I would consider any guides at a position other than 180 degrees to be a part of the transition guides / transition zone. Even if there was only one guide at 0 degrees and another guide at 180 degrees. Which goes back to Emory's original analysis. At least three men of sound mind and articulate faculties each independently used similar words to refer to this method. I don't think we were having a mass hallucination or passing thru a cosmic harmonic mind-meld. Emory used the word "magic"; Chia Chien used the word "miraculous"; Cliff used the word "mystical". The original description left a cloudy image, because of the claim of having NO transition guides. So, semantics confused the discussion. THAT is ultimately what all the fuss is about, IMO. Even Jay L. said: "I consider any guide that is set between 0 & 180 degrees 'transition' guides. Even the butt guide, when set off center, is a trans guide to me." I (Cliff) concur, and apparently so did many others prior to this discussion (and still do). ... At this stage, what seems relevant is that there is an important addition being born to the spiral wrapping methods. And having said my peace, I am now content to leave it at that as well. Best Wishes, -Cliff Hall-

I should add that even with just 14 ounces of load on these rods, most people had a very hard time holding the conventional rod upright by holding the blank itself. The effect and the torque is great enough, even with just that tiny 14 ounces, that they had to hold the fatter reel seat or foregrip to keep it upright. Likewise, they could not easily turn the spiral wrapped rod upside down unless they used the reel seat as a hand hold. And, of course, as soon as they released it, the spiral rod snapped back upright.

I'll also put the plans for the device in RodMaker at some point. It's a great tool for any custom builder to have in his shop or booth at any fishing or sportsman's show. Seeing is believing.

......

Cliff, I don't think it matters but so I'm not confused let's say we have a rod with a butt guide at exactly 0 degrees, no offset. Then the next guide at 180 degrees. Nothing inbetween. Are you saying that these are both transition guides or that neither are transition guides??

Tom, I would love to see the plans to build that device. I played with it at the show it sure puts the effect of rod twist in your face. Not much anyone can argue with when you've got the proof right there and set up just as the rods would be while fishing. I only wish I had had that device with me when arguing with some of the bass guys around here. It would really have shut them up once and for all.

Shawn - I would consider any guides at a position other than 180 degrees (but also including the first guide at 180 degrees) to be a part of the transition guides / transition zone. Even if there was only one guide at 0 degrees and another guide at 180 degrees. I would refer to them as transition guides. Apparently, no small percentage of people would only use that term to refer to those guides that are strictly in-between the 0 degree and the 180 degree guides. Hence the misunderstandings, because of an unrecognized difference in definitions, that seemed (erroneously) to lead to some fantastic claims (which were not made by Kirkman nor by Colby, but which were inferred by a number of readers).

[Shawn Moore wrote: Cliff, I don't think it matters but so I'm not confused let's say we have a rod with a butt guide at exactly 0 degrees, no offset. Then the next guide at 180 degrees. Nothing inbetween. Are you saying that these are both transition guides or that neither are transition guides?? ] Cliff would call them both transition guides, IMO. That is why I could not believe it when it was said that there were no transition guides in this method. Now, I see what was meant and I understand the descriptors being used.
"Amazing grace, ... was blind, but now I see." -Cliff Hall-

Nothing like a new concept or deviance in a concept to get us Rodbuilders fired up. Board hasn't been this hot since the CCS system first came about.

Dan Grulke

The most amazing thing is the fact that Emory Harry is going to convert into a spiral wrap apostle during 2005. And when he does, he will be it's most ardent proponent.

In a couple months, he's going to have to face Ralph O'Quinn. It won't be pretty but when the dust settles Emory will be busy rewrapping all his "incorrect" rods to the correct format.

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

Tom,
I do not have ball bearings in my wrist and neither does any other fisherman so what did you actually prove, that there is some torque. Sure there is some torque but not enough to be a problem in most applications, some applications maybe but not in most.

I didn't say problems, I said the conventional rod wanted to flip upside down with considerable force. How much of a problem that is depends on the fish and the situation you're in. I don't think you really realize how much force you're expending to keep your rods upright. It's considerable, even on light bass rods.

But that's okay, Ralph is going to get ahold of you at the Lamiglas event and you will see the light.

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

Tom,
I look forward to meeting Ralph. I have heard about him for years and have enjoyed some of his posts.
As far as "considerable force" is concerned, those are your words, if that were true no one would have ever landed a very large fish on a conventionally wrapped rod. I have personally landed many many relatively large fish and never even noticed the torque. And there is a very good reason. If a conventionally wrapped rod is held so that the guides are directly over the rod there is NO torque. Torque is force times moment arm and there is no moment arm if the guides are directly over the rod. Torque is created when the rod is turned to one side or the other because there is then a moment arm. However, all one has to do to eliminate the torque is turn the rod back where it belongs with the guides on top. I think that most experienced fisherman probably do this instinctively.
I will agree though that with either a spinning rod or a spiral wrapped rod the guides on the bottom tend to try to pull the rod back to the point where there is no moment arm and therefore no torque. In other words it does tend to be more stable.
As far as transition guides are concerned, I am with Cliff.

Tom,
These arguments about spiral wrapped versis conventionally wrapped rods have started to bore me and I am sure a lot of others as well. The same issues have been argued a number of times. That is except on those evening when I have had a couple of glasses of wine and then I enjoy them. Maybe I should think about it some more and either give up or develope some better, more convincing arguments for you exaggerators.
Maybe I should just ask Cliff to help me. He definitely is a sweet talker who has a way with words.

If the arguements are boring you, maybe you should stop starting them?

I think you need to gain more experience with the spiral wrap. It's not something you can really argue about once you've put two rods up head to head in a practical demo that proves the inherent instability of one and the inherent stability of another. That was the point of the demo fixture I took to Charlotte. It makes things pretty cut and dried when a person can actually feel the forces at work rather than just hear about them. Few can hold any rod perfectly upright with the load directly down on top of the rod. They certainly couldn't do it on the demo device and it mimics perfectly the forces at work when you fight a fish.

Surely many large fish have been landed on conventionally wrapped rods. They would have been landed with less effort from the angler if the rods had been spiral wrapped. Both work, but one works better.

........

Sunday 08:00AM - Well, fellows, this surely has been a sinuous discourse without enough channel markers and several serious hazards to navigation. It seems like we all are now that much closer to realizing that each side of the discussion was simply using either a more inclusive or a more restrictive aspect of our definitions, (for transition guide, or for a straight line path, or for what it means to “re-direct the line path in any way”), which provided plenty of fuel for the fire of our disagreement.

Maybe now we can all pour some water on those coals and all get back to rowing together in the same rhythm and in the same direction, and get out of this treacherous whirlpool known as the Spiral Wrap. This devil’s vortex has brought too much water inboard, and I’d like for us all to be friends and sing,
… “Michael row your boat ashore, … Hallelujah, …”

And if that song offends you, let’s try Mr. Rogers’
… “It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood, a beautiful day for a neighbor. Would you be mine, Would you be mine? … Let’s make the most of this beautiful day, …Won’t you be my neighbor?”

I hope so ! -Cliff Hall, the Sunshine State of Mind-

You used to be me neighbor, until you moved to Florida, lol.

Billy-40-V: Touche, Billy ! You're cracking me up, Neighbor !! -Cliff-

OK guys, I tried it. Take a rod with a casting reel put a tip top on string a line though it from the reel, Take a look at the line Except for the first guide to keep the line off the foregrip, which could be smaller, it can go under with Smaller and mybe just one more guide, then running guides. Try it

Gee guys, I did not want to stir up a hornet nest! I just wanted to know "which method is better". This has been very interesting. I think this shows that more detailed articles (not just in Rodmaker) need to be done on this subject. I would offer, but I don't know much about "Spiral Wrap". I can see a bunch of test on different methods of this wrap are now needed. Did everyone forget the original post. Here it is again. " At the show I saw a few different methods for a spiral wrap. I have never attemped a spiral wrap but I plan to within the month. Now, I am confused on which method would be best. I plan to build on a American Tackle, Matrix Mag Bass 6'6" (AMMBC784). I would like to use the New Titan guides also. The reel I plan to use is the Pflueger "President". Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated."




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2005 10:52AM by Jim Rippe.

You might remember that in Charlotte I was careful to say that I didn't feel that any particular spiral wrap method was "better" than another. They all work and all have their proponents. I think the method which Bill has written us for us works as well as any of the others, is easier to set up, places zero side pressure on what anyone may want to call a "transition" guide, and also reduces the overall number of guides needed to get the job done.

I'm all for whatever is "better" and when one is as good as another I'll usually opt for whichever is quicker and easier, yet can give me the same end results.


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

Of "Acid wrap", wrap on acid? Rap on Acid? I Love it!!!
Can't wait for my next issue Rodmaker!

If you really want a 'quicker and better' method. Take a two piece rod, turn the tip around so the guides face the bottom. If there are still guides facing the top, remove and rewrap them except for the butt guide. Quick and dirty. You'll find the spiral wrap is more tolerant of spine location than conventional(line on top) guide systems.

A thought, s'il vous plait, before I go. When you get many moons experienced as I am, your wrists and shoulders will remind you of the many fish hauled over the side. C2