Denier vs. Ought

Author
trout man
Avid Angler
  • Total Posts : 160
  • Reward points: 0
  • Joined: 2009/02/04 15:20:17
  • Status: offline
2014/06/18 12:11:11 (permalink)

Denier vs. Ought

Hello all
I was going through my tying inventory and realized I have a confusing array of threads. In an effort to standardize my tying thread, as a starting point, I thought id get some advice. Your thoughts on the "ought" system versus the denier system? Seems to be more ought choices than denier. I'm considering going to a 3 thread system. Sort of a large, medium, and small set up. I don't tie anything smaller than a 14, with the occasional 16. The largest I tie is the occasional 2/0 streamers, and I don't do much with deer hair. So I'll only need maybe one heavy thread. As always, thanks in advance for your help.
Tight Lines
Trout Man
 
#1

6 Replies Related Threads

    Plum Bob
    Expert Angler
    • Total Posts : 597
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2007/01/12 21:19:01
    • Status: offline
    Re: Denier vs. Ought 2014/06/18 16:04:42 (permalink)
    What works for me is Uni thread, 3/0, 6/0, & 8/0. Black, fire orange, & chartreuse. All I tie for now is steelhead, tube flies, egg flies & a few nymphs.  Most tied with 8/0. 6/0 is used to bind different diameters of plastic tubing together. Only use I had for 3/0 thread was tying bucktail or flashabou on wire coils to make bucktail spinners for muskie fishing. If you watch your thread tension, 8/0 is enough for most any fly. 3/0 uni is very strong & you really have to reef on it to break it. Tubes I fish (streamers) take hooks size 6-10. Egg patterns 10-12, nymphs, 10-12. Don't understand the denier system & have no need for really fine tying thread.
    #2
    steely34
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 1303
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2006/03/12 17:43:05
    • Status: offline
    Re: Denier vs. Ought 2014/06/20 05:34:14 (permalink)
    Totally agree with Plum Bob. Understand that with the "ought" description - the higher the number - the thread will have a thinner diameter. With denier's - the higher the number - the thread will have a thicker diameter. Denier measurements actually came from the sewing industry where threads are measured by gram weight of 9000 meters of thread - thus a thicker thread will have a higher number. For my tying - I do use denier's on my classic ties but for tying for fishing - almost always use 6/0 or 8/0. I must say though that 70 denier tying thread is a good substitute for 6/0. Like Plum says though - gotta be mindful of thread tension on everything.

    "They say you forget your troubles on a trout stream, but that's not quite it..... you begin to see where your troubles fit into the grand scheme of things, and suddenly they're just not such a big deal anymore."

    John Gierach

    #3
    Cold
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 7688
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    Re: Denier vs. Ought 2014/06/24 17:08:24 (permalink)
    #4
    Plum Bob
    Expert Angler
    • Total Posts : 597
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2007/01/12 21:19:01
    • Status: offline
    Re: Denier vs. Ought 2014/06/25 06:52:20 (permalink)
     Interesting chart. Uni 6/0, 130, approx. 2 lb test & 8/0, 72, about 1 lb, nice to know.
     
    post edited by Plum Bob - 2014/06/25 07:00:35
    #5
    trout man
    Avid Angler
    • Total Posts : 160
    • Reward points: 0
    • Joined: 2009/02/04 15:20:17
    • Status: offline
    Re: Denier vs. Ought 2014/06/28 11:55:20 (permalink)
    Nice chart cold. But it seams that there is really no uniformity between thread strengths and weaknesses. Different threads of the same type having large differences in breaking strength depending on the manufacturer. Something that I didn't expect. I would have thought that threads of the same material and same size would have comparable breaking strengths. I guess I will need to be more aware of the tension I put on the thread than the size. As long as the thread is size proportionate to the fly.
     
    Tight Lines
    Trout Man
    #6
    Cold
    Pro Angler
    • Total Posts : 7688
    • Reward points: 0
    • Status: offline
    Re: Denier vs. Ought 2014/07/01 18:05:27 (permalink)
    But it seams that there is really no uniformity between thread strengths and weaknesses.

     
    That's not a flaw of the chart, though.  If anything, that's precisely the point it's making.  
     
    I have the same issue with thread classifications as I do with fly rod/line weights: there's no simple, elegant way to meaningfully compare two products, because there's too many forces at play.  The measures that are easy to apply across the board (denier, "Xwt" designations) are also often the most useless.  Even if we break down and define what exactly we're measuring, it doesn't really serve as a valid comparison to anything other than itself.  
     
    So you determine the denier, as a common denominator, of two tying threads, what does that tell you?  Nothing really, other than weight.  
     
    What does the weight of a fly rod tell you about how it'll fish?  Nothing.  It's just a recommendation of the line weights the manufacturer feels it'll cast best.  And those reference the AFTMA standards...which are based on???
     
    Ultimately, in these things, I think the only really truly valid method of comparison is personal experience.  Even two tyers or anglers will have different experiences with identical products.  All you can do is try a spool and see how it goes.  If you have a strong negative experience, maybe give it a second try, and if it repeats, move on.
     
    Also keep in mind for thread that there's a lot to be said for tying skill, and not dragging the thread across the hook point.  I'm careful, but I usually bang the thread off the point once or twice per dozen flies, and with UTC, that usually means fraying if not breakage.  Uni will sometimes break, but more often than not, I can save it.  That, combined with Uni's bonded nature, gets it the nod 9/10 times for me.  Only where thread bulk and smooth bodies are a primary concern do I bust out the UTC 70.
    #7
    Jump to: