Hey!

On my first rod when doing the static test I measured the distance between the blank and the line at its furthest point (running guide part) in order to get an accurate placement. I managed to get 7mm / 2/8inches.
I am currently doing the static test for my second rod (spinning) and I was wondering what is your max distance from the blank to the line while static testing at 45 degrees?

I thought it might be very informative to see the average distance that each of us/you have,

Luc

EDIT: As pointed by Mark the better measurement would be : What is your worst line angle, in the runner guides zone, on your light rods?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2021 04:58AM by Luc siat.

I have always just eyeballed it, I'm not concerned with the distance the line is from the blank because on rods your guides are all different height off the blank to start with, I'm concerned that the line's path does a, decent job of following the blank's natural curve. On casting rods my line usually does, or comes close to, touching the blank at 90 degrees, I'm just looking at my initial setup at 45 degrees.

Before you take somebody else's word about the optimal distance between the guide and the blank you should learn what type of line and what ambient temperatures are assumed when the line/guides will be used. The performance of 30# gelspun braid and #30 nylon monofilament varies wildly with temperature. Then again, it might make no difference whatsoever, unless you suspect the MEASURED performance of various lines, guide spacings, heights, and ambient temperatures might matter?

Are you talking a fly reel, a revolving spool casting or trolling reel, or a spinning reel?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2021 01:08PM by Phil Ewanicki.

Luc,
As others have said, I could care less about any distance from the line to the blank.

I just want to be sure that for a spinning rod, that when a blank is well loaded that the line follows a similar curvature.

In the case of a casting rod, I just want to be sure that the line may touch the blank, or even rub lightly on the blank, but I don't want the line to be under the blank on a fully loaded blank.

Very easy to see and note.

Building rods is not rocket science. Don't make it more difficult than it needs to be.

Enjoy the education you get by building, using and rebuilding rods when you find that you can move or change something here or there to make it a bit better rod for you.

Best wishes.

Luc,
The actual distance the line is from the blank is immaterial. However, if you like to measure things, the distance the line is from the blank MIDPOINT between the all the runners should be the same, or at least very close; this is assuming the runners are the same size and type. One could also measure the angle of the line as it passes through each runner and, yet again, those angles should be the same or very close. It is safe to say that most simply eyeball the line passing through the guide-train and adjust accordingly to achieve an arc which mimics the blank as best possible. Unlike measuring each individual line height or angle, eyeballing allows one to see the entire guide-train at once and a guide which is not in the proper location stands-out like a red-headed stepchild.

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

I'm with Mark.

I do think there are advantages to having the line as close as possible to the blank. This pretty much equates to saying smaller guides have advantages but different frame styles have different heights.

Mark, a question if I may. You are one of the few here (that I am aware of) that fishes both ends of the spectrum. You fish for trout and you fish offshore. Do you feel it becomes more and more important to take care with guide layout as the ratio of fish size/strength increases relative to line strength used?

Ummm, that might not be clear. Would you pay more attention to guide choice/layout for a 15# class spinning rod intended to catch 100# tuna or a 130# class intended to catch cow tuna?

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you talking a fly reel, a revolving spool
> casting or trolling reel, or a spinning reel?


A spinning reel

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Before you take somebody else's word about the
> optimal distance between the guide and the blank
> you should learn what type of line and what
> ambient temperatures are assumed when the
> line/guides will be used. The performance of 30#
> gelspun braid and #30 nylon monofilament varies
> wildly with temperature. Then again, it might make
> no difference whatsoever, unless you suspect the
> MEASURED performance of various lines, guide
> spacings, heights, and ambient temperatures might
> matter?

I don't understand how the temperature will be useful for my static test.
I am just curious of finding out how close to the blank are people having their line. But I do understand now that the information would only be useful if they would use micro guides of max size 5.

Mark Talmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Luc,
> The actual distance the line is from the blank is
> immaterial. However, if you like to measure
> things, the distance the line is from the blank
> MIDPOINT between the all the runners should be the
> same, or at least very close; this is assuming the
> runners are the same size and type. One could also
> measure the angle of the line as it passes through
> each runner and, yet again, those angles should be
> the same or very close. It is safe to say that
> most simply eyeball the line passing through the
> guide-train and adjust accordingly to achieve an
> arc which mimics the blank as best possible.
> Unlike measuring each individual line height or
> angle, eyeballing allows one to see the entire
> guide-train at once and a guide which is not in
> the proper location stands-out like a red-headed
> stepchild.


Yes thank you. I did not thought that through. The information would only work if comparing a very similar setup. I do have the same measurement on all of them except between the choker and the first running guide where i have on millimeter more because the angle was good. The better question is indeed what is the worst angle you have on your light power rods.

Russell,
You said, "I think that there are advantages of having the line close to the blank."

May I ask you what is any advantage of having the line close to the blank?

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you, but as long as the line gets from the reel to the fish - what more does a person need? Does the actual position of the line on the rod or in space above or below the rod blank make any difference at all in putting the fish in the boat?

Just wondering.

Roger, smaller guides use less finish and thread. They weigh less. They sit lower to the blank and have a shorter "lever arm". This subjects the blank to less twisting forces.

When you use more than the minimum amount of guides you reduce the bow string effect. This also moves the line closer to the blank and allows a larger % of the blank's strength to go into the fight. Done right you can move more line with each pump.

Rather or not it is worth the effort likely comes down to how hard an angler pushes the limits of his gear.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

I remember when Fuji posted the below information and while I agree with most of it especially rod power and smaller rings perform better than larger rings ( With braid) I disagree on some as well particularly increased casting distance.



Additional guides INCREASE casting distance.
Guide rings are far more slippery than rod blanks. The real culprit in robbing distance is line slapping the rod on the cast. More guides hold the line away from the blank and casting distance improves dramatically.

Guides are largely responsible for a rod’s sensitivity.
Additional guides add “contact points” along the rod that transmit information. Amplifying these signals with more contact points makes subtle strikes easier to detect. Smaller, lower guides are closer to the blank and transmit more of these subtle vibrations.

More guides INCREASE rod power.
Additional guides help the line track the curve of the rod precisely and allow the angler to use more of the energy stored in the bend for better hook sets and more fighting power. Guides located further apart create a ”bowstring effect” that negates portions of the rod’s power.

More guides REDUCE line twist.
In spinning applications more guides create a slighter angle between guides, reducing the tendency for twists to push forward toward the lure.

SMALLER rings perform better than larger rings.
Because line traveling along the rod through smaller rings is better controlled, smaller rings actually improve line flow and result in longer casting distance, less torque and more accuracy.

Russ and Luc,
I can’t imagine I am the only trout-to-tuna type on this site.
I hope I understand your question correctly. While I typically use lighter tackle than most to enhance the challenge of the fight, I would hardly employ 15lb gear while seeking 100lb tuna; getting spooled with braid would get expensive lol. I think guide choice and, even more importantly, guide placement to be the most important aspect to producing the best possible rod, whether a 1-4lb UL trout rod or a 100lb stand-up tuna stick. It is foolish to think guide placement is not as important on a very stout 100lb blank simply because that blank will be subjected to a considerable amount more force than an UL.
Proper static load guide placement is paramount for any and every rod to perform at its peak. Every blank will require different guide placement and the action of a blank may have the biggest influence. I am in the process of building a <20lb spinning rod, primarily for Calico but there is a good chance a 30lb + Yellowtail might take the hook as well. It is built on a vintage FG Conolon (extended 16in to achieve 7’6” overall) which is inherently full-flexing, all the way into the butt. Under full load during static load testing, I felt the line angle between the KL-H reduction guides was too much and “scrunched” them together by about 4in. which required the addition of an extra KB runner (talk about “Rapid Choke!). 9 guides is more than anticipated but the overall line path looks much better. This is the first spinning rod I have built for saltwater so I will have to see how it works. One way or the other, if a 30lb Yellowtail gets on, I will certainly have my hands full (I can only hope)!

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

Luc,
I cannot really answer what the “max line angle” would be for a spinning rod; I just use common sense (or possibly common “dense”) in my case. Under max static load, it is safe to say the reduction guides will produce a greater line angle than the runners, especially the runners closest to the tip. The majority of blanks today seem to be more in the “fast” action range and will probably not produce as much of a line angle through the reduction guides as would a medium or slow action. Just my non-veteran observations.

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