Based on the OEM purchase of "micro" guides.... I disagree. But what do I know... we only sell the guides. I guess they could be thrown in the trash can and not put on rods.

Hydra Fishing, LLC

Online: [www.hydrafishing.com]
Facebook: [www.facebook.com]
Email: info@hydrafishing.com

That makes NO SENSE ?????

Bill - willierods.com

He said (in so many words): that his company sells a lot of Micro guides to big rod manufactures. So they are either still putting them on rods or just throwing them in the trash.
not hard to understand at all

Maybe we need to press the “re-set button” here.

We can all agree that the proper size guides are the smallest ones that will pass your line and any required connections and hold up to the required task.

“Micro Guide” is simply the terminology use to describe very small or relatively small guides…..usually smaller than a size 6. Other than size, they are of the same conventional/traditional design as larger guides. Since rod manufacturers must build their rods to satisfy a broad range of fishing types, obviously micro-sized guides would not be practical on all their models. For most fresh-water and some salt-water applications, they are advantageous and the manufacturers recognize this and many do offer rod lines with the “micro sized” guides.

As to the “advantages” of the “micros”, the most significant is lighter weight (mass)….not so much weight itself, but where the weight is located. The other touted arguable advantages (line control, casting distance, sensitivity, air/wind resistance, etc.), although valid to some degree, are usually over-hyped and might best be left to the marketing gurus.

Guides are a necessary evil. They are required to distribute the load on the blank. They are however, parasitic in nature, requiring the rod to expend energy for their dynamic movement. Weight added to the tip has a number of undesirable effects (weight times radius squared). It will slow the rod down, not in its action but in its speed (it lowers the resonant frequency). It also increases the time it takes the rod to damp out vibrations and lowers the rods efficiency (stiffness/weight). The rod will feel less crisp and responsive.

If one needed convincing of the benefits of a lighter guide train, it would be a simple matter of taping on a small amount of weight close to its tip. The difference would be apparent and no technical hypothesis would be necessary. Granted, this inverse experiment is still subjective, but still pretty conclusive.

For Roger’s “tongue- in- cheek” query : “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?”……..I guess the answer would be yes, depending on where the additional weight was located. Not so much in a static mode, but even a very small amount of additional weight at the rod’s end would be readably apparent during the dynamics of a cast. If the reference to “feel” is inferring to “sensitivity”, then I’d say that although the power to weight ratio does affect sensitivity, it’d be far more subjective. The weight of guides probably won’t help with Bill’s comfort level much, as they don’t account for much of a rod’s overall weight….although tip-heaviness can be a comfort issue. There are other components that could provide much greater weight savings in that regard.

With guides as in anything else, there is a point of diminishing returns…..in size or weight. For those of us looking for maximum performance, guide sizing is a major consideration. There are those that want to satisfy a greater range of fishing options…or believe that “normal- sized” guides are good enough and the small guides create some perceived inherent problems or are too small to handle and can’t “feel” the difference in performance anyway.

Maybe we need to press the “re-set button” here.

We can all agree that the proper size guides are the smallest ones that will pass your line and any required connections and hold up to the required task.

“Micro Guide” is simply the terminology used to describe very small or relatively small guides…..usually smaller than a size 6. Other than size, they are of the same conventional/traditional design as larger guides. Since rod manufacturers must build their rods to satisfy a broad range of fishing types, obviously micro-sized guides would not be practical on all their models. For most fresh-water and some salt-water applications, they are advantageous and the manufacturers recognize this and many do offer rod lines with the “micro sized” guides.

As to the “advantages” of the “micros”, the most significant is lighter weight (mass)….not so much weight itself, but where the weight is located. The other touted arguable advantages (line control, casting distance, sensitivity, air/wind resistance, etc.), although valid to some degree, are usually over-hyped and might best be left to the marketing gurus.

Guides are a necessary evil. They are required to distribute the load on the blank. They are however, parasitic in nature, requiring the rod to expend energy for their dynamic movement. Weight added to the tip has a number of undesirable effects (weight times radius squared). It will slow the rod down, not in its action but in its speed (it lowers the resonant frequency). It also increases the time it takes the rod to damp out vibrations and lowers the rods efficiency (stiffness/weight). The rod will feel less crisp and responsive.

If one needed convincing of the benefits of a lighter guide train, it would be a simple matter of taping on a small amount of weight close to its tip. The difference would be apparent and no technical hypothesis would be necessary. Granted, this inverse experiment is still subjective, but still pretty conclusive.

For Roger’s “tongue- in- cheek” query : “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?”……..I guess the answer would be yes, depending on where the additional weight was located. Not so much in a static mode, but even a very small amount of additional weight at the rod’s end would be readably apparent during the dynamics of a cast. If the reference to “feel” is inferring to “sensitivity”, then I’d say that although the power to weight ratio does affect sensitivity, it’d be far more subjective. The weight of guides probably won’t help with Bill’s comfort level much, as they don’t account for much of a rod’s overall weight….although tip-heaviness can be a comfort issue. There are other components that could provide much greater weight savings in that regard.

With guides as in anything else, there is a point of diminishing returns…..in size or weight. For those of us looking for maximum performance, guide sizing is a major consideration. There are those that want to satisfy a greater range of fishing options…or believe that “normal- sized” guides are good enough and the small guides create some perceived inherent problems or are too small to handle and can’t “feel” the difference in performance anyway.

I apologize for the double-posting. Don't know what's causing it....I'm only clicking on the "post reply" once.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/2016 03:26PM by jim spooner.

It really matters little what folks say about a given way of building a fishing rod.

As has been said many many times in the past - use fishing rod components that are appropriate for the rod and for the intended use of the rod.

This may mean huge guides, tiny, tiny guides or somewhere in between.

It may mean a 30 inch grip or it may mean a 5 inch grip.

It may mean a conventional reel seat, or some combination of a split reel seat.

It may bean a split grip or a contiguous grip, or it may mean no grips at all.

Build the rod to do the task for which the rod is being built.

Be safe

No mention has been made of the influence of the amount of the blank covered by thread wraps and epoxy, a factor which influences both flexibility and weight. There are rods with micro guides and large, decorative multi-colored windings?

Phil,
Although a bit off-topic, you’re correct, they are relevant and also factor into the performance of the rod. We’ve probably all seen well-designed, good performing rods with cosmetic wraps judiciously placed (away from the rod tip). Guess you could call these a happy medium (there are many compromises in rod building). We’ve seen other rods where performance was obviously not a priority….at all. Perfume on a pig (snicker). Many consumers are drawn to a rod’s aesthetics rather than the way it is designed and/or built. We see that in many things….fishing lures, boats, cars/trucks, etc. . Glitz (paint, graphics) sells.

BTW, “performance” is a term that can be difficult to define. For many, it’s just what “feels” right and that’s good enough.

Jim: Your analysis is spot-on. But after dealing with a slew of floppy-wristed, balloon-loop casting fly fishermen who remained happy with their style I keep wishing and believing they could improve their style (and equipment) and "feel" even better about their sport.

factory rods are NOT built for one customer -- They are built for The MASSES Trying to get the rod so many people will buy it -- Got to make those 1/4 numbers ( profit )
But if one builds for some one that is a well fished fly caster or bass fisherman or woman and knows what they are looking for - Big difference When you are using a rod for 1000 casts do you want it heavy -- Or as light as possible That is where the micro's come in
If a customer is trying to thread his rod at say 4: 00 in the morning and can not see He will probaly not like that 3 guide you put on

Bill - willierods.com