I often see the advice of 19" to 21" from the reel face for the first guide on a casting rod. I generally just stick mine at 20" and call it good, but I have been wondering lately if there is some sort of a test to see if it would be better to move it closer or further away.

Seth,

Temporarily put a guide at 19 inches and do some test casting with someone taking a picture of the line going through the guides with high speed photography.

Then, move the guide to 20 inces and repeat.

Then move the guide to 21 inches and repeat.

----------------------------------------------

However, I prefer to do the testing in a much simpler way.

I tape all of the guides in place on the blank and put the reel of choice on the rod's reel seat and thread the line through the rod guides and the tip top on the new rod.

Then, I pull about 50 feet of line off of the reel and let it stack up on the floor. Then, while sitting down, I run the line through the toe and next toe with a stocking on my favored foot. I use the foot to act as a line tensioner when I am reeling in the line.

Then, with very bright light in the room, and on the rod and line, I slowly reel in the line while keeping a very close watch on the bath of the line as it comes back through the guides and back onto the reel.

I am looking for a line flow that just barely touches any of the inner side of the rings on the rod guides. I also want the line to touch all 360 degrees of the stripper guide as I reel in the line. If the line is only touching on the bottom of the guide, the guide is either too tall, or the stripper is too close to the face of the reel. If the line only touches the top of the stripper guide and not the bottom, the guide is too short. If the line does not touch the sides of the guide the guide is likely too large.

So, by doing this test, I can determine the placement of the stripper guide as well as to determine the diameter of the stripper guide.

The theory behind this test is that you do not want any line friction on a slightly loaded rod while retrieving. This test will minimize both the line retrieving effort on a slack line as well as maximizing the casting distance on an outward cast .

I have used this method after receiving the request many years ago from a client who made thousands of spinning rod casts with big spoons for big northern's and Musky's. Since it works so well for a bigger rod casting bigger lures, the same theory applies to lighter rods casting lighter lures and baits for smaller fish.

After employing this method on every rod that I have built I have never had any requests from any client to change any part of a guide train.

Best wishes.

roger wilson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seth,
>
> Temporarily put a guide at 19 inches and do some
> test casting with someone taking a picture of the
> line going through the guides with high speed
> photography.
>
> Then, move the guide to 20 inces and repeat.
>
> Then move the guide to 21 inches and repeat.
>
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> However, I prefer to do the testing in a much
> simpler way.
>
> I tape all of the guides in place on the blank and
> put the reel of choice on the rod's reel seat
> and thread the line through the rod guides and the
> tip top on the new rod.
>
> Then, I pull about 50 feet of line off of the reel
> and let it stack up on the floor. Then, while
> sitting down, I run the line through the toe
> and next toe with a stocking on my favored foot.
> I use the foot to act as a line tensioner when I
> am reeling in the line.
>
> Then, with very bright light in the room, and on
> the rod and line, I slowly reel in the line while
> keeping a very close watch on the bath of the line
> as it comes back through the guides and back onto
> the reel.
>
> I am looking for a line flow that just barely
> touches any of the inner side of the rings on the
> rod guides. I also want the line to touch all 360
> degrees of the stripper guide as I reel in the
> line. If the line is only touching on the bottom
> of the guide, the guide is either too tall, or the
> stripper is too close to the face of the reel.
> If the line only touches the top of the stripper
> guide and not the bottom, the guide is too short.
> If the line does not touch the sides of the
> guide the guide is likely too large.
>
> So, by doing this test, I can determine the
> placement of the stripper guide as well as to
> determine the diameter of the stripper guide.
>
>
> The theory behind this test is that you do not
> want any line friction on a slightly loaded rod
> while retrieving. This test will minimize both
> the line retrieving effort on a slack line as well
> as maximizing the casting distance on an outward
> cast .
>
> I have used this method after receiving the
> request many years ago from a client who made
> thousands of spinning rod casts with big spoons
> for big northern's and Musky's. Since it works
> so well for a bigger rod casting bigger lures, the
> same theory applies to lighter rods casting
> lighter lures and baits for smaller fish.
>
> After employing this method on every rod that I
> have built I have never had any requests from any
> client to change any part of a guide train.
>
> Best wishes.

Thank you very much Roger. I always get the advice to test cast, but without said high speed photography equipment, that method seems subjective at best. This seems like a very practical test that will be easy enough to observe.

Roger,

Question for you. I can see how this would work well for a spinning setup but how can this work for a casting? I'm a bit lost as in a casting you don't have the rotary movement around the spool like you do with a spinning reel.

Jake

Jacob,
In essence the same principle.

Again, you are only looking for very light contact or no contact at all on the guides of the rod as you reel in the line. In the case of a casting reel, there is really no up and down movement, only side to side movement so check accordingly. Just be sure that the line on a light tension retrieve, gets just to the edge of the stripper guide with out any angular deflection of the line as it is retrieved. If the line never touches the guide, the guide is too large or too far away from the reel.

If the line has significant angular deflection during the light tension retrieve, then the guide is too close to the reel, or the guide is too small or maybe too short.

Good luck

Thanks I set all of mine up KW concept casting with the RV stripper spiral wrap so I look at that just to ensure that I don't have any spool stacking on my reels.

Try using your I phone in Slo mo mode and view it

Many, many, past posts on this topic.

A low-tech-high-reliability procedure: Tape the first guide on at, say, 19", take 5 or ten casts, and measure their distance in feet and inches. Move guide and repeat procedure. Let form follow function rather than feelings.

2 times what Phil said

some times depending on blank, not much difference in distance
on other blanks can be quite substantial.

I'm almost certainly overthinking this, but here it goes.

There are four variables here that I think are important, and I'm trying to figure out how they fit together: The reel and the first three guides in the guide train. Let's imagine for a second that all low profile baitcasters are the same, just for the sake of argument. I would also like to imagine that the guides after the choke point aren't relevant to the cast. With those beliefs in place, we have three variables to worry about, the stripper guide, first transition guide, and choke guide.

Also want to lay out the guide train. Fuji KW 10, KW 5.5, KB/KT 4 to the tip top.

If we believe that 19-23" is the optimal stripper guide placement, and that was all that mattered, then we could simply move the single guide and test cast. The first problem is that, according to Fuji, the transition guide and choke guide are important to the cast. That means that they need to be properly aligned for each stripper guide placement for a true test. You would need to move 3 guides each time you test cast. Are you aligning them by bullseyeing them or gradually spacing them? If bullseye, from what height above the blank and distance from the guide?

The second issue is that, at least for me, casting is dependent on how well I'm working my thumb. I can't take that out of the equation. I would need a machine that could cast, or at minimum a competitive caster to try to minimize this issue. No way this process would be "in control" if you ran statistics on your casts.

That's just off the top of my head, I could come up with many more issues such as environmental factors that could throw off your distances. Don't even get me started on the measurement problems that would be present if you're doing this on anything but wet sand.

I say all of that to ask this question. Does anyone believe it really matters? Are we talking about teasing out a 1% difference in distance or a 20% difference in distance. It would be great to know if the time is worth the effort.

Seth: The type of line you are using, especially mono or braid, diameter, and even brand has a substantial impact upon what guide type, size, and placement will allow your rod to perform at its best. When you add up the type of line, guide size, and guide placement the combined physical effects on casting performance can be substantial, even if your feelings don't change.

To answer your question:
That depends on what you are trying to accomplish with your builds.

If you are more or less-just an "assembler" some one who uses standard recipes that you find on blank suppliers web pages or web forums for your builds,
or.
An assembler claiming to be a custom builder who uses the exact same guide spacing. for rods in specific model blanks, with out taking into account that each blank in that particular model line will have differing characteristics. (little softer, little stiffer, one blank flexes further back then the next, little faster or little slower, slight more or less power ECT.) Then it really doesn't matter.

But
If you are trying to develop your rod/rods into finely tuned instruments that out perform what you can get at a store or from other custom rods. It maters greatly.
Example;
When developing the first two Micro guided rods for base fishing
On the spinning rod:
I went through 25 different guide spacing and size layouts before finding the one that out performed the rest.
In the end it was really one small tweek that maid the difference, but that difference was substantial and it took going all the layouts to find it.

on the bait caster- set up the guides. flex and stress tested it moved them around a little bit.
took it out to test cast it , and it out cast every other rod I'd ever built except one 8 ft crank bait rod. Further than I could even effectively set the hook. So never changed a thing.

as far as test casting. You cannot not control every variable, but you can limit them.
If you have a bad thumb day, do all the testing that day, or a good thumb day do the same.
Same with environmental concerns do all the same day in same whether conditions.
I will routinely make 45 to 50 casts with each set up to create a broader bass line to work with limiting anomalies in the casts

If you have to move 3 guides at a time or 10, doesn't matter, if you keep focused on what you looking to accomplish.

As for your results question
Some times you may end up with a 1% result, and some times you could be looking at 30+%
But you won't know that until you test.

Personally IT IS WORTH IT.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2019 05:49AM by Steve Gardner.

Agree with Phil 100% , line type , diameter, size , properties etc... is critical in determining what would be the best choice. Shockingly, many to this day don't consider it as big of a factor as they should, especially in regards to spinning setups which is not relevant in this particular case but line choice determines pretty much everything , it's among the first things that must be decided on.

Hello All.

10X Steves comment, test-test-test, cast-cast-cast, you cant just slap it together.


Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.

No surprise here, I’m going to agree with Steve also. I typically find it more likely that a spinning rod will work out okay going with the math alone.

Toughest time I had was my first acid wrap. Rod was an 8’ live bait blank, 17# mono, penn 525 reel. The reel was brand new and wicked fast. I was casting a 2 ounce sinker. I went through the trouble of wrapping the guides on and was still ripping them off the blank.

For me it wasn’t about X% farther cast. It was about going from something that I couldn’t keep from backlashes to something that would cast farther than I could see. No doubt it is an extreme example but I learned you simply have to do some tests if casting matters.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Seth, I don't think you're over thinking it at all. I think you're on the right track in questioning the whys and what ifs of building fishing rods. With that said, for me, the thing I'm looking at when determining the placement of the butt guide on a casting rod, is the angle of the line as it enters the butt guide. I want the angle of the line between the reel's line guide and the inside of the ceramic ring (at its top) of the butt guide, to be as shallow as I can have it, while still retaining good line control between those two points. The greater the angle, the more friction it causes and the more prone you are to have line management problems. And yes, line size and line type play a very important role in the equation. The stiffer the line, the less forgiving it gets when it comes to guide placement.

Since the angle of line between the reel's line guide and the butt guide is my primary concern, the things I look at first are the height of the reel's line guide in relationship to the blank's surface, (with the reel mounted in the reel seat) and the overall height of the inside of the ceramic ring (at its top) of the butt guide. A taller guide with a height that more closely matches that of the reel's line guide, can be placed closer to the reel's face without adversely affecting casting performance. The greater the disparity between the height of the reel's line guide, and the height of the butt guide's ceramic ring (inside top), the further from the face of the reel you need to put it in order to keep the line angle shallow between the two.

I've found through test casting a couple of different guide train layouts, that just as you can have a butt guide too close to the reel face, you can also have it too far from the reel face. Both can lead to a rod and reel combination that seems to backlash easier, so there definitely is a sweet spot. Although I haven't done a lot of experimenting, it seems that an inch or so either way of the true sweet spot doesn't make that much difference, anything more than that can definitely make a difference. Especially if you're using stiffer lines.

As far as the remaining guides of the reduction train and the remaining guides on the rod go, I place those using static load. There may be better or more proper ways of placing the reduction train guides as it pertains to casting performance, but my main concern is fighting and landing fish. Thus far all of the casting rods I've built can cast as far as I can effectively fish a bait that is tied to the end of the line.

Seth
One other control factor I forgot to mention in the above post.

I only build bass rods, so this may not work out with some of your heavier salt water stuff.
But one other variable you can control to keep your results honest.

I always "ALWAYS" use the same size weight for test casting. A 1/4 oz lead weight, (plastic weights bonce to much affecting your variables)
Doesn't mater if testing rods for throwing 1/16 oz. jigs or flipping sticks throwing 1 oz jigs.
After testing a few to many rods for a particular application you now have a standard for other builds to live up to.

That way: Lets say your getting an average of 210 yards on a cast most of the time, and you set up a rod that's only getting 190 average yards on a cast.
You instantly know somethings off. Usually, if your using the same model and brand of blank? its something in the guide setup.

But if your testing a different brand similar model blank and you start getting 240 yard average cast. Then you may have found a blank that is better suited for your casting application.
Now that doesn't mean it going to be better for that application, but it meets your first criteria of improved casting distance, or casting the distances you need with less effort

Once built; You still have decide if it meets other criteria for a particular application (is it more/less sensitive, is the action right, does it have enough power, how does it balance in the hand, it it lighter, ECT).
Then if most to all of your criteria are met or are close enough that it doesn't mater.

You may have found a new favorite blank!

Side note: I always tightly wrap a piece of 2 in bright lime green tape around the casting weights, it aids in visibility so you can see where it lands,
reduces bounce, and protects the lead from being worn away helping to keep results consistent.

Seth, good news, the first guide on a baitcaster has already been determined for you - it’s on the reel. Put the second guide wherever you like - within reason. If you want more casting distance, change to a better reel. More sensitivity ? Try braid & FG knot to a leader. Better at fighting fish ? Spiral wrap. The hard part is always picking the best blank for the technique you intend, the rest is easy and fun. Just make every element better than it needs to be, you will not be sorry . It may be just a tool to catch fish, but it can be a magic wand.

Seth
Listen to Richard!
He is one of the true masters of this craft