Setting up an Effective Trout Leader

The topic of leader setup is an interesting one. The deeper I’ve researched it the more I’ve realized the complexity and diversity of information that is really out there on the subject. Some of this is worth digging into, some isn’t. For me setting up a leader isn’t a hobby in and of itself, it is a means to an end. If my system isn’t making it easier for me out on the water, then I’m overthinking things. My goal with this article is to discuss some of the fundamental components necessary for setting up an effective trout leader as well as help clarify some of the misconceptions out there around leader and tippet material, usage etc. Building an effective trout leader isn’t always the simplest of endeavors, though it doesn’t need to be rocket science either. Finding somewhere in between is where we want to be.

Leader Turnover
You’ve probably heard of the term domino effect. It’s the idea of how one event can trigger the succession of similar events one after another. If you ever played with dominos as a kid you probably remember setting them up in long interconnected rows and watching them fall until the very last one dropped. Often times though there would be a domino accidentally placed out of kilter with the others and the chain reaction would come to a halt before all the dominos could fall. This was always disheartening.

The domino effect is essentially what happens to our leaders every time we cast a line. As we make that final forward cast, energy is transferred from the fly line down to the leader and then to our flies. This transfer of energy from fly line to flies is called “turning over” a leader and if you’ve ever seen it in action you know it’s a beautiful thing. Similar to those dominos cascading one to the other, our leader and flies should roll out in corresponding fashion… smooth as silk. That being said, what happens when there is a hiccup in the system and this flow of energy is disrupted? Not unlike our misaligned domino scenario, our flies stop short of their destination and at best fall into a crumpled heap on the surface of the water.

Aside from natural factors like wind etc. there are really two main things that can keep a leader from turning over. First and foremost is our cast – a bad cast will wreak havoc on a fly presentation – and second is an improperly built leader. The aforementioned I will speak to in a future post, the latter we will begin to dissect here.

Leader Makeup
A tapered leader can be broken into three parts, whether hand-tied or knotless. First there is a the thicker butt section that attaches to the fly line. This is the backbone of your system and is the critical piece in turning over the leader. A typical butt section should make up 40-60 percent of your entire leader. Next there is the middle or taper section of the leader. This is where you will notice a progressive yet significant decrease in diameter as the leader tapers down toward the tippet. This taper section should take up about 20-30 percent of the leader. Lastly you have your tippet section. This is the thinest part of the leader and what is presented to the fish. It is here you will tie on your flies. This section should take up the remaining 20-30 percent of the leader’s length.

Leader Length/Size
There are three common lengths of prepackaged tapered leaders, 7.5, 9 and 12 foot. As a general rule shorter leaders are better for nymphing and longer leaders are better for dry flies. I very rarely fish anything less than a 9 foot leader (including tippet) unless I’m banging through small creeks in the backcountry. I feel 10-11 feet is a good middle of the road length that accommodates both nymphs and dries.

Both leader and tippet are referred to in X sizes. The larger the number the smaller the diameter. One easy way to find the diameter of your leader or tippet is to use the rule of 11 (not to be confused with Spinal Tap’s rule of 11). You do this by subtracting the X size from 11 to get the material’s diameter in one thousandths of an inch. For instance if your tippet is 5x you would subtract 5 from 11 to give you 6. The diameter would be .006.

Leader Formula
For my nymph rig I usually start with a 7.5 foot prepackaged leader. I then snip off roughly .5 inches of tippet from the bottom of the leader and add a tippet ring. From here I tie a piece of 12″ tippet material one step down in diameter from the leader size. I attach another piece of tippet to this section via a surgeons knot and place my split shot above it. This keeps my weight from sliding down. I add my first fly to the end of this section. I then add another piece of tippet from the bend of the hook and attach my second fly to the end of this section. If needed I will add a 3rd fly in the same way as above. My tippet X sizes will vary since these will be driven by the size of the fish I’m pursuing, conditions, etc.

Tippet/Leader Guide for Standard Rig
– Average Trout | 3x Leader > 4x > 5x > 5x
– Average Finicky Trout | 3x Leader > 4x > 5x > 6x
– Large Trout | 1x Leader > 2x > 3x > 3x
– Large Finicky Trout | 1x Leader > 2x > 3x > 4x

Leader Knots
Below are the knots I use for building out my leader from fly line to bottom fly.

– Leader to Fly Line | Loop to Loop Connection or Nail Knot
– Tippet to leader | Double or Triple Surgeon’s Knot
– Tippet to Tippet Ring | Improved Clinch Knot
– Fly to Tippet | Improved Clinch Knot

When tying your tippet to the leader via a surgeon’s knot remember not to join diameters greater than two X sizes. Your knots will adhere best the closer they are in diameter to each other and you will get the smoothest leader turnover.

Also, for the strongest connection possible between leader and tippet use a tippet ring. Experience has proven that tippet to metal connections are stronger than tippet to tippet. Though keep in mind a tippet ring does reduce the smoothness of leader turnover by acting as a hinge in the leader so for dry fly presentations this might not be the most realistic approach.

Leader Material – Nylon vs Fluorocarbon
There are two types of materials manufacturers use for leader and tippet monofilament – nylon which is often referred to as “mono” and fluorocarbon which is often called “fluoro”. Both have their pros and cons and both have their place in a trout fisherman’s pack (in my opinion). The challenge is knowing when to use one over the other and why? As you will see, there isn’t a lot of scientific proof to back the claims of either. Many fly shops or guides just state the information as fact with no explanation. I did however find some reliable resources that went the extra mile to at least try and answer the why. I also did a little testing of my own.

The following seven categories are the main variables in question when we compare nylon to fluorocarbon.

1. Visibility
One of the biggest claims manufacturers make about Fluorocarbon is that it’s less visible to fish than nylon. They base this on the fact that fluorocarbon has a refractive index of 1.42, and nylon 1.62. Since water has a refractive index of 1.33, closer to that of fluorocarbon, the thought here is that fluorocarbon will be less noticeable to trout underwater. Seems a bit of a stretch. Half of the tests I researched stated fluorocarbon might be slightly less visible underwater than nylon, while the other half showed no real noticeable difference. Though the science makes sense, it’s hard to prove this either way without being able to talk with the fish. I’ll have to stay neutral on this one.

Winner: No difference

2. Abrasion Resistance
Another presumed benefit of fluorocarbon is that it’s more resistant to abrasions than nylon. This is based on the idea that since fluorocarbon is made of a denser material than nylon it should hold up longer under direct contact with rocks, logs etc. This isn’t necessarily true. The majority of tests I found showed little to no difference between the two monofilaments when tested side by side. In fact some results even showed nylon to be more abrasion resistant than fluorocarbon when significant weight was applied. I decided to run a few comparisons of my own and found similar results. Below are my findings.

I suspended both nylon and fluorocarbon tippets with just under a pound of weight. I then rubbed sandpaper against an isolated section of both tippets to see which would last the longest. Seven out of ten times the nylon was superior. This surprised me at first, but as I continued to observe I noticed an interesting trend. Nylon, being the more supple material, even when stretched tightly still had some flex to it. Fluorocarbon did not. It was this elasticity that seemed to make the difference as it acted like a shock absorber protecting the nylon fibers from the direct pressure of the sandpaper. Pretty cool!

I tested Rio and Umpqua tippet materials (dry) in both 5x and 3x diameters.

Winner: Nylon

3. Flexibility
Research was unanimous in showing that nylon, having more elasticity than fluorocarbon, is the better option in situations where a soft realistic presentation is needed. The preferred choice for soft hackle or dry fly presentations.

Winner: Nylon

4. Knot Strength
Tests have shown that the softer more supple makeup of nylon makes it easier to seat a knot therefore creating a slightly stronger knot connection overall.

Winner: Nylon

5. Sink Rate
Another big claim of fluorocarbon is that once it breaks the surface tension of the water it will sink faster than nylon. Though this may be true, considering it is a denser material than nylon, the research I found shows the advantage is negligible… maybe 5% faster over nylon. To be honest the bigger influencer to sink rate will be the diameter of your tippet.

Winner: Fluorocarbon

6. Buoyancy
The specific gravity of water is 1.0, nylon having a specific gravity between 1.05 to 1.10 and fluorocarbon 1.75 to 1.90. Based on this we see that nylon is less dense than fluorocarbon and should have better buoyancy. The issue is the margin is small. With the differential being as slight as it is, often times tippet alone (either nylon or fluorocarbon) does not provide enough weight to break the surface tension of the water. Only when comparing fully tapered leaders is there enough weight present to actually tip the scales in favor of nylon. This means nylon has the buoyancy advantage when it comes to keeping a full leader afloat, but it’s on equal footing with fluorocarbon when comparing tippets by themselves. A good reminder that nylon is probably the best option when making dry fly casts with long leaders.

Winner: Nylon

7. Water Absorption
Though fluorocarbon has taken a beating in our comparisons so far here is where the tables turn. Nylon monofilament will absorb up to about 10% of its weight in water. Though the upside to this can be added flexibility for knot tying etc., the downside is often increased diameter and elongation as well as reduced breaking strength by about 20%. Not good. Fluorocarbon monofilament, however, is basically impervious to water. Depending upon the formulation, it absorbs less than 0.05% of its weight in water and loses none of its physical properties after a prolonged soaking. All this to say, many of the advantages nylon has over fluorocarbon get dismantled when water absorption comes into play.

Winner: Fluorocarbon

Nylon vs Fluorocarbon – Conclusion

Score – Nylon 4, Fluorocarbon 2, Neutral 1

To be honest I really wanted fluorocarbon to score better than it did. I’ve spent a lot of money on it over the years. Regardless this has been an informative exercise. I’ve been wanting to dig through the colossal mess of information on this topic for a while now.

So here is the question. Has my view on monofilament material changed since doing all this research? To a certain degree it has. I see much more value in nylon now and I can see through some of the fluorocarbon hype. More than anything though I can now justify why I am using one material over another instead of just blindly trusting the masses. I hope you will feel more informed too.

Here are my material recommendations for both nymphing and dry fly applications.

Nymphing Leader: My Choice = Nylon

Although water absorption can be an issue with nylon, since my leader is always one size larger in diameter than my tippet, this should offset any strength reduction issues.

Nymphing Tippet: My Choice = Fluorocarbon

Visibility – Yes, the results were inconclusive, but I still think there is some validity to fluorocarbon being less visible to the fish.
Abrasion Resistance – Though nylon was the clear winner in the abrasion resistance tests, this advantage was countered by a 20% overall strength reduction due to its susceptibility to water absorption. This is just too big a risk considering the amount of time my tippet will be submerged under water.
Knot Strength – The lack of overall knot strength in comparison to nylon is concerning, but I will continue to bridge this gap by tying good knots and making sure I wet my line when I secure them.
Sink Rate – There wasn’t a huge difference here over nylon, but I’ll take whatever I can get… 5% is better than nothing.

Dry Fly Leader: My Choice = Nylon

The buoyancy advantage just confirms this is the best material for dry fly set ups. Since a dry fly leader spends the majority of its time in the air or on the water’s surface, water absorption shouldn’t make a difference here.

Dry Fly Tippet: My Choice = Nylon

Again, the buoyancy and flexibility advantages are huge selling points for this being the material for dry fly applications. Like above, since dry fly tippet spends the majority of its time in the air or on the water’s surface, water absorption shouldn’t play a factor here either.

Leader/Tippet Brands

Leader
– RIO Powerflex Trout | 7.5′ or 9′ | Nylon Leader
– Umpqua Perform X Trout | 7.5′ or 9′ | Nylon Leader
– Umpqua Perform X Power Taper Trout | 7.5′ or 9′ | Nylon Leader

Tippet
– RIO Powerflex – Nylon Tippet
– RIO Fluoroflex – Fluorocarbon Tippet
– Umpqua Deceiver X – Fluorocarbon Tippet

Leader Examples

Setting up an Effective Trout Leader

About the Author: Eric Anderson

Leave A Comment Cancel reply