I didn't want to digress to this on Rolly Beenen's thread about the micro pull-out issue and I know it is being considered "unresolved" by some. Either way, my question is to the design of micros themselves and whether this is it. Assuming they stick around (looks like it), will the form remain as a single foot/single wrap to save as much weight as possible?

Is it possible or practical to manufacture a tiny guide like this with a slight extension in front of the guide? Not a full double-foot persay, but SOMETHING there in front to take a few wraps just for additional pull-out protection? A mini-foot wouldn't add much weight in epoxy or thread, but might be very nice to have for both stability and open the potential for positioning while wrapping the guide itself. Might even allow for a shorter backfoot on some. I don't have enough familiarity to say and will even go as far as to admit the possibility that I shouldn't be asking this. The pull-out stuff is rather unsettling though, betting we'll see more now that some are using micros on larger scale production.

Mini-foot in front completely out of the question?

I would hesitate to assume that there are "pull out" issues with the so called Micro Guides. A few dozen pull outs mentioned here, against the many thousands and thousands of them in good service, does not a problem make. Yet.

Like most any product, it may take awhile to access the real pros and cons of such guides. But until some sort of common pattern unfolds it may be a little too early to assume that there is any sort of problem with these guides pulling out of the wraps.

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

I'm with Tom on this there have been a few events of this happening. Rolly's is an extreme for sure.
But we still don't have all the facts as to why it happened. Once those are ascertained finding the problem (if there is one), may be very simple. Some of us are working behind the scenes to see if we can duplicate what has happened in order to determine what could cause such an event.

Long before Micro's became available; I repaired many rods that single foot guides have popped out on.
Actually watched as two popped out of a Steeze rod when my tournament partner set the hook on a fish.

Been using and building Micro's on rods for over three years with out a single incidence of one pulling loose.
You may consider the problem "unsolvable”.
But with as many as are being used for tough fishing, both in tournament situations and the guys catching inland salt water fish, and strippers with out any problems.
I don't think the problem is in the guides. Consider the fact the Rolly's guides just didn't pull out; he used "locking wraps".
So they had to be pulled hard enough to cut through the threads to get out. In that situation I personally don't think it would have mattered if they were Micro's 6's or 8's, the results would have been the same.
With the angler looking at the rod and these -new teeny guides- of course in his mind they have to be at fault.

As far as design goes; yes I think there will be advancements in designs, not do to any problem but like all designs I think they will continue to evolve. Will they ever make it to a double foot don’t know and really don’t see a need for it. I'm hoping that eventually they will be available in the ALP's design.

This was also posted on the previous thread.

On my ‘data gathering post’ yesterday I made one serious mistake. I didn’t use a scale to determine how much pull it took to pull the guides off. Please allow me rectify.

This morning after reading this post, I decided it was time to go find an appropriate scale. Remember; I’m the guy that likes to “Put ‘em on the scale Dewey”.

I ran the same experiment on the micro rod that I used yesterday. I used the scale this time and pulled another guide out of the wrap just like yesterday. Answer 34.5 pound’s. Then I decided to investigate what happened to the locking wrap threads. I carefully unwrapped the thread and found that not one of the locking wraps was broken. I checked all the ones from yesterday and found the same thing. Not one locking wrap thread was broken or damaged.

OK, decided to take this a step further this morning. Found an ole broken rod that had a single foot #8 and 3 single foot #6’s all BLAG’s. Strung it up with 85 pound braid by tying to the #8 ring and threaded thru the 6’s and tip. Pulled with the scale. The #8 pulled loose at 48.6 pounds then it proceeded to take out the next #6 by breaking the metal ring that holds the insert (it didn’t pull the guide from under the wrap) then proceeded to take out the second #6 by pulling it from the wrap.

I then carefully unwrapped the thread on the two pull-outs and as above, none of the locking threads were broken or damaged.

My conclusion so far is that you can pull any guide out using enough force and that heavier thread wraps won’t make any difference. Sorry I don’t have any permagloss to check out the next hypothesis.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/09/2009 09:41AM by Bobby Feazel.

Bobby:
That is a good piece of info.
I would never have dreamed it would take so much weight to pull any fresh water rod guide off.
I agree with your conclusion.

Also have a question;
I know that on the Micro's some people including my self have gone from 3 locking wraps to 2 because of the shorter necks.
On yours are still using 3 wraps or less, and if less do you think that may have something to do with it taking less weight to remove micro's?

Steve

For my Forhan' have always used 1 under, 2 locks and 2 blocks.

My current 'off the cuff' thoughts to your second question: With no good data to back this up of course, is that it won't make much difference how many locking wraps we use.

My reason for thinking this way is because I noticed during my destructive testing that the first thing that happened is that the guide straightens out and almost eliminates any bend angle. Thus, the locking wraps then became nothing more the regular wraps preceeding them.

you have to understand that i am new to this science of micros.the only reason i am responding is because i want to understand the ins and outs and i just built 2 micro set ups for myself. Bobby pulled 34.5 # with the line tied directly to the guide.bear with me on this,i am new.i can understand that a sudden hookset with the line wrapped around a guide might pull a guide out but if the line is attached to the reel with any drag at all,it is going to take a lot of force to get it out.if Bobby had tied that same guide with line coming from the reel and through the rest of the guides,i believe,in my non-expert opinion,that it would have taken a lot more pressure or pounds to strip out more than one guide.now,if the line breaks at the reel and the line is wrapped around the butt guide,it could and probably would take out a guide or some guides if he hooked a stump on the hookset. mono does not stretch that much between the reel and the tip in order to take out that many guides.
i may be way off track in my thinking about this,but i would like to hear more.
thanks for bearing with me on this.
James

James

If I understand correctly, I think you are exactly right. Had i used a reel and then secured the running line to the guide, when the guide pulled out the reel would have taken up the load before continuing on to other guides causing damage to only the secured guide.

Earth to Rolly!!..........Earth to Rolly!!!.....he must be out of range. We may not get further details on his particular failure.
I think the score remains..... SUCCESSES-many FAILURES-few I did not state earlier---but on my failures guides were torn by the roots....locking wraps broken.......and undamaged guides riding on the line between secured guides. Both occured on hookset......one on a man-sized Warmouth......the other on a 2 lb bass. Straight line pull as in Bobby's testing did not apply. When repairing 1st rod for freind I intentionally used a pair of pliers to remove next guide down the train. Had to apply so much force that I moved into an open area so as not to damage the rod or injure bystanders when (if) guide finally broke or broke loose.

Reference my statement in other thread made by a very wise man "you can tear up anything"

IMO, something incredibly unique happened. The vast number of guides pulled, coupled with locking wraps AND permagloss, makes it all the more miraculous.

I use micro-guides on inshore rods. I use 2/0 or 3/0 silk, locking wraps and regular two-part epoxy. The fish I chase are much larger than an eight pound northern pike AND a lot more determined. I have fewer issues than with more "conventionally" sized running guides.

My thoughts are still the same on micro-guides ... they work very well in applicable situations AND I won't hesitate to use them on relevant builds.

Jim -

I kinda like the idea Joesph has on the additional front extension on the micro's. It may not be needed, ever, but one things for sure: a guide held on two sides has to be much stronger than one held on one side alone. It would almost be a double foot micro really, and I'm curious if one was created what the weight savings would be? Would the additional foot, thread, and finish be much at all? Sure would take care of some customer "worry" about the smaller guides also I'd think?

Hardly micro's, but I see some wear and slight guide movement over time with a 6mm ring single foot fly guide on Musky rods, spiral wrapped. Not on every guide, but some. I know the Musky is a little more battle than a bass, and the lures thrown weigh up to10oz each, but I've never lost a guide on the battle or cast. Reason for this statement, if there were a.... lets just say "double footed" micro created, I might make the switch from the 6mm single to the micro (as long as the ring size would pass the larger braids) on rods for heavier applications like Striped Bass, Musky, flipping sticks and such.

Just thinking out loud :-)

DR

Turning the guides around with foot facing fwd would accomplish the same with no weight gain

Chis, I LIKE your thinking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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 have given these guides every chance to pull-out problem lately. The last month, I have cursed while pulling in dozens of large stingrays (to the side of the boat). I was using a Batson ISB 721 from Riley Rods, a 6-foot, medium-light action spinning rod with micros and the bend and pressure I put on that rod and guides was extraordinary. Most times the rod was bent double for extended periods of time to put the necessary pressure of powerful "nuisances." I did used the Forhan locking wrap and used the tiny micro finish brushes from Backlash Components to make sure the front of the guide had some epoxy underneath in front of the guide. I thought the rod would break before the guides would pull off, but it never did. Both did the job!-the job being able to save my line, ( several of these things came close to spooling me and I had the drag cranked all the way down), and save my Carolina rig except for the part of the leader just above the hook, which I cut as quickly as I could. Just my experience and my $.02.-David Spence, Beaufort, NC.

Chris,

How would turning the SFguide around accomplish anything at all? You still have the same thing, only in reverse?

DR

It wouldn't be able to pull out without breaking all of the threads because the ring would be on the butt side of the wrap

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!!

Makes sense Mike. :-) But reversing it wouldn't make the wrap any stronger, a two sided wrapped guide would?

DR

DR, I agree the wrap wouldn't be any stronger but the guide could not pull straight out from under the wrap as sometimes happens with even larger guides with Forhan wraps

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!!

Well they could be pulled out just as before but the force would have to be applied from the opposite direction.
Still a good idea IMHO as the force applied under normal fishing conditions would be from the tip side not
from the butt side.

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

I agree Raymond, the idea is a good one and worth a thought plus some.

DR