Hello to all-

I know the spine must be determined on a modern graphite blank, but what about the old spiral wound glass rods? I'm guessing that they don't but I did want to make certain. Thanks to all.

Ed


"We got the motive which is money and the body which is dead" - Gillespie

Actually, I don't think that spine has to be determined on any rod. IMO, it makes little, if any difference in performance. I would build to the straightest axis

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!!

All rods regardless of the materials used in construction have a spline.
Contrary to Mike’s opinion
I believe It may not be critical to spline a rod, but it does make a difference in performance.

I was using with a factory built rod last night in a tournament.. A pitching stick, that the spline falls about 40 degree’s to the right of top dead center .
And no matter how I to pitched the bait. It veered off to the right like a base ball pitcher throwing a curve ball.
Used some other rods at the same time that I had splined when I built them with out the same results.

Steve, I know that all blanks have a spine and I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but I just don't believe that spine orientation can affect casting like happened to you. How can you tell that the spine had anything to do with the bad performance of your rod??? I have test casted the SAME rod with 4 different spine orientations and was able to detect no discernable difference.
I did state that these are my opinions and I hope that more knowledgable people than me step in here.

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!!

The spine doesn't have to be determined on anything, really, as it has little practical effect in actual casting or fishing. But yes, nearly all round, tubular or cylindrical objects will have a "spine" effect.

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

I asked Dale Clemens about the word spline at a seminar. He said the proper term is spine but when his book went to print someone mispelled "spine" and "spline" became the word used due to that error. I have long since given up looking for a spine or spline on a rod blank.

It has been mentioned several times that a number of different things can produce a "spine" besides the flag seam. Is this subject concisely discussed in a single reference, like a back-issue of RMM, ... or is this info dispersed thru-out the RBO Archives? ...

Also, on some low-end (under $45) factory rods that I have had or handled over the years, some rods had a HORRENDOUS spine. VERY strong rotations.

I have here a factory rod (that I bought for a friend as a gift) that I checked the spline before I gave it to him. It was fine with respect to guide-spine orientation at it's original length of 7-1/2-feet. He recently snapped off the top 2 feet of the rod while moving it in and out of the car. Now at 5-1/2 tall, I thought maybe we could turn it into a bottom-rod or a cobia- on-the- pilings jig-tosser.

The new spine flexion is so strong, and at a 90 degrees offset from dead center that it will FLIP into its new spine even with 14-OZ. of spinning reel on the reel seat. THAT is a hellacious spine. The whole guide-axis has to be changed if this rod is ever gonna do anything other than strain his girl-friend's wrist, if she ever can fish it again.

I guess the better brands have less spine effect than some low-end stuff. But it seems too dismissve to too broadly ignore the potential for a spine to adversely influence the rod's fish-fighting (or pitching) performance. IMO, -Cliff Hall+++

Mike:
All I can tell you is that I spent 5 hours pitching this rod with virtually the same effect. Bait curving to the right. When I picked up my other rods to use. Effect was not there. Was so pronounced that I was compensating on my cast in where I was aiming so I could hit what I was pitching at. Checked the spline in my shop when I got home to find bait curving same direction as spline. May be because I’m pitching instead of casting there is not enough force to override the spline effect. Also could be that your were using rods with less strong of a spine or just a softer rods in which the effect is not as pronounced

The spine won't affect casting accuracy - turning or twisting around a central axis won't alter the casting path of the rod tip.. Rod or blank curvature will, however.

The 7 or 8 manufacturing anomolies that create what we call the spine effect have been detailed in a past RodMaker issue.

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

Steve Gardner wrote: "Maybe because I’m pitching instead of casting there is not enough force to override the spline effect." - BINGO !!!

When Pitching, the lure's initial velocity is very low, because you are not swinging the lure around like a snap-cast. Therefore the lure has virtually no initial inertia of its own to set it and keep it on the correct flight path prior to being subjected to the rod blank's spring effect. Now a rod blank with a strong spine that is oriented in opposition to the rod's plane of casting can exert a noticeable effect on softer casting styles and lighter lures. -Cliff Hall+++

Steve Gardner also wrote: "It could be that you were using rods with less strong of a spine, or just a softer rod, in which the effect is not as pronounced." - DAILY DOUBLE !!!

By taking the ONE SAME Rod Blank and orienting the Spine in 4 different axis (axes) at 000, 090, 180 & 270 degrees; and by observing that the difference in Axis had no discernable effect on typical casting habits and lure accuracy, that only demonstrates that that rod blank had a mild spine.

FOR YOUR ROD APPLICATION, if no problem is exposed, then I am not trying to create one. But a better test would be to take a rod with as SEVERE a spine or curvature as you dare bother building and see how that rod performs when you orient the spine at various Axis relative to the Plane of Casting.

It may still be an effect that you consider sub-consequential, Mike. But your initial description did not indicate how strong a spine that one rod blank had. And I have seen some doosies of a spine on low-end rods that make that bargain a better scrap blank or grip-reamer than backbone for a fishing rod.

"That's my story and I'm sticking to it." B)- -Cliff Hall+++

Won't happen. Put it on a casting machine and remove the angler's input (error) and you will not be able to get the rod to cast any differently just by orienting the spine in a different place Revolving, turning, twisting around the same central axis does not change anything insofar as the path of the rod tip - which the lure is going to follow.

If the blank is not straight - the curve not in line with the direction of cast will have some effect, but this is not the spine. This is the natural curvature that nearly all blanks have. This is a totally different subject.

Rod spine has nothing to do with casting accuracy or direction. Zero, zip, zilch. Casting, flipping, or pitching. That's been proven in actual tests where human input/error was removed from the equation.


.........



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2006 07:45AM by Tom Kirkman.

Tom Kirkman wrote: “Won't happen. Put it on a casting machine … You will not be able to get the rod to cast any differently just by orienting the spine in a different place.”

Cliff Hall asks: What kind of casting machine are we talking about?

Did those casting machines wind-up the rod-tip like a tennis player whacks an overhand serve, like any standard-style overhead or side-arm fishing cast. ? … How strong a spine did the test blanks have? … Did they vary the weight of the lures used? … Did they vary the speed of the casting swing? … Did they orient the spine so that it was in greatest opposition to the plane of casting? … Who did the research and who paid for it?

If the casting machine used a standard overhead casting style, then that is precisely the kind of experimental condition which I explicitly described as capable of imparting to the lure, before the line is released, an initial velocity and initial inertia which has enough kinetic energy to OVER-RIDE the weaker countervailing forces of most rod spines. In the usual case, the Angular Momentum (radial velocity) of the rod tip imparts more energy into the lure’s trajectory vector than the launch-spring effect of the rod-tip.

I think if the experiment was repeated with a rod blank with a very strong spine, mounted in opposition to the rod’s Plane of Casting, and used in a gentle bow-like fashion like Pitching, the results for the spine effect being neutral would be less impressive or perhaps even inconclusive. …

Most of what we discuss here at RBO and provide as evidence is, for a myriad of reasons, limited to empirical or anecdotal evidence that has some loosely controlled conditions. We don’t have many details when we try to make our comparisons. We don’t always know what those relative conditions are, and how much the unknown conditions or variables may affect our observations, or alter our final assertions (conclusions) if we were aware of them. … And that makes for some jousting sessions like this one.

I can’t imagine Steve Gardner, (or most other rod-building fisherman, if they had an experience like Steve’s), pitching off-target for 5 frustrating hours, NOT coming to the same conclusion that Steve did: This rod’s excessive spine threw off the rod’s pitch.

I am reasonably confident that those casting-machine tests were done in a well-designed experiment, with decent statistical analysis. But I suspect that the style of casting did not well mimic the Pitching technique which Steve Gardner used and which we are also discussing here. Pitching may be a special case of casting which is more sensitive to spine effects than the majority of other casting styles. And I do concede that spine usually is not a big deal. But when and if it, or curvature, is, then it is not a private hallucination or self-fulfilling prophecy, as may be suggested by some comments above.

In my opinion, -Cliff Hall+++

My answers are in all caps - I'm not shouting, just making it easy for the responses to be seen.


Cliff Hall asks: What kind of casting machine are we talking about?

A SPECIAL BUILT MACHINE THAT WAS CAPABLE OF LOADING THE ROD AND RELEASING THE LOAD WITHOUT THE NEED FOR HUMAN INPUT IN EITHER LOADING OR CASTING. THIS ALLOWED US TO SEE WHAT THE ROD WAS DOING, NOT WHAT THE HUMAN HOLDING THE ROD WAS DOING.

Did those casting machines wind-up the rod-tip like a tennis player whacks an overhand serve, like any standard-style overhead or side-arm fishing cast. ? … How strong a spine did the test blanks have? … Did they vary the weight of the lures used? … Did they vary the speed of the casting swing? … Did they orient the spine so that it was in greatest opposition to the plane of casting? … Who did the research and who paid for it?

THE SPINE WAS ORIENTED IN 4 DIFFERENT AXIS POSITIONS TO JUDGE ANY DIFFERENCE IN CASTING DISTANCE AND/OR ACCURACY. A MINIMUM OF 50 CASTS WAS MADE IN EACH POSITION.

If the casting machine used a standard overhead casting style, then that is precisely the kind of experimental condition which I explicitly described as capable of imparting to the lure, before the line is released, an initial velocity and initial inertia which has enough kinetic energy to OVER-RIDE the weaker countervailing forces of most rod spines. In the usual case, the Angular Momentum (radial velocity) of the rod tip imparts more energy into the lure’s trajectory vector than the launch-spring effect of the rod-tip.

AGAIN, ROTATING THE TIP OR THE ROD AROUND A CENTRAL AXIS WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE IN THE PATH OF THE ROD TIP WHICH THE LURE CAN ONLY FOLLOW. IN ACTUAL TESTS WITH CASTS AVERAGING 100 FEET, NO PARTICULAR SPINE ORIENTATION RESULTED IN MORE THAN 1 INCH OF DEVIATION FROM THE TOTAL RESULTS.

VERY CROOKED OR WARPED BLANKS COULD BE ORIENTED TO PROVIDE AS MUCH AS 8 INCHES AT 100 FEET FROM THE LANDING POINT OBTAINED WHEN THE "CROOK" OR WARP WAS POsiTIONED EXACTLY TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE.

I think if the experiment was repeated with a rod blank with a very strong spine, mounted in opposition to the rod’s Plane of Casting, and used in a gentle bow-like fashion like Pitching, the results for the spine effect being neutral would be less impressive or perhaps even inconclusive. …

OVER 100 RODS WERE TESTED, SOME WITH VERY MINIMAL SPINE EFFECT AND SOME WITH GREAT SPINE EFFECT.

Most of what we discuss here at RBO and provide as evidence is, for a myriad of reasons, limited to empirical or anecdotal evidence that has some loosely controlled conditions. We don’t have many details when we try to make our comparisons. We don’t always know what those relative conditions are, and how much the unknown conditions or variables may affect our observations, or alter our final assertions (conclusions) if we were aware of them. … And that makes for some jousting sessions like this one.

EXACTLY WHY WE DID NOT WANT TO INCLUDE HUMAN INPUT INTO THE EQUATION. WE MADE THE MACHINE AND DID THE TESTING SO WHAT WE WOULD BE OFFERING WOULD NOT BE OPINION, BUT FACT.

I can’t imagine Steve Gardner, (or most other rod-building fisherman, if they had an experience like Steve’s), pitching off-target for 5 frustrating hours, NOT coming to the same conclusion that Steve did: This rod’s excessive spine threw off the rod’s pitch.

STEVE PLAINLY STATED THAT HIS ROD CAST OFF TO ONE SIDE BUT DID NOT WHEN HE PICKED UP HIS OTHER RODS. THAT'S THE PROBLEM - HE PICKED UP HIS OTHER RODS. DIFFERENT ANIMALS. HE WOULD HAVE TO REBUILD THE INITIAL ROD AND TRY IT AGAIN WITH THAT ONE. YOU CANNOT COMPARE DIFFERENT RODS AND COME TO ANY VALID CONCLUSION - THE SAME ROD WOULD HAVE TO BE ASSEMBLED AND TRIED TO REACH ANY VALID CONCLUSION IN THIS INSTANCE. AND, YOU'D STILL HAVE HUMAN CASTING ERROR INVOLVED. I DOUBT ANY HUMAN CAN MAKE PERFECTLY VERBATIM CASTS. A MACHINE, EVEN A SIMPLE ONE, CAN.

I am reasonably confident that those casting-machine tests were done in a well-designed experiment, with decent statistical analysis. But I suspect that the style of casting did not well mimic the Pitching technique which Steve Gardner used and which we are also discussing here. Pitching may be a special case of casting which is more sensitive to spine effects than the majority of other casting styles. And I do concede that spine usually is not a big deal. But when and if it, or curvature, is, then it is not a private hallucination or self-fulfilling prophecy, as may be suggested by some comments above.

THE PATH OF THE ROD TIP DETERMINES WHERE THE LURE WILL GO. SPINE HAS LITTLE TO NO EFFECT ON THE PATH OF THE ROD TIP. EXTREME VARIANCES IN ROD BLANK CURVATURE CAN AND DO AFFECT THE PATH OF THE ROD TIP AND THEREFORE THE CASTING ANGLE. THE MACHINE TESTS SHOWED THIS.

A MOTION SUCH AS PITCHING WILL NOT EVEN BRING THE SPINE EFFECT INTO PLAY AS THE ROD DOES NOT FLEX DEEPLY ENOUGH FOR THE SPINE EFFECT TO HAVE... ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER.

THERE IS A LOT MORE TO THIS BUT IT HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED IN THE MAGAZINE AND ON THIS SITE. A SEARCH WILL TURN UP A LOT OF INFORMATION. SPINE ORIENTATION HAS LITTLE TO NOTHING TO DO WITH CASTING ACCURACY. IT WILL ONLY HAVE AN INFLUENCE IN CASTING DISTANCE WHEN THE LURE WEIGHT CHOSEN IS OR IS NOT BETTER SUITED TO THE ERN (RELATIVE POWER) OF THE ROD IN ANY PARTICULAR POSITION. THIS HAS TO DO WITH MORE OR LESS LOADING OF THE ROD FOR THE POWER AVAILABLE IN ANY PARTICULAR ORIENTATION. BUT EVEN THIS WAS MINIMAL.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2006 02:06PM by Tom Kirkman.

My totally non scientific tests have impressed upon me that the spine makes almost no difference whatsoever on casting accuracy. But sometimes a rod does cast off to one site a tad. When I have had this happen I look for a crook near the tip and usually find it.

I am not doubting what Steve has experienced but do not believe it has anything to do with the spine location on his rod. I think it has to do with how straight the rod is and where that straight axis is located. Plus I don't think anybody could cast in the exact same plane all the time, every time, anyway. Too much is made of this spine business. I'm all for custom rods and custom rod builders, but I tend to think that spine is just a way of baffling fishermen with................. you know what.

That's a very good point. Casting out of the plane of the straightest axis can certainly have some effect on casting. Many would just assume the spine had something to do with it.

.........

Thank you, Mr. Kirkman, for your directed response. ... I guess I have just read too many articles in professional, peer-reviewed, scientific literature (mostly biochemistry, medicine, pharmacology and clinical trials; not much in engineering) to not feel that there is a world of difference between these two levels of experimental design and methods of interpretation. ...

Maybe Mike Barkley is right - it's not rocket science (even though the lure is a launched projectile) it's only RodBuilding, ... and maybe I should revert to treating it as such. ... Respectfully, -Cliff Hall+++

MAYBE MY WORMS WERE CROOKET AND THE WIND COAFISHANT CAUSED THEM TO VEER OFF TO ONE SIDE (RIGHT SIDE ACTUALLY). I must be pretty good at duplicating hook placement as I went throug many worms and all shot off to the right.

That may well be, but none of it would be due to spine orientation. The spine just doesn't have that type of effect on casting.

The spine and its effect have been overly hyped for years in custom rod building circles. It wasn't too many years ago that folks believed that if you didn't orient the spine in a particular position on a particular type rod that you'd be causing twist when the rod was loaded, as well as the idea that a particular spine orientation could even prevent such rod twist. Of course, both notions were totally false. Still, they lived a long life because the explanations behind them sounded impressive. Trouble was, they were completely false. All it took to disprove them were a few practical and properly conducted tests.

Most rod builders today accept the fact that guide placement either causes or prevents twist. And, the day will soon come when rod builders will accept the fact that casting inaccuracy (when not caused by human error) is the result of a rod blank that isn't straight and that has any such deviation far off the plane of the cast. Even then, the deviation must be relatively severe to seriously impact casting accuracy.

..........

Wheew! I wonder what all the newbies think of this thread? For blank orientation it may be a lot simpler if you use belly up set ups to place the majority of the mass in the vertical plane! Then you can blame crooked casts on frayed nerves and old age.

Gon Fishn