And, no, it is not a question about the bumper guide. Thanks to Bill Colby's article, I think I've got that one right. It concerns the first 180 degree guide. After doing a static line test, this guide isn't really bearing any load. The line is deflected at the 90 degree mark of the guide ring, but no higher. Should this guide be moved forward? This is a 6' medium action RX7 blank with a fast tip. I used a #12 butt guide, a #8 bumper guide, the first 180 guide is a #8, and is followed by 4 #6's, and a #6 tiptop. I would go a size smaller with the 180 guide, but a #8 is the smallest double-footed guide I have. Thanks for any suggestions.
Tight lines,
Hunter

From ghoulies and ghosties,
and long leggedy beasties,
and things that go bump in the night,
Good Lord deliver us!

My thought is that you have a few options. I wouldn't move it up but I would either buy a double foot #6 or make the other 180 guides larger like a size 10. If you think that will add too much weight then take the #8 you have now and either replace with a #6 or rebend the foot and frame to get the ring closer to the blank.

I've done several rods with the bumper type arrangement and only had what you mention happend to me once. I just put a #6 on it for the first 180 guide and that took care of the problem.

I hope my post has a little relevance. I have only built two bumper wrap rods. I ended up starting with a DF10 and then to size 6 SF for the bumper and the rest of the guides out on both rods. I built them for low profile reels . One rod was a Rainshadow IP844 that I fished with all last sumer, the size six bumper guide and the rest of the size 6 guides out to the tip showed no signs of moving or bending. The last rod I bumper wrapped was a Tiger Eye 2PC 6'6" ML .I built it for light line and small lures and am very happy. I may turn the bumper guide around and have the foot face the front of the rod on my next rod that is similair to the IP844, it does show a little scuffing at the front edge of the epoxy on the foot of the bumper guide, barely scuffed. I fish 8lb. line on the IP844 and like the way it casts also. Have a great day, Rich.

You could also use a single ft. #6. I do with out any problems

When you say "The line is deflected at the 90 degree mark of the guide ring, but no higher.", you mean the first 180 guide and higher meaning down (a higher degree towards 180?)? If so, then I would think this:
The low point of the ring where the line is to bear on the first 180, relative to those that follow to the tip. should be no lower than they. The lower it is, the harder it will be to get load to it. I am doing something a bit odd in shortening guides so that I can have a larger ring and still be low,,,, but that is just my little thought. In general, the first 180 being small is a decent idea, and of course once you do that there is no reason for all the guides to tnot be the same size to the tip. ... by size I am thinking the distance from the rod surface to the point in the ring that the line will run.

On the type rod you discribe I only use on double foot guide, the stripper. Then I use single foot fly guides for the rest going with the smallest bumper guide I can get away with. The original bumper article was a general info article, I believe, using an heavier powered example than your rod. Give it a try, I think you'll see you can go lighter and lower this way.

A NON-Loading condition in the First 180 degree Guide is one of the few potential drawbacks of the Simple Bumper System - whether you use a Bumper Guide or eliminate it completely. Non-Loading does not have to be a problem. However, Non-Loading can become a problem in rods that are lighter power that are heavily bent during hook-setting or fish-fighting.

Using a First 180-degree Guide that has too high a Ring Height, or too large a Ring Diameter, or that is blindly positioned along the rod blank and not checked for Non-Loading is more lekely to result in Non-Loading.

In that case, the effective load-bearing guides now become the Butt Guide and the SECOND 180-degree Guide. The Bumper and the First 180-degree Guide are not carrying ANY load IN THE PLANE OF ROD-BENDING. That makes the bridge span or effective interval between the Guides something like 16 or 20 inches, when you never intended that, and the guides are only 8-10 inches apart physically.

Pay attention to this, and move & choose guides to avoid Non-Loading is my best advice. Some Non-Loading at low bending is tolerable. Complete Non-Loading under heavy loads has the potential to overload the rod in that region.

Some more discussion of this can be found by Searching "Non-Loading" and / or reading the Post & Replies cited below. ... Good Luck, -Cliff Hall, FL-USA.



Sprial ... Jay Lancaster ... Sept 2, 2006 19:47
[www.rodbuilding.org]
SEE ALSO – [www.rodbuilding.org]
On most, if not all, spiral wraps I've done, the line generally doesn’t want to touch the ring of 1st 180’ guide. Normally, under load, it will touch the 2nd 180-deg, yet not the 1st.

So far this hasn't been a problem, but I have customers who really pull on these blanks mention it to me. My normal response is, "this hasn't been a problem for me". ETC

Are their concerns valid? Should I be giving them a different answer to the questions they ask about it? I quickly looked in the photo section and immediately found some pictures that show the same thing I'm talking about...rod flexed and the line traveling through the center of the first 180 and hitting the ring of the second 180. Jay
[www.rodbuilding.org]
[www.rodbuilding.org]