cheap one if the finished outfit isn't up to the job,ok for fishing smallish flies at close range bank or boat on the odd day but if he is going to fish regularly on reservoirs from the bank he is going to be seriously undergunned even with forward taper or shooting head,which of course should be a size heavier.....all the watercraft in the world aint gonna catch fish if they're out of range.

Hmm, OK. Firstly, it's cheaper than buying a new rod. As Christopher asked for advice on a rod he owns, not one he might be persuaded to buy, I consider it courteous to try and help him make use of it. Eight and a half foot cane or glass fly rods usually take a five or six line, so buying a six is a fair bet; the test I describe will enable him to ascertain the true line rating for when he buys his next line.

Secondly, he makes no mention of where he proposes to fish. If he intends to fish somewhere like Grafham from the shore he'll discover for himself if the rod is inadequate; chances are it will be, as you really need a longer rod of nine to ten feet for that type of fishing. However, if you've ever seen Hywel Morgan do one of his demonstrations, you'll know that he can cast plenty far enough with an old glass rod from Woolworths with half its rings missing. Fancy tackle is no substitute for ability.

But if he plans to fish streams, rivers or small stillwaters - collectively comprising about eighty percent of the available trout fishing in the UK, geographically speaking - an eight foot six rod is ideal and, as no long casting will be required, there's no need to replace it - as long as he can find what line it works best with.

Oh yes - I forgot. That old chestnut about forward-taper and shooting-head lines having to be a size heavier. Nonsense. All fly rods are (or should be) rated for ten yards of line beyond the rod tip. Now it makes no difference at all whether that ten yards is a double-taper, weight-forward or shooting head as the weight of that length of line will be the same in any given size.

The experienced angler may elect to use a double taper line one or two sizes lighter than that recommended for the rod if he anticipates casting static dry flies to rising fish at ranges beyond ten yards, as a rod that lifts ten yards of seven line will lift twelve of six, or fourteen of five, and the double taper allows any length to be lifted straight off (within the limits of the rod's power) as there is no change in thickness after the initial taper at each end. Try lifting more than ten yards of standard weight forward (or a ten yard shooting head) and you'll have a pile of line land at your feet.

Of course, reducing the line size means short casts become increasingly difficult, but it's up to the angler to choose his tackle accordingly. If you expect fish to rise closer than ten yards, you naturally use the right weight of line or even one size heavier to work the rod; if they are all at fifteen yards, use a lighter line. You could just use a weight-forward and shoot the extra line (which is what most people do) but then you have to retrieve a few yards of running line before you can lift off and re-cast, wasting valuable time and possibly drowning your dry fly.