Torin

You say that you do not use the 27X method. I believe that you do. You said that you put your choker halfway between the 27X location and the spool upsweep intersect. So you are using 27X in your choker location.

Where did you locate your choker guide before 27X? Halfway between the spool upsweep intersect and where?

......................and the 27X intersect. Again, not following the 27X method to the 'T', but incorporating (part of) it for my SPECIFIC application.

Yes I already know that you incorporate the 27X factor. That was not my question.

Again, where did you locate the choker guide prior to the 27X factor being brought forward? Halfway between the reel spool upsweep intersect and where?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2009 09:53PM by Tom Kirkman.

.....................HALF WAY BETWEEN THE SPOOL CENTERLINE INTERSECT (OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE SPOOL UPSWEEP INTERSECT) AND THE 27X INTERSECT LOCATION IS WHERE I ENDED UP WITH MY CHOKE (INTERSECT) GUIDE. I CANNOT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ANY MORE CLEARLY THAN THAT!!

You did not answer my question. The 27X method has only existed for about two years. BEFORE it came into being, how did you locate your choker guide? It would have been impossible for you to use 27X in any way prior to it being brought forth.

So before the 27X factor existed, you located your choker guide halfway between the reel spool upsweep intersect and where?

In less than ten minutes, you could create a spreadsheet reference chart that would give you all the 27X values for all spool diameters ever made. This would then make the 27X method the quickest method of finding the initial choke point. Change that to five minutes.

Ray Zarychta
Glastonbury, CT



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2009 09:18AM by Ray Zarychta.

I'd still like to see how the 27x guide spacing works out for a 61.54mm spool, with the intersect guide set 65.4" away from the spool's face, and the center of the spool sitting 90mm above the reel stem's foot. That's all the info one would need - mabe Duane could illustrate for us the sizes and spacings to be used in this situation. Thanks.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2009 11:08AM by Tim Collins.

Tim,

I haven't posted in this thread, and dont use the 27X method at all. I can set up a spinning rod faster than someone can measure the spool face and rod blank LOL .....Are there two Duane's here?

DR

Duane Richards (DR) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tim,
>
> I haven't posted in this thread, and dont use the
> 27X method at all. I can set up a spinning rod
> faster than someone can measure the spool face and
> rod blank LOL .....Are there two Duane's here?
>
> DR

Sorry Duane - my bad, I meant Richard. I have Old Timer's disease.

Tim,

In general, the larger the reel the larger the line diameter that the angler is going to be using. This is another plus for the 27X choker location method. It moves the choker guide farther out on those rods using the larger reels (and likely larger, stiffer line) which automatically locates and sizes the butt guide to a larger and/or higher model, which is generally better with larger, stiffer line.

The thing to keep in mind, is that the 27X factor wasn't dug up out of nowhere and then asked to work. It was taken from rods of all types (UL to Surf) that were already known to work exceptionally well. Call it "reverse engineering" if you like.

And before we get back into an argument, just like the article points out, the 27X factor is meant to locate the choker guide "just about right" for nearly any combination of reel, line, etc. I'm sure there are other systems that will perform better in certain specific applications, but for the very reason that they are tailored for such specific uses, those systems are not likely to work as well across the broad spectrum of uses that the 27X factor does.



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

For everyone else...

Many people develop systems or methods with the goal of producing something that will work exceptionally well with a particular or specific task in mind. When the focus or requirements are narrow, you have a fairly easy task before you.

While trying to find something to replace the very arbitrary spool upsweep method, I did not have the luxury of developing something that only needed to work well within a narrow or specific focus. I was faced with coming up with something that would work with all common spinning rod set ups.

It had to work well for the guy who was building the long, heavy line surf rods as well as for the guy who was building dainty ultra-light rods. It had to work with braid or mono. It had to work with 2lb line and 20lb line. It had to work well across the entire spectrum of spinning set ups that the 16,000+ readers of RodMaker might be faced with. In that regard, it has succeeded nicely. The five dozen or so emails and phone calls I used to get every week asking me what to do when the spool upsweep put the choker guide out past the tiptop or why the rod didn’t cast well stopped within a couple weeks of the article appearing. I don’t believe it was a coincidence.

The 27X factor works exceptionally well with nearly any spinning set up and that’s what it was intended to do - work very well with the broadest possible array of common spinning set ups likely to be encountered by most rod builders. It was never intended to provide the absolute best of all worlds for each specific set up or each particular scenario. If you can come up with a system that does that, well... you've done something that nobody else ever has.


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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2009 06:55PM by Tom Kirkman.

My reel is the Cabela's Prodigy 4500 which is a proprietary copy of the Daiwa Capricorn. I use 12# Siglon F which is a rather supple line, for both Salmon and Steelhead with 6-8# tippet. My blank is a GLoomis GL3 1143, great for Steelhead and at the minimum edge I would think for Salmon. I'd just like to see how someone else would have set this with a 61.54mm spool with it's center 90mm above the stem's foot.

I would multiply 61.54 by 27 and take the total and then place the choker guide that far from the reel spool. And I would be confident that it would work very nicely.

Richard Kuhne Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would multiply 61.54 by 27 and take the total
> and then place the choker guide that far from the
> reel spool. And I would be confident that it would
> work very nicely.



Maybe on your rod but not on mine.

Why does it not work well on your rod? What is it that it will not do?

Tim,

I took another look at your pictures of your Loomis rod (beautiful rod!)and I have a question regarding the handle. Do you tuck the fighting butt in your armpit when fighting a fish? If so, how comfortable is that fighting butt? I just recently built myself an 8'MHF out of a 7'MHF and I plan on using it for throwing smaller musky lures. I placed a large diameter cork fighting butt on it that is about 6" long. It I haven't fished it much yet but it seems to tuck in nicely. I'll post some pictures of it soon.

I currently have a steelhead rod in my basement that is going to be torn down and rebuilt. I'm putting a Shimano 2500 on it but I'd be happy to show you my guide placements when I'm able to get to it. I have no need for a reel as large as your Prodigy 4500. I'd be happy to tell you how I'd set up your rod and reel combo but I'm sure that would just lead to more disagreements and I don't think we need more of that here.

jeremy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2009 07:52PM by Jeremy Wagner.

Jeremy -

the rear section and butt lays underneath my forearm and nestles near my elbow. I actually hold the rod in the normal position (probably not by some) with the reel's stem between my index and middle finger. When I'm fighting a fish and get tired, I'll drop the butt down to my waist and hold above the reel (foregrip) with my off hand. I was given the idea by Cedric Knuckey, a custom rodbuilder from Minnesota who a big Salmon/Steelhead fisherman. My last 4-5 spinning rods have been built this way and I even turned down my GLoomis STR 1025S on a lathe and slid the same setup onto it from the rear up against the factory winding check.

I do have a Daiwa 2500 but the current on the Big Manistee in northern Michigan is rather swift, especially near the dam so I find it's easier for Salmon and Steelhead to have more reel than necessary then it is to have less. And the larger spool helps me cast farther just in case I don't set my transistion guides in the right place :-)


Richard -

instead of just typing on the keyboard here on the forum , why not actually layout a rod with the 61.54mm spool that's 90mm high at the center and tell us what size and spacings you come up with? I've asked several times so far and all you've said is "multiply by 27 ought to be about right". Richard - it can't be that hard to do. I did it . . . I just didn't like it. It looked too much like the old fashion cone method that the NGC supposedly replaced.

Tim-I'm confused...a couple of posts up the page you told Richard it may work on his rod but not yours. Then you stated that you tried that method and you didn't like it because of the way it looked. Do you dislike the method because it didn't work or because of how it looked on a particular rod?

Tim

You said it did not work on your rod but in reality your objection is strictly regarding how it looked, based on your subjective opinion, not on how it actually worked.

It will work very nicely. I have used it with reels larger than yours and it works great.

Chris - I didn't like it because with the choke guide 65.4" away, the 4 Fuji CYAG guide spaced out looked too far apart between the it and the reel. And with 5 CYAG transition guides it looked like an Eagle Claw from 59 years ago! That also put the choke 33.6" from the tip on a 9 1/2' rod.

Like I said earlier, I static tested the front section first and "married" the choke location from the table edge mehod with the guide that was the closet - this put the a choke 49 1/2" from the spool which leaves me 50" of tip section with 6mm running guides. My 3 CYAG transition guides are 8 - 16 - 25 and are perfectly concentric with the choke. By law, I should have used a 30mm butt guide but it looked too large. I can get away with the smaller and lighter 25mm butt guide because I use Siglon F which is very supple - I don't have heavy stiff mono line trying to pile up in front on the butt guide.

My reel actually comes in two sizes - 3500 and 4500 - the frames are the same, the 4500 just has an oversized spool. I have both size spools but prefer the casting advantage of the larger. I wonder how one would set up a rod using one from US Reel? These are oversized-diameter short-length spools to facilitate casting disance. I suppose if you used 27x with one of these reels, the choke would wind up on the other side of the river. I use this same reel on my other spinning rods with the same guide setup and measurements from the spool to the choke. They all cast fine, they all have the same handle design, and all were built using the table edge method. If I build a rod for my smaller reel, I'll look at the 27x method but I'm not going to use it on my big one. It like you guys are trying to stuff Health Care down my throat and I ain't swallowing it!



I wonder what caused this thread to have a 1000+ hits?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2009 07:09AM by Tim Collins.

I'm glad you're happy with it Richard.