Now that I have your attention, this is not actually a battle between the two but simply a test of the old world COF guide arrangement versus Fuji’s modern KR Concept. A few weeks ago, I stated desire to learn the (casting) difference between an old-school COF rod compared to the present day KR Concept rod and it apparently sparked some interest from others of you on this site as well. If you care to do so, please find the results below.
To set the stage and make the test as fair as possible, I attempted to eliminate as many variables while including as many constants as possible. Both blanks are “identical” vintage FG Conolon #155s (2-8lb), Fuji DPS seats (spaced the same), cork rear grip without a foregrip, sported my CARL ferrules (CCF testing concluded less than 1% difference between the original blank and after cut), Alconite guide rings for both, even thread wrapped in the same fashion albeit a different color. While we are all aware of how “identical” two blanks of the same make, model and manufacturer are (yah, right), this is the best I could do. The only obvious difference were the guide trains: KR Concept = KL-16H, KL-8H, KL-5.5M, 2 X KB-5, 4 X KT-5 with a LG-5 tip top; COF = all LVs, 25, 20, 16, 12, 8, 6 with a LG-4.5 tip top (a LG-6.0 was unavailable at the time).
[www.rodbuilding.org]
The casting arena was set-up at my local park with fairly thick grass to minimize any bounce of the .5oz (including water) casting bubble employed. Obviously, the same Lew’s Laser Speed Spin 100 spooled with 4lb P-Line Floroclear was employed for the test casting of both rods. Due to not being a tournament caster, each rod was cast 10 times; 5 in both directions to average-out any wind influence (which was virtually nil); the results were then averaged.
THE RESULTS:
KR Concept = 114ft average with 120ft being the best.
COF = 100.875ft average with 105.5ft being the best.
With approximately 6ft difference between the average and max distance achieved for both rods, I feel my casting was at least quite consistent for the test, even if others may be able to cast further. Using the average distance achieved, the KR rod cast 11.5% further than the COF rod. While using the max distance achieved, the KR rod cast 8.75% further. To average yet again, and while not profound, a 10% gain in casting distance is substantial; after all, we all know the fish are 5ft further than we can cast LOL.
To be honest, I thought the KR rod would out-perform/cast the COF by a wider margin (maybe it is just I build a great COF rod but a lousy KR rod LOL). All things considered, more than a 10% casting distance gain is certainly proof that Fuji’s R&D developed a better system of line management through the KR Concept; I am certainly a believer and consequently my rods will utilize such (as if I had any doubts)!!!
No, I did not include Minimas or MicroWaves; that is for you to test and share!

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

Mark, I thank you for your efforts and your report. I can't help but to be curious what the results would be if you used a braided line. Any chance you could be persuaded to repeat your tests with such line?

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Good work Mark! i thoght the numbers would be closer especially with flourocarbon trying to make the turn at the choke guide..if it was 8# line, it may have..Russell took the words out of my mouth about trying braided line..thanks for doing the test..

Russell,
Thank you for reading and replying. At the risk of sounding rude to your request, the answer is NO for a number of reasons; 1.) This was a test of guide train concepts, not line type, 2.) I do not use braid for my Sierra/Rockies trout fishing so purchasing braid to replace my mono/fluro simply for your suggested test only to strip it back off and replace it back with what I normally use would be a waste of time and money, 3.) The 4lb mono/fluoro used for the test is inherently very limp = similar to present-day braids and 4.) Back in the days of COF builds, the only braid was Dacron and that was much heavier test line intended for off-shore saltwater use (if I am not mistaking). While I would be very interested in learning how employing different types of fishing line affects casting and fish-fighting abilities, thus was not the intent of this test.

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

ben belote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good work Mark! i thoght the numbers would be
> closer especially with flourocarbon trying to make
> the turn at the choke guide..if it was 8# line, it
> may have..Russell took the words out of my mouth
> about trying braided line..thanks for doing the
> test..


wondering what average cast is if you dropped the high and low numbers then averaged..Thanks.

Ben,
Thank you reading and responding as well. Please see my reply to Russell above.

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

Just a thought Mark..maybe you know someone who uses braid for spinning and they permit you to borrow their reel for a few casts..i was just wondering how much braid would level the playing field if at all..

The biggest difference between these systems is not casting distance. It is rod weight, balance and speed.

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

Mark,

Thanks for posting the results of this very interesting experiment. Although not easily quantifiable, did you notice any difference in the effort used to cast with each type of system? Also, did you notice any difference between the balance and weight of each rod like Tom alluded to? Great looking fishing rods as well!

Thanks for sharing your results. I am sure a lot of time and effort in your testing.

Fishing is not a sport, it is an art.

Mark
Thanks for the testing
Based on your info, from a tournament bass anglers perspective making 500 to a 1000 casts a day
who usually is casting at specific targets

That means I can use about 10%(+/-) less effort on each cast allowing the arms to be a lot less tired towards the end of the day helping to maintain accuracy and efficiency
Compiled with the increased weight saving's Mr. Kirkman mentioned.

your synopsis of: "I thought the KR rod would out-perform/cast the COF by a wider margin"
Is a much larger margin then you realize

I had done similar testing years back using Micro guides, proving that those margins can be greater then what you've established.

Thank you for doing the work and sharing the results

What about the feel of the two? Did one feel smoother than the other?

I am pleased with the number of replies and input = thank you!
Ben, as stated initially, the max distance achieved (for both) was approximately 6ft further than the average and the shortest distance was approximately 4ft less than the average; embarrassing proof I am not the most proficient at casting.
Tom, after viewing Fuji’s KR Concept R&D video attempting to tame the chaotic coils coming off a spinning reel spool, I concluded it was certainly about casting distance in addition to rod weight, balance and speed. I set-out to obtain exact numbers to reflect the difference in casting distance between the two systems (hopefully Phil Ewanicki approves). But since you asked, and although I did not weigh the blanks or components prior to building, the completed KR rod weighs 3.6oz / 104g while the COF rod weighs 4.1oz / 116g which certainly seems appropriate. However, with the COF rod weighing .5oz more, I expected the balance point to be noticeably further up the rod; actually it is closer to the butt!?!? Measured from the butt, the balance point for the KR rod = a tic under 23in while the COF rod = 22.75in.
Lee, there was no noticeable difference in casting effort between the two rods but then I may be more numb than others and I was more concerned with observing the line-flow of the two systems. As for balance and weight, see my reply to Tom above. Thank you for the compliment; I noticed and liked the open-spiral on a number of older rods and thought it appropriate to carry the theme onto the vintage Conolons I build. It may go against “Form Follows Function” and add a tic more cantilevered weight to the build, but I do it simply because I can LOL.
Danny, you are welcome. Yes, time and effort was required but we are all here to learn.
Steve, good point on conserving energy. Now you can fish longer; just don’t be late for dinner.
Ed, There was no noticeable difference in “smoothness” between the two but, as stated earlier, I may be number than others.
There is one more Thank You I would like to express; to Fuji and Anglers Resource!!! Their commitment to fishing in general and rod building in particular continues to raise the bar of efficiency across the board of fishing components for all of us to take advantage of. My hat is off to both of them!
While I am certainly glad to have performed this War of the Worlds test, it is doubtful the COF rod will become my go-to choice; anyone want to buy a nice COF rod LOL?

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

Mark, as others have said, I think it's great that you took the time and initiative to do such involved testing. It's certainly not something I would have taken the time to do. Hopefully this goes a long way in proving to some of the doubters, that the guide train plays a very important role in casting performance. Not just in casting distance as your tests prove, but in the ease and accuracy aspects that Steve alluded to.

Hopefully, without stepping on any toes because that is surely not my intent ... but I'd like to share my own observations concerning how a COF guide train handles stiffer lines, compared to how a KR concept guide train handles those same lines. I have no recorded data, just personal observations. I didn't build two rods as you did, I just rebuilt one of my old factory rods from the ground up, and replaced its' COF guide train with a KR concept guide train. I used Pac Bay Minima match guides and fly guides for the actual guides, Because I use 100% fluorocarbon line as the main line on my spinning gear, I went with a 20, a 10, and a 5 for the reduction train. A #5 fly guide for the choke guide, and #4s for the remainder of the running guides. I used 11 guides not including the tip top in the rebuild. Those 11 guides weighed a total of 4 grams. I took 7 factory guides not including the tip top, off the rod. I didn't care enough to measure them, so I have no idea what sizes they were, but I do know they had aluminum oxide rings. Those 7 guides weighed a total of 11 grams. The difference in the feel of the rod was night and day. While I expected to feel a difference, I didn't expect the kind of difference I felt. Everything was markedly better, and that includes the sensitivity of the rod. It was a totally different rod.

Anyhow .... as far as the difference in casting distance and how the smaller and higher number of guides handled the stiffer line goes. I experienced the same results that you posted. The KR concept was far superior in every aspect. Of course I am estimating, but I'd say I experienced at least a 10% difference in casting distance. I found the distance control and ease of casting to be much more consistent which despite what others may think, clearly aids in casting accuracy. Line slap that was quite noticeable with the COF guide train, was in all but a few instances, completely gone. An over all much much better rod when compared to the factory configuration.

I realize a COF guide train is about as old school as you can get when it comes to spinning rod guide trains. But my guess is that the same results you posted, would show in an NGC versus KR concept comparison as well. It's crazy how good the KR concept guide train is. And the KR software on the Angler's Resource website makes it so easy to set up. Personally I can't see why anyone building a spinning rod would use anything but a KR concept guide train. It's the real deal.

Once again, you are to be commended for taking the initiative to do the kind of testing you did. Great job !!!

Part of the difference in casting difference can be attributed to one rod being lighter than the other. Reducing weight along the blank, particularly in the upper half of the rod, increases rod speed (casting velocity) and shortens recovery time.

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

I really doubt that there would be any different conclusion if braid less than 15 pound test were used in the testing. Think about it. Four pound test mono and braids less than about 15 pound test are very similar in characteristics. Both are very forgiving of guide trains which are not optimum, but the fact remains that in this testing one guide train design was better than the other for casting distance. I suggest those who question the results do their own tests and publish rather than asking Mark to do over with other variables.

I just realized/discovered the KR rod employed a size 16 DPS seat while the COF rod used a size 17DPS; dang rookies! I can only assume that is what made the COF rod balance further back than anticipated. Without any lying around to weigh, does anyone know the weight difference between the two?

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

David, Thank you for your in-depth reply; you are almost as long-winded as I am LOL. From my understanding, NGC was quite an improvement over COF just as KR is quite an improvement over NGC. I was curious to learn the difference between the extremes, COF verses KR; while I would think the difference between NGC and KR would be noticeable, maybe only half as much as between COF and KR; but that is for someone else to test and report = I’m done LOL.
Tom, I am certainly in agreement with you that guide choice directly influences the weight of a rod which in turn influences the speed and balance as well which attributes to how well/far a lure can be cast. Additionally, the type/style of the guides, especially the reduction guides, greatly influence how easily the line passes through them; hence the test I produced and provided. Excuse me for being confused by your first posted reply.
Michael, next time I will employ you to write my posts; you required much less space and said it in a nutshell “…the fact remains that in this testing one guide train design was better than the other for casting distance”.

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

The difference between KR and a good NGC will be absolutely minimal. Try it and see for yourself.

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

Mark, thanks for the experiment you did a nice job. I’ve been building rods for a very long time, and I have tried just about every type of guide that has been made over the past 50 or so years in various types of configurations and concepts. I love to experiment and have also directly tested various guide concepts against each other, and in my opinion, supported by my results, the KR concept is the best I’ve used. Once I tried it I never looked back. Unlike Mark, I much prefer braided line, and carbon fiber rods over monofilament and fiberglass rods, but that is only my opinion and preference. Braid will make any rod cast better, and graphite rods are lighter and more responsive and in my opinion just perform and feel better. A KR concept will improve performance no matter the rod or line used. With ultra light and light powered rods I do like the Minimum M and F guides in a kR concept. The lightness of these guides do bring out the best in these light powered rods, and have had the same experience as David with these guides making a rod feel totally different. On more powerful rods I love the Fuji KR guides.
Norm