[www.visualwrap.com]

Here are the results from the NERDs test cating this past Saturday. 16 people showed up with temps in the 30's with the wind howling 20-30NE. There will be more NERDs gatherings this Winter, would like to do some more tests along these lines in the future.

"HEre is the data I collected. I wish we were able to do more of this, but this was a good start. I'd love to do this again and fix some of the problems we ran into. Far from perfect, but definately a push in the right direction.  
 
I wonder how many will look at this and make neagative comments and doubt what the results show."


I don't know if people will make negative comments or not and the results are what they are. Obviously you didn't make them up. But from what I saw in earlier posts you made, this wasn't exactly a scientific test. Not that I doubt it and I don't doubt that your results would be the same as if you had done a truly controlled scientific test but if someone wanted to dispute any conclusions drawn from your data, they couldn't be discounted.

On another note I would like to see the guide sizes and placement for each rod tried just to get a cleared idea in my head of what each rod was like.

I am a little surprised that mono seemed to best the braid on nearly all the different rods and outfits. I won't draw any conclusions for the reasons I said above, but this is certainly not what I would have expected. Maybe braid is not good for windy days?

Right, same here. When I see Fuji "concept/low rider" I assume you mean the new guide concept with high guides for the first few down to a choke point and then low frame runners? Sort of like what's on the library page here? I would think it would cast the farthest.

And on the conventional vs. spiral what type spiral? O'Quinn, Forhan, Roberts', or other?

I don't doubt the results but would like to get a better idea of exactly what I'm looking at. Thanks.

I did notice that the spiral outdid the conventional on distance with one type of line and lost out when used with another type. Or am I mis-reading something?

Thanks Billy - The "test" appears to be about as "scientific" as anyone is likely to see on a beach (especially under the conditions you described). Did you have many "wind knots" in the Power Pro? Just wondering because it's a problem that I have on very windy days if you try to throw into or on a quartering cast to the prevailing winds - especially gusty conditions. Power Pro (and all the braids) seem to make the nastiest messes. Of course those messes could have something to do with my casting ability too. Power Pro is great to fish with especially on a baitrunner type reel and circle hooks as terminal - so I guess the snarls are just a 'evener' for the sensitivity.

WC - I am tired, and that "warninglabel was a lot harsher than I meant it to be. What I meant by "negative", and the etc's - is don't post that the results are no good because of this and that unless you have some sort of first hand data to back your claims up. We hear all teh time how the Concept system doesn't work, etc, etc from guys who use the older style of set ups. I've been greeted with a whole lot of "doubters" that teh newer style of spinning set ups will not work on surf rods by guys on other surf forums. I really don't want to hear that anymore, lol.

Scientific - we all knew we couldn't be 100% scientific, but I think since all rods were (supposed to be) casted by everyone, with teh same reels, line, weight & in teh same conditions - that an average distance would be realistic enough to draw a conclusion.

However, the data on the conventionals leave a lot to be desired. I admit that. The guys did a great job casting them, but the first few casts of the day were basically wam ups and skewed the data, without question. I still stand by what I stated, that teh straight on casted slightly further, although I strongly suspect that if we re-did the tests there would be no noticeable difference between the 2.

Jonathan asked for specifics. I must apologize becaus eI do not know them for all the rods. I do not know exactly which line was on teh reels, but I think Spiderwire Stealth 30 was on the Green Abu 6500s, and 14# mono on teh mono Penn 5500 - not quite sure what braid was on teh other 5500's. 14# Mono is very thin (obviously) so that is probably the reason why it casted so well. I think if we do this thing again, which we will - we're gonna use heavier line (Mono) & larger reels.

THe Low Rider rod was not built with Low Rider guides, just the Concept. THe Spiral wrapped rod was buit the Billy 40 method (lol). BNLG 25, 16, 12, then all 10's. Stripper was 29" from teh reel seat, then teh guides were plaed at angles so teh line ran the straightest through them from reel to the tip. Seriously, I don't know which method to label the spiral set up, I guess it's a combo of them all.

Ken - no wind knots, wind was at the casters back. BUT, there were a LOT of break offs. We were on a small beach and retrieving the line over the sand chafed it up pretty bad. THat realy caused problems and limited the amount of testing we were able to do since there were so many re-tie's. This also led to less diameter on teh reel, so more science thrown out hte window. This will be taken into account next time, I promse.

Well it's quite true that unless somebody has different data gathered in similar fashion that they can't really disown yours.

I think the spiral set you describe is closet to the O'Quinn method and it's the only one I suspect would really work on a heavy surf rod.

I'm certain from my own use of it that the concept system when properly set up will outcast any other set up. But I don't have data to back that up and even casting like yours may not give the kind of data that the naysayers will believe. That was my point. But the fact that different people all achieved better distance with it on the same day under the same conditions does say something.

I'd still like to see the guide sizes used on both rods just for comparitive purposes. More for general interest in getting a feel for the rods used than anything else.

My own tests run by myself and some customers were no more scientific than yours. We do feel that spiral wrapped surf rods cast at least as far and maybe a little bit farther than those with the guides all on top. This is probably due to the fact that you can get a straighter line path with the spiral wrapped version because the line doesn't drop from the reel and then get that slight upward turn that it does on all conventional rods. It can drop on down past the rod and on to the tip in a straighter path. But from what we've seen in doing this for a couple years now is no real measurable difference between the two.

That's the problem, most of the guys who are so sure that their grand-dad's guide system is the best have never tried anything different or newer. They just make up their minds that it can't possibly work.

I know guys who still believe a rod with a #75 wire butt guide will outcast a rod with a higher frame and smaller ring like the #40HH Fuji. You should hear their rods! The line beating the blank on the cast sounds like a flag on a mast on a windy day! But they won't try anything else. They "know" their system is the best.

I wrapped surf rods because I was too ignorant to know that you couldn't spiral wrap a surf rod. I fished with these rods as well as farming them out to test subjects with good results noted. I decided to do my own test just to get a close to a good comparison.

I test casted with a 11 foot 9 inch(modified) Diawa Sealine X rod with an ABU 6500 CS Mag reel loaded with 17 lb test SIlver Thread mono with a 4 oz bank sinker three times to establish an average. I recorded wind conditions. The cast was an off-the-ground cast.

I then stripped and wrapped the rod with a spiral wrap(modified O'Quinn style) with a three guide transition. The rest of the guides were put back on the rod with the same spacing. Why didn't I just turn the tip over? I just wasn't thinking. I put the same reel and weight on and used the same off the ground cast.

I took this rod out to the beach and checked the wind conditions. They were close to the same. I cast the rod three times to establish an average and will make my original claim: A properly designed and built spiral wrapped rod will cast just as well as a conventionally wrapped rod.without the rod torque. C2

Billy,
I applaud your efforts.
Thanks

I too applaud your work, and it sounds like you had a lot of fun at this too. Wish I was there! Please don't take the following as a criticism, it isn't intended as such in the slightest. Just observations from a number cruncher.

First, it doesn't appear that any of the differences (with the exception of the low rider style rig) are statistically significant, if you look at the results from all four casters on each set-up. I mean, on your conventional rigs for example, your means and deviations overlap for all set-ups. To me, that means that the differences in set-up are pretty much inconsequential except from the standpoint of an individual caster (in other words, one guy might do better with a specific rig, but no one rig is particulalry better for an unknown caster).

This carries over into the spinning results also. You've got one guy doing above average casts with the "traditional" set up mono, one guy doing below average, etc. I'd want to see the raw data, but from what you've got up there, it doesn't look like you can say any one set-up is superior for all casters.

Second observation...the exception to the above...the low rider style set up. Those results are kinda shocking, and from my own experience, I'd agree it has a lot to do with the 14# mono you used. I'd also guess that was the rig you had the most snap-offs on. I've found it pretty easy to snap off a 2 ounce bank sinker, test casting a powerful rod with14 pound mono. I think I put one into orbit this past summer, lol. Did you use a shock leader with this set up (or any of the set-ups), and if not, I'm hungry to see how this set up would do with say 20# mono.

Now, somewhere ;-) you commented that "it was obvious" which set-ups cast the best... I'd really, really like to hear more about that. After you get some sleep!

Thanks for sharing this, it's great stuff.

J

I think there is one solid observation that can be made from these tests and both are quite contrary to what you hear from many, many rod builders and fishermen - that is that both a spiral wrapped surf rod and a New Guide Concept System surf rod, do not result in any loss in distance over the more traditional set-ups. Forget the fact or the experience of these few that they actually cast a little farther, but concentrate on the fact that they seemed to cast at least as well. And, while casting as well, one is going to provide you with more stability under load and another is going to balance better.

The way I look at something like this, is that here you have two modern systems that gain you something in the stability and/or balance category without reducing your casting distance. I would think this would make them a better all around choice than the older and more traditional systems. Any time you can gain on one end without losing anything on the other, you've got something worthy of consideration.

.............

Charlie,
I was thinking the same thing on some rods I want to retie to spiral.
But if all I do is turn the top section over and retie the first three I have changed the spine.Will it cast to differant and will all of my findings be effected much?.Is this correct thinking or can I just turn it and retie the first three?
This my be better as another thread.
Mike

Where the spine falls won't matter much for casting, plus, if you spine is in line with the guides then it's not in the casting plane anyway.

I am confused on something myself though - if you just flip the rod over, what do you do about the reel seat? Isn't this going to put your reel upside down?

..................

I haven't done this tip turnover, but I'll bet that it would work. IMHO , the spine is not as important when dealing with the spiral wrap. I'll check it out, but I completely strip a rod and place the guides using a static distribution test when refurbing it to a spiral. This would have saved some time for the test of this particular rod. It also may have skewed the test results somewhat but I don't think so.

In fact, in Ralph O'Quinn's early writings he did just this.

Tom: this is a two piece rod. C2

Mike B - I agree with you on the line being straighter on the spiral wrapped rod than on a traditional wrapped rod. The problem with test casting conventional is it is inconsitant. With teh spinner, you can wing it, but conventional you gotta thumb the spool, timing is critical, etc. Not a big deal to someone who casts every single day, but it is still tough to achieve consitancy in teh specific scenario we had on Sunday., More time was needed, and a heater & a wind blocker. I'd love o do a side by side comparision focusing more time & energy just on those 2 rods.

John S - None of the distances were all that different. That kind of surprised me. I apologize for not being better organized and having teh same person cast 4 different set ups so you can see the difference in distance with this one individual caster - maybe the results woud've been more conclusive.

No shocker was used. Poorly organized, I apologize. We know better for next time. One of the things we spoke about was testing teh same rod with a few different sized reels - say a Penn 5500, VS 150, VS 250 - with say 20, 30, and 40# Mono. Maybe not that exactly, but something along those lines. I don't expect to see results out of teh ordinary, but it would just be interesting to see exactly the differences between teh line size as wella s teh spool diameter. Am I off base with that?

Obvious - each person/caster noticed how far well Low Rider/Concept rod casted. TEH guys standing on the side @#$%&, the lady & gentleman runing after eth tennis balls and recording the data, and most importantly teh guys test casting. IMO regardign the test casters - there were 2Rodbuilders casting, one guys builds rods but is just getting into it and was open minded to new theories but doubtful (imo), and someone who has been in distance casting tourney's with much longer rods & had really no idea all teh Concept theories & etc's.. All 4 said teh rod felt better when casting - the line went through the guides smoother, and just in general the rod felt better. To me, that says a lot - when you can get someone who is not "poisoned" by stuff they read on teh computer & magazines agree with what we read on teh computer & magazines - that to me is a big step forward.

Tom K - you've said that before, other's have said it before, but it is so true I had to say very well said.

Bottom line - I enjoyed myself, and the other 16 people enjoyed themselves. WE had fun with teh casting, @#$%&, eating , @#$%& more, drinking a few beers, there was a raffle for 7 or 8 "things" donated by a couple of local shops (thank you Bogan' & Betty & Nicks) - and we somewhat proved with hard data (not as much as I would have liked, but give it some time) what we' as internet ROdbuilders (lol) knew all along - or at least the last 4 years, lol again.

I do apprecaite the feedback, and welcome suggestions & opinions on how to do something like this better next time.

Good job Billy , I'm sorry I had to miss the day with you nerds, but I was unfortunatly injured the weekend befor in a boating misshap at the dock . I'll see you at the naxt gathering . John Henry

I wouldn't put shockers on for test casting. Knots and stuff don't need to be there to skew results. As long as each set up was cast with the same line and same reel then everything is fair and level as to which outfit casts the best or longest. I think you did well just as you did and more testing probably wouldn't change anything other than to make your results just that much more concrete.

Kevin - the only need for a shocker was when we were retriving the line oer sand, 14# test ws all frayed up and resulted in aa lot of lost time retrieving the ball & then retieing, then making a practice cast to get teh line on the spool tight again.

John - hope your knee gets better soon. See you at the next Gathering