Do spiral wrapped rods limit casting ability in any way (if guides are placed correctly)?

No, not in any practical manner. A good spiral wrap keeps the line traveling in a nearly straight path. There is nothing to hurt casting performance.

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

My subjective opinion is that; some times it increases casting distance.

Steve - "subjective opinion and "sometimes" is being quite nice and very diplomatic -

I will be a little more blunt!

Choose one of the major conventional wrapped production rods using low profile guides placed where high V frame gudes were originally placed - do the best job you can to test cast and measure distance.

Take that same rod - strip and place guides correctly in a spiral and retest!

In this case you will be able to change the words from "some times" to "everytime"!

Bill;
You are right
I was being politically correct.
I agree with you completely and know what my results have been. (every time)

I have come to realize that maybe the people not getting those results are doing it a deferent way, and rather then change things around to se if there is a difference. They would rather argue that I couldn't.

I have been jumped on about this one so many times I just didn't feel like another battle.

But when you know something to be the facts there is no reason to be "politically correct"
Thank You for calling me on it!

Is there a type of spiral that is better than one another for casting. For example, I have seen the Forhan "Revolver" spiral on bass rods. Is it better on small rods or rod designed for working crank baits? (Maybe I should post this as another thread) Thank you for your responses!

I use the Forhan style and the O'Quinn on all bass rods including cranking rods and am pleased with the results.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2008 01:20PM by Bill Stevens.

Maximo,

I use Steve Gardners spiral design, and it does very well for me.

I'd say most of the spirals work, I've yet to try one that didn't. Some do perform better, and those with less weight and the straightest line path are the best imo.

DR

If you remove the rod from the equation - the line path between a good spiral and a good standard guides on top set up aren't very different. For that reason I've seen little to almost no difference in casting distance between the two. But I would stop short of saying that a spiral wrap adds additional distance to a cast over a good guides on top set up.

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

This very subject was used in the custom rod marketing seminar at ICRBE 2008. It is a classic example of the customer attitude of SKEPTISM. When this happens the ONLY thing that may sway the person is a PROOF SOURCE provided by an independent third person that is acceptable to the customer. This is a long post but it may provide some information that will be beneficial to those who deal with fishermen who are not familiar with a spiral wrapped rod. Steve Gardner was in the room and his responses to questions probably convinced a few rodbuilders to try spirals and give them an honest trial.

It is very unusual to find a conventional wrapped rod on the commercial market, at present, which uses low profile, light weight guides, in reasonable number that has desirable performance characteristics. I am glad that the production builders have not recognized the performance limitations most of their rods exhibit. Casting distance is only one of the issues involved. The marginal performance characteristics of many conventional production casting rods provides a marketing advantage for those custom builders utilizing the spiral to their advantage.

Casting distance always causes a stir when the subject comes up between custom builders who seek to market their rods. It is the one thing that will keep most from ever trying the spiral to start with - anything that looks that crazy can not possible cast a lure!

The following text was published in the BWB Magazine(Bass Walleye Boating) in the September Issue 2006. I keep this article with pictures in my shop for all customers to read. It answers the casting distance question that any logical person who fishes may have about the funny looking wrap. In all reality it does not! This blind test by skilled anglers even reported an increase in casting distance.

BWB Magazine Text

Bass anglers are always looking for a competitive edge. One of the most important advantages and angler can have is the ability to cast lures with distance and accuracy.

That's where this new column takes you, to a comparison of spiral wrapped rod vs. the conventional rod. The design of this rod, where the guides rotate around the blank, is also known as a Robert's Wrap, a Missouri Wrap, or, in saltwater circles, an acid wrap. Though most anglers are not familiar with rods wrapped using this method tout several benefits including; less torsion or twisting force on the rod while under load; and the ability to cast farther.

We wanted to check out this claim for ourselves, so we held a little cast off - between identical conventional and spiral wrapped rods. For out test, we used two seven-foot medium- heavy bait casting rods from custom rod builder Kit Harrison at Texas Sidewinder Rods. Kit built the rods using two identical blanks, one wrapped conventionally and the other spiral wrapped. Both rods were outfitted with new Team Diawa Zillion 100Sha bait casting reels spooled with 12 pound Maxima Ultra Green line.

To make this comparison as fair as possible, I asked Ron Ballanti, a contributor to BWB and an accomplished recreational angler, and Robert Lutes, a Southern California bass pro, to put these rigs to the test.

We rigged the rods with identical 1/2 ounce jigs (with the hooks and skirts removed: and adjusted the Magforce-Zanti backlash control on each reel to identical settings. Following this, each angler took a few practice casts to warm up.

Because we were all curious to see how the spiral wrapped rod would perform, we tested it first. Robert stepped to the line and rifled of 10 consistent casts ranging from a low of 127 feet to a high of 146 feet, with an average of 138 feet- 4 inches for the set. Next, Ron stepped up to the plate and fired of his casts. Ron's cast ranged from a low of 129 feet to a high of 142 feet- 8 inches. His average was 139 feet 5 inches.

With our spiral wrapped date logged, it was time to see if the conventional rod could keep up. Robert led off again, his first cast came in at 128 feet, 7 inches. Ron's first was also near the low end of the range at 124 feet. As the tests continued, it became obvious that the conventional rod couldn't keep up with its twisted sister. neither angler was able to reach the 140-foot mark with the conventional rod Robert averaged 126 feet while Ron averaged 130 feet 4 inches.

To be certain our results were accurate, we eliminated the only remain variable between the two set ups by switching the reels and performing the tests again - and got virtually the same numbers.

Although not truly scientific, our test offers accurate real world results.The three of us were skeptical a the beginning of this comparison, with the spiral wrapped rod easily outperforming its conventional counterpart, we all walked away eager to put the "outcast" through it paces on the water. Since this column focused solely on the casting difference between the two rods, we used identical reels. The pair of new reels (#250)were excellent casting reels. I believe the reels six ball bearings and the Magforce-Zanti backlash control contributed greatly to the consistency of our tests.

End magazine text.

This kind of information may be the thing that will convince someone to give a spiral a chance! I have a lot of customers that have refused the spiral but the interesting thing I find is that no one who used the first one made it his last!

Gon Fishn



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2008 06:24PM by Bill Stevens.

If the line travels in a mostly straight path then it really doesn't matter if the guides are on top of the rod or the bottom. The worst thing ever done to the spiral wrap was to call it a spiral wrap. If the line is actually spiraling around the blank then you have a very poor spiral wrap. You just want it to skirt by the blank on one side, not spiral around the blank.

Is there a formula for the spiral wrap? I jest bought a 7' med. rod for trout and reds . and i'm thanking about the spiral wrap . is so where can i find the proper location of the guides?

Mike;
I have always thought the "spiral warp" was the reference to the guides spiraling from top to bottom, not the line

Marty;
If you do a search on Spiral wrap in the search section. Include all post from the last year. You will obtain a wealth of info to work with

You'd be correct, Steve. Unfortunately I see where Mike is coming from - the name gives folks the idea that the line spirals around the blank.

There is probably a better name for it but we're so far down the pike now you'd have a hard time getting anything else used.

...........

Marty,

Do a search on this site for "simple spiral" and you will turn up all sorts of information.

Past issues of RodMaker detail just about every type of spiral wrap method ever used.

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

I’d really like to hear anyone speculate as to the results achieved in the test done by BASS & WALLEYE BOATS magazine that Bill posted above. To get a 7 to 9 per cent increase in casting distance is certainly noteworthy. In going to the rodbuilders site that furnished the test rods, I see they also claim much better sensitivity with the spiral…… but that’s a whole new subject.

My speculation;
Is that I have had similar results in increased casting differences on the tests I have run.

Steve,
You and Bill have already said as much and I’m sure your “testing” has got you convinced and that’s all you need to know. I’d still like some speculative ideas as to WHY. If you’re achieving this kind of results, perhaps rotating the guides once more around the blank would give you another 5 or 10 percent. (I’m being facetious, of course and I apologize)

The validity of the B&WB test would be suspect since there is no scientific or logical reason for the results shown. While the “spiral” does have advantages controlling torque, casting distance, while not adversely affected, cannot be improved on by rotating guides to the bottom of the rod. I suspect that if any “reverse engineering” was done to determine why the “spiral” performed better than the “conventional” rod, you’d find that the blanks would not be identical (CCS measurement). I have subscribed to B&WB magazine for many years and I was surprised to see this test published without any validation process. Had a similar test been done by RODMAKER, I think the results would have been very different and probably not worth publishing.
Credibility is kinda like virginity……once lost, its difficult to regain.

Jim,

I tend to lean towards your thoughts on this matter. I think anyone can set up a test to provide the results they desire and as much of a proponent of the spiral wrap as I am, I still stop short of saying that it will increase your casting distance. Our tests done some years ago by a mechanical device certainly didn't show any increase in that regard.

I won't even begin to make a comment on the notion that a spiral wrap increases sensitivity.

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

S Gardner: Your statement above "

I see this as an opportunity not a battle

Jim Spooner }>

I propose there is more "diversion and false advertising" concerning your chosen subject matter of "virginity" than mine of spiral wrap superiority.

I build rods in three markets primarily - inshore popping, bass and blue water. I honestly believe the spiral is superior in all markets I serve. Casting distance is never an issue or even close to the top but the contrarian view by all who do not understand rod performance issues will never buy one if the "objection" to the casting distance concept is not properly handled. In my above post please note the wording of the sentence - "This blind test by skilled anglers even reported an increase in casting distance". This sentence was not directed at a custom builder for literal interpretation. I personally do not believe it either but on the other hand no one can prove that the distance will be shorter when using a spiral. I believe the article when used properly is a no harm no foul marketing tool. I do understand the position of those who may be interested in long range casting tournaments.

You also asked why -

The stability of the blue water stuff alone when dealing with standups and large fish needs no explanation when observed first hand.

Bass Fishing Pitching, Flipping and work inside of 45 feet with casting rods.

The Whys I consider and talk over with customer.

For work with lure weights that do not load blank the line on the bottom reduces wet line drag on the blank during the cast and certain slack line technique specific presentations. The accuracy and soft presentation are easier to accomplish.

Lighter builds due to reduced number of guides.

S-N-I-I-Y ( Others to bring up this work NOT ME EITHER )

Reduced blank failure caused by blank torsion contribution to total stress placed on blank during violent hook set. I can not prove this either buy since I started building spirals my return rate was significantly dropped. The inshore guys are really bad about swinging in fish to the boat and high sticking problems were extremely bad prior to using spirals.

I figured out I would wait until Tom was out for the day, at JPs gathering, to post this. Maybe when he gets back he will let us in on his ideas as to WHY he is a proponent of the spiral.

I am glad I do not have to sell a spiral to a long distance caster who is a rodbuilder!

Gon Fishn

I like a spiral wrap because in many ways that's just the proper way to build the rod - the line and the guides want to be on the bottom of the rod. You can put them up top and fight them as they attempt to take their natural course, or you can put them on the bottom and let the inherent forces at play work with you instead of against.

But I don't think we do the spiral wrap any favors when we make false claims about it. I've seen some marketing campaigns here and there that claim benefits that the spiral wrap just can't deliver on (greater sensitivity is one of them). I watched a rep from the Bud Ernhardt (sp?) company once tell a consumer that the spiral wrap was more sensitive than a guides on top rod because it put the line against the guide ring opposite the rod blank. Now what kind of nonsense is that?

When you run into somebody with half a brain they're going to become suspect of the real benefits of the method simply because someone has already fed them a false line about the spirals. It's human nature to figure that if you were lied to about something in one area - then the other areas are probably bogus as well. Obviously somebody with a full brain will be able to separate the chafe from the wheat, but there's no use in having folks make the average fisherman suspect of the spiral right off the bat by making unsubstantiated and often impossible claims.

For this reason I think we need to be careful to push the spiral wrap based on good common sense and the practical experience of what it actually will and won't do.


.........