Is there any documentation available which gives a proven difference - between the action of a rod - when wrapped with single foot guides compared to being wrapped with double foot guides.

On the surface, one would think that the rods action would stiffen a bit with the addition of the extra feet and wrapping.

However, I personally, have not been able to verify that by any testing, or any other method for that matter.

Of course, you have the isse of a bit more weight with the double footed guide compared to the single footed guide. However, the question of the day is:
Does a double footed guides change the rods action or sensitivity - when wrapped with a double footed guide compared to a single footed guide of the same ring size??

Thanks for your thoughts.
Roger

I've been thinking about this for 2 days since Bill Stevens had a similar question.

I'm on my way out the door right now, so I'll just say this. The variations in the rod blanks, even within the same model #, may make such measurements difficult in the first place.

I have also been wondering if the same force will bend a double-footed guide if the heels move FARTHER APART, as in the mounted UNDER the rod position;

Or if there is a difference in force or stiffness if the guide is mounted on TOP of the rod blank, and the heels move CLOSER TOGETHER.

Grab a double-footed guide for yourself and see what I mean.

Great Question, Roger Wilson. Thank you. I hope to bring it up in a Post which I will make tomorrow morning, a sort of Mini-Review of guide selections from recent Threads.

Until Later, Gators. ... -Cliff Hall+++, Gainesville, FL-USA*****
Happy Passover & Happy Easter !

Roger wilson Wrote:
> However, I personally, have not been able to
> verify that by any testing, or any other method
> for that matter.

This is the ONLY thing which matters. If you can prove somethign scientifically is better, but you do not notice a an actual fishing situation performance increase based on this test - which one matters more? If you have tried both and do not notice a difference when you are actually fishing, that's the only test I would pay attention to. Nobody is going to grab your rod while you are fishign and take it into a labratory for testing.

What is the advantage and disadvantages of double foots and single? That is a great question and a good response by BILLY. The rod maker that i learned from takes a fishing approach to rod making and not science and i think that has rubbed off on me as well. However the confidence that comes with a scientificly sound rod could make a difference in how you fish it. I would be curious to here disadvantages and advantages of both. thanks ike

Roger,

I am in the same camp as Billy. Fishabilty is #1.

I like single foot guides on my fly rods (mostly mid-light wt rods) because of the feel. It is hard to characterize exactly why..is the extra wraps,the extra epoxy, the actual guide. To me when I build a rod with single foots it seems to act more like a bare blank. This,.to me feels better.

On heavier casting rods I prefer double footed guides more because I want more strength and feel like that is the way to go. If I'm worried about a rod being frail I won't have confidence in it.

For the types of fishing I do this makes sense for me. You can give me all the scientific evidence in the world and it won't change any of these things.

I'd like to add - I do feel people should understand as much as possible, and continue to learn how to make a better rod. I just think there is a point where we go a bit overboard. The fact that he has tested both, is a lot different than assuming one was better than the other without even trying.

i have wrapped the same blank with double & single foots, and I find the one with single foots felt better in my hands (balance wise). Blanks were GUSA 704DHX's, one had UN's, the other LN's - same handle set up and everything. Was teh difference that noticeable, not really, especially once I stuck a reel on teh rod. The problem is the rods have been knocked around, and I've had to re-do 2 guides on the single footer - the one with the double foots was for a charter captain and everything is still in place even though I know it's been beaten up. In this case, I built a "better functioning" rod with the single footers, but in actual fishing use I should have went with the 2 footers.

Try everything, learn as much as you can, and base your decision on what YOU FEEL is best for YOUR fishing.

Well said Billy,
I had this conversation with another rod builder whom I have a lot of respect for and was
shown 2 rods that were identicle in every way except for the guides and fancy wraps.
One was wrapped with SF guides with plane Jane wraps and the other had DF guides,
underwraps, and fancy overwraps and butt wrap. All the bells and whistles as he put it.
I could not tell by feel which was lighter or better feeling and no reels were attached.
Obviously the DF guided rod had to be heavier but without using a scale I could not tell.
I did not have the oportunity to cast the rods. However, I was told that everyone who did
test cast both rods with identicle reels got the better results from the rod with the "bells
and whistles". From a scientific and logicle point of view this does not make sence to me
but then again fishing conditions are not always logicle and scientific. LOL!
If I ever catch a bass with a Masters degree I will have to ask him about it! One of these
days I will have to try the same tests for myself.

Raymond Adams
Eventually, all things merge, and a river runs through it..

Not scientific and probably more out of laziness than anything else, But I use SF guides with Forhan wraps on almost all of the rods I build except where I just can't talk the customer into it or I know they are extremely abusive with there tackle - except maybe a doublefoot butt guide on musky rods. I really don't think that strength is an issue. I think that SF guides can more than handle anything that fishing can throw at it. Keep in mind though, the biggest thing that I build are musky rods. Salt may be a different story!


Mike (Southgate, MI)
If I don't want to, I don't have to and nobody can make me (except my wife) cuz I'm RETIRED!!

Mike - it's not the fish that mess up single foot guides, it mostly transport and storage. I know the Forhan thing was because of how tough Bass fishermen were putting rods in and out of a rod locker. Well, NOBODY I know of has a clue what a Rod Locker is, most of use store our rods in a corner somewhere in the house, when we go fishing we shake the rods to untangle them, throw them in teh back of teh truck/car, roof rod rack, slide them in and out, wiggle them so they untangle again - you see where I'm going. I agree that teh Forhan wrap is great to prevent the guide from getting pulled out....but nothing will prevent a SF guide from getting knocked ut of alignment when sideways yanking and pulling occurs. The guide will not pull out, but it does need to be replaced after a trip (or two, lol)

Billy Vivona - when a Bass fisherman is talking about a ROD LOCKER, it is a lockable-hatch compartment in the deck of the Bass Boat. They tend to be a cramped and curved spaced, crowded with rods. Sometimes the hinged section of the hatch is only ~ half of the rod length, and the rod has to be "bent" to get it down the hatch and into its final position. The tips are prone to tangling, and that's when the "fun" starts. -Cliff Hall+++

DELETED - DOUBLE POST -Cliff Hall+++



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2006 12:22AM by Cliff Hall.

Emory Harry did an extensive article on this in RodMaker Vol. 8 Issue 3. The jest of the article is that heavy boat rods and the heavier bass rods will have a difference, but it may not be very noticeable due to the weight/power of the rod. The lighter powered rods, salmon/steelhead, 3 power and lighter bass rods, spin popping rods, etc. will see a very noticeable difference, he reports about 6 to 7% performance change as measured as reasonant frequency.
The difference between how I build steelhead rods now and how I built them in the early 90's is huge, especially the spinning rods.

I wonder the same thing about single and double footed RECs. The double foots are a lot more flexible and I can't see how they can inhibit the action at all. However, I wrapped 1 bamboo tip with singles and the other with doubles and prefered the tip with the singles. Could be that the singles did in fact stiffen up the blank and this is why I preferred it!

I personally like single foots but then again I only fish freshwater as of now. So I'm usually not concerned about a fish screwing up my guides. But, like Cliff said, bass fisherman have their rods lockers. Most of us aren't the most graceful with our feet and rods go just about anywhere ,many times during a day. They get stepped on by excited(or really po'd! ) guys, jammed into rod lockers at warp speed, thrown on the deck during fish -induced panics as the anglers grab a different rod on the deck and many other rather rough uses! So inherently a lot of guys like duble foots. I think that single foot guides help a rod stay like the original blank, which is how I want it. I bought a blank to fit a certain demand, so it's bogus for me to put on double foots and then go mess with the action that I bought the blank for in the first place. But if you don't have confidence in your rod, you won't fish nearly as well as with a rod you trust. But usually when I'm on the water, I forgot about the rod althogether and all the details that go with it. If I made the right tool to start with, I'm going to fish and not worry about how the rod reacts to anything other than how it detects and reacts to fish. But that's just me.

It's a weight thing ! The more weight you put on a flexible tube the slower it becomes because it has to carry that weight . It will bend more ( cause of the weight ) and will return to it's straight position more slowly cause it is carrying more weight. When ya get into heaver rods you don't notice it as much because they don't flex as much to begin with and with heavy fish ya want a stronger wrap to hold the guide in place