Hi all, i made a mistake yesterday, i was glueing up grips and reelseat on a spin rod, i splined the rod, then without thinking i glued the reelseat inline with the spline like u would a overhead reel, any opinons on what i should do now would be greatly appreciated, should i cut off front grip and reelseat and start again, or will the rod still be fine the way it is, i would like the rod to perform to its best possable performance, i made a wooden insert for the reelseat, if at all this mistake i made will affect performance are there any other ways to correct this, other wise i would be prepared to cut it off and start again,
Thanks in advance for any advise on my stupid mistake, i will not make this mistake again, lol,
Craig Johnson

You might get a range of suggestions as the importance of effective spine (or spline) is a subject open to interpretation. I have taken the advice of many skilled builders and simply build on the straitest plane. It has proven to yield excellent results for me. I would hope that you find you have done the same even if by accident. Nevertheless, it is good to realize that spine is not a "thing" like a backbone.. but rather an effect caused by the forces at work upon the blank. The many builders who I respect are in agreement that the effective spine has little to no impact on rod performance whereas building on the straightest plane provides a real benefit.

That is my best advice... but you may certainly consider alternate opinions. Trial and success is surely the best way to make your own decision about spine. ( I am also confident that the word "spline" entered our vocabulary as a result of a typographical error .. probably in a book by Dale Clemens.)

Dave Gilberg

I wouldn't worry about it! I'm one of those that feels that the spine has little or no effect on performance or much of anything else. Just MY opinion. I build to the straightest axis of the blank with the "belly", if any of a curve on the bottem, regardless of spinning or casting.

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 thank u both for your replys, i have got it on the straightest axis, i will now just keep going with the build, line the guides up useing the new guide concept, have a few casts, then glue her up, oh and sorry about spelling spine incorrectly.
Craig

Craig,
There was no spelling error to apologize for. The word "spline" was used back in
the 70's & 80's. The term "spine" is more common nowadays but I don't when the
word changed or why. LOL

If you want help with spelling just see Bob Balcombe. I think he can help! LOL!

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

The exact wording of your post could prove to be quite interesting. You originally said you placed the THING like on a casting rod. My question is which way did you place the THING - top or bottom. On a spinning rod the guides are already on the bottom and the blank apparent torque issue does not come into play. The placement of the THING When the only issues are fish fighting and casting power do not appear to be very important ON MOST RODS. Build as is and enjoy.

Why is such a fuss over where the guides are placed, "top of bottom" when the spine has no consequence, supposedly? Top or bottom of what ? In relation to what or where?

Craig,
I do not know how the use of the word spline came into use to describe the affect in a blank but if you look up the meaning of spline and spine in the dictionary you will see that the affect in a blank is clearly a spine not a spline.
I would not worry about where you put the guides relative to the spine. It will have little effect on the performance of the rod unless the spine is a very pronounced one. And even if it is very pronounced a number of conflicting arguments can be made for where the guides should be placed relative to the spine. The following are some of the conflicting arguments that are made in favor of positioning it one way or another.
Mount the guides on the softest axis and this will prevent the rod from torquing one way or the other when under load.
Sensitivity is a function of rod stiffness so mount the guides on the stiffest axis to get the maximum sensitivity.
Mount the guides on the plane of the casting motion, close to 90 degrees from the stiffest axis, and this will cause the rod to track better and more accurately when casting.
You can see these all conflict with each other.
I believe that it is actually impossible to mount the guides on the spine of most blanks because the spine does not run straight up most blanks but actually rotates up the blank which causes the spine to move slightly as more and more load is put on the rod. What most people are calling the spine is only the spine at one load condition.
I think that you received good advice from the posts above and have made the most reasonable compromise by just putting the guides on the straightest axis.

Ah, but you haven't even begun to mention LOCALIZED SPINE and what about DIRECTIONAL SPINE?? Then you got the TRACKING SPINE and the CONTRARY SPINE to deal with. These are just a few of the different spines you deal with on a rod blank. Or as some would have you believe! LOL!

John,
I agree with your statement "Or as some would have you believe". It seems to me that Localized Spine, Directional Spine, Tracking Spine and Contrary Spine is just a bunch of Mumbo Jumbo that unfortunately is fostered on rod builders by the same person that is responsible for a lot of other rod building misinformation.

Looks like I may have to start taking my blanks to a chiropractor!

I've been Tracking this thread and its Direction from a Local pubs computor, and Contrary to public opinion...., its pronounced "SPLEEN".

(soft side to the sea...is good for me!)

SPINE......SPLINE.... all is FINE !!!!!
BACK IN THE HORSELESS CARRAIGE DAYS IT WAS ALL ABOUT FIBERGLASS AND WHEN A ROD WAS "SPLINED" SOMETIMES IT WOULD JUMP OUT OF YOUR HANDS....SINCE THE INVENT OF GRAPHITE AND OTHER NEW FANDANGLED STUFF THERE WAS NO NEED FOR ALL THIS....FOLLOW THE EYE SIGHT AND POINT IT DOWN...ALL is FINE

If you read the earliest books on rod building, few mentioned spine. The one or two that did played it down. It was something that was hyped in the 70's and accepted without any verifiable evidence that it really had anything to do with rod performance.

Of course, if a person did want to spine their rods and locate their rods a certain way, it isn't going to hurt anything.

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

Well.....OK....I've read all about how the Spine doesn't matter. I've also read about how some really like the precise 180 degree orientiation that Lamiglass gets on their XMG blanks. I think this was also brought up during one converesation I had with Lamiglas.

Regardless, given my interest in minimizing weight for the power, on our recent foray into 2 wt fly blanks converted to spin, I definitely took into consideration where the spine gave most & least power. I think there is a difference in power although I did not measure the change in ERN from different orientation of the spine. Flexing it was noticeable and when dealing with 2 lb line with 0.8lb drag setting , I figure a bit of difference could make a difference.

However, I'd urge that you bow to the superior and collective wisdom on this board and ignore my thoughts.....:)

Mo

If you need more or less power, then you'd want to buy a more or less powerful blank. The difference in the blanks softest and stiffest axis (which are not 180 degrees opposite each other) is only a small percentage and varies depending on the total power of the blank. Generally, building the rod on the straightest axis gives you the most power. Building it on the spine gives you the least. Again, these two positions are not opposite each other.

The argument always used for spine importance was twofold: First, that it somehow could be oriented to eliminate rod twist or torque. That is incorrect, it cannot do that. Rod twist is a function of where the guides are located, not where the spine is oriented. Second, that spine position somehow affects casting accuracy. It does not and tests without human influence have been done to prove this.


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

Ok then assume I want to ignore spine and find the straightest axis- do I just site down the blank- roll it like a pool cue on a flat table or what?


Just to add my worthless opinion to the subject, on a couple of light spinning rods I built I have to say the spine was VERY noticeable and so evident, that I'm not sure it would have been wise to disregard the spine, despite the claims that contradict the importance of the spine.

Still researching the subject, and as a newbie haven't formed strong opinion one way or the other.

Question for Emory- care to enlighten me on the inference to who is supplying builders with "mumble jumble". Pm or e-mail me if ya want to be discreet- being a newb I'm not getting the inference, but if I need to be wary of bad info I would appreciate a word of caution.

Thanks.