I'm pretty sure I've seen the technicals of the subject discussed in detail on this site, but I cant seem to be able to find them very easily. Anyone know where or how I might find them? I'm looking for a good description of the differences in effects on the casting distance between a conventional setup vs a (simple) spiral wrap , due to the different line paths, etc.

Also, when casting, is the line "pulled" out by the weight of the lure or is it "pushed" out by the forward thrust of the rod, or some combination of the two - does one over power the other? Is there a detailed technical discussion on this somewhere as well?

Steve,

I can't give you the techno mombo jombo.....but the lure does pull out the line. And, I see NO difference in casting distance with one over the other, what I do see a difference in is rod feel, and tip weight. The spiral wins.

DR

My "tech-lite" two cents would be, yes, the lure pulls the line; but line path might effect the amount of resistance to that pull. Practically, except for long range surf stuff, I don't know if I'll ever use a non-spiral wrap again. I used my first on a light bait rod this past summer and love it. I noticed no difference in casting; although I did laugh when I looked over at an older gentleman staring at the rod looking perplexed...

Assuming we're talking about good variations of both, there would be no practical difference between the two. The line paths would be similar in either case, with the line traveling in a pretty straight path from reel to tip in either set-up.

Whatever weight mono or braid has that might be "pushed" out by the rod (sort of like a heavier fly line) would be offset by air resistance. This is why you would have a hard time casting just your line, without a lure or sinker on the end of it. The line incurs quite a penalty on the cast - air resistance along and across it, tend to 'suck up" much of the energy you impart to the lure or sinker. Witness what happens on one of those casts where you really heave one out there and the line snaps about 3 feet behind the lure. It'll be one of the longest casts you'll ever make, although you'll not get that lure back.

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

For as long as I have been using spiral wrapped rods, I have never seen any loss in casting distance at all. In the past, there was one rod builder I think trying to say it improved casting distance, but I have never seen that. I try to tell people the main advantage is a more stable rod when fighting the fish and that the position of the guides compared to a conventional rod has no effect on anything else.

Ok, that helped a lot with whether the line is pushed or pulled. Great examples.

I build only spirals on my casting rods and love 'em as well...but I guess I'm not understanding why, well enough. I get the whole twist and torque thing, I think. But what I'm still struggling with describing is the concept that the line path is the same and "straight" on both setups, esp. since we can see straight thru the guides on a conventional setup but not on a spiral, because the 1st guide and remaning guides are 180 apart...so the presumption is that the line path is bent more and so might presume that its travel is "impaired" as well.

Is it that the spiral does bend the path but eliminates line slap, by guiding the line on the bottom instead of the top - whereas the conventional setup doesnt bend the path, but creates more line slap by guiding the line on the top? - so that they are effectively similar?

A properly guided rod, either conventional or spiral for casting should avoid line slap all together. Now a conventionaly guided casting rod may have more guides to keep the line off the blank when loaded on the retireve, compared to a spinning rod static test of the same blank. But when casting and the rod is loaded the effect and guides are placed such that thay are in a spinning rod rod configuration until the follow through, after release, this is where line slap might possibly occurr; when the rod counterflexes, and this counterflex is never equal to that place on a blank during a loaded retrieve. Moreover when you static test your casting rod for conventional guide placement the rod is counterflexed much more than happens on a cast. So casting distances are similar, the major benefit to spiral wrapping is the difference in twisting torque on heavy retrieve loads. AND most importantly, that there is a double guide space that has to be bridged by the rod blank as the 180 degree guide carries no load until the rod is heavily counterflexed on a loaded retrieve and even then, the majority of the load distribution is placed upon the bookending guides (excluding the bumper guide) Don't worry about casting distance, the major consideration to ponder on a spiral wrap is loss of load distribution on the 180 degree guide

A properly executed spiral wrap will allow the line to travel as straight as any conventional layout. I prefer the simple Bumper Wrap configuration, even for surf rods.

As to the forces at work during the cast it's worth noting the difference between a conventional reel (with a revolving spool) and a spinning reel which simply lets the line flow freely. The weight of the lure and the force applied to it with the casting technique starts the flight of the line in both cases. The spinning reel does not add anything to this process to improve distance. It simply lets the line flow out as powered by the forces already imparted to the lure.

The conventioal reel aids in the cast by spinning the spool and, thereby tossing the line forward which reduces friction and assists the flight of the line. This accounts for casting reels achieving longer casts as compared to spinning reels.

Dave

While you spiral wrap experts are still around, here is my chance to get you to help me. I will be building my first spiral wrap. I need all the encouragement and help, otherwise I may chicken out and go back to the conventional. Simple reason, the spiral looks ugly.

Blank: Gloomis IMX MB 782
Butt handle: 8" cork
Fore grip: 2..5" cork
Reel seat: Fuji ECS 16
Guides: Fuji Titanium SIC(Originally for conventional : TLNSG 12, 10, 8, TLSG 7 x 2, 6 x 3 Tip TMNST 6 )

Can you guys suggest where and how I should place my guides. Also, what size guides must I retain and drop.

Thank you for your advise.

Anthony Lee

Anthony,
Drop the 8's & the 7's all together regardless if you wrap it spiral or conventional.

Place the 12, 10, and 6's just as if you were building a standard conventional
"guides on top" set up. Then flip all the guides except the butt guide #12 to the
bottom of the blank. Then place a low framed #6 exactly in the middle between
the butt guide and the first 180 guide. At this point your effectively done placing
guides. However, if you wish to tweek the placement positions and number of
the #6 running guides go right a head.

The simple spiral method is name that because it's true. It really is a SIMPLE
and EFECTIVE way to get the line to the bottom of the rod.

Steven,
I have found no decerning difference between the distance I get between the
standard and the simple spiral wraped rods I have built with the exact same blank
using the same reel & line and I build rods for spinner casting for salmon where
I stand and cast after cast after cast for hours.

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

Raymond nailed it!! No reason to use more than3 sizes of guides on any rod, in my opinion/

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!!

I collected my first spiral from my builder 3 weeks ago, a 6' Harrison blank with a lure range of 0.5oz - 1.5oz.

I'm afraid that I don't have the time, equipment, space or dexterity to do the build, so I source the blank etc. myself and supply my builder with a very full spec. He then sticks it all together for me. For me this works really well, as I get the rod of my choice, built 100% to my design & specification. The finish is immaculate.

However, having tested the rod on a few sessions I can honestly say that casting distance does't suffer at all. The feel of the rod though is totally different to a conventionally wrapped rod. It just seems to transmit so much more of what the lure's doing. Playing a fish is also far superior to a conventional wrap, no fighting the rod's desire to twist, just more control over the quarry.

Simon.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2006 07:21AM by Simon C. Joseph.

Thanks Raymond and Mike. I have decided to strip my Gloomis IMX C721 and spiral wrap it. I have a feeling that I am going to hate looking at it. But I need to satisfy myself that the simple spiral will out perform the conventional. It's my favorite rod and if it is not going to cast like it did before, then I will let you know.

Anthony Lee

I wonder if the dropping of one guide (friction), negates anything lost in the change of line path? I love spiral binds, but I hate all the customers in my shop trying to align the tip on a one piece rod! Cheers Paul.

One note to Raymond's fine instructions: Place the low frame #6 (Bumper Guide) at 90 degrees from the 0 axis (top) of the blank. Most builders place it on the same side as the reel handle so that the rod can be laid on a flat surface. Measure from the Butt guide ring to the next guide ring and set the Bumper Guide ring precisely half way between the two, as Raymond stated.

One note to Raymond's fine instructions: Place the low frame #6 (Bumper Guide) at 90 degrees from the 0 axis (top) of the blank. Most builders place it on the same side as the reel handle so that the rod can be laid on a flat surface. Measure from the Butt guide ring to the next guide ring and set the Bumper Guide ring precisely half way between the two, as Raymond stated.

OOOPS! Thanks Dave! Forgot to mention which axis to wrap it on!!

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