Gary typically builds on the straightest axis, curve up, so that the weight of guides tend to bring it back to straight. This isn't the spine, however..

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

Watched the video Kent...thanks. That's how I learned and have been doing rods for 10+ years. I always appreciate every body's input.

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gary typically builds on the straightest axis,
> curve up, so that the weight of guides tend to
> bring it back to straight. This isn't the spine,
> however..
>

So if we just take that S word "spine" out of it, are we good to go? lol





***And for the record, I was the one who said time to grab a bag of popcorn the last time this was brought up... and I made sure to get a big enough bag to go around!

[media.tenor.com]

A level table, two dowels and a China marker are my tools for this pursuit. It takes only a couple of minutes to let the blank tell you it’s curvature. I put curve up for rods meant for typical freshwater sized fish and curve down for the big ones. This gets you the casting accuracy that Kent talks about for most rods. When the fish get big, then the same forces Kent mentioned in casting are in greater play when fighting or lifting. After you mark the hollow of the curve, you can bend and rotate the rod and see that this will be the “soft spine”. Is it a big deal?, probably not. Is two minutes worth it on a custom made rod?, I think so. Gravity is an accurate tool.ect



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2021 09:15AM by Tom Kirkman.

I use 4 rods. One with guides on the side for more accurate side casting, one with the guides on top for overhand casting, one with the guides on the bottom for underhanded casting........wait.......maybe I only use 3 rods.

The spine is almost never in line with the straightest axis of the rod.

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

As long as nothing on the rod is loose it will cast the same way every cast. A competent caster will adjust for how (where) the rod casts. It's a "feel" thing, not a gunsight thing.

Thank you for this interesting discussion. I built my first rod, a Sabre 196-7, almost 50 years ago, still have it. We set guides the opposite of Gary Loomis’ advice. Things change as we learn more. I’m looking forward to trying new stuff as I turn back to rod wrapping.

So far, I have only built 5 rods. All were built just as described by G. Loomis in Kent's previous post. His video was all I knew about the subject at the time I did my first couple of builds. After that video I just assumed this was gospel on the issue. I see no reason to build any differently since it is now part of my routine. I certainly mean no disrespect to anyone who builds differently as I am still in the Idiot stage of learning this craft.

Consistency seems worth spending the two minutes it takes to find the curvature of a blank. If you have four rods sitting on a deck or in rod holders, why would you want to continually adjust your casts to each one being built on a different part of a blank’s curve. I’d rather have them all the same, or at least 180 degrees apart, if I am building them myself.

If you're like me I don't cast my baitcasting rods with the reel in the upright position, I roll by hand, thumb in, so I can free my wrist, I also cast from a variety of positions, not just overhead. If the guides aren't on top when I cast, or I'm don't cast with the load over the guides when I sidearm the cast then what did I gain by building on the spine? Especially when as Tom said I would have to look at any bend in the blank for the rest of eternity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2021 12:27AM by Spencer Phipps.

There used to be a lot of smart people that thought the earth was flat. Today ..... not so many.

Kendall Cikanek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A level table, two dowels and a China marker are
> my tools for this pursuit. It takes only a couple
> of minutes to let the blank tell you it’s
> curvature. I put curve up for rods meant for
> typical freshwater sized fish and curve down for
> the big ones. This gets you the casting accuracy
> that Kent talks about for most rods. When the fish
> get big, then the same forces Kent mentioned in
> casting are in greater play when fighting or
> lifting. After you mark the hollow of the curve,
> you can bend and rotate the rod and see that this
> will be the “soft spine”. Is it a big deal?,
> probably not. Is two minutes worth it on a custom
> made rod?, I think so. Gravity is an accurate
> tool.ect


........

You are reducing rod power and deadlift capacity when you put the curve down. Not good when fighting larger fish, if any fish. Theories are fine but actual test data is better. [www.rodbuilding.org]

..........

I prefer multiple sections in my rods. From a physics standpoint, the area of the most stiffness, perpendicular to the rod length, will resist hoop collapse best. This means that the rod blank will have more lifting power, and sensitivity. However, the tip bends into a straight line, and so isn't stressed as much as the bittiom.opposite the spine) on the top two portions. The rod will bend toward the ti[prod will not load as easily, and will not be as accurate. Also, if the rod bends easier, it will act as a shock absorber for light tippets, protecting them from breaking better.

Typically, the bottom half of the rod (closest to the reel) is where you want the power to come from. So, on a four pierce blank, i will place the guides on the stiffet axis. and on the belly for the top two sections. This gives me more fish fighting [ower toward the but, and tippet protection and better accuracy toward the tip.

If you put the correct taper and weight line on your reel, the rod will load properly on the back cast, and throw forward well do the the power of the butt sections. I built a CTS 3 weight fiberglass trout rod, and it both casts, and fishes beautifully.

I have no numbers, or empirical data to back this up. This my opinion. But fishing my Winston, with all guides positioned on the belly (my first rod build, but with high end components, and my CTS built half and half, the CTS is more fun to fish.

Casting and spinning rods are a whole different animal though I still prefer a medium fast rod over a fast rod.
whatever rod blank you use, over time, yo will develop a feel for how to best cast, fish, jig, retriev., etc.

a good friend of mine said it best. As teens, we had a cheap aluminum boat, with a 21 horse Wards tiller motor on the back. We had cheap fishing poles with Cheap Zebco, or Abu-Garcia closed reels, or even older bait cast reals that gave you the worst snarls. We caught many a bass, perch, brook trout and pike oncheap gear. And Because We were together, as best friends, we had a blast.

You can catch fish with a willow stick, and string. The reward is getting out with friends, and eating potato-fish sandwiches, fried up fresh, streamside.

Tight Lines and Frisky Fish

RJF

Reading the responses to this thread I get the idea that rod spine is of little importance to many custom rod builders. If this is the case, why is so much effort spent on teaching people how to find the spine and what to do with it? There is tons of information out there from blank manufactures, rod building supply outfits, and individuals on how to find the spine. Is all this effort wasted or is it more of a matter of,”do what makes you feel good, it really doesn’t make much difference.”

Guy, it,s a lot of hot air..because if they want to sell rods they build them straight..no one buys a rod that looks crooked..

ben belote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guy, it,s a lot of hot air..because if they want
> to sell rods they build them straight..no one buys
> a rod that looks crooked..


and if everything the on spine builders say were true, i would still build on the straightest axis because crooked guide trains make me ill..lol.

Guy Taylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reading the responses to this thread I get the
> idea that rod spine is of little importance to
> many custom rod builders. If this is the case, why
> is so much effort spent on teaching people how to
> find the spine and what to do with it? There is
> tons of information out there from blank
> manufactures, rod building supply outfits, and
> individuals on how to find the spine. Is all this
> effort wasted or is it more of a matter of,”do
> what makes you feel good, it really doesn’t make
> much difference.”


The idea that "finding the spine" is important has much to do with convincing custom rod builders that they're doing something special (they are but it doesn't concern the spine). And, there are spine finding tools that wouldn't have much market if many builders didn't bother with rod spine. The facts are that building on the effective spine does not change casting accuracy, does not prevent rod twist and does reduce deadlift capability. But there is no right nor wrong here. If there were, then people couldn't be aligning their rods in so many different ways and have all of them work just fine.

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

Guy Taylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reading the responses to this thread I get the
> idea that rod spine is of little importance to
> many custom rod builders. If this is the case, why
> is so much effort spent on teaching people how to
> find the spine and what to do with it? There is
> tons of information out there from blank
> manufactures, rod building supply outfits, and
> individuals on how to find the spine. Is all this
> effort wasted or is it more of a matter of,”do
> what makes you feel good, it really doesn’t make
> much difference.”

It really depends on the fishery. Where I fish (west coast socal) and to me personally, the spine is really important and it serves a functional purpose in a rod. The argument against building along the spine that I've read and heard is mostly because it "doesn't help or matter." For example, the spine wont affect your cast, and building off of it won't necessarily cause failure, and building along the straightest axis looks more visually appealing.

I would consider this, though. The stronger the blank, the stronger the spine. I did a test on one of my rail rod builds and found that while manually loading the rod, the force of the spine was strong enough to flip and hold an international 30 size reel upright against the force of gravity. To me, that is a significant stabilizing factor while fighting larger fish without harness or seat. The lever arm effect with guides upright causes downward torsion, and I need every bit of force I can use to my advantage for stability while fighting fish. I wont do spiral wraps for long range fishing because the 8 or so rods I bring won't bundle well (actually a big deal) and it's harder on the deckhands on tangles. Not to mention while rail fishing, having the line under the blank is a nightmare, especially when you have to step back from the rail, move over a bow point, or let someone else fighting their own fish move under you as you move over.

For fly rods, trout rods, bass rods, spinning rods, pretty much any rod fishing less than 20# of drag, the spine may not matter, sure. I would say, however, that it also probably doesn't hurt, and for heavier rods it definitely matters to me personally.

Best of luck, and remember that the rod is a custom because it's built for you, your fishery, and your application. Take all the good information you can find, then make the decision that is best for you.

Nick

it was the lever arm effect that flipped the reel not the spine..lol.