I know, some people are thinking "what's this fool talking about"? I understand the phylosophy and the use of the story pole guide spacing method but I don't remember how much the blank was flexed in the initial setup. I thought I asked on this forum before but there's nothing in the archives - (probably for good reason). In the initial setup, was the rod flexed to 90 degrees, or 1/3 of it's length like in the CCS procedure, or some other amount? Any help would be appreciated, thanks.

It's been done by many people. The amount of flex was determined by the placement of the final mark on the "story pole." We did an article in an early issue of RodMaker based on a system I first saw used by Jim Reid of Winston Salem.

You set up a distance, divided it by the number of guides you decided to use, then used those equi-distant marks on your "pole." When the rod was flexed to the point of the final mark (tiptop) placement marks were then drawn on the blank. Although the marks on the pole was spaced equally, the flex in the blank ensured a progressive spacing.

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

Thanks Tom, it's that "you set up a distance" part that I'm having trouble with. I'm trying to reverse enginneer a 7' GLX that has 8 guides to help me understand. The butt guide would be predetermined based on reach from the grip and the 8 guides span a total of 55" . What distance would I begin with to flex the tip and butt guide location to?

I'm almost under the impression that once a specific distance and blank flex was set, shortening that distance and adjusting the flex to it wouldn't make that much difference in the spacings. Could you just put a good flex in the blank set horizontally, extend verticle lines from the tip and butt guide (the "set up a distance"), divide that distance into 8ths, and drop those lines back down to the blank for the guide spacings? Thanks again for your input.

If you have a rod that you find well set up and want to plot the same progressive spacing on another blank, it's easy.

Take what you have now and fix the butt horizontal. Hang a weight from the tip until you have a full 90 degree bend in the blank. This will happen faster on a very fast action rod than a slower action rod, but even then the butt will have some flex in it. This is what you want.

Now walk your "story pole" down the rod, stopping at each guide and making a mark on the pole at each present guide location.

Now any other rod that you want to use the same progressive spacing and number of guides on (the spacing won't be the same, only the progression) just fix the butt horizontally at the same height as the first one, flex to 90 degrees, and walk the story pole along the rod, marking the rod at each point where the previously made pole marks intersect with the blank.

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

The way I remember it, as I did it once. You set your butt guide and top. Flex the rod some amount that I don't remember, probably 1/3. Mark the butt guide and tip top on the story pole. Make marks on the story pole dividing evenly by the amount of guides you want. Transfer those marks to the rod. See if you like it that way.

Hope this helps,
Greg

After finding the Jim Mick article, basically that's how it's done, except the flexing amount is enough to go just beyond where the stripper/butt guide is located. My only issue is when I visualize this, if the tip section is flexed close to verticle (90 degrees) and the spacings are equal on the story pole that are transferred to the blank, then it would seem that the spacings would wind up further apart at the tip than at the last butt guide spacing. . . . . opposite of what you would want.

No, they'll get longer. The less flex the further the spacings will actually plot the guide locations. The more flex, the closer together the marks will fall on the blank.

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

This was a Jim Mick article that was listed in Angler's Warehouse which they were nice enough to dig up and forward to me. After picking up on a particular step, I realized the story pole is meant to be placed vertically and I had it set up horizontal with the blank - duh. Oh darn, now I have to build another rod just so I can play with this method! I would have provided the link but I can't figure out how to post it on this forum.

The pole itself is the "record keeping device." The spacing method is based on the use of equal distances plotted onto a flexed rod blank, which creates a progressive spacing. The pole is simply the means for transferring those equal distances onto the rod blank.

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