06-29-2004, 10:53 PM
Experimenting with the use of all DNA and two spreaders. Basing this on the hollow fly and Buffy concept. The inside spreader is smaller with a 360 sparse application of pearl Krystal flash... the larger spreader in front is 360 three shades of DNA, white , then light green and topped with a darker green. The camera is not picking up the colors. The fly is translucent with the flash visible but subtle enough under the sparse DNA. The fly will expand, but lays flat in the vice. I will fix the hook gap on the next one.
06-29-2004, 11:11 PM
Here it is spread out for a better view.
06-30-2004, 07:05 AM
Interesting. Kind of a mullet profile. Coming off the spreader....do the DNA fibers taper back to a pointed tail (like bucktail would) or do they trail off straight back? I'm still getting familiar w/ the properties of this material. Did you use goop on the spreader to temp. hold the fibers...then epoxy?
Looking good John!
06-30-2004, 07:54 AM
Jim..I have not tub tested it...I will fish it this weekend as something different tp sand eels. All i did was tie the stuff in in 4 small clums on the spreader equal distance between each and them held them in place with my figers... then epoxy and used a bodkin to move the fibers around so that they would set evenly around the spreader as the epoxy set. Did the inner spreader first with the crystal flash..then the front larger spreader next.. I may do as you have done for the final fly by placing a base of hackle in directly on the shank...then the spreaders to give it more profile, but keep it sparse.
06-30-2004, 01:20 PM
John, you're giving me more ideas for pike and smallmouth flies.
06-30-2004, 01:37 PM
Very nice looking patterns :smokin:
Mark raises a good point viz. Pike.
Has anyone done any trials of DNA on toothy critters? For me the ultimate test was always barracuda - anything that can withstand the first hit gets a pass mark. Only Super Hair / Ultra hair has made the cut to date. Interested to know how this stuff stands up?
07-01-2004, 06:58 AM
To quote Fred A "The DNA sand eel experiment is over for me. Stuff morphs into kinky fiber after a fish munches on it."
So it looks like it might not pass the test.
07-01-2004, 01:06 PM
Just to be clear, DNA didn't work for me with longish deep eel patterns. Beyond that I can't make any value judgement. It may be fine for shorter patterns that don't tend to foul. The stuff is cool in the water. Puffs up a bit on the stall in retrieve. Any deep eel tends to snarl when eaten. It's just that some materials (super or unique hair) are relatively easy to unsnarl with an old tooth brush.
I have yet to see this stuff out here. How does it compare to fluoro(sp?) fibre? That stuff is nice in the water as well but only for smaller patterns. I have found it gets pretty kinked up if longer than 3 inches but looks killer in the water.
07-01-2004, 01:22 PM
Yes..it is very similar to flouro fiber..it comes in two types..one is a bit glossy and the other "powdery"...I must say I am not enthalled with the bait fish and am coming to realize that it may be best as highlighter for bigger flies and I will use it for sand eels and shrimp...but again, I have not fished it yet and probably will not fish the bait fish one since I will probably fish eels, shrimp and crabs.
07-01-2004, 01:40 PM
When I insinuated the use of this material in pike flies, I was thinking of it being a highlight to augment other materials.
On the other hand, it may have more practical use as a main component in smaller smallmouth patterns. We'll see.