Dennis;
I pretty much understand what you are saying about;
“the problem with locating a guide in the declining amplitude part of the waveform is that the interference of the guide causes concertining of the line in the wave form ( ie it stacks up behind itself viv-a vis "damming" ) and the amplitude increases even more ..............causing increased velocity perpendicular to the rod.”

The one thing I’m having difficulty with is, placement of and size of the guide in relation to locating “strippers at 3/4 wave amplitude on the rising side”

Would not the location or size of the guide then change were the ¾ wave is rising or falling.
And if so, then do I again relocate it at the new location only to cause the effect to change further in a non ending sequence?




Jim you’re not being presumptuous the phrase has already been coined
[rodbuilding.org]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/29/2008 09:56AM by Steve Gardner.

Jim Spooner:

From a previous M&M Thread on this board.

The camera angle is deceptive - the spinning rod phto with a butt guide 12 ring high frame titanium

Drop Shot Rod

[www.rodbuilding.org]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2008 07:50AM by Bill Stevens.

Steve and Bill,
I did see and read those. I guess the “tame the lion” thing was too subtle for my addled mind. Was clever….”lion---line”. I should have got that since I live in Alabama where “Jim” is pronounced with two syllables (snicker). It still would seem more appropriate to me if you would refer to the “system” as the (“lion (or line) tamer system”) rather than the misnomers (?) “micro system”, “micro technology”, “micro rods”, etc, since “micro” guides are nothing more than small guides. I use the micros with both casting and spinning rods, but the rods are set up using “conventional” thinking. Your set-up method is new and unique and probably deserving of an appropriate name. I’m not being critical….just a suggestion. I’ll sit down and shut up now.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2008 03:16PM by jim spooner.

Jim;
You are correct it does make more sense to use the words "Tame the Line" especially when referring to it as a system.

If you read the first post in that thread it is referred to that way. "Tame the Line" and is actually quoted from the Vibronics article In Rod Maker Mag. back in 2007 when it was used to explain why the guides were choked down so quickly.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2008 09:22AM by Steve Gardner.

"Tame the Lion"... very good use of words. I was in tune and waiting to see where this would go from the get go.... it went where I thought it would, and now I have some TESTING, TESTING, TESTING to do. Thanks Bill Stevens, Bob McKamey, Steve Gardner, Denis Brown, and everyone else who has weighed in here.

Be in touch in the New Year with how it's going, along with a bit more of my tinkering..

Just back at home for 18hrs or so & then I'm off back down the cabin again.
Too many visitors over Xmas & the beer & wine supply would not last thru new years frivolity.
Got to get the priorities right, plenty of fish, plenty of bait & lures, enough food, ................but the grog is in short supply.
Sea conditions on the rocks is marginal safetywise today so abandoned fishing in the interest of lubrication.

responding to Steve G's query.
- the damming usually only affects less than a wavelength
- the guide does not require repositioning in response to the changed waveform.
- the wavelength of the choked wave is reasonably estimated from the immediately preceeding wave, as it is minimally affected.
- the object is taming waveform exiting the guide , this comes at the price of some damming as the waveform is choked.

My choking has been modest and the 3/4 amplitude position on the rising wave works for me.
For those trying more aggressive choking, the guide size and its position on the rising amplitude of the wave will be determined & limited in its benefit by dealing with excessive damming ( as per prev post ).

I look forward to hearing how more agressive choking works for you Steve & what you find in the process of trial & error.

Regards & Happy New Year to you all.

No. 1. I'm just curious as to whether anyone is still watching this thread now that it is so far down in the stack?

No 2. FWIW, I did my own testing and got results similar to Bob McKamey when using smaller guides.

I'm watching the thread! I find it fascinating. My main concerns are:

The 27X choke guide spacing seems to necessitate 3 guides (1 butt guide and two transition guides) PRIOR to the choke guide. Some have suggested 27X spacing may be too far out for the choke guide. If so, are there alternate ways of locating that guide closer to the reel face, apart from trial and error?

I understand line type should be a factor. I am partial to Sufix 6 lb braid. Any thoughts on butt guide spacing from the reel face with a limp, small diameter braid line?

I like to fish in windy conditions. It seems a tame the line rod layout coupled with micro guides would help under windy conditions? Any thoughts about this?

Thanks,
Rick

Richard,
My testing would suggest that the 27X choke guide placement would be irrelevant with braided lines. If you’ll unhide your email address (or send me an email), I’ll send you a copy of my test notes.
I wonder if anyone else has done their own testing since this tread first got started.