I am trying to figure out how to fit 10 micro 3's on a 7'3" med-heavy rod, butt guide 29" from the reel seat, and that left me 43 and a half inches to the tip, no matter how I arranged them, on the test the line kept going under the rod, I did this cause I am pretty sure that I read that some guys only put like 10 micros on a rod comparably the same length, I just don't know how they do that with out the line going under the rod, or does it matter if it goes under the rod, like when I bend the rod towards the 90 degree angle and at times I am not even close to 90, before the line goes under, this is on 10 micro 3's. so I got 12 plus tip and they go right along the curve of the blank barely touchin the blank, if at all. this is just my 2cents worth, Tight lines you all!

What kind of micros are you using, as that can make a difference? Keeping the line above the blank comes from making sure you have enough guides to properly distribute the load on the blank. In any case, you can get by with fewer guides than you would expect, but some performance aspects may suffer. With that said, if the line dropping below the blank makes you feel uneasy, use 12 guides. If you are satisfied knowing that the blank has plenty of guides to be properly supported with 10, 8, or even 6 guides, then go with it.

My personal choice is to go with the extra guide or two to make the line path satisfy me aesthetically. After all, adding an extra micro or two doesn't come with the same penalty of adding extra 6mm or larger guides.

Joe

what is the blank?

-----------------
AD

The blank is a HM-MHX med-heavy,7'3", mag bass casting blank. Joe, what do u mean by " adding an extra micro or two doesn't come with the same penalty of adding extra 6mm or larger guides", I was thinkin of going with a 5mm butt guide then a 4mm then 3's all the way up to the tip. But my ? is, if the line goes under the blank even though the guides are evenly distributing the load through the blank, woukld that be a hinderence of any kind like say casting or landing a big fish? what would it hurt?

I have set up an 8 foot crankbait rod with using only 10 guides and a tip and not have the line go below the blank. For your setup, where on the blank is the line going below the blank? Also how much load are you putting into the rod to test the guide spacing? I guess I would need to see a pic of your setup once with the rod under the load to see what is happening.

Mike, are you using micros? or double fotted guides?

Ten #3 Micros in 43.5 inches,,,,,that means they can be 4.3 inches apart. Something is bad wrong if any of them are going below the blank on
a 7'3" med hvy Mag Bass . Even if it has a fast tip. I never have that kind of a problem with a 4 power blank and setting the butt guide at 23 to 26 inches.

J.B.Hunt
Bowling Green, KY

Lorenzo.

I typically space my guides in the same way you are, with the line just touching the blank under load. Guide design can make a difference. I typically use the Batson micros for my builds, and those guides put the ring a few mm off of the blank. Kigan micros, for example sit significantly lower to the blank, and may require more guides if you space the guides based on line touch. Each micro design out there has pros and cons, and guide design is just one of many of the compromises to consider for a build. After recently getting the opportunity to handle some Kigans up close and personal, I can see where their designs can add some additional options to the Batson and Amtak guides I've worked with in the past.

My statement about the weight penalty relates to the fact that about 6 3mm guides weigh about as much as a single 6mm guide. By working with 3mm guides, you can add several guides without paying the same penalty as adding a single guide to a rod that uses 6mm running guides. With that in mind, if I need to use an extra guide or two to make the line path look the way I want, I won't lose sleep over it.

I like to think about guide trains in this manor. A blank is designed with a particular curve (action and power) in mind. As builders, we want to try to let the blank flex in a natural way, and the way we accomplish this is through static testing, and trying to match the line path to the blank's curve as much as possible. If guides were 'small and massless,' we could accomplish this exactly by using an infinite number of guides. Instead, we live in the real world and guides have size and mass, and mass detracts from the performance of the rod. So rather than matching the curve exactly, we approximate the curve with straight line segments. The more segments (guides) we use, the better we can approximate the curve, but each segment takes away some amount of performance. So, we need to make a compromise to find the number of segments (guides) that optimizes the performance of the rod.

For me, line control matters, and I'm more likely to err on the side of too many guides than not enough. This probably comes from my days of using factory rods without enough guides to get the performance I needed out of my rods. The good news, as mentioned above is that with micro guides, you can get away with adding an extra guide or three without killing the responsiveness (damping), sensitivity, and other properties dependent on resonant frequency the way adding larger guides in the tip area of the rod will.

Now, for line touching or dipping below the blank during casting and fighting fish, when do these situations occur (1)? How long do they last (2)? Is the line moving at these times (3)? What does all of this mean for performance (4)? I'll help you out a little here, but I could go into more detail.
1. At or near maximum load.
2. Casting, not very long. Fighting fish, as long as your are pulling hard on the fish.
3. Casting, at max load, the line is not moving. After the line is released, the rod damps pretty quickly and the line flows smoothly and without line slap, if your guide train is in the ball park. Fighting fish, the line is only moving when you are reeling, and with respect to bass fishing, we usually pull fish hard for short periods to get it away from cover quickly and take up line between pumps of the rod. So, the line is rarely moving when the rod is at maximum load.
4. For most freshwater work, the line touching or even dropping below the blank is not much to worry about, as long as you have enough guides placed properly to support the blank.

Hope this helps.

Joe

Very nice write up Joe V. I like the concept thinking and it fits my own personal building concepts of static and guide placement. Its worked for me on all of my builds thus far. To me using this concept, builds the right rod for the User in mind and what he intends to catch with that build. Its all about picking one that works best for you and using it to build for your customers. You can always adapt and change to improve or do something that a customer wants even if it goes against another's concepts and beliefs. The versatility in this craft never stops in the new concept idea department LOL. Well enough said have a great evening folks!

Rick H.

rwheil@msn.com

Website
[www.facebook.com]
[home.comcast.net]

Mind if I ask why you aren't using a spiral on this rod to combat or compliment the fact that the line is dipping down? I could see this as a prefect opportunity to spiral your wrap and use what the line is doing to your advantage.

For myself Lorenzo I am using all micros on that crankbait rod.

To spiral or not comes down to how the rod is being used for how I build. Basically slack line retrieves I spiral, tight line retrieves all on top. It depends on the position of the rod when using it the most. For bass fishing, the fighting part, with the rod under load is for a short period of time during the day.

I am starting to get the concept, Thanks for the help, On my last build I have the butt guide at like 29and an 8th, from the reel seat, it has a slight dip in the line when it reaches the guide and pass's though it, barely noticable, I wouldn't think that would hinder my cast, if it does not by much, I mostly fish from the bank, so I need long cast most of the time. i am thinking of moving it up to like 30", on my next build of the same rod blank, any feed back I wouldn't mind hearing. Have a good one.

Lorenzo using the micros I've found you need to keep the spacing pretty close in
the first 1/3 of that type rod, then go progessively further apart towards, the butt.
Layout the first few guides (4) at about 3.25" then a few(2) at 3.50, 3.75, 4.00, 4.5, 5.0 5.5 etc.
Do static testing and adjust from there. You're line will touch the blank under load but it
should not dip below.
You may need (11) guides depending on how close you have to place the first few..

Steven thats the way I got my last rod setup, my butt guide to the first one next to it is like 6", then progessively shorter for the rest till I got to the tip, so all together I had like 12 #3's, then the tip, and the line was pretty much almost touching the blank, on the test, the last guide was like 2.75". So I'll have to wait to see what this next one will turn out like. Tight lines!

Lorenzo,
Put the first guide at 30 inches.
Put the first 4-6 guides from the tip at 2 1/2 inches apart, and space the last 4 to the 30 inch mark and you should be fine.

But, suppose that you put on 12,14, 16 guides.

If you don't want the line to touch, just keep adding guides. The weight is a non issue. So, if you want to keep the line off the guides, then just increase the number of guides if you need to.

But, nothing wrong with going to a fairly healthy distance from the reel to the first guide, and nothing wrong with having the guides two or three inches apart.

On many of todays extra fast tipped rods, I will commonly use a 2 1/2 to 3 inch guide spacing near the tip. But, this is generally only in the first foot or so of blank length.

Roger

It doesn't matter if the line goes under the blank. Go search it. Why use micros if your using 15 micros. Try setting it up standard do some test cast then go from there.