Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Simple Spiral, assuming you do understand what
> that is, is not a colossal failures in any sense
> of those words. It works perfectly fine.. It has
> no transition guides and offers a very straight
> line path, the only deviation is slipping by one
> side of the blank. It's the only one I use,
> although I think many of the others have their
> place as well.

'You' above = OP?

ben belote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i really love the simple spiral and don,t use the
> bumper so that i can swing the line around to the
> other side of the rod in case i get a line build
> up on one side of the reel spool..i simply run the
> line from the reel straight to the first 180
> guide..

And on this one we will have to disagree yet again.

In my opinion the 1909 patent for the Scanlan spiral wrapped rod is more advanced than the simple spiral. On the Scanlan patented idea the line never touches the blank- and that was in 1909. And yet today in 2021 we have the simple spiral wrap at the top of the recommendation list and without guides for use to keep the line OFF the blank. Say what?

Using airplanes for my analogy... the simple spiral is akin to a hot air balloon. The 1909 Scanlan patented spiral is akin to flying the Wright brothers plane. A Cagey Hook Wrap is akin to flying an F-18 with some sub orbital space available too!

I've been flying the F-18 spiral wraps for decades now, so why would I ever get into a time machine and jetison back in time to fly the most advanced technology of the time before Scanlan and fly a hot air balloon or simple spiral wrap?

In my opinion when new custom rod builders come asking about how to construct a good spiral wrapped fishing rod, why hand them the hot air balloon every time? Why not advise and suggest more advanced methods of spiral wrapping?

A well designed spiral guide system will not cause line stacking since the line flow is in alignment with the blank. No offset pulling to cause line to stack on one side of the reel. One might consider that the simple spiral is the reason for this to happen in the first place because the line side offset for the simple is more than is found in advanced methods.

And since when does a custom rod building rule become let the line rub the blank and all is great?

I know some of you may not like this opinion but the simple spiral should be removed from any recommendation lists unless the person is specifically looking for it. I don't think it should be at the top of any spiral wrap recommendations because doing so is negatively affecting their interests into spiral wraps. I read twice now on this forum in less than year where this has happened so why keep doing it over and over again?

In my opinion more advanced spiral wrapping should be at the top of the list and as the list goes down so should the level of spiral quality also go down with it. The F-18 should be at the top of the list, not the hot air balloon that keeps getting responses like "I have no faith in it" or "Colossal failure" or "does not seem right" and if this trend continues I will be able to accumulate more negative descriptions for the simple spiral.

Just imagine that! Who would have thought that the top of the line high tech greatest recommendation for a spiral wrapped fishing rod on a custom rod building forum is to build a rod where the line is pulled off to the side, rubs the blank, and makes angular bends and turns around the blank and through the guides from the reel to the rod.

One would think we advance in technology over time, but in spiral wrapping it is regression to pre-1900's era technology is preferred by some.

And the very issues being recommended in simple spiral wrap are the very ones I would have thought a custom rod building group would be opposed to! Like line rubbing the blank is now "good advice." And if your line stacks up on one side of the reel because you are pulling it sideways too much too fast that you simply move the line to the other side of the rod blank to now rub over there to correct the issue the simple spiral is more than likely to blame in the first place.

Simple spirals are not for me and I cringe when I read it being recommended on here. What Ben wrote here is just mind boggling to me...

ben belote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i really love the simple spiral and don,t use the
> bumper so that i can swing the line around to the
> other side of the rod in case i get a line build
> up on one side of the reel spool..i simply run the
> line from the reel straight to the first 180
> guide..

Ben, try flying an F-18 sometime. I think you would agree that going back to the hot air balloon era just don't cut it in 2021.

You can build a great performing spiral wrapped fishing rod without the unacceptable issues you say you love like line rubbing the blank on both sides, and line stacking. Unacceptable to me. And honestly I would not even call the simple spiral wrap a spiral wrap because it is NOT spiraling anything like the 1909 patent shows in the drawings. Going from top directly to bottom is not a spiral wrap. And it is not something I would ever build for myself or anyone else for that matter and I take credit for already changing a few members minds about spiral wrapping all based around their own experiences.

First they came here and were told to construct simple spirals. They did not like them so much they did not even use those rods and set them aside until one of them met me. I showed him what was possible and he quickly cut off the guides on a number of his simple spirals and learned my method and he cannot believe the difference and he said so on this forum. And there are others here as well who now get it.

I guess my whole rambling point is that the simple spiral if it is going to be recommended at all, it should be recommended along with other methods rather than this one single low-tech method being pushed on new members here over and over again who balk at it once they build it and try and use it.

We are supposed to be at the top of our game, not the bottom and that is where the simple spiral is. At the bottom. A blank line rubbing, line stacking low tech unpleasant unsatisfactory method of getting the line around the blank. Out of them all, the simple spiral has got to be the worst I have ever seen or experienced, and this is where custom rod building is at today? Line rubbing the blank is the best we can do?

Count me out! Beam me up Scotty! These people are butchers as Doc McCoy would say...

Spock would be flying the F-18!

ADDED:

When stock off the shelf fishing rods exceed the performance and quality of custom made, then you know you have a problem. And that is the case with this simple spiral idea.

On a custom rod forum it is top rated recommended to construct a simple spiral wraps where the line rubs the blank and the guides designed to keep the line off the blank are not fully utilized, and angular bends in the line flow are actually RECOMMENDED along with line stacking on the reel!

And would you believe it! Spiralite who builds commercial off the shelf generic spiral wrapped rods are far more advanced- a hundred years further than what is currently recommended in custom rod building.

It is NOT supposed to be this way! We are supposed to be on top and current. And we are supposed to leave lesser behind and reach for the greater. Not the other way around.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2021 09:13PM by Kent Griffith.

Where does the Simple Spiral fail? Use a rub prevention guide and the line won't touch the blank. Who are these people who came here and built them and then refused to use them? And it doesn't cause line stacking.

No one has pushed anyone to use it or any other method. They are all out there and available for rod builders to decide which one appeals to them the most.

........

The Simple Spiral has been my go-to system for all freshwater crankbait trolling rods for over 10 years now. It just plains works. And so what if the line rubs the blank? What does that hurt? I put a low frame bumper on that spot and now the line just touches that guide instead of the blank, dead in the bottom of ring as the SS teaches. It works. I have not had any problems with it and rods built that way cast fine too.

I'd be willing to discuss this in private.

And yes it is generally perceived when people ask about how to make a spiral wrapped rod here, the simple is most often recommended in my opinion, and its not working out well for some. And I am just bringing this point out into the open and asking that a change in this matter occur if possible.

In my opinion we build custom rods to enjoy our craft and hobby, but also to seek performance above and beyond what is offered in commercial off the shelf rods.

The simple spiral is not in alignment with the desires of a custom rod community seeking to advance and improve their science, techniques, and results.

The simple spiral is going in the opposite direction in my opinion and should be quietly allowed slip into the dust bins of history same as the buggy whip.

I think what we need in custom rod building is an accumulation of spiral wrapping knowledge and experience in one area so it can all be easily accessed by all who come here. As it stands right now, a newbie mostly gets comment recommendations from some guy online rather than finding a cohesive library of knowledge showing the advancements in the spiral methodology.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2021 09:24PM by Kent Griffith.

The Simple Spiral has been well received by tens of thousands in the custom rod building craft. It won't satisfy everyone but it does satisfy many. It is often recommended here precisely because so many use and like it.

The Revolver Spiral is likely the most popular spiral wrap method in use for all time. There are things about it I don't like, but that doesn't make it bad. For its intended purpose, it works and many like it.

The O"Quinn Spiral is perhaps the favorite of surf rod builders. They like it for what they do.

The library of spiral wrap methods is in RodMaker. We've done two articles that give an overview of just about every system that has come down the pike in the past 110 years. None are proclaimed the best or the only way - they are listed so that builders can utilize the one or ones they feel meets their needs the best.

...........

Mike Ballard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Simple Spiral has been my go-to system for all
> freshwater crankbait trolling rods for over 10
> years now. It just plains works. And so what if
> the line rubs the blank? What does that hurt? I
> put a low frame bumper on that spot and now the
> line just touches that guide instead of the blank,
> dead in the bottom of ring as the SS teaches. It
> works. I have not had any problems with it and
> rods built that way cast fine too.


Listen to what you are saying and in a custom rod community where we are supposed to build fishing rods better than off the shelf rods.

And Mike, an F-18 works too. But just because you like to fly old school hot air balloons does not mean this is what everyone else wants to fly every time some newbie shows up here asking about spiral wraps.

Put a hot rod F-18 spiral in your hands and you will forget all about the simple bend the line around the blank idea.

When something better is at your fingertips why in the world would anyone choose the lowest form of line around the blank when good methods are available?

Kent, sorry i didn,t know you had such strong feelings about spiral wraps..lol..first i,m not a custom rod builder..my rods are homemade for me not anyone else..some are gifted also..so far i have not had any line build up on my reel spools even though i run the line straight from the reel to the first 180 guide..i have been doing this for over fifteen years on my flipping rods without any wear on the rod at all, not even a hint..i did not say i was getting any stacking just that in case, i was ready..i have not yet had to move the line to the otther side of the rod..i just fish fresh water for lm bass and pan fish, nothing too big that taxes my tackle..and by the way i was not giving any advise, just saying how much i liked the Simple Spiral..if someone takes it as advise, that,s their problem..lol.

Uh, maybe because it works just fine? What I see in your posts is a guy that was rod building in a bubble somewhere and suddenly showed up with ideas from the 80's and thinks they are on the cutting edge. They are not. I read your system in a past issue of RodMaker. It is not new. There have been at least two or three similar if not identical spiral systems published in the past 10 or 20 years. It is not for me. What is it going to do better than the Simple Spiral for what I use it for? It won't cast better and it won't fight a fish any better. I know this as I have built them all. What is the end result that you think is better other than filling your self desired requirements? If you and others like it, use it. But it is not for me.

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Simple Spiral has been well received by tens
> of thousands in the custom rod building craft. It
> won't satisfy everyone but it does satisfy many.
> It is often recommended here precisely because so
> many use and like it.
>

Really? You know I have been around the custom rod building companies ever since they opened up here. My experience has been quite different. You will not find a simple spiral on display inside of MudHole showroom. But you will find more advanced spiral wraps in there on display made by the likes of Pat VinZant RIP.

I have never seen nor heard of the simple spiral until this forum and its members.

>
> The library of spiral wrap methods is in RodMaker.

But have you considered digitizing all of this? Right now it is available in stacks of paper to be purchased from you one by one or a few at a time, but if digitized and made available online to the whole world it might be of more widespread use- and might sell more if more people could find it. Stacks of magazines collecting dust in a warehouse don't get the word out. The WWW does it a lot faster and better.

It would be great to find one website with a list of methods dated chronologically quickly accessible at the push of a button.

So it is my hope that in the future more and more of your RodMaker magazines are digitized and offered online.

Mike Ballard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What is it going to do
> better than the Simple Spiral for what I use it
> for? It won't cast better and it won't fight a
> fish any better. I know this as I have built them
> all. What is the end result that you think is
> better other than filling your self desired
> requirements? If you and others like it, use it.
> But it is not for me.

If the line rubs the blank does this not add additional friction to line flow? So casting would be affected by line rubbing on the blank? And it will rub even harder when a big fish is on the line. That adds increased friction to reeling in the fish.

More advanced methods don't have these issues. But if you are happy with the simple spiral then enjoy it. But for some of us, we want more... and the simple spiral just don't cut it. It is not for me.

Mike Ballard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Uh, maybe because it works just fine?

Line rubbing the blank works just fine?

And you are happy with just fine?

Not for me.

Enjoy your 1890's hot air balloon rides!



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2021 10:11PM by Kent Griffith.

I won't offer the magazines online for a variety of reasons which I've outlined many times. In the meantime I don't think you understand the circulation of the magazine and just how many people it reaches.

I knew Pat and liked him very much. I don't believe his spiral wraps were any more advanced than anyone else's, just different.

You (or anyone) could certainly put together a list and overview of all the spiral systems, digitize them and make them available online. It would just take you a little time and some money.

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

I don't run a custom rod website and forum. So I am not the person to do such a thing.


I also got to know Pat in the years before he passed. He and I discussed spiral wraps and other, and I'd like to think that maybe I had a little influence on his spiral wraps made in his last years.

I look for his rods at MudHole every time I go in there. I seek out his few remaining custom rods still on display and just marvel at them as well as look for minute details in his spiral guide placements.

The sad thing about these last Pat VinZant custom rods remaining inside MudHole showroom is that we can never know what era they are from. We can only guess.

I was told the rods still on display will never be sold and are only there because Pat made them for customers who never paid for them. So they wound up inside MudHole on display to this day and are used in some of their corporate videos found online.

There is one rod in there I sure would like to have hanging on my wall! I don't think I could bring myself to actually using it since he passed. But it is one of the most advanced spiral wrapped rods I've seen from him.

The one thing I don't see in the rods is his willingness to stretch out the spiral like i do. Pat got around the blank pretty quickly and ran the 180's down below 50% of rod length, something I do not do any more.

RIP Pat!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2021 10:08PM by Kent Griffith.

That's the problem for those of us who do - there is only so much time and money to go around.

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

So when you retire what will happen to all that data?

RodMaker should be in the National Archives!

Digitizing is the only way to go in this day and age.

Sell that data!

Have any strength tests compared the breaking point [in pounds / ounces] between rods with guides built on spine versus those built ignoring spine? If there is no significant difference why spend time worrying about, finding, and building on spine? I always wondered: When people who believe that spine is important cast or pull on a fish or on a snag do they take care to align the direction of the pull on the rod with the spine on the rod, and rotate the rod to keep spine aligned with the load on the rod?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2021 10:18PM by Phil Ewanicki.

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> If there is no significant difference why
> spend time worrying about, finding, and building
> on spine?

Well if you had read the thread you would have read "building on the spine is for CASTING ACCURACY ONLY." Gary Loomis, er, God said so!

You are late to the party! What took you so long?

Nothing like a good spine thread again! Gotta keep those newbs straight.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2021 10:15PM by Kent Griffith.

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have any strength tests compared the breaking
> point [in pounds / ounces] between rods with
> guides built on spine versus those built ignoring
> spine? If there is no significant difference why
> spend time worrying about, finding, and building
> on spine? I always wondered: When people who
> believe that spine is important cast or pull on a
> fish or on a snag do they take care to align the
> direction of the pull on the rod with the spine on
> the rod, and rotate the rod to keep spine aligned
> with the load on the rod?

Yes these type tests have been done: [www.rodbuilding.org]


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

Kent: Got it! So whether highly accurate casters cast side-arm or overhead these casters rotate their hand along with the rod handle so their hand and the spine will be exactly parallel with the plane of the rod. The thumb of their casting hand must align with and be parallel to the spine and direction of the cast. Otherwise the cast would fly off target!I I never thought to look for this detail for all these years.

Ya, sure ya didn't!