Sighter Types / Advantages / Disadvantages

[Domenick Swentosky]

Many of you know that since I started euro nymphing, I've mostly been using the backing sighter.  I got comfortable with it quickly and I didn't much like the curly when I first tried it.  Most of my nymphing was still at pretty close range, but I now have a longer rod and I've become much more comfortable with the casting stroke needed so I'm using a longer butt section and fishing further out.  But I found out pretty quickly that I don't care much for the backing sighter when long casts are required, especially with a pair of light nymphs. 

Have any of you spent much time fishing long range with a backing sighter?

So I've started to revisit mono sighters both straight and coiled.  I've tied them in all kinds of lengths, materials and diameters.  What I've found is that I can get used to a straight mono sighter very quickly.  With a taper built in, it casts like a dream but I've definitely lost some visual sensitivity.  The 20# backing would jump around out there and was so much more flexible than mono that it did a better job of telling me how good my contact was.  Backing straight -- in contact, backing bending -- not in contact.  I don't really get that so much with the straight mono sighters, although I can see them just fine at a distance and I think that nothing could be more versatile, which is a plus.

The coils are sort of a pain in the butt to me, but I am growing to appreciate what they offer.  I feel like the coil gives me back some of that visual sensitivity and the contact-0-meter that the backing gave me and it is very easily visible at any distance as well as giving me the ability to float the coil which I can't do very well at all with straight mono.  Besides the minor inconvenience of the maintenance of the coil, my major problem with the coil is the loss of line feel.  When I fish close, I often want to feel the occasional tick on the bottom and I don't have that with the coil.  I also enjoy the solid feel you get with backing or straight mono.  When a fish takes, it often nearly hooks itself since you're in contact with the nymphs and I like feeling the hits.  With the coil, that's mostly gone for me and it's almost all visual. I mean, I can feel the hit sometimes, but not nearly to the extent that I can without the coil.

So these are my observations and I'd like to hear your take on these things, especially if you're experience has been different than mine.  Learning all of this is a blast and obsessing over the small points is fun for a while and I think I become a better fisherman for it, even if one sighter over another probably won't catch me more fish.  To me, it's about exploring all available options to their full potential and even trying to come up with something new, and then whittling all of that down to a system that works for me on the water. 

Enjoy the day.
Domenick

[John Killinger]

What fly rod did you upgrade to? Big difference isn't it? I like the coiled sighter, when I first started this whole new way of nymphing I did the short line method and it caught more fish than indicator style. Now I do long line method and that has great advantages, you can get a much longer drift allowing your flies to be seen longer than the short line method. If you have the space you can cast it great distances and I think the coiled sighter is more sensitive. You can grease them and use them as an indicator on flat water. Yes they are more work but I really like them.

[Dejon Hamann]

I went through a very similar progression Domn... and ended up converting fully over to the coil. I just got rid of a pack of backing sighters I carried around with me for a year and didn't use.  I do miss the slight edge you have in sensitivity and short range nymphing with the backing/straight choices but it comes down to small sacrifices for a net gain and the coil is just much more versatile. 

[Domenick Swentosky]

What fly rod did you upgrade to? Big difference isn't it? I like the coiled sighter, when I first started this whole new way of nymphing I did the short line method and it caught more fish than indicator style. Now I do long line method and that has great advantages, you can get a much longer drift allowing your flies to be seen longer than the short line method. If you have the space you can cast it great distances and I think the coiled sighter is more sensitive. You can grease them and use them as an indicator on flat water. Yes they are more work but I really like them.

John, I'm fishing the CZN right now but I don't necessarily feel that it is an upgrade, just different.  The extra length is definitely helpful when long lining, no doubt, but the reason I've become more comfortable with the required casting stroke had nothing to do with the new rod.  I put in all the work of breaking down my cast and starting from scratch on the Avid and then moved to the CZN.  I actually love the way the Avid feels when I pick it up again, and I plan on keeping it in rotation for the smaller streams which I fish a lot.

I also don't feel that long lining is a step above or beyond short lining.  I think it's just another tactic that I'm trying to add to my bag of tricks.  I had no need for it until a bad day in the northern tier of PA where I just couldn't get close without spooking fish.  They were gone before I ever got into position and I knew that I needed to be able to present this system at a greater distance sometimes.  But I don't see myself ever setting out planning to long line all day.  I enjoy fishing long, short and medium distances all day long.  I'm not so sure that longer drifts mean more fish, and it would also be hard for me to change my approach that I work as close to the trout as I feel that I can, believing that the closer I am, the more control I have over my drift.

But back to the sighters: if I could change my sighter instantly I would fish a backing sighter for short work and switch to a coil for long lining, but of course, that's impractical as I love to cover a lot of water with various tactics. 

Since most of you guys seem to fish the curly, how long have you done so, and what did you use before?   Reading back through some older threads, I was surprised to see that the curly seems like a rather new development.

Enjoy the day.
Domenick

[Chris Topmiller]

I do miss the slight edge you have in sensitivity and short range nymphing with the backing/straight choices but it comes down to small sacrifices for a net gain and the coil is just much more versatile. 

Agreed.   Way, way more versatile.   The backing sighter is great-I used one for two years-but it can't compare to a slinky.   There's just no comparision.  

[Chris Topmiller]

But back to the sighters: if I could change my sighter instantly I would fish a backing sighter for short work and switch to a coil for long lining, but of course, that's impractical as I love to cover a lot of water with various tactics. 


Enjoy the day.
Domenick

Domenick, why do that, though?   You can still short-line nymph very effectively with a mono sighter.   That's what I do.  I guess the only thing I would say is that I had to get over feeling fish and just working on detecting the strike by watching the slinky.  If anything, my catch rate has only gone up (and yes, I still do a  fair amount of short-line nymphing).

[Loren Williams]

Today I was catching stupid mutant pint-sized no finned stocked browns (and suckers and chubs) in deep frog water  on tiny nymphs under my rod tip and I doubt I would have taken half of them had I not been using the curly.  It didn't stretch, or jump, or twitch-in fact I'm not really sure I can explain what it did.  But it gives me a level of  contact and strike detection that amazes me.  I don't always need it--but it's never in the way either.

Not saying someone else could not have done as well or better with their favorite sighter.  I think the more you use whichever you prefer the better you get at reading it.

Why not dry dropper?  They were eating on the drop and it was deep, S-L-O-W water.  I had no bite detection when the bite was occuring.

[Mark Hanes]

For me it did take some time on the stream adjusting to going from feel to more of a visual strike detection.  If you get use to the visual cues in time you will start picking up stikes you were missing before.  

[Shannon York]

I've never tried a coiled sighter, but it seems the time has come.

Can someone point me to the "best" link(s) with instructions on how to make these?

And, any supplemental info that you experts can share will, indeed, be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

[Dejon Hamann]

Making a Coiled Sighter:
1)Strip a cheap white ball point pen to just the plastic case
2)Blood knot two 12" sections of your favorite Colored Mono (I like 14lb Gold Stren & 10lb Berkely Solar Green or Cabelas Pink Floro)
3)Wrap a few on the pen leaving tags on either side (the middle 12" "coiled" on pen) and secure with tape or rubber bands
4)Boil for 15 minutes w/ some vinegar (helps retain color)
5)Pop right in freezer overnight
6)Enjoy
7)Experiment with different lengths, colors, test, diameters, etc, etc.

[Domenick Swentosky]

You guys should consider stickying the curly directions.  Very common question. 


Thanks for the replies, gentlemen.  So it sounds like you guys would agree that much of the feel is gone with the curly as opposed to the backing sighters or straight mono, but that it really doesn't matter to you since the visual advantage is greater.  I'm not sure that i feel like the visual is better with a coil at close range than the barred, two colored 20# backing sighters that I tie, but I'm looking forward to getting more and more comfortable with the coil.  I've used it quite a bit now in the last few weeks, and I'm getting the lengths and diameters dialed in for what I like.

So, to anyone who used backing sighters for a while before moving to a curly, did you ever have much trouble casting light nymphs long distances with the backing sighter, or is this just me?  The backing is so limp that I seem to lose control and power in the cast beyond, lets say, 20 feet.

Out of curiosity, when did you guys start using the curly and when did it appear on the scene?

Enjoy the day.
Domenick

[Bret Bishop]

Dom,
The slinky is relatively new. I started fishing the slinky after reading the Charles Jardine article in Fly Fishing and Fly Tying  around 2006 (right after the first Colorado Nationals) and he only learned about from the French not to many years before that. At the time I had been fishing with a single piece of colored mono (yellow Stren) built into my leader and I had spent a short time with braided sighters and entire braided leaders.  I really like them but since they are not comp legal I really don't use them much any more.

For me, no matter the material I use, strike detection mostly comes down to sight. I can  see what is happening to my line before I can feel it...sight trumps feel (most of the time). For me the slinky was like a revelation, it just made sense. It gave me the best visibility and versatility in a comp legal sighter.

Initially, when short lining with a slinky, I too was concerned about the loss of contact. But the more I used it, I got used to its nuances... at times it stretches to nearly straight merely from the weight of the flies and the slight lead of the rod so one can still feel. Still I generaly set on the visual cue I perceive whether it is a flash, a pause, a stretch, a jump, or a barely perceptible tightening before the tactile  registering of a feel and the slinky helps me perceive the most imperceptible touches from a trout.

In short, I like the slinky, as many of you know. It is a great all around sighter.  Still straight mono has its time...

[Domenick Swentosky]

Cool.  Thanks for the history, Brett.

Enjoy the day.
Domenick