Atlantic Salmon Bombers [Archive] - Fly Fishing Forum

: Atlantic Salmon Bombers


D3Smartie
10-02-2004, 02:27 PM
Just a few pictures of bombers that I have been tying up for next summer.
The hook is a TMC 200R size 4.
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/bombers.jpg
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/yellowbomber1.jpg
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/brownbomber.jpg
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/orangebomber.jpg

flytyer
10-03-2004, 12:02 AM
Nicely done; but they aren't really "Bombers" since they lack tails and wings. They are really varios types of "Buc Bugs" - sort of a Bomber without wing and tail that is usually tied in smaller sizers and incorporating a florescent floss butt, which all of these have.

"Buck Bugs" are effective, they just aren't "Bombers".

D3Smartie
10-03-2004, 02:54 PM
I have always called these bombers. Mainly because they arent a Bug due to size and how they are fished. We used to keep the wings on but found them less effective than the ones without.
Here is a "true?" bomber
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/brnbomber.jpg

MCorder
10-03-2004, 11:36 PM
Nice looking fly's, I'm hoping that some day my assigment officer grace's me with a tour in the North East, I'd like to try them.

flytyer
10-04-2004, 02:22 PM
D3Smartie,

I had no doubt that you could tie a nice Bomber based upon the Buc Bugs you posted. However, the point of my prior post was that if you leave tails and wings off a particular fly style or pattern, you no longer have that fly pattern or fly type. Any of you who have been around the forum for a while already know I am a stickler for accuracy in fly types and patterns. This doesn't mean a fly that leaves something off (such as a wing for instance) is not effective, it simply means it is not the same fly. Unfortunately, calling a fly that leaves off an important component such as a wing the same as the one with the wing confuses people (especially newcomers to the sport) and leads to many people telling their local fly shops that they can't get a properly tied (insert fly name here). This is why I am a stickler for accuracy in fly types and patterns.

Also, as you already indicated when you said that your Buc Bugs are more effective than a Bomber in your experience, Bombers fish diffrently than Buc Bugs, and this is due to the wing and tail.

Charlie
10-04-2004, 04:41 PM
Flytyer makes a good point. If you ever find yourself on the east coast of Canada fishing for Atlantic salmon you will find that Bombers and Buck Bugs are 2 very different flies. And not only because of the absence of tail and wing but as flytyer also pointed out, the radically different way they are fished for Atlantic salmon. Bombers, with stiff tail and wings are supposed to be fished as dry flies. Buck bugs are supposed to be fished under the surface, swung on a tight line as wet flies.

D3Smartie, the ones in your first post are very good examples of the later. They would work great swung through any Salmon River.

Charlie

D3Smartie
10-06-2004, 03:05 PM
I do fish the east coast of canada. Restigouche river, and the ones I first posted, like i said, have always been called bombers in the camp there. We only fish them dry and really only fish 1 bug, the green machine.
Fished dry, the top flies have out produced the traditional bomber in our experience.

Charlie
10-06-2004, 04:25 PM
Cool that you got some fish on them. :biggrin: Especially in the Restigouche, big fish river! Next time you are up there and can't get them to hit, try sinking them and squeezing the air out of them and fishing them swung under the surface. They make a great change of pace fly when the fish have seen everything else.

Charlie.

P.S. Any pictures? Would love to see some Restigouche fish. That's a river I have not had a shot at yet.

flytyer
10-06-2004, 08:10 PM
Charlie,

This works on steelhead too; although I've gotten some pretty strange looks when others see me intentionally water log and drown a clipped deer hair bug.

D3Smartie
10-07-2004, 12:47 AM
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/ds38.jpg
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/33.jpg
http://students.pepperdine.edu/dssmart/images/ds26.jpg

FrenchCreek
10-07-2004, 01:30 AM
When I fished the Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia & Labrador rivers for Atlantics, we used both types, Buck's & Bombers. A local "expert of renown" taught me that the Buck bugs are typically smaller in diameter of body and the deer hair is packed loosely with longer hackles (Yellow butt Green Machine with black or dark reddish brown hackle) whereas the Bombers, with white or cream tails & wings as noted by Flytyer are packed more tightly and have a larger diameter body and more football shaped with various colorfull (red, yellow, orange, chartreuse) hackles buried deeper so that they appear shorter Vs. the buck that is typically longer shanked and more like a short cigar shape. Both had been effective for me, the buck's being subsurface and the bombers being in the film or as floaters.
P.S. they also work very well for Steelies!

Charlie
10-07-2004, 11:03 AM
flytyer,

Very cool, I have tried them a few times for steelhead but I don't think I gave them a fair shake. I will have to give it another shot.

D3Smartie,

Nice fish brother.

Below I included one of my bugs tied for the Gaspe. As FrenchCreek described it, it is a bit slimmer.

Charlie

2tancaddis
10-13-2004, 06:24 PM
Great flies...but why the 200r?

2tancaddis

D3Smartie
10-13-2004, 09:26 PM
just what i had around and they are one of the better hooks we have found.
What do you reccomend?

flytyer
10-13-2004, 10:08 PM
DsSmartie,

There is nothing wrong with using the 200r. I tie bombers on Daiichi #2220 hooks (4XL, 1XStrong) in sizes from #2 to #8. The bottom line is use a hook with sufficient strength for the fish, with a shank that is long enough for the fly to look right, and don't worry about whether it is a traditional loop eye salmon style iron or not.

D3Smartie
10-14-2004, 08:59 PM
ever use the CS42 (i think) from partridge? I have heard it is good but never used one.