I'm trying what is for me a new project: taking the framework of a conventional freshwater bass rod and converting the concept for saltwater, estuarine fishing.

I came up with this idea, and was intrigued by it, when I picked up a bass rod (baitcasting) somewhere a few months ago. I don't know anything about freshwater fishing, but I was impressed with how light the thing was, and how good it felt in my hands. That led me to do some reading about what bass fishermen do, and I came to the realization that a lot of the back-bay fishing that i know is very similar to bass fishing. The little creeks, channels, and cuts that guys fish for flounder, weakfish, and the occasional striper are very similar to the sweetwater spots that bass fishermen haunt. So I came up with the harebrained idea to build a "converted" bass rod, one with the same general framework as a bass rod, but with saltwater-grade components, a saltwater-grade reel, and a bit more oomph in the butt in the event that the angler is lucky enough to run into a good-sized striper.

And the entire process, right up to the static distribution test, was fun for me, and I learned a good bit from it. The cork grips, the reel seat, the selection of the reels, the configuring of the components -- after I had completed the handle assembly, and installed the tip top, I flung those two rods around like a samurai, and liked how light, crisp, and responsive they seemed to be.

But I am having an issue with guides. I picked very small guides (size 6), because nothing other than line will pass through them, and figured they'd be light, and work great. But when I did some load testing, and moving around of guides, I realized that I was going to need 10 guides on a 7 foot rod, to keep the line off the blank when the rod is under a load. This seemed way too many to me, so I figured that I had done something wrong. So I blew up everything and started over, and I ended up with 10 guides again. The combination of small guides with very low profiles (i.e. they sit very close to the blank), combined with a very light, soft tip section of the rod (this light tip is one of the things that i liked in the bass rod, by the way), results in needing what looks like a scandalous amount of guides for a rod of this length.

So my question (and I'm sorry I took to long to get here): has anyone else experienced this? Is this common when you're using guides this small, and with such a low profile? Please don't tell me that a spiral will solve this -- I know that -- but otherwise, any input here would be appreciated. Has anyone else run across a situation like this before?

You're allowing your notion of what a rod is supposed to look like stop you from building a better rod.

Yes, if you want to keep the line off the blank during periods of heavy flex, you may well need that many. Due to the very light weight of the guides, using 10 of them on a 7-foot rod is not at all out of the question. Even before the advent of super small guides, it was common for 7-foot casting rods to feature 8 guides plus a tiptop, so what you're looking at really isn't that far out of the norm.

Tape them up and go cast the thing a few times. See how it works and feels to you. Drop one and re-space. Try that combination and see how it works. The proof is in the pudding.

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

Keep in mind that your rod will travel through an infinite number of bend configurations on every fish you catch. You'll never make "all the bends happy all the time". Load similar to what you think a strong actual fighting bend would be and position there. Many now believe (with the recent popularity of smaller guides) you can position to allow the line to touch the blank but not travel below it. And Tom is right, toss the ruler in the corner and let the rod whisper to you, Grasshopper.

Chris,
If you are worried about the line touching the blank, you could build the rod with about 6 guides if you built it as a spiral wrap.
i.e. start with the first guide on the top of the rod and then have the line on the bottom of the rod by the time you get to the 3rd guide. Then, just use the small runners to the tip of the rod.

Good luck
Roger



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2012 05:43PM by roger wilson.

Jim

I talk to my rods all the time
maybe I need treatment

Bill - willierods.com

Bill

You & Me Both Brother.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.

Jim,
Good luck

Take care
Roger



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/17/2012 06:29AM by roger wilson.

This is very helpful -- thank you, guys, for chiming in.

Chris, I think you are one the right track and doing fine. In my area we have used blanks like that for a long time. We called them "plugging" rods and fished for snook with them. Probably a little stouter than your rods but same concept.

If you know the line will only touch when you put your thumb on the spool to turn a fish that is one thing. But if your line is going to touch when your drag is screaming that is another. I don't want my line touching so I use extra guides too. I think it makes for a more "efficent" fighting tool.

If I was building such a rod 30, 40 years ago lighter rods would have abu's and heavier rods might be anything from a squidder to a newell. Blanks ranged from fenwick/shakespear to sabre/calstar. Blanks on the lighter end were more of a spin/jig and on the heavy end more of a live bait taper. Butt grips were fairly short. Something like a newell p220 on a calstar could be pushed to handle 30# grouper.

You will have a blast. Todays baitcasters have come a long ways. Calcutta is proven, luna's are nice, plutons are tanks, and revo's and curados are surprisingly powerful for what they are. In your quest don't overlook a top quality glass rod from the likes of calstar. They are surprisingly light and quite hard to break.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.