Hey now,

Long time lurker , first time builder here wondering if I need underwraps for my Batson SW1087 surf rod. If so can I use size D gudebrod NCP which I allready have, or go thinner? Also is there a general guideline for underwrap necessity?

Much Thanks

Lumo

Lomo , underwraps are for looks , they do nothing but add weight and offer no protection to the blank from a poorly preped guide foot . I normaly don't use them , but on heavy boat rods they look good . It's purely a cosmedic feature ,and your choice to use them on not . At least that's what I've been hearing for years here . Have fun , hide the credit cards........... you'll be an addict in no time . That's a nice blank you chose . John NoEast Rod Builders

Got Fish ?

I'd agree with John. If you do decide to use them, however, go with size A thread, then overwrap with C or D.

.....

I underwrap for a simple reason: Why would I want to place metal in direct contact with an expensive blank? It matters little whether the guide foot is prepped or not, if you place the guide on the blank thats direct contact. I underwrap. If an underwrap DOES prevent this metal to blank contact, then in this sense it does protect the blank. How much weight would this add? The weight is negligible and is a minor tradeoff for the benefit of added protection to the blank.

The ONLY rods I do not underwrap is when the owner specifies it, and sometimes when I build on solid glass blanks.

Next time you get a chance to do a guide repair on a well used rod that does not have an underwrap pay close attention to the areas under the guide foot.

Lou

If there is infact a burr or sharp edge in a bad spot on a guide foot , under wrap or not it will get to the blank . An underwrap may prolong the fracture from happening , but it will . John

Got Fish ?

Lou,
I would not be too quick to dismiss the weight of underwraps. The weight of the additional thread is small but the weight of the additional epoxy can be significant. The measurements that I made about a year ago on a Steelhead rod showed that underwraps on a typical steelhead drift rod can be as much as 30% of the total weight of the guide plus wraps. On a boat rod or any rod that will not be used to cast the resulting drop in rod efficiency is not as important but for any rod that will be used to cast and efficiency is important the additional weight of the underwrap and additional epoxy required can make a significant difference.

No Luis, there is no guideline for underwraps. Gives you the freedom to do what you want to do and what makes sense overall.

The SW1087 won't really notice the added weight of an underwrap.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2006 09:54PM by Michael Joyce.

Luis,
I am very familiar with the Batson SW 1087 and I think that your size D thread is fine but if it were me I would definitely not use underwraps on that blank if you are going to use it as a surf rod. Because casting distance is going to be effected by the weight that you add I would tend to use as light weight guides as possible, even at the expense of some durability, not use any more guides than necessary, and not use any longer wraps or more epoxy than is necessary.

Generally, until you get to very heavy power rods, you can easily tell the difference between a rod that's been underwrapped and the same model without underwraps. The non-underwrapped rod will be noticeably more responsive and quicker to damp after a cast.

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

What guides are you planning to use?

Hey guys

Thanks for the replies, keep em coming. I'm using 40,30,25,20,16,12 and a 12 top fuji hardloy BSVLG's as per recommended by the salesman at the shop I bought the blank from.

Luis , go up to the top of the page here and look in the library at the "New concept guide primer " artical . there is nothig "wrong" with your set up , just that there is a better one . The New Concept set up is reported to give additional casting distance . Not to mention that the guides used after the line gets to the blank (running guides , the first 3 are the choke guides...i haven't read it in a while , I think thats the wording )will save a ton of weight in the most important part , the top of the rod . John

Got Fish ?

Luis,
As the weight of the blank gets higher, the SW1087 is a fairly powerful and therefore fairly heavy blank, the weight of the guides gets higher, you have selected pretty heavy guides and also the weight that you will be casting gets higher, often when surf fishing you will be casting quite a bit of weight, the added weight of underwraps naturally gets proportionally smaller and smaller and has less and less effect on the rods performance. On lighter blanks with lighter guides the effect of underwraps can be significant but on the heavy blank that you are building with the heavy guides you have selected and with the weight that you will be likely to be casting I would not worry too much about the added weight of underwraps. It is not necessary to use underwraps but if you think that they are more attractive go for it. On that blank and set of guides the only place where you may notice the difference is, as Tom points out, on how rapidly the rod damps out vibrations when you cast.
John has made a very good suggestion that you might want to consider. Going to the New Concept will result in lower weight guides where it is most important toward the tip of the rod and will have more effect on your rods performance than the underwraps will have.

Right, the old guide set you have there will certainly work, but it's heavy and the rings are much larger than necessary on the subsequent guides after the first one or two. Reduce that weight out near the tip and the rod will balance better, cast a little further (don't expect to double your distance - that won't happen) and generally be a bit nicer to cast and fish with.

Aftter you're done, go back and show the salesperson where you bought the blank some of the advancements that have taken place in guide systems in the past decade or so. He can use that information to pass on to future customers.

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

The only recent rods manufactured that REQUIRED underwraps were a flush of G-Loomis GLX blanks (non -fly rods) back in early 2000. (Could still be the same as I have not wrapped a high end G-Humis since then) The insisted that the 1st 30 inches of the tip section be underwraped otherwise the warranty was voided. Now the fly rod which they said did not need this special treatment still broke ofen and were particularly suspetable to high sticking failures.

Thought I'd mention that for my first build I am definately not going for decorative guide wraps. I actually prefer a simple design like the one on my St. Croix freshwater deal. Somewhere down the line I would like to learn to be more decorative but I would probably stick to the butt and split grip wraps to show my own style. My priority on this guy is to be as light as possible, functional, efficient, and cast 3/4 to 2 oz. swimming lures (bombers, mag minnows-darters, slug-go's, red fins, etc...) as far as possible. with a stradic 5000. I have checked out the new concept guides and am interested but not sure if I can dole out the money since I allready have the bsvlg's. If anyone has used the new concept guides with this blank and maybe even a similar real what was your set up?

If you are truly interested in light weight, you'll use the New Guide Concept (with or without new concept type guides). Don't confuse the guides with the system - two different things.

"Light as possible, functional, efficient..." If you are truly serious about this, read that article in the online library here. What you have now and what you'd likely do will run contrary to everything you say is important to you in this rod.

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

You already have the expencive stuff , it's just a matter of getting a few more of the smaller guides to put twards the top of the rod . If you have the opportunity to shop at a retailer that sells components , you should be able to return the guides not needed and get the ones you do . 40 , 25, 16 , then 12's out to the #12 top . You may have to juggle the sizes around a bit , but that's a start , depending on the axis angle of the spool . John

Got Fish ?

Lumo,
Go ahead and build this one using all the above information on underwraps (not needed) but if you like the look - go ahead using size A with B or C overwraps (just to make your first attempt easy / less frustrating). Considering the type of fishing you describe - once you have finished this one for your next attempt I would suggest you think about the Rainshadow Steelhead blanks There are several in the IST and DR series that will do 1/2 to 1.5 or even 2 oz), drop your reel size (down to a 4000 or 3500B "series" by Penn /Captiva or Shimano/baitrunner) and all your guide ring diameters using any of the manufacturers (Batson, American Tackle, Pac Bay zirconium or titanium (titans)). Go ahead an "mix" the guide styles too - using "v-frames" for the lower stripers and shifing over to single foot guides after the first one or two). When you wrap the second on consider doing "trim bands" for the look of underwraps while saving a bit of weight. Yes, I make quite a few of these for the folks who fish Cape Cod (jetty jumpers) as well as people locally who do a lot of casting (rather than sand spike fishing). The lighter you can make it the happier you (and your shoulder, forearm, hand will be at the end of the day). If there's are "drawbacks" - they are almost all two piece blanks and you will not "horse a fish". The ISTs are "fast" and the DR's are "moderate" actions.

You could even get away with something like a 30, 20 or16, 12 and single foot 10's if you're using say 20 to 30# braid and throwing those size plugs....with the massive weight savings, you could even add an underwrap on the first three guides...lol