A little over a month ago, Bob McKamey at Custom Tackle Supply posted the results of his guide set-up using smaller guides (ref “M&M Vol 5 spinning rods”). I have done similar testing and I’ve gotten very good results. Although this set-up is comparable in casting distance to the NGC set-up, a significant/advantageous weight decrease is realized because of the much smaller guides.
I should note that my set-up did not perform well with mono or fluro lines.
Has anyone else done any testing? Conclusions?

Get in touch with Bob

Bill - willierods.com

Bill,
I talked to Bob last week and he said others have experimented with it, but I thought it would be interesting if others would give feedback on their results on this forum.

"a significant/advantageous weight decrease is realized because of the much smaller guides. I should note that my set-up did not perform well with mono or fluro lines."

What weight lure and fluoro were you using - What was the "aero" of the lure? Whacky Worm or casting test plug?

"Has anyone else done any testing?" Yes - fishing them hard

Conclusions?

Primary effect when using fluro and mono is significant lowering of rod weight which provides increased "sensitivity and feel" for bite detection on those rods like Shaky Head, Weightless Whacky Worm and Drop Shot - when using braid you can include longer casting distance.

Here are the SEARCH results on the subject [rodbuilding.org]

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!!

Bill,
As part of my testing, I tried Stren Magnathin 12# test with a Batson “M” (BMLG12) type hi-frame guide (butt guide) and got significant line slap. From what I could see, the mono seemed to have a much larger spiral “envelope” compared to braid and the “smaller” butt guide appeared to be causing more choking or stacking ahead of the guide. Casting distance with the mono was 6 to 8 feet less than braid (I used distance to equate to efficiency). Admittedly, my tests involving mono were not comprehensive, but it was never my intent to optimize my set-ups for mono, since I seldom use it. I would concede that it would “work” for mono (or fluro), but “work” would be a relative word.
What have you been using for butt guides to get satisfactory performance?
I used Dipsey swivel weights in 3/16 and 3/8 ounce for test casting. It is a given that when casting “real” lures (as opposed to casting weights), distances and “efficiency” (wind resistance) will vary considerably, depending on type and weight of lure.
Btw, one thing that hasn’t been mentioned is cost savings. I.E. I look forward to saving considerable money when I replace titanium 25’s with 12’s.

Mike,
Thanks for the search results, but I think most of those deal with “small” guides as the running guides. The set-up I refer to utilizes relatively small butt guides and transition guides as well as the so-called “micros”. I think the “conventional” thinking regarding guide set-ups might need re-thinking when it comes to braided lines.

Jim S

I love it when a man gets "out of the box" and challenges conventional wisdom. We all move forward from there.

Bobby

The NGC concept doesn't deal with ring sizes - it deals with guide frame height and line path. That's the important part - the line path.

Conventional thinking, if you want to call it that, has been obsolete for at least 15 years now.

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

in the testing i have done, the difference in using mono vs braid is tremendous in using the micro guides. i found that my casting style had changed after cutting off the end of my finger. I had developed a looping to my casting and i would impart some twist to the lure as it was cast. this in turn put twist in the line. i found that this caused problems with the micro guides. i have corrected my casting and use braid more in certain applications. it seems that i should only use the really small micros with braid for my personal rods. i have noticed longer casts in using the braid and micros on the spinning setups

The issue is not simply about “micro” guides. IT’S ABOUT USING SMALLER GUIDES FOR THE WHOLE SET-UP. It has often been said that we should use the smallest (lightest) guides that will do the job. Had Bob at Custom Tackle not shared his set-up (see M & M vol 5 spinning rods on page 13), I would never have thought to try a size 10 or 12 for a butt guide. He has stated and I agree, it does not work for all set-ups, but a little experimentation can pay off with lighter weight (and inherent sensitivity)….not to mention, decreased costs.

One thing I just thought of, if you do use braid, tie on a mono leader or when you get hung up you will have to cut the braid. With the mono it will break and you keep your line.
And check the knot you use and make sure it passes though your guides.

Bill - willierods.com

Jim the people responding to your query on this board fully understand you are dealing with the complete guide train and are not saying to use the micros on all guides on a spinning rod. Several builders have progressed from 35, 30, 25, 16, 12, 10 and now even to eights sitting on top of a Fuji match rod guide frame for the butt guide - I fully expect to see some of all of them at the show later in the month at the ICRBE. Who knows someone may just take a Fiji TATSG 12 frame, drill a hole in it and figure out a way to press fit a 3.5 SIC micro ring! One thing for sure it will be one fine day when all of this new stuff appears in the same place with reels on it for custom builders to test cast - hope to see you there!

Gon Fishn

If you can get the right height, even a #12 or #10 will work for mono. The reason we often use larger rings isn't for the ring size itself, it's for the height obtained.

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

I found that the ring size was as much an issue as the height.

Bill B,

You do NOT have to cut your braid when hung up and NOT using a leader of any kind. Exception to this may be when using a very high pound test line (50lb or more).

Point your rod tip AT the snag, grab your complete spool mechanism to keep it from turning or spinning and make one quick pull back in a straight line with NO bend in the rod. The line will break at the lure. IF it does not, you'll likely straighten out the hook(s) on the lure and get your lure back. In 11 years fishing spectra lines I've only had to cut my line once, that was on a Carolina rig and the swivel became lodged in rock and would not come out (brand new 50lb line and just tied on). Funny thing is I had a 10lb Fluoro leader on at the time!, but the leader wasn't hung, the barrel swivel was.

DR

Spin casting reels, spooled with mono, cast pretty darn well. Most have only size 10 openings and that opening is located only a half inch from the spool (the line never has time to get out of control). It's also aligned with the spool center.

If you do the same thing with a spinning rod guide, use a very small ring but get the proper height, it'll work fine. The trouble is, you aren't going to find a size 10 or 12 guide ring that has the same overall height as a 20 or 25.

There was a company up in New England some years ago that used to weld their own frames and fasten them to existing guides. They offered and successfully used very high size 10 and 12 guides on spinning rods. These things were 2 and 3 inches high.

...........



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2009 10:30AM by Tom Kirkman.

For that butt guide you can look for the ( M ) guides. They are higher then the concept with the smaller ring size. Pac Bay - Batson. I think Pac Bay is the only one that still has them on there site ?

Bill - willierods.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2009 10:19AM by bill boettcher.

I believe it was C. Altenkirch that made and offered the very high guides. I no longer see them listed, but remember how they bent the frames and welded them to higher frame additions.

[www.altenkirch.com]


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

Bill,
Custom Tackle Supply and Fishsticks carries the “M” guides. I found that as long as I didn’t get “line slap”, The Fuji concept guides worked as well a the “M” guides.

Tom,
I agree, most any size will “work”, but I was looking for optimum performance and I saw a drop in efficiency when going from a 12 to a 10. Both were same height (BYAG12 vs. BMLG10)