# New "Textured" Wulff Line?



## Shadowcast (Feb 26, 2008)

Just saw it yesterday too. I'm working on a new 6 wt outfit and that line maybe going on there....even though it will be tough to not put a Monic Henley on there.


----------



## lemaymiami (Feb 9, 2007)

Textured fly lines... Be hard to recommend any fly line that’s likely to cause more line cuts on my angler’s stripping fingers. Hope they did their research in the field first (unlike what Scientific Anglers did with that awful Sharkskin line a few years back...).


----------



## Smackdaddy53 (Dec 31, 2012)

lemaymiami said:


> Textured fly lines... Be hard to recommend any fly line that’s likely to cause more line cuts on my angler’s stripping fingers. Hope they did their research in the field first (unlike what Scientific Anglers did with that awful Sharkskin line a few years back...).


I doubt it’s like sandpaper. That Sharkskin was pretty brutal, I fished a friend’s setup that had that line on it and it sounded like it was eating through the guides.


----------



## Ken T (Dec 10, 2015)

I set up a new TFO Axiom II X with the new textured Wulff line about a month ago. I have been fishing it and have put it in quite a few clients hands in that time.

I am no fan of textured lines and the new Wulff line has not swayed me much.
Here are some observations.

It is, like most of the others tough on your fingers.

Not as loud as Sharkskin

Picks up dirt and debris quickly

Generates great speed and fly's through the guides.

Goes long effortlessly

I personally do not think that the finger issues and the way it picks up dirt are worth it. Others may.

I have 5 rods on my skiff that are now rigged with the non textured Bermuda Triangle line. I personally do not think that there is enough difference in performance to justify the finger burns and fast dirt collection issues.

I do highly recommend the non textured line and love the fact that they are offered in #5 weight.

Ken


----------



## grass bass (Aug 29, 2017)

The Sharkskin was a difficult line to fish and annoyingly loud, not to mention the first $100 PVC line, but SA rapidly refined and toned down their embossing. You can put a finger guard on if you need to but I generally don't find I need it. I don't fish textured lines exclusively but I do use them extensively. For applications like searching open water with sinking lines on heavier rods -- stripers and wipers -- I love them.


----------



## jamie (Jan 22, 2016)

hate the sound of textured lines.


----------



## grass bass (Aug 29, 2017)

I don't even notice the sound.


----------



## sevenweight (Sep 3, 2015)

I’ve been using the newer textured lines from SA and Orvis (which I understand are also made by SA) for a few years now and I’ve gotten to the point that if a line I want is offered in textured and non-textured versions, I’ll buy the textured one for the performance. I did my first extended bonefish trip last June and as a bonefish newbie it took a few break-offs to stop me from trying to slow down or stop fish with my rod hand index finger while reeling up slack line. The textured line probably accelerated my learning curve!


----------



## jay.bush1434 (Dec 27, 2014)

I fished a buddy's 6wt that had the Orvis Pro Ignitor textured line. I really don't like the high pitched grinding noise the line makes going through the guides. When it is new, it sure does cast though but then again, so does my SA Amplitude Grand Slam line smooth finish and no grinding noise.


----------



## grass bass (Aug 29, 2017)

sevenweight said:


> I’ve been using the newer textured lines from SA and Orvis (which I understand are also made by SA)


Yes, Orvis owns SA now -- maybe should at present, given the way ownership of these companies swaps around like baseball cards -- and is making Orvis' lines.


----------



## Shadowcast (Feb 26, 2008)

Ken T said:


> I set up a new TFO Axiom II X with the new textured Wulff line about a month ago. I have been fishing it and have put it in quite a few clients hands in that time.
> 
> I am no fan of textured lines and the new Wulff line has not swayed me much.
> Here are some observations.
> ...


Great report Ken! Can you compare its "goes long effortlessly" to the BTT Shorts?


----------



## Ken T (Dec 10, 2015)

Shadowcast said:


> Great report Ken! Can you compare its "goes long effortlessly" to the BTT Shorts?


The "goes long effortlessly" refers to the fact that you would have to put more effort into throwing long with the non textured BTT. The difference is enough to notice. It flies through the guides.

I had one of my regulars out for a full day today. He was easily throwing 25+ ft. further than normal with the Axiom II X and the Wulff Textured. He loved it and I'll be shipping an Axiom to him this week.

My main issue for not liking it is that it picks up scum from the water more easily that non textured lines. I don't have time to clean lines other than rinsing in fresh water when I wash my skiff. Others with more time for maintenance will love it.

I also have a tip that I show all of my clients for stripping the line which will cut way back on finger wear.

Almost all casters strip the fly with the rod held to the side of their dominant hand / casting hand. This causes line to be pulled at near 90 degrees across your control finger, fingers. If you move the rod to the opposite side of your body while stripping no more burns. It takes some getting used to but it also leads to more strikes. This rod position allows you to strip perfectly straight through the guides and past your body. Strips can run from a few inches to several feet. The longer strips transfer more action to the fly and drives the hook home far better on strikes. Most all Snook and other ambush predators hit the fly on the pause. The 90 degree strip most often is not sufficient to convert slack line strikes.

Ken


----------



## coconutgroves (Sep 23, 2013)

The standard line has a very subtle texture. I was curious to see how different this new texture is compared to the previous, standard version. Personally, I love the standard texture. I absolutely despised the Sharkskin line.


----------



## cj.james (Apr 24, 2018)

I am just curious, but speaking of shooting the BTT, do you guys ever find yourselves underlining the BTT? I know the grain weights are a full line weight heavier. curious if anyone does this for faster line speed, or if there is no need for it


----------



## Shadowcast (Feb 26, 2008)

Never did it with the BTT


----------



## T Bone (Jul 24, 2014)

cj.james said:


> I am just curious, but speaking of shooting the BTT, do you guys ever find yourselves underlining the BTT? I know the grain weights are a full line weight heavier. curious if anyone does this for faster line speed, or if there is no need for it


I underline with the BTT by one...


----------



## cj.james (Apr 24, 2018)

any difference in performance by underlining?


----------



## Pat Damico (Dec 12, 2019)

If you want to cast further, underline.


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

Shadowcast said:


> Great report Ken! Can you compare its "goes long effortlessly" to the BTT Shorts?


The difference between the BTT and the BTT Short is the BTT is a full line weight heavier than what affta would consider to be a true to line weight rating, as well as being a standard head length of about 30ft, while the BTT Short is a little over 1/2 a line weight over than a standard weight rated fly line and of course the head is shorter at 23ft (for an 8wt line).


----------



## BobGee (Apr 10, 2019)

Smackdaddy53 said:


> I doubt it’s like sandpaper. That Sharkskin was pretty brutal, I fished a friend’s setup that had that line on it and it sounded like it was eating through the guides.


This is a side comment for anyone who fishes in cold weather (for example trout fishing in the Rockies). The textured lines carry a lot more water and freeze a lot more when it’s cold.


----------



## Shadowcast (Feb 26, 2008)

Pat Damico said:


> If you want to cast further, underline.


Welcome Capt. Pat!


----------



## Net 30 (Mar 24, 2012)

jackson man said:


> I know that this is an older post but I've had an opportunity to test this line and although I liked the castability and floating quality, I did not like the way the texture seemed to pick up and trap dirt and scum from what appeared to be absolutely clean water. The texture also makes it a bit harder to clean IMHO!


Thanks for the update - gonna stick with the tried and true original!


----------

