Seen in a new Outdoor Life article, they say the fad is over, and they knew it all along. Time to fold up our tents.

O so we all should put heaver guides on our rods ---- Naaaa

Bill - willierods.com

Bill,
I think that the total weight of 14 micro guides on a rod, or 9 conventional guides is essentially a wash. So, take your choice.

Be safe

That is GREAT news, the public can go back to heavy, oversized guides that are not needed and grow accustomed to less than optimal performing rods and just make it that much easier for builders to sell their rods!!!!

[www.outdoorlife.com]

Roger
I read that Yet I don't see posts that they break ----- and yes are hard to thread So instead of going 2's go 5's
Fuji also has those thick framed guides which I would think would not break
But a lot worry about weight - So ???

A lot of the rods they talk about a builder could not build and make any money on
So what is the use Plus a rod is built to what the User Wants

Plus they are not saying what size guides are being used on the rods mentioned

Bill - willierods.com



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2016 05:38PM by bill boettcher.

Roger
Six 3-mm micro guides weigh approximately the same as one 6-mm guide (depending on material and manufacturer) so if you took off SIX 6-mm guides and replaced them with THIRTY 3-mm guides them it would pretty much be a "WASH" .

But anything less them THIRTY 3-mm guides equals: less weight. better line control, less recovery amount and time, better balance, which all equates to better performance, and just for general info nine 3-mm micro's is about twenty one short of the wash effect

Now have some Micro guides broken. I'm sure they have, But to date I have still replaced more broken 6-mm guides then micro guides, and have yet had anyone ask me to remove micros's and replace them with number six's, and for more general info. I have yet to replace an ALPS micro or seen one fail period

As for those with poor vision they can learn thread them the way I have shared in the past or buy glasses.

The article is fluff. Nothing serious, nothing quantified, no cited, authoritative sources, and no mention of resulting rod performance gains or losses. It's primary purpose is a left handed marketing attempt to make readers run out and replace their micro guide rods and thereby increase the sales of the publication's advertisers. Nothing to see here, move along.

Reminds me of Mark Twain’s “The reports of my death are grossly exaggerated”.

Reminds me of Mark Twain’s “The reports of my death are grossly exaggerated”.

Some anglers select rods for their performance. Some seek them for their appearance. Where can I find an objective, third-party study comparing the performance of the same rod blank equipped with micros versus that same blank built with standard guides?
Subjective evaluations are for marketers and patsies.

Phil,

I know that it is expensive to have "demo rods" that will be just laying around most of the time but I have a couple that are built on the same blank with same components other than guide trains. I use them as tools to allow people to feel first hand the difference between using a standard layout vs a micro layout. It quickly allows users to see the huge gains that can be made if the smaller guides will work for their style of fishing. I have even gone as far as to have mock up handle parts to allow them to feel the differences between the different materials. It all takes a little time but it can really open their eyes to the benefits of a true custom vice something from the shelf.

You can't ask for a better subjective opinion than the people who will be using the end product.


Tom



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2016 11:46AM by Thomas Kaufmann.

I don’t know of a published article regarding micros vs. std guides on the same blank, but I have converted many rods from standard guides to micros and although the difference in performance was significant and noticeable, it was still subjective. Other factors aside, the rods definitely did feel more responsive and less tip-heavy. If further objective conclusions were needed, checking the resonant frequency would show a distinct advantage.

There are of course, considerations to be made as to whether small guides are appropriate and/or practical. I think their use offers significant advantages, but in some cases they are not the right choice. I see that many rod builders are now up-sizing their original micro-sized guides and still labeling them as “micros”. I guess you could consider this a compromise.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2016 02:57PM by jim spooner.

I have had customers that purchased rods with 3 or 4mm micros ask me to reguide several high-end (G Loomis and St Croix) rods to smaller guides because they "felt like tanks" compared to the customs.

I just looked at that article. Not accurate, not true. "Worse yet is their inability to transport line along a blank’s length, allowing the line to rub the rod and weaken." Weaken what? The line? Bull crap!

Way back in 2009 Bobby Feazel said; "Chuck a short piece of blank in your lathe and spin it about 800-1000 RPM. Take any type line you wish and tie a loop about 8 inches in diameter. Put your safety gloves on and place the loop over the spinning blank piece. Be totally amazed at how much time and force it takes to damage your loop of line. Observe how much damage you get to the piece of blank. Then start thinking about how often you will ever encounter a similar circumstance in the real fishing world. Fisherman experiencing 70 MPH runs from black marlin may be exempted from this bit of trivia. " [rodbuilding.org]

_________________________________________
"Angling is extremely time consuming.
That's sort of the whole point." - Thomas McGuane



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2016 02:09PM by Chuck Mills.

I’m a little amused at some of the concerns relating to the height of micros and the fear that additional guides must be added to prevent the catastrophic consequences of the line rubbing or dropping below the blank. On several (non-spiraled) rods where I replaced standard guides with micros without relocating or respacing, they worked just fine and have had no issues after several years of hard use.

I’m a little amused at some of the concerns relating to the height of micros and the fear that additional guides must be added to prevent the catastrophic consequences of the line rubbing or dropping below the blank. On several (non-spiraled) rods where I replaced standard guides with micros without relocating or respacing, they worked just fine and have had no issues after several years of hard use.

Interesting objective comparisons would involve casting distance and accuracy involving different weights and lines. I have never seen a credible objective test of the "sensitivity" of any rod and I doubt any such measurement is practicable. Bottom line is if you prefer micro guides use them and good luck to you, but please don't hype the "sensitivity" or "soulful" or "light" feelings which rod blanks or components supposedly provide the angler unless this difference can be measured, physically measured.

FEEL can be measured I guess ?? don't know how and don't care
But if the rod is lighter in hand and if I have to cast it 1000 times I want it to feel and BE LIGHTER
Bottom line

Bill - willierods.com

I wonder if a rod has an 8 oz reel on it, can one feel a 1/2 oz difference in the weight of the rod?

Be safe

Sure The lighter the better Unless you are Mr America and don't care about the weight

Bill - willierods.com