Joe Vanfossen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Inertia is the difference between the guide
> trains. By reducing inertia, the blank is able to
> react and recover more quickly and transfer energy
> more efficiently to the load being cast.
>
> It's the same reason that single foot guides have
> become favorable over double foot guides in most
> freshwater and a lot of light saltwater
> applications, the same reason that rods with micro
> guides cast as far or further than rods with
> conventionally sized guides.

Exactly.

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

Good points from Tom and Joe = thanks.
When all is said and done, all aspects of insuring a fair, simple casting distance test between new-world and old-world guide systems was taken into account; I am comfortable in accomplishing that and pleased to offer my findings to those interested.

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

Mark, you get my "best post of the year award"! Which is worth just that. Lol

Lynn,
Thank you for the approval and kind words. I am flattered “War of the Worlds” has received almost 1000 views; apparently the context and sparked replies were well received by many and I could not be happier to have been allowed to present the topic. I have received an enormous amount of information, ideas, support and general assistance (not to mention new friendships) from many veterans on this site such as yourself to flatten my rod building learning curve in such a relatively short period of time. While Thank You does not begin to express my deepest feelings, being allowed to offer a little something in return gives me great pleasure.
OK, enough of the fluffy stuff. I still have a COF rod built on a vintage FG Conolon blank for sale; although it did not catch any fish, it has only been used once LOL.

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

Lynn,
Thank you for the approval and kind words. I am flattered “War of the Worlds” has received almost 1000 views; apparently the context and sparked replies were well received by many and I could not be happier to have been allowed to present the topic. I have received an enormous amount of information, ideas, support and general assistance (not to mention new friendships) from many veterans on this site such as yourself to flatten my rod building learning curve in such a relatively short period of time. While Thank You does not begin to express my deepest feelings, being allowed to offer a little something in return gives me great pleasure.
OK, enough of the fluffy stuff. I still have a COF rod built on a vintage FG Conolon blank for sale; although it did not catch any fish, it has only been used once LOL.

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

The metal or ceramic used in guide rings and the coefficients of friction of these rings are known facts - although manufacturers/advertisers don't release this information, probably because so many guides are made of identical materials. All guide rings are round as far as I know. That leaves guide size, height and placement as the relevant variables, except maybe for guide weights - which are rarely advertised. It's not unusual to find a display photo of a rod with super-light micro guides attached with long, decorative, two-layer thread wraps plus intricate thread wraps above the grips?!

Phil, it,s like a big person,s fast food lunch compensating with a diet coke..they compensate with micro guides..lol.

Gimme a break Phil! "micro guides with two layer wraps" you gotta be pulling our leg! Show us the picture!

Certainly not going to dispute Joe's points about inertia. It's physics that we can all see in different forms in real life. The only thing I wonder about, is the reason micro guides cast better (and I truly believe they do) only because their lighter weight, or is it because they control the line better?

The reason I question this is, all of the rods I've built that I use for flipping and pitching have micro guides as running guides. They aren't as small as what Steve Gardner uses, but I would consider a 4.5 ring as a micro guide. Anyhow..... pitching, at least the distances that I normally pitch, is a low energy cast. While I know that the act of putting the rod in motion is loading the blank. the weights I normally use on the power of rods I use, is not loading the blank very much. It's more the pendulum motion of the rod propelling the bait than it is the transfer of energy as the blank is straightening out. Now I may have worded the point I was trying to make. But I hope it's understood.

I just think that the size of the guide rings, control the line more precisely, and that it plays a big role in how well micro guides cast.

Yes? No?

Phil Ewanicki, IMHO you are overlooking the very reasons why some guides systems claim to improve casting performance.

Tom Kirkman didn't claim the 27X system worked better because of the hardness or weight of a guide. He didn't say you had to use a particular brand. What is at the heart of the system is using taller single foot guides to more quickly reach a "choke" point, and then use all the same size guides from there. One does want to use the smallest, and therefore the lightest, guides consistent with meeting the needs and usage of the rod.

Fuji's new KR system is basically suggesting the same thing. They are just saying that with braid you can be even more aggressive with how quickly you reach that "choke" point. They have also provided high speed photos to show how their new ring design helps to tame the line coils better/quicker which aids in distance. They aren't claiming it only works with a certain ring or guide material. In fact they offer choices in those areas under the KR family of guides.

So to me, to concentrate on the properties that you are......but to ignore the system or concept behind this claimed casting improvement....is missing the boat. Rather that is on purpose or not is up to you.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

To me it,s not the system...it,s the line that matters..Fuji admitted this when they pointed out that the KR system works best with braided lines..the thing is they all work best with braided line..even ice fishing...lol.

Dave, I noticed similar results when I built my first micro guide rods. I'm still not terribly certain that I can pin down the physics of why micro guides aid in pitching accuracy. For me, I made my first jump to a high modulus technique specific blank with the addition of micro guides. I would have had to try to make those builds poorly performing rods.

In traditional casting, the inertia is going to be the dominant effect. For pitching, the inertia will still come into play because you have to start and stop the rod from moving, whether the rod blanks is loaded or not. Whether or not the diameter of the inserts has a significant role to play or if it's just the rod itself being easier to start and stop leading to slightly less effort involved, I have no idea. It would require some truly repeatable scientific testing to work it out.

That said over the last several years I have not spent enough time on the water, and no rod or guide train is going to help my casting and pitching until I build back the muscle memory.

Unfortunately, there are those who continue failing to understand the purpose of my War of the Worlds test to simply discover the casting difference between the old-school COF and modern KR Concept guide systems. The objective was to eliminate as many variables while including as many constants to produce the fairest test possible between the two guide trains; I am confident such was accomplished. The two blanks were as “identical” as possible, both sets of guides were Fuji with Alconite inserts, reel seats and cork rear grips were mounted in the same position, even the thread wraps were virtually identical as with the amount of finish applied. The only variable was the actual guides themselves mounted to the blank in their specific fashion/spacing. Any consideration of rod weight, balance, tip speed, coefficient of friction and such as to what contributed to the casting distance achieved is totally immaterial. As expected, the COF guides were heavier and most likely slowed the tip speed/rebound; so what? That is inherent with that style of guide and consequently a constant with all COF systems. Some were concerned with the coefficient of friction while others claimed it made no difference; so what? Either way, both guide sets employed Alconite inserts to insure a constant in the casting equation.
The War of the Worlds test was simply executed to discover the DIFFERENCE IN CASTING DISTANCE between two different STYLES OF GUIDE TRAINS, COF and KR Concept; nothing less, nothing more. Allow me to suggest that others more concerned with the actual physical and dynamic factors which contributed to the difference in casting distance engineer their own test and share the results with the rest of us = WE ARE ALL HERE TO LEARN!!!
That being said, I am pleased to have provided a topic which produced (is producing) so many tangents of replies.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hopefully it will be less eventful the 2020. Be safe & healthy!!!

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

This topic should be required reading for new builders. A terrific amount of info made it's way thru this thread!

Choke points in a guide train primarily relate to rods with spinning reels rather than to rods with conventional reels or to fly rods. This fact is not immediately apparent to newcomers. Braided line behaves differently than monofilament going through a guide train, and the behavior of monofilament line varies considerably with its diameter and with the ambient temperature. Simplifying or ignoring the variables in a problem can frustrate efforts at improvement.

Joe, we're going to need to get you out on the water more. lol And thank you for the reply. Certainly the combination of an easier to accelerate rod tip combined with better line control both contribute in the equation.

Mark, I sense a little frustration from you. I'm sorry to see that. Yes your intention was to present a valid test of two different guide trains, and you did an awesome job of doing so. But ....... pretty much everything you listed as being immaterial, is IMO quite material to the discussion. Humans are inquisitive. We want to know why one does a better job than the other. The discussion concerning things other than drag co efficient of guides, is very material in the discussion. As you said , we're all here to learn. I agree totally with Lynn's latest post. There is a lot of learning coming out of this discussion.

The discussion is like teaching how an internal combustion engine works ....... except it's a fishing rod's guide train.

I'm lovin it !!!

The success of an experiment is best measured by how many more questions is raises..

David,
My cause for consternation stems from a very small percentage of those who are the first to complain or condemn yet are notoriously the last to compliment or contribute; you and the vast majority of responders are certainly not amongst that group. I have admittedly been flattered with the abundance of posts offering a wealth of knowledge to a topic I started and indeed hope they continue from which all of us can learn.

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

Mark, first and foremost your experiment is wonderful! You did it in a very accurate and clearly understandable way. The results, of course, opened the discussion that has broadened, due to the interest of many of us who are inquisitive .

I think you knew this was going to happen, when you chose the title lead word "WAR!"

Again............................good job in more ways than one!

Mark: No offense intended. Your experiment was refreshingly factual and scientific, but that won't stop advertisers and others who pretend differences don't make any difference. What key differences could be be ignored discussing your experiment? Many posts ignore line type - nylon monofilament or fluoro monofilament or gel-spun braid for example, or line diameter/pound test, or ambient temperature - which makes a big difference in some materials.