video - CDC&Elk

[hankaye]

Hans, Howdy;

"*chuckle*

You must not have read my text on wax use in flytying where I wrote something like:
"wax is a flytier's crutch, it is a substitute for inadequate dubbing technique"
Did I mention that it was a text intended to be a little confrontational? "

Obviously I haven't.... where might I find the whole inflammatory manifesto.
You anarchists all have manifestos don't you ????

ALL ment with wry humor

hank

[Hans Weilenmann]

Hank, here goes:

===

Some 15 years back, and on a very different forum, I posted pretty much verbatim the below text on wax use in general flytying. It stirred up some passionate debate, which was very much the intention. When I came across my old text, I thought it might be interesting to revive it - and offer it for your perusal and comments here.

One comment to start - there are a number of dubbing techniques, in general use, and in my use. The focus of the conversation is on the most-used form of a dubbing noodle, where dubbing is wrapped around the thread. Other dubbing techniques are perhaps for another thread

Let's go...

===

Wax - Its use and abuse in tying

I am a "why" person. I 'need' to know why I use a certain technique, and am always looking for the better mousetrap. Or in tying terms: "because that is how I was taught", or "that is how I read it in a book/mag" works as a CDC&Elk to a trout. I just have to have a go at it

So why wax?

Strip away "history" and pretty well nothing is left.

Wax acted as a preserver for tying thread when tying thread equated silk, it would delay rotting. Wax alse helped to retain the 'bite' on materials before vises and bobbin holders, when often the silk was left slack or dubbing noodles were pre-made.

Today, with vises and bobbin holders and much better (synthetic) tying threads none of the above reasons applies.

Ok, if we accept this, are there good reasons _not_ to use wax? I believe there are valid reasons against using wax. Some are fairly minor, and one is a biggie. I will save that one for last

Some minor cons:

- Wax matts the dubbing, making it lose sparkle/'life'.
- Applying wax introduces an extra operation in the tying process.
- Wax often 'dirties' and discolors thread, dubbing and fingers.

But the single most important Con:

- The dubbing noodle is stuck at a fixed location!

Allow me to go into some more detail on this one.

In order to use wax and then apply dubbing you have to work in tight corners, hard up against the hook shank and the hook point/barb.

Without the use of wax you can apply the dubbing away from the hook, shape it to your liking (taper and length), press as many fingertips of your wrapping hand against the dubbing noodle to cover it from one end to the other, and then slide it up the thread easily until it touches the hook shank for subsequent 'clean' start of the body or thorax. Quite a good position to start from

Let me finally attempt to tackle the final argument for using wax: "Ease of dubbing application because it is tacky. And 'needed' to dub hard-to-use materials, such as spiky seal's fur."

Wax Is A Flytier's Crutch!!!
A workaround to cover up sub-standard dubbing technique.

Any dubbing material used in tying can be dubbed on without the use of wax, provided one prepares it properly (quantity, 'spread') and applies the dubbing on a tightly held thread with suffient finger pressure in a single direction! Be is 'easy' material such as rabbit, or 'hard to dub' material such as the referred to seal's fur.

Does it make any difference whether one twists the dubbing on clockwise or counter-clockwise? Yes it does, as some torque is worked into the thread as the dubbing noodle is wrapped. Which will tighten or loosen (depending how you have wrapped the dubbing noodle in the first place)

But... in practical terms this additional torque, over the limited number of wraps we are dealing with, is insignificant in relation to quality of the dubbing process itself.

So whether you prefer to spin on the dubbing in a clockwise or counter-clockwise direction, I suggest you stick with it and simply concentrate on getting the dubbing transferred to the tread as best you can.

I invite you all to shoot holes in the above comments and I look forward to a lively and interesting discussion.

Cheers,
Hans W

[hankaye]

Hans, Howdy;

Thanks very much for answering my question and presenting your thoughts on the subject.
I'm sure that some discussion will ensue ... looking forward to seeing it.
Should be interesting.

hank

[Hans Weilenmann]

Hank,

You are not getting away with it this lightly.

It is your turn to share your thoughts on the matter

Cheer,
Hans W

[hankaye]

Hans, Howdy;

If you insist ...

The below post is not to be construed as argumentative nor combative. As if I could argue with anyone
about fly tying ……
My tying experience is extremely limited. I've only been tying for less then 2 years.
I have dipped into the well of knowledge as often as I can and ask the questions that come to mind when
they do ... or, they don't get asked.
I asked about your thoughts about wax. You gave me an answer based upon your opinions and experiences.
Which is what I was looking for. Something I'm sure you measure in decades.
Most of the members here (from what has been posted), have declared that the use of wax, in it's various forms,
is a useful tool that they employ to either change the color of a thread, use to help preserve the tightness of their
thread whilst tying, or because that is the way it has been done for eons by the folks form the 19th and early 20th.
centuries.
I have used wax because of the above named reasons. You, on the other hand appeared to be 'wax free'. So,
thought I'd ask ...
Apparently you don't have any or many problems with the flys you tye becomming untyed ...

That's about all I can offer for the moment...

hank

[Hans Weilenmann]

Thanks Hank, for responding and sharing your thoughts.

Cheers,
Hans W

[Ruard]

I think that I don't have to use any wax. Only for touch dubbing I use a very takky wax and sometimes that becomes a mess. I have made my own wax by mixing beeswax and resin and oil together. It was an experiment. Just trying. I tried the wax also for making the whipfinisch, but I wonder if that does any good. The only use I see now is for tying the greenwels glory or other traditionel patterns.

And for dubbing I have one advise: use half the ammount of what you think is alright or use a dubbingloop.

Greeting

[michaelgmcgraw]

When dubbing a fly I usually use a noodle, recently I have used wax on the thread as I thought it helped keep the dubbing noodle stable. Seeing the dubbing material become "soiled" by the wax I will no longer use wax unless I'm touch dubbing a fly body. I really believed wax could make everything easier.

[kacbo]

CDC&Elk is fly I like, and like it very much. Can't imagine dry fly box without it! Great fly, great design, simple (two materials), effective and a very quick tie. First video of tying CDC&Elk, some years ago, I used to learn how to use Elk/Deer hair in fly tying. Here is the place to address this:
Hans, why "Elk" in the name of fly, since You used Deer hair (early season hair..? - if I remembered correctly)?
Thank's for the fly and video of it!

@Moderators: "Wax in ft debate" - maybe it's better that part of this topic to be separated as a new one?

[Hans Weilenmann]

kacbo,

The CDC&Elk pattern dates back to 1992. It went essentially nameless for a year, even through demonstrating it at the FFF Conclave in Montana summer 1993, and the Flytying Symposium in New Jersey, November 1993.

After the Symposium we visited the flyfishing museum just outside Roscoe, in the Catskills. While there I was asked if I wanted to donate some flies. Sure, no problem.

Suddenly I was presented with a release form, officially transferring ownership of the flies! Hmmm...

Anyway, this presented me with a small problem, as the flies had to be identified by name. The others were mostly established patterns, but not this wee critter. Some quick thinking on the hoof was called for.

The CDC&Elk was inspired by Al Troth's Elk Hair Caddis. My attempt to try and improve on that venerable pattern, and I anted to retain the link in some way with the name. What resulted was the name, now 'official' from that moment on: CDC&Elk.

A silly and likely confusing name, but what the heck

Cheers,
Hans W