Let me see. Walk into a rod forum that (seemingly unknown to you) just happens to have the largest collection of the most knowledgeable people in the field.......Tell them they are all full of it and you are certainly more of a professional then they are.....Then wonder why nobody takes you seriously? I would say you are internet trolling and I don't know why I am bothering to reply.

Maybe you should start by letting us know who you are. After all, a quick internet search will show you whom a lot of the members here are and their qualifications. A search on your name failed to turn up anything of note.

Next, consider showing us your research and see if it stands up to peer review. That assumes you actually care to advance your knowledge in this field.

Anyone who has been lucky enough to catch a big enough fish on a conventional rod with tall guides (like roller guides) has seen rods twist. Anyone who has been open enough to innovation to have tried an acid/spiral wrap has seen that problem go away. Location of guides on the " so called" spine of the rod is irrelevant.

Only in fishing rods would anyone suggest putting the load on the weakest axis of a structural member as the best possible solution.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

So, Dufford, you come out with your first post calling people names and denouncing what many of us believe! Nice way to introduce yourself to the forum!

Your feelings and observations are yours, but they DO NOT equate to FACTS !! They are your opinions unsupported by any data.

I only have your experience beat by 20 years.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2020 08:01PM by Phil Erickson.

Building on the spine is to rod builders what pins and clips or oar locks is to white water boaters. I built on the spine when I first started building rods now 30 years later. I don't worry about it and look for the straightest axis. I can't tell the difference between a rod built on the spine and one built on the axis. Any more i have a hard time even finding the spine on most rods and some have what feels like several spines. I look for the spine because it's a bad habit and i can't break it. Build the way you want to but don't try to force your way on me. I am a CUSTOM rodbuilder not a professional and I will build the way I or the person I'm building for wants it built. I use a Forhan wrap on all my single foot guides and not because i think the guide will pull out but because I like the way it looks when finished.

Good dialogue is welcome here and it's okay to disagree. But newcomers need to be aware that we don't get mad, don't call people names and try to keep things above board at all times. I think if Mr. Scott spends a bit more time here, regardless of his opinion on spine or anything else, I think he'll find that this is a place where discussions can lead to greater knowledge and understanding. Everybody here brings something different to the table.

Beyond that, there is another reason to build on the straightest axis, which is typically along the axis that offers the greatest deadlift capacity. If the blank is oriented in this fashion, butt and tip up, belly low, the blank is able to sustain the weight of the components (mostly guides, wraps and finish) more "crisply" than in any other orientation. Gary Loomis used to talk about this a good deal - positioning the blank in a concave position so the slightly greater power along that axis in combination with the component weight would "bring the rod back to straight."

If you perform a CCS frequency measurement, you will find that building on the straightest axis, again, butt and tip high, belly low, will result in the highest frequency measurement of any other orientation. Keep in mind that gravity plays a role and the greatest resistance to gravity in that regard is usually a good thing.

Interesting subject and always room for civil discussion.

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

Hi Dufford,

You'll find that this forum has a few quirks to it in that replies always fall in line in the post. If you want to reply directly to someone, it doesn't hurt to hit the quote button to include the author's text to emphasize the reply. Another quirk is that replying to a topic doesn't bump it back to the top of the list. It keeps the discussion here fresh, but also kind of shuts down some interesting discussions once they make it off of the front page.

The reason for my question about spine orientation was not meant to be a snarky comment, but only meant to spur further discussion and set up the physics discussion.

Physics can be fickle at times, and there are some observations that can be deceiving and when subtle changes alter things significantly.

Yes a rod blank will have an axis where it flexes most easily, i.e. the orientation of least resistance. When flexed by hand the rod blank will snap into this orientation when loaded deeply enough when flexed by hand. There is no argument there. If I were building a cane pole, tenkara rod (where a section of fly line is affixed to the tip top, as I understand the technique), cat toy, golf club, or other device where the load of the blank is carried by the tip, even something like the old Cabela's interline rods where the line runs through the blank, you can bet that the spine is going to affect my build choice. In all of those scenarios, the blank is going to snap into the orientation where the weakest axis is at the bottom of the blank. I do not dispute what your hands and eyes are telling you in this regard. I feel it too.

Where things change is when we add guides to the blank. Once the guides are added, the rod is loaded at a series of discrete points and torques applied to the rod blank at each point. Once you do this, the scenario changes from the rod seeking its curve of least potential to the line and lever arm forces (torques) seeking out a shortest possible path for the line. Regardless of where the spine is located, the tip guides are going to be torqued strongly enough to rotate to the bottom of the rod, even when the reel seat is forced to remain upright. This means that the torque from the load on the line is greater than the torque of the rod seeking is curve of least potential. Regardless of the spine orientation a casting or conventional rod with the guides on top is going to want to flip upside down. (Tom's spiral wrap demo jig shows this very well.) Why, because the shortest path for the line is under the blank. With a spinning rod or fly rod with the guides on the bottom, again the torque on the guides due to the load on the line is going to cause the line to stay directly under the rod under load resulting in a stable feeling rod.

After considering the physics involved, the best argument I could make to myself for spining a rod is to place the softest axis up on a guides on top casting rod to make it easier to load during casting lures at the lower end of the blank's casting weight range and keeping the line in the plane of the blank's flex during the cast because there is not torquing or twisting of the rod blank near the tip. In theory this could help accuracy ever so slightly, but not enough to fix issues with my cast due to not having a lot of time on the water for a number of years. This orientation would also put a stronger axis into play when fighting the fish, however the rod is going to want rotate into the curve of least resistance due to the torques from the guides and in part due to the spine.

My preference is to build my casting rods with a spiral wrap to help keep them stable under load, and all rods on the straightest axis. At the end of the day, I know any torsional load in the blank is going to come from the battle between the lever arms of the guides and the spine, which is going to result in a significantly lower torsional load than a deeply loaded guides on top build rotating the tip section of the blank 180? to just a bit more in about the worst case scenario fighting a fish.

At the end of the day, for me, when working with little 3mm and 4mm guides, if the blank isn't straight, it shows in a heartbeat, as the curvature of the blank between two guides is comparable to or can exceed the ID of the guides. Also, as Tom mentions, the components also help bring the blank back to straight when built along the straightest axis.

It is fairly safe to say the “Spine VS Straightest Axis” controversy will remain rod building’s most frequent and heated topics; it has been brought up more than any other topic since I joined over 5 years ago. Of the three pages of previous replies, I like Roger Wilson’s the best = build the rod way you want!!! In the grand scheme of things, it simply boils down to preference as there is a multitude of support for either method. Many expecting hard facts one way or the other are often guilty of rarely affording such; they simply like to stir-the-pot.
I commend Dufford for taking a stance, whether or not agreeable to all. While building on the straightest axis seems to be the preferred present method, on this site anyway, he has pointed out off-spine issues I have noticed as well. Personally, I consider both the spine AND the straightest axis for my builds with more emphasis toward the spine, but I am unorthodox in placing the guides so that under load, the blank exhibits the least resistance (butt and tip down, belly up). While this allows the tip to visually droop more than the inverse when held horizontally, it affords that little bit of extra “umph” while casting and we all know the fish are 5ft further than we can cast. Any reduction in fighting power is easily countered with angling in the true sense of the word.
While I am certainly not a volume rod builder as are many of you, I have noticed the exact same rod inspection procedures of every customer I have had; they first look at the threadwork, then the grip, and then flex the rod. If they flex a rod and the guides go off on a weird angle, all the explanations of building on the straightest axis goes right out the window. If they flex the rod and the guides are aligned with the arc, they are happier than pigs in slop!
I cannot afford any hard facts or measurements but merely what my customers expect; I certainly cannot say they are wrong!
None the less, touché Roger!!!

Mark Talmo
FISHING IS NOT AN ESCAPE FROM LIFE BUT RATHER A DEEPER IMMERSION INTO IT!!! BUILDING YOUR OWN SIMPLY ENHANCES THE EXPERIENCE.

I have found no empirical evidence for either argument on this thread. I truly don't have the answer. I took it upon myself to ask for help. I contacted CTS and described the argument. I asked them if they have done testing to determine correct guide placement. Myself, I I had to guess. I would say to place the guides on the lower 2/3rds of the rod on the power axis, so as to increase its lifting strength, and resistance to breakage. I would place the rest of the guides on the belly to protect the line and tippet from shock and breakage. That's just my best guess. If CTS gives me real world testing results, I will share.

Tight lines and frisky fish

RJF

Passing on information is nothing at all like stating opinions. People who rely upon their feelings (opinions) rather than demonstrated facts keep Las Vegas in business and scoundrels in elected office, but building a rod on the spine won't ruin your fish pole - it just won't make it any better.

rods built on the spine are generally crooked to some degree..how do you sell a customer a crooked rod..you don,t,,you build on the straightest axis or not get any repeat business..everybody who sells rods builds on the straight axis..the dollar wins again..lol.

Robert Flowers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have found no empirical evidence for either
> argument on this thread. I truly don't have the
> answer. I took it upon myself to ask for help. I
> contacted CTS and described the argument. I asked
> them if they have done testing to determine
> correct guide placement. Myself, I I had to
> guess. I would say to place the guides on the
> lower 2/3rds of the rod on the power axis, so as
> to increase its lifting strength, and resistance
> to breakage. I would place the rest of the guides
> on the belly to protect the line and tippet from
> shock and breakage. That's just my best guess.
> If CTS gives me real world testing results, I will
> share.
>
> Tight lines and frisky fish
>
> RJF

We have the evidence and the numbers to prove that building on the straightest axis (generally what you call the Power Axis) results in a rod with greater deadlift strength and a higher speed (response/recovery - frequency). There are no numbers, to my knowledge, that show a rod built on the spine does anything better. When we start talking about casting accuracy there's really no way to judge that due to the fact that the main ingredient in play there is the person doing the casting.

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

Deep breath...just my personal opinions that could change...

Data, data, data, data, opinions on all sides, conspiracy theories, death. Try to squeeze some fishing in and less of the data. The best BBQ in Texas isn't made on a pit with a thermometer, its made by feel, and touch and heart and soul. Lets not forget that nothing in this world is perfect nor ever should be. Just like no rifle shoots the same, no blank bends or casts the same. This is not science, its feeling. Its getting to know the tool you have and making it work the best for your needs. Custom rod building is different for everyone. That is what makes it beautiful. No right way, just opinions. That is what is at the core of why we say, "This is how we do it." Because nobody can argue with that. I like to say that I make mistakes as fast as I can so that I can learn quickly. And sometimes I forget and make the same mistake again and again. Life is a journey and a process. So is custom rod building and more importantly fishing. That is why I do it. I build a rod to fish with, the way I want. I am not interested in a work of art to be a wall hanger or on the cover of a magazine. I want to fish with a rod I build, that I know won’t last forever and isn’t perfect. And when it is retired or breaks then I will build another one better than that. That’s it. Just keep moving forward. Don't get mad. Agree to disagree.

Flex Coat Company
Professional Rod Building Supplies
www.flexcoat.com

Touché’ to John as well! That is how we all should do it.

Mark Talmo
FISHING IS NOT AN ESCAPE FROM LIFE BUT RATHER A DEEPER IMMERSION INTO IT!!! BUILDING YOUR OWN SIMPLY ENHANCES THE EXPERIENCE.

John Cates Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The best BBQ in
> Texas isn't made on a pit with a thermometer, its
> made by feel, and touch and heart and soul.


Well, I mean that’s not even BBQ down there.... if it’s not Eastern NC BBQ then it’s not BBQ

<duck, cover and run.... lol>

Kinda reminds me of the story of the old Doctor and George Washington! ... George was quite ill. The old doctor was surgically 'bleeding him' of bad blood. A younger doctor seriously questioned him about the properness of this procedure?! The old doctor sternly proclaimed he had been doing this for over 30 years with hundreds of very ill patients! And that he had learned it from the best surgeon in France!

Michael Ward Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John Cates Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> The best BBQ in
> > Texas isn't made on a pit with a thermometer,
> its
> > made by feel, and touch and heart and soul.
>
>
> Well, I mean that’s not even BBQ down there....
> if it’s not Eastern NC BBQ then it’s not BBQ
>
> <duck, cover and run.... lol>

Don't even get me started. What I can do on Weber Kettle, in the middle of a snow storm in 8 degree F. weather...

Ok, I won't digress from the topic anymore. To be sure, I just want my rod builds to come out as great as my BBQ turkeys, or ribs. And I agree, knowing your gear, whether in fishing, archery, or cooking is more important than any other factor. With cheap aluminum arrows, taped on sights, and missing fletching, on a 1975 Carol Compound with 70 lb. pull, and 20% letoff,, I could put 10 arrows in a 3 inch square at 60 yards, every day. I could also do it with my recurve. Now if only I could get my fly casting as accurate. Maybe if I could spend thee hours a day practicing, like I did with my bows...

Tight lines and frisky fish.

RJF

Good one! Looks like a dare for who can get the most responses from rod building experts.
Nothing gets people wrankled like a good ol' spine debate, especially one arguing "feel".

Rick, did you notice how facts were not allowed to get in the way of a good story..lol.

And here all along, i thought this was a post on knicker twisting!!

Spine?? Accuracy?? Give me a beautiful 8' spinning rod and after 10 casts I'll put the lure within 3 feet of my target every cast. Give me that twisted branch, maybe with leaves still attached, and after ten tries I'll still put that lure within 3' of the target. And if that spinning rod twists under load, I know a sea bird has picked up my bait.

Spine?? Accuracy?? Give me a beautiful 8' spinning rod and after 10 casts I'll put the lure within 3 feet of my target every cast. Give me that twisted branch, maybe with leaves still attached, and after ten tries I'll still put that lure within 3' of the target. And if that spinning rod twists under load, I know a sea bird has picked up my bait.