Actually I don't think any American maker has ever produced a fly rod with all ceramics, although Scott may have in the early 80's - but they used a very heavy type of ceramic guide if memory serves correctly. I do seem to recall that they had a slower action bass specialty fly rod and they used all ceramics on it. I believe it was an older version complete with aluminum oxide rings mounted in shock rings to boot.

Several European makers now use only ceramics on their fly rods. I suspect this trend will continue with more and more makers coming on board. Some of it will depend on lower cost single foot ceramic guides becoming available.

For myself, I wouldn't think of putting a snake or wire guide on any rod I build, but I would never suggest that they don't or can't work. Obviously they do, and they do so at a relatively low cost.

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

Overwhelming weight increase? I've not seen that and I've weighed them more than once. In fact, I'm sure that the sets of ceramics that I use weigh no more, if not less, than comparable sets of snakes. I know full well what additional weight does to a rod and I won't increase weight unless it's going to something very special for me.

You can certainly quantify feel - the Common Cents Frequency will do just that for you, with a number that is relative across the board. Check the recent issue of RodMaker with that article, or just go to the Common Cents Website and download the article for yourself. I think you'll have fun playing with it.

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

My understanding is that a blank works it's best with no guides on it at all.
So as guides are added the blank has to carry and swing that weight which as Tom states slows it down. It has to work harder to recover and go back to straight.
maybe that is a reason why a lot of blank makes are making Xtra fast blanks. The extra fast should carry the weight better. It is stronger or stiffer.
That being said if the blank is a more moderate action, I call them a softer, blank, putting that same weight on it will I think slow it down even more. If one puts on a 9 ft rod say 10 snake guides it would be like putting on at least 15 guides because of the two wraps and finish. IMHO.
The only guides that seem to be the right choose I think would be a single foot wire, less wrap and finish, Ceramics which will last longer for weight I would think the Titans " for price " or Fuji Ti frame.

Another thing I wonder about is the ID of rings. I have used several St Croix with wire guides and the suggested ceramics do have a smaller ID compared to wire.

Guess the only way would be to tape on different sets and compare the performance ?

Then again if I go to sell it but people want the look of snake guides ?????



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2005 08:02AM by bill boettcher.

Stiffness and action are two different things. You can build very stiff moderate action blanks just as you can build very soft fast action blanks.

The less weight you hang on the blank the better. The type guide you use is not the only consideration. It may be that I don't find much weight increase with ceramics because I use lower and smaller types than some. I also tend to use one guide less than most factory rods for the same length. My wrap extensions are only about 1 or 2 threads beyond the guide foot. As light as guides are these days I tend to think that some if not a great deal of any weight difference lies in guys are using and wrapping the guides.

But there's no question that the less component weight you hang on the blank, the faster it will react and recover.

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

I do tend to say stiff, i should say faster recovery.
I also here that some shorten the foot on single foot guides cause they tend to be longer. With a Forhan locking wrap which I do on all single foot guides. Easy to do.

Bill, You remember the old Sy Simms clothing commercials motto... "An educated consumer is our best customer"... One lesson I learned in my (real job business) is the customer is always right until I tell them they are wrong...Bob.

Tom

Re reading back posts, you say you use one less them most factory rods do ?
I was under the understanding that most factory rods did not use enough guides ?? That one more then factory was better ? I guess if it casts nice, and the stadic test shows it to be good for the blank ? Less is better?

Here is a great response to this very topic, given by a person who was questioned about "performance". Read it & re-read it again just to make sure we all understand. I think some really good points are made here insofar as actually fishing with the rods you build, and knowing which materials are "BEST" and offer teh most "performance" for each type of situation. Anyone can glue parts togther and use top quality components and say they build a better performing rod, but imo if you do not fish the rods you build, and are relying on parts to make your rods perform better - you're lying to yourself.

[www.rodbuilding.org]

Bill,

You should always use the proper number of guides. That would be the least that would still offer adequate stress distribution for the blank. Same with sizing, using the smallest and lightest possible guides that will do what you require. I probably made a bad choice of words in saying that I "use one guide less than most factory rods," as there is no standard number used on factory rods. Some are about right, some have more than they need and others could use one or two more.

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

Scared me there for a minute. Thought I was doing every thing wrong ??

Billy
Cliff hit it about right.

I also disagree with what seems to be the general consensus herein that ceramics or single foot wire guides are better performers than snake guides on fly rods. And I also find myself in disagreement with those who are of the opinion that using the smallest possible guides are best for rod performance. I've been fly fishing for 47 years and have been building fly rods for myself and friends for the last 29 years. In that time I've built rods with ceramics all the way up to and including the top; rods with ceramic strippers, snakes, and ceramic top; rods with ceremic stripper, wire loop top, and single foot wire guides; rods with ceramic strippers, single foot wire guides, and wire loop tops, and I find myself going back to using ceramic strippers, oversized snakes, and wire loop tops because the rods perform better when casting interchangeable tip lines (those with a loop so you can use various rate sink tips in addition to the floating tip).

The oversized snakes allow the interchangeable loops to flow through the guide much easier with no hanging up like I experienced with the ceramic fly guides. I have replaced all the single foot wire guides on two factory Loomis GLX spey rods I own because the single foot wire guides didn't have a large enough inner ring diameter to prevent the line loop from catching at time and the single foot guides were too tight for good shooting of the line belly (I perfer long-belly spey lines and the 90'-100' bellies have to be shot at times). I put #6's and #5's on the heavy 11 wt line GLX spey rod and put an extra large wire loop top on it too to better handle shooting the heavy 10/11 long-belly spey line belly. I put #6's, #5's, and #4's on the lighter line 9wt GLX spey rod because they provide better shooting of line belly and passing of the line loops. Additonally, the large snakes also work better when winter steelhead fishing because they don't ice up as readily with the fat fly lines.

I have replaced the ceramic fly guides I've put on the single- hand fly rods I built with them because in order to get large enough inside ring diameter to easily pass the interchangeable line loops, I'd have had to use the largest size for all guides, and that would have increased the weight of the guides. In fact, I wouldn't consider building a #3 or #4 fly rod with anything smaller than a #2 snake and my own #3 and #4 rods have #4, #3, and #2 snakes on them with a wire top and ceramic strippers.

No one said to use the smallest possible guides - you misread. The idea is to use the smallest guides that will still perform the required task. There is a big difference in these two statements. Guides need to be large enough to do the job, but no larger. Added weight is the enemy of rod performance.

I built rods professionally for over 20 years and all my fly rods used ceramic guides. I did some consulting work for Thomas & Thomas during that time and they were so impressed with the performance of the ceramics that they truely wished they could have incorporated them on their then new line of saltwater rods. But the cost was just too much for them to absorb. These were big water rods shooting all sorts of connections and loops. The ceramics excelled in this area and we had no problem with hang-ups of the various connections. We also used the appropriate sized guides - the smallest that would still get the job done in the manner required.

Even on my 15 to 17 weight rods I used ceramic guides with no ill effects. They have been my fly rod guide of choice since the late 1970's.

At some point in time, the fly fishing industry made the move from the ring and clasp guide to the snake guide, and at some point they will make the change from the snake guide to all ceramic guides. It will happen.

Bill started this topic wanting to know why the commercial makers used snakes. The reason is plain and simple - they work, and they do so at a very low cost. They're also what most fly fishermen are used to seeing on rods so no additional money has to be spent to sell them on a new idea.

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

Tom
What ceramics do you use ?