Larry,
As long as it catches fish, it doesnt really matter -but
you're sort of working at cross purposes by bulking up a Ray's fly.
In terms of design, the interesting thing about the "Rhode Island School"
of tieing is the minimal amount of material used and the translucent/
transparent, representational quality the flys have when wet. The flys
contain the signature of a baitfish/prey without attempting to duplicate
all features or replicate the exact size. Who really knows why these things
work, but a well tied Ray's fly has a dark top strip (providing outline and
dimension), a wide range of colors (attraction and duplication of coloration),
and some flash (again, attraction and an accurate representation of one of the significant features of schooling bait). I'm convinced one of the reasons
why the pattern works so well is that the thinness/sparseness of the fly
contributes to its success by blurring the particulars of the materials
and allowing background elements to show through. Of course this could be whole cloth, but the fly clearly works. By adding a head or heavy
body you're eliminating the key working element of the original design.
Again - I'm certain your fly will catch fish but we're in the rare world of
fly design theory here.
I've never been able to overcome the feeling the original design would be improved with a big eye but I've not found a method of attaching same without
destroying the basic qualitities of the original fly. I do have a
juvie herring/baby bunker pattern I'm working on that has some of the
features of a Ray's and has a big eye. I still have some kinks to work out
but it fishes well in the smaller sizes but doesnt scale in size nearly as well as a Rays fly. (Let me know if you'd like a prototype)