I
nternet gathering place for custom rod builders
  • Custom Rod Builders - This message board is provided for your use by the sponsors listed on the left side of the page. Feel free to post any question, answers or topics related in any way to custom building. When purchasing products please remember those who sponsor this board.

  • Manufacturers and Vendors - Only board sponsors are permitted and encouraged to promote and advertise products on the board. You may become a sponsor for a nominal fee. It is the sponsor fees that pay for this message board.

  • Rules - Rod building is a decent and rewarding craft. Those who participate in it are assumed to be civilized individuals who are kind and considerate in their dealings with others. Please respond to others in the same fashion in which you would like to be responded to. Registration IS NOW required in order to post. You must include your actual First and Last name and a correct email address when registering or posting. Posts which are inflammatory, insulting, or that fail to include a proper name and email address will be removed and the persons responsible will be barred from further participation.

    Registration is now required in order to post. You must include your actual First and Last name and a correct email address when registering or posting.
SPONSORS

ICRBE 2021
EXPO ON FACEBOOK
CCS Database
Int. Custom Rod Symbol
Common Cents Info
American Tackle
Anglers Rsrc - Fuji
Anglers Workshop
BatsonRainshadowALPS
BRC Rods
Cork Specialties LLC
CRB
HNL Rod Blanks–CTS
CTS New Zealand
Custom Fly Grips LLC
Decal Connection
Flex Coat Co.
Get Bit Outdoors
Hitena USA
HYDRA
Janns Netcraft
Mickels Custom Rods
Mudhole Custom Tackle
MHX Rod Blanks
North Fork Composites
Pacific Bay
ProProducts
REC Components
ReelSeatBlanks.com
Renzetti Inc.
Rod Builders Warehouse
RodHouse France
RodMaker Magazine
RodMaker Blog
Schneiders Rod Shop
SeaGuide Corp.
Tackleworks
The Rod Room
Trondak U-40
Utmost Enterprises
VisualWRAP/VisualWEAVE
ZipCast

Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Aaron Wilde (---.ipv6.telus.net)
Date: October 11, 2020 03:07PM

I am working on a 4 piece fly blank casting rod that is 9 feet #9 weight that I will simple spiral wrap.

Upon static testing and bending the blank, the transition guide rides downward into a more extreme position. I was wondering if I should leave it in the extreme position it takes when it's under a heavy load, the normal 90 degree placement, or split the difference?

Guide spacing was spinning spacing (4", 9", 14.5", 20.5", 37", 34", 41" (split the difference on this last 41" guide) with the last 3 guides conventional spacing ( 48 inches from tip, 58.5 inches from tip, and 70.5 inches from tip) and then I put the 2nd guide from but in 90 degree position.

Here are two pictures showing you what I mean:

First picture is normal 90 degree transition guide under normal circumstances


2nd picture is where the transition guide gravitates to when under the load of fighting a fish


Thx

Edit: Ive been doing a bunch more reading and realize that this is not the simple spiral I am doing. I will turn the 2nd guide down to 180 degrees and add a bumper guide between the butt guide and 2nd guide. Will this same thing not still happen?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/11/2020 05:31PM by Aaron Wilde.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Tom Kirkman (Moderator)
Date: October 11, 2020 05:42PM

Right, what you're doing is a 90 degree transition spiral. With the simple spiral this will not happen because the rub prevention guide will not have any side load on it. Any load-pressure will be directly back into the rod blank.

.........

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Aaron Wilde (---.ipv6.telus.net)
Date: October 11, 2020 07:15PM

I corrected guide placement for the proper simple spiral (all normal guide placement with all guides besides the butt guide at 180 degrees) and havent added the bumper guide yet. When i flex the rod without a bumper guide im wondering if simple spiral would even work as when under load the line rubs thr blank very close to the butt guide. By me placing a 90 degree bumper guide half way in between these guides wouldnt the line angles be creating a side load on the bumper?





Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/11/2020 07:20PM by Aaron Wilde.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Tom Kirkman (Moderator)
Date: October 11, 2020 08:02PM

No it won't. The rub prevention guide should be situated so that there are no side loads on it. Run the line through it, load the rod, and slide it back and forth until you find the spot where the line is pressing on the bottom of the guide ring (this will put the load directly back into the blank. This location may be exactly halfway between the first two guides, or it may be 60% one way or the other.

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

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: roger wilson (---)
Date: October 12, 2020 09:35AM

Aaron,
As you may surmise, when using the rub prevention guide, you want the shorted guide possible.

i.e. the line essentially wants to rub the side of the blank. So, by using the shortest blank possible - essentially withe bottom of the ring essentially on the blank, you are just providing a hard rubbing surface for the line while deflecting the line the least from its natural line flow.

Nice color combination on the blank and guide color.

Good luck

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Russell Brunt (---.lightspeed.miamfl.sbcglobal.net)
Date: October 12, 2020 11:19AM

FWIW, I built a 15-20# class salt water conventional rod. Used Virtus double foot guides. So halfway substantial rod.

I ended up cutting off my bumper guide and replacing it with a single foot fly rod guide (looks like a size 8). It has held up just fine catching king mackerel.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Aaron Wilde (---.ipv6.telus.net)
Date: October 12, 2020 04:50PM

So I put a micro guide on the blank at 90 degrees between where the 1st and 2nd butt guides go and tested it (yes the micro guide is backwards, I'll turn it around once I take the line out lol)

Looks like a nice line path when the rod isn't flexed:


but as soon as I flex the rod deeply that bumper guide moves into an extreme position.. it moves closer to 180 degrees (under the rod) than 90(sideways):




Russell Brunt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FWIW, I built a 15-20# class salt water
> conventional rod. Used Virtus double foot guides.
> So halfway substantial rod.
>
> I ended up cutting off my bumper guide and
> replacing it with a single foot fly rod guide
> (looks like a size 8). It has held up just fine
> catching king mackerel.

Thanks for this reply! I was JUST thinking.. hmm wonder if I put a size 7 single foot micro guide there. I may do just that.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2020 05:22PM by Aaron Wilde.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Tom Kirkman (Moderator)
Date: October 12, 2020 05:22PM

You want to put whatever you need to put there, that will do the intended job.

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

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Joe Vanfossen (---.neo.res.rr.com)
Date: October 12, 2020 08:51PM

Aaron,

I would likely add a guide or two to your guide train and static test again. If I recall, when doing a simple spiral it works best when the distance between the butt guide and the first 180 guide is in the range of 8"-10" putting a 4"-5" spacing between the butt and bumper and bumper and first 180. In your configuration, I think you may be forcing the transition to happen over too long of a distance. Re-spacing the guides might help you out here. It looks like you have 7 guides plus a tip top on a 9' rod. Unless you are using an exceptionally long handle, the rule of thumb that I use for most rods is L in feet + 1 when 6mm is the size of my running guides. L in feet + 2 when 3mm or 4mm are the smallest guides. Some builds may require one extra or one fewer depending on the particular blank. Assuming you are using something like a typical bass sized reel, these rules of thumb work pretty well for me. Very large reels and very long handles will certainly change the situation.

Also, when working with a simple spiral the bumper guide is excluded from those rules of thumb. It's added in only as a means of keeping the line off the blank in the transition.

That said, I have a hard time getting used to looking at guides with 4"-5" spacing in the butt section of the rod, so I tend to use a slow spiral on my rods where I rotate the rod and create a small window from one guide to the next until I get to 180 degrees. It doesn't give me the complete reduction of rod torque that the simple spiral gives, but on my bass rods, building this way doesn't produce a rod that torques enough for me to notice it significantly while fighting fish.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Russell Brunt (---.lightspeed.miamfl.sbcglobal.net)
Date: October 12, 2020 08:54PM

Looks to me like your butt guide is too big/tall. I'd go smaller/lower. Given that it seems you are using a fly rod blank as a casting rod I'll assume it isn't anything too powerful. I'd be thinking something like 8 butt guide, 6 bumper, and 4 running guides.

The reel will determine the butt guide but I doubt you are using a large round profile conventional reel on such a blank. Then I could be wrong. The more details you give us the better our answers can be.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: roger wilson (---)
Date: October 12, 2020 11:06PM

I agree with Russell,

Lose the first guide.
Take the guide that is currently the 3rd guide and move it into spot #1.
Take the 2nd guide and make it a smaller and shorter guide.

Then, continue as Russell suggested.

I would also add at least 2 more guides and likely 3 more guides to your guide train as well. These would all be smaller running guides.

You might try the first guide at 16 inches, the 2nd guide at 26 inches and the 3rd guide at 33 inches and runners as usual.



Good luck

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Tom Kirkman (Moderator)
Date: October 12, 2020 11:11PM

I would go back and read the instructions for the Simple Spiral again.

You're attempting to shoe horn in guides and placement rather than let the line path tell you what you need. That's backwards. Your micro guide is not a good rub prevention choice - the ring is too small. You want low, but not necessarily small ring.

In the Simple Spiral, the first and second guides would never be more than about 10 inches apart. How far apart are your first and second guides?

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

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Lynn Behler (---.97.252.156.res-cmts.leh.ptd.net)
Date: October 13, 2020 10:06PM

I use pac bay size 4 wide foot micros as a bumper. Very small very close to blank. Have no trouble with 50 lb braid to a 15lb leader. Alberto knot. Bigger may be better, I was trying to keep it as close to the blank as possible.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/13/2020 10:17PM by Lynn Behler.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Tom Kirkman (Moderator)
Date: October 14, 2020 10:08AM

The purpose of a larger ring is to allow more movement of the line within the guide without placing any side loads on it. Per the article, guides with larger rings should be bent-shaped to put the ring down low to the blank.

But whether or not you need a larger ring to accommodate line movement at that point depends on your rod. If you don't need it, don't use it.

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

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Aaron Wilde (---.ipv6.telus.net)
Date: October 14, 2020 04:09PM

Thanks for all the tips. I've never read the actual book instructions for the Simple spiral.. just what I've found on forums.

I ended up figuring it out for the most part by removing the size 12 double foot butt guide and replacing it with a size 10 double foot guide. I then redid my spacing with spacing my first 2 guides 9.5 inches apart, and placing a size 7 single foot micro guide in between at around the middle way, but slightly offset around 110 degrees as I found this was the best middle ground for the line path to take for when the rod is loaded and not loaded. I tested it in the alley way behind my building and it casts fine, seems fine. I respaced the rest of the guides accordingly as well. I am wrapping it now. Thanks for the help.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Tom Kirkman (Moderator)
Date: October 14, 2020 05:31PM

That sounds about right.

Much of what you read on forums about the Simple Spiral won't be good information - many that don't take the magazine envision it as a standard 90 degree transition spiral.

...........

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Simple Spiral static test result
Posted by: Aaron Wilde (---.ipv6.telus.net)
Date: October 17, 2020 12:22PM

I figured it out. It's a nice rod with the proper simple spiral method. Works pretty well. I think that performance wise it has it's ups and downs. I find that using it for a drift rod you can ever so slightly feel the line has tension as it goes through the bumper guide. This doesn't seem to affect casting distance or anything but you can definitely feel it a little bit here and there while free spool float drifting in the river. It seems to work about 95%+ as well as conventional for the purpose of drifting a float if the water is really slow. I'm not sure if I would build another spiral wrap over conventional. Both work great.

Options: ReplyQuote


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Webmaster