OK, sorry to go back to this well discussed topic but I can't find anything related to the weight of the line vs. a couple grams of under wrap and finish on the guides.
After a little thought it seems to me that once you have a few feet of line out past the tip it will far outweigh any guide under wraps that were done (assuming nothing ridiculously heavy was done).
Won't the affect of a couple grams of under wrap be far overshadowed by the leverage and damping of the action effect from the line? Even a 3wt line weighs +/- 33 grams in 10 feet, and close to 100 grams in 30 feet.
Any comments concerning this are welcomed. Thanks

No, the additional weight that underwraps add is carried full time by the rod. It is noticeable, very much so unless we're talking very heavy, stiff and powerful rods. The line beyond the rod tip has nowhere near the same effect on the rod.

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

Paul, try this. The weight differences that you are talking about are similar to the weight differences between a micro guide train on a typical bass casting rod vs a traditionally sized guide train. To illustrate the difference, you can reason that the center of mass of the guide train, or thread wraps will be somewhere around 2/3 of the way up the blank from the butt. Take a raw blank, or even a rod that is wrapped without under wraps and go through the casting motion and pay attention to how it responds. Quickly snap the rod up and down and see how long it takes for the rod to naturally damp the vibrations. You can be as qualitative or as quantitative as you want here.

Now, a 1/4 oz weight has a mass of about 7 g, so if you want something closer to 3 g, an 1/8 oz weight will do. Tape the 1/4 or 1/8 oz weight at that point about 2/3 of the way up the rod blank. Now repeat the casting motion and snapping of the blank up and down. You should notice that the blank responds more slowly and takes a longer time to damp vibrations. Even though you are distributing that extra mass along the blank, it has the same effect as placing that same mass at its center of mass. If the rod is finished, try the same thing casting your favorite fly line with the rod. You should be able to note a distinct difference.

Seldom does a 3 wt. rod have to cast more than 40 feet of line, so the loss in casting efficiency which inevitably results from the unnecessary excess weight of decorative wraps will likely go unnoticed. But I doubt the conflict between form and function will ever go away.

> But I doubt the conflict between art
> and function will ever go away.

And that is why I am biting my tongue and avoiding this one! Tom spoke for some us!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/03/2021 09:44AM by Kent Griffith.

Thanks for the responses!
After reading some other forums and articles, and my personal experience, I am getting the impression everyone compares the difference in rod action between with or without under wraps by false casting with no line.
I seldom fish with no fly line out, just shaking my rod at the water....although the fish seem to think so at times...yuk, yuk
I am still curious about the mostly universal belief that the fly line beyond the tip has little effect on the rod compared with the couple grams of extra weight from under wraps. Bear with me, my logic may be faulty, but it seems if that was true then fly line weights would make little, if any, difference in how a rod performs/feels. I personally do notice a difference in feel and performance when using one weight of line over, or under, with the same fly rod.
Joe, I haven't tried adding weight to the rod and doing some casts with a fly line like you suggest. That seems like a great test and thanks for the suggestion. I'll give it a try.

Under wraps will undermine the speed (reaction and recovery) on lighter rods more than on heavier rods. On a 3-weight you simply don't want under wraps anywhere near that rod.

The fly line loads the rod during the casting motion, not after it.

...........

The rod provides the speed and inertia to the line and thus distance to the cast. The more weight is located toward the tip of the rod and thus leveraged the more poorly the rod casts. Beauty is strictly in the mind of the beholder, while distance and direction can be measured. Most people settle for some sort of trade-off. I would suggest wrapping the entire rod with thread and covering the thread with epoxy is an extreme measure in the pursuit of beauty.

I apologize for opening "Pandora's Box". It is not quite as contentious of a topic as glass vs. bamboo vs. composite/graphite, but it seems close! It certainly warrants some experimentation so I can speak from personal experience in the future.
Tom, please forgive my ignorance but when you refer to "reaction and recovery" are you referring to the moment just before the line loads the rod on either forward or back casts?
I appreciate the responses from you all.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2021 08:07PM by Paul Schenkenberger.

I'm talking about the time between your input transfers into rod movement, and when your input stops, how long it takes the rod to recover to straight. Underwraps affect this more than you'd think, particularly on a very light rod such as a 3-weight fly rod.

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

Got it, thanks Tom

Just thinking out loud..thread weighs nothing, so the underwrap gets the weight from the applied epoxy but don,t some builders seal the wraps with CP including the overwraps and appply epoxy only as a top coat and no more, unlike many who saturate top to bottom with epoxy?