Rod

tuna macker · Oct-11-2009, 09:38 AM

Obviously this Westboro Baptist Church needs to learn more about the love of God.
It is people like this that confuse the none believer.

combatvetfisher · Oct-12-2009, 06:39 AM

Just two more days till the class!!!

REP · Oct-12-2009, 09:41 PM

Whatever you do, do NOT try to simply go with the "one guide per foot of rod" idea as a "rule", or worse yet, the currernt micro-guide fad or the so-called "NCG (or "NGC") formulas of guide placement. In fact, don't get caught up in some sort of "formula" at all. Read the MH info to get the general idea, and then test the guide placement against the bend of the rod (it's called static testing). To get the final placement you will need to install the grips, reel seat, and tip-top first. Just keep it straightforward and remember, the distance between your guides will decrease as you get toward the tip, and pretty much everything you read will be suggestions for starting points, not "rules". The exact number of guides you end up with, and their placement, will be determined by your individual rod blank and exactly how it bends.

Uncle Russ
Calico Creek Rods

E. Harry · Oct-12-2009, 10:01 PM

Combatvetfisher,
Do not get too hung up on guide positioning. The guides are there to accomplish two things, line control and stress distribution. If you think about it neither of these two dictate that the positioning of the guides is critical. In fact, the positioning and number of guides is not critical. If the rod is going to be used to cast with then the overall mass of the guides is very important. The number of guides and the mass (weight) of the guides should be kept as low as possible particularly those guides out toward the tip of the rod because those are the guides that will have the biggest affect on the rods performance, the rods resonant frequency or reponsiveness. But other than that do not get too worked up about the number and positioning of guides.

Comedie · Oct-13-2009, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E. Harry

Combatvetfisher,
Do not get too hung up on guide positioning. The guides are there to accomplish two things, line control and stress distribution. If you think about it neither of these two dictate that the positioning of the guides is critical. In fact, the positioning and number of guides is not critical. If the rod is going to be used to cast with then the overall mass of the guides is very important. The number of guides and the mass (weight) of the guides should be kept as low as possible particularly those guides out toward the tip of the rod because those are the guides that will have the biggest affect on the rods performance, the rods resonant frequency or reponsiveness. But other than that do not get too worked up about the number and positioning of guides.

A whole lot of "it depends" in there Emory. Most of what you see on BD is SW rods, which are not that light. Guide weights are going to be a smaller % impact.

Compared to FW, many SW rods verge on UL when comparing fish:tackle ratios,,, so load/stress distribution is more critical. For instance, FW bass guys are often using tackle in the 12-15# range,,, but only very rarely are catching 12-15# fish. A SW 30# setup, however will commonly be into fish larger than its rating. Point being that common SW gear can easily be more highly stressed than common FW gear, so stress distribution is relatively more important.

Line path is also greatly effected by guide selection and positioning. It is important.

Note that the 'minimalista' are primarily concerned for FW, where the gear was oversized to start with. I suspect if you look at the weight:fish ratios of that minimalized gear and a lot of SW gear, what you will find is that a lot of that minimalista gear is just approaching some SW gear. Would be an interesting study, actually. But as you go down that weight cutting path, you also begin to trade off durability. Stress/Load distribution becomes even more critical.

So I think it incorrect to tell a new guy something along the lines of guide positioning doesn't matter. It does. In fact all of these things matter to various extents, and it is blending their priorities that results in a better rod built for a purpose. Static testing is one of those things that is easy to learn and do as well, so I think it difficult to say not to bother. It is easy stuff afterall.

venturarodlure · Oct-13-2009, 10:33 AM

Put enough guides on it so the line doesn't touch the blank under load. Try to keep the angle between any two guides relatively the same. Go fish...

Comedie · Oct-13-2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by venturarodlure

Put enough guides on it so the line doesn't touch the blank under load. Try to keep the angle between any two guides relatively the same. Go fish...

Hey John,,, that's a decent a 2 sentence description of static testing! Add two more,,,, "Avoid acute line angles" and "Avoid detouring the line path quickly" and that's it in a nutshell.

REP · Oct-13-2009, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comedie

Hey John,,, that's a decent a 2 sentence description of static testing! Add two more,,,, "Avoid acute line angles" and "Avoid detouring the line path quickly" and that's it in a nutshell.

High praise from a builder who is currently trying to figure out how to take a perfectly good spinning rod and make in into a spiral, as opposed to the other way round - - -

But he's right. Four sentences that say it all. John's and Dave's.

Uncle Russ
Calico Creek Rods

BakerStBobby2 · Oct-14-2009, 09:04 AM

.........and you get to try it out for yourself tonight, Oscar! C-ya at the shop...
Bobby~

E. Harry · Oct-14-2009, 11:15 AM

I have done a great deal of testing of rods with different numbers and sizes of guides and the implications on rod performance. In fact, I wrote an article about this several years ago that was in RodMaker magazine. Most of the testing was measuring the resonant frequency which relates more to performance for rods that will be used to cast with and does not bear much on heavy salt water rods but I have also done some stress testing with strain gages and an oscilloscope. I will not say that guide positioning is not important but I will say that it is less important in terms of line control and stress distribution than many people believe.
I agree that static testing is a very useful tool and I will also agree that minumizing the line angle through the guides is a practical approach to minumizing stress. However, I do not agree that one should use enough guides to keep the line from touching the rod when the rod is under a heavy load. I think for rods that will be used to cast with that results in too many guides which means too much mass which means reduced performance. With some of the recently available very light guides that have been made available this is less of an issue. The original reason for not letting the line touch the rod was to avoid friction between the line and the rod but normally when the rod is under heavy load the line is not moving. If the line is not moving there cannot be any friction. I will concede though that with heavy SW rods where powerful fish can make long runs and the rods are not cast so the weight and number of guides is not a big problem it is probably a good idea to keep the line off of the rod.

venturarodlure · Oct-14-2009, 12:18 PM

I've seen people say now that it doesn't matter if the line touches the rod or even runs under the rod while loaded. I just wouldn't want to see what my Spectra would do to my rod under a high speed, high pressure run. I think it could easily cut through the rod blank. Not positive though, but I don't want to take that chance with mine or more importantly a customers rod...

Comedie · Oct-14-2009, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by venturarodlure

I've seen people say now that it doesn't matter if the line touches the rod or even runs under the rod while loaded. I just wouldn't want to see what my Spectra would do to my rod under a high speed, high pressure run. I think it could easily cut through the rod blank. Not positive though, but I don't want to take that chance with mine or more importantly a customers rod...

Well there are stories of spectra cutting thru anchor lines. Yeah John, pretty sure it can take out a blank, especially if the braid is plugged with minerals or using something nasty/abrasive like PowerPro. Spectra is Ultra High Molecular Weight Poly,,, same stuff I use as rub rails, but a little softer. Still, it is a match for most plastics and rods are largely plastic. Add a little mineralization to it, and it would be a great abrasive cutter.