To previous comment: No, you did not because first of all you did not get what I was saying. You came up with something else out of it and responded with your mistaken understanding of it in an emotional angry way.

"This is why I said and still think you are trolling this message board just for your own fun. If you are not then please provide me with the law of physics that would cause a rod blank being cast along a certain plane to suddenly turn off onto another plane and send the lure in a different direction."

Suddenly? This is why I can't take you seriously because you did not grasp what I said, and invented your own misunderstanding of it and then lashed out unprovoked calling me a troll 2 or 3 times among other negative statements so why should I or anyone else respond to you if you cannot control your anger?

This is the last time I will try and explain it for you.

A lot of rods with prominent spines have sides that they bend to easiest and sides that are stiffer and the difference goes around the blank in varying degrees of strength or weakness.

When you find the soft side by spining methods, build on it straight up as Gary advises in video.

When you backswing cast into loading a rod with the sweet spot straight up, Gary says the rod will load straight into it and cast straight out of it, and this way the rod is balanced.

If you build on a blank and the spine is not straight up and is offset to one side or the other, this means the builder is creating a rod with an embalance of power distribution in the blank. So if you held the rod out in front of you as if fishing, looking down a the rod, from the center line from butt to tip, if the spine is offset, then you are looking at a rod with a stronger left side or weaker left side, and the reverse for the other side.

Now when you backswing an unspined, unbalanced rod into the backswing, with the weakest side now located off to one side or the other by say 15 degrees, when you backswing to load up that rod will it load STRAIGHT back into the sweet spot? Nope. The rod blank cannot and will not move that way. In the backswing load up the rod will flow to the weakest side. This is a given. And the effect is variable up to the tip increasing as it gets closer to the tip which deflects the most of any part of the rod for obvious reasons.

When you try and bend something in a way it does not want to bend, it will try and go sideways towards the easier path of least resistance. And the backswing cast is no different.

If you listen to Gary and what he says about the spine and how the rod loads up into it straight is the key, and out of it straight is the key in a well balanced rod when the blanks wall power is evenly distributed rather unevenly distributed.

So basically what I said was if you build a rod off the spine, when you backswing into the load up of a cast, the rod will not flow straight back into the weakest spot because that spot is now off to the side and so the rod tip especially and varying degrees of more rod blank further down will tend to skew off to one side or the other based on where that weak spot is in the build.

You have to realize that there is nothing in the world to stop the rod tip from skewing sideways into its own weak side. You throw the rod backwards and it bends how it WANTS to bend. Put the weak side where it is supposed to be and balance out the rod and all is better. Put the weak side off to the side and rod is no longer power balanced, and casts will tend to skew sideways.

Reverse engineer Gary Loomis words and you get the same thing. He says a properly spined rod is balanced, and will load straight into the weak spot and straight out of it. Now if you "listen" to what Gary did not say... if the rod is not spined and the spine is offset from center, then it won't load straight in and straight out.

Did you ever have a rod that when you cast it, you knew you cast it straight ahead but the lure went off to one side or the other in the same way on each cast. I think this is directly related to my comment above and is why spining is important.

The skewing to the weak side is not a sudden turn. I never said that. It starts the second the rod is forced into the backswing load up and reaches its maximum right at the stopping point before the return unloading of the rod.

How hard is it for people to grasp that an object has ways it wants to bend and ways it does not want to bend? And when you try and force an object to bend against a way it does not want to bend, how hard is it to grasp that this rod will flow naturally away from the stiff side and towards the weak spot on the rod where ever the builder put it.

This is absolutely key 101 Gary Loomis for all of his rods for his entire career. And I'm the bad guy for not explaining it well and deserving of words directed at me negatively. Unacceptable. I did nothing wrong.

And I will say it again, this is a forum for casual discussion. Getting angry over talking about fishing rods and turning on each other is unacceptable to me. This is why people leave.

And Tom thanks for your moderation post. I have no problem with good refutations if one can do it. But I do have a problem when people get angry and lash out especially unprovoked. That is NOT refutation.

Troll over and out.


ben belote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i think someone is shilling for spine finder
> manufacturers..lol..modern rods have so little
> spine it,s not worth locating much less being
> concerned about.

You know Ben that is a great point!

I buy the older vintage rods NOS. They have softer action than today's stiff rods. And on those, spining is a must, but by hand.

So no, I am not hawking spine finding tools. Heck i do not even have one. Don't need it.

But when the new book comes out along with the new T.A.D. finder I might reconsider!



Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 10/06/2021 04:15AM by Kent Griffith.

Kent, there are more who think like you do but it is just not worth the argument to try and change minds. I was fortunate to have a Legend of rod building for a teacher many years ago who also was a friend of Don's. I was introduced to Don Morton many years ago at a Duck River gathering where he gave a seminar on spine. I was fascinated with his teachings and off hand I know of no other builder who spends more time with spine than him and can explain it better than anyone on par with Gary. I also believe in building for function first and foremost but also think you can build for function and artistic looks. Live and let live are what a lot of spine builders do.

Mike Ballard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kent - I flat out gave you the physical reasons
> that what you are saying cannot happen. Please
> look into the physics of 'lever arms" and
> "inertia.'
>
> Now I am positive you are just trolling everybody
> here......

You are just plain wrong. Just because you want to make it so, does not mean it is so.

I have participated and contributed my opinions freely and without emotion and without doing to you or anyone else what you are doing to me. It is wrong.

You, have issues and I would like to now block you from sight on this forum. have a good one.

Tom, does this forum have the block member option? This guy is out of line in my opinion and I do not want to be in contact with a problem like this. Forums should be free from this sort of thing.

Terry Kirk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kent, there are more who think like you do but it
> is just not worth the argument to try and change
> minds.

> I was introduced to Don Morton
> many years ago at a Duck River gathering where he
> gave a seminar on spine. I was fascinated with
> his teachings and off hand I know of no other
> builder who spends more time with spine than him
> and can explain it better than anyone on par with
> Gary.


Yes its true. Don does spend a lot of time on it and is writing a new book about it. He researched out a new way of finding it as well as a new tool to find it. Time to see how he is doing.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/06/2021 03:52AM by Kent Griffith.

Mike has not broken any of the forum rules, nor have you.


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

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mike has not broken any of the forum rules, nor
> have you.
>

I suppose I interpret the rules differently.

"Rules - Rod building is a decent and rewarding craft. Those who participate in it are assumed to be civilized individuals who are kind and considerate in their dealings with others. Please respond to others in the same fashion in which you would like to be responded to. Registration IS NOW required in order to post. You must include your actual First and Last name and a correct email address when registering or posting. Posts which are inflammatory, insulting, or that fail to include a proper name and email address will be removed and the persons responsible will be barred from further participation."


1)Those who participate in it are assumed to be civilized individuals who are kind and considerate in their dealings with others. Please respond to others in the same fashion in which you would like to be responded to.

I do not agree that his personal comments are the same as I respond to him.

2)Posts which are inflammatory, insulting, or that fail to include a proper name and email address will be removed and the persons responsible will be barred from further participation."

Hmmm... inflammatory and insulting. Its right there as I see it. The man has been personally attacking me, his posts are inflammatory as well as insulting.

i would like for it to stop. I do not do this to others and I won't tolerate it being done to me.

I stayed strictly on topic and did not direct any words to provoke his comments. he wanted to get mad just because he is not on the same page as others and it seems to bother him that others have opinions he does not like. Tough. Too bad. Leave me alone with the personal attacks.

The rules are in place to encourage civil participation, not let bullies stomp on others because of disagreements.

***Everyone here should notice that discussion here on this thread has been halted, and on the rest of the forum postings have also dropped because when one or more people lose their cool and start turning any sort of negative words towards other members is when a mistake is being made that will discourage participation. The only way forums can function is if such behavior is controlled. This is just fishing gear. NONE of us should ever get mad at another member for differences of opinion. If you do, may I suggest to walk away before posting negative words towards other members.

I, like Tom here, have owned my own forum now since the mid 1990's. I now have nearly 25 years of admin forum experience. I have run numerous forums as top admin same as Tom here. If anyone is interested, it is a forum for discussion on music, focusing on regional Southern music, and more specifically for Lynyrd Skynyrd and other bands and artists- a lot of whom I was fortunate to work with or for over decades in live sound engineering. Another great source of info as well as rare and unreleased music. Its called Skynyrd Frynds on proboards.

Here is a link to one of the books I have contributed to: [www.google.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/07/2021 08:58AM by Kent Griffith.

Kent - you cannot claim that your statements follow the laws of physics when in fact they flat out contradict those same laws and principles. If you would take just ten minutes to look up the definitions and explanations of lever arms and inertia you would learn that what you are saying is just not possible. I am no genius but know a little about physical laws and your statements make it impossible for me to take you seriously. This is why I said and still think you are trolling this message board just for your own fun. If you are not then please provide me with the law of physics that would cause a rod blank being cast along a certain plane to suddenly turn off onto another plane and send the lure in a different direction.

Nothing in my posts has been mean or nasty. You claim a law of physics to back your statements but have yet to provide it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/05/2021 05:53PM by Mike Ballard.

Terry Kirk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kent, there are more who think like you do but it
> is just not worth the argument to try and change
> minds.

I know. I know. I know. Nothing any of us can do about it but thanks so much for this comment.

I'd just like to say that I never try and make someone change their mind. All I can do is provide information and let others make up their own minds, but sometimes there are those who go off the rails over the slightest thing and ruin the discussion for all.

For some reason I seem naturally good at pushing people's buttons. Its a gift I suppose or a curse.

Thanks again.

A true spiral wrap would have to take the line path completely around the blank before it exits the tiptop. Lol I agree with many of the things said here, but have no Idea which ones anymore!

Mike, Please lay off the "troll" comments. They're not necessary to make your point.

Kent, You have made some very bold claims on a forum that hosts many very intelligent people. You have to expect some to refute them.

Otherwise everybody play nice.

.......

Tom,

To revisit the post you made at 7:56pm last night before all this went crazy, I just wanted to say that my initial effort at spiral wrapping was in no way simple. I attempted to create a spiral wrap using American Roller guides, which was suggested to me and was felt to be the best guide for the spiral wrap on the Phenix 700X3H blank I was using. I received the guides and a lot of paperwork along with a printout of a compass to help with setting the angle of the guides. I spent a LOT of time on it and it almost made me crazier than I probably already am. I had the stripper guide badly positioned right out of the gate, tried it on the boat and just racked the rod, shipped it back home, stripped it, and refitted it with Fuji HB's. Looks good now and I'm confident it will fish fine. The Calstar I'm working on right now is my 2nd effort and would have been a "simple spiral" until I let the guides position themselves as related in an earlier post. So I have two rods with roughly the same characteristics other than the way they are wrapped. I'm anxious to see how they compare. I do understand the simple spiral theory and intend to incorporate it on some upcoming freshwater builds. As you have said, the physics speak for themselves. Hopefully I'll hook up on something in a couple of weeks that will verify what I think I already know.

Dave

David,

The American Roller guides do require precise locations on the blank in order to work. Spiral wrapping roller guides is always a challenge, even those that are purpose built for the job.

I know several builders who champion the method of allowing the guides (not rollers) to shift/spin to their own desired locations as the blank is loaded. We've run at least two if not three articles on that method in the past 24 years. I'd say you'll be fine. You just have to pick the system that appeals to you, and works at doing what you need done.

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

Tom,

I've been building rods since 1975. The best quote I ever read on this site was one builder who said that "every rod I build is a prototype". Lots of truth in that. Like many, I constantly think about what if's and what I can do better. When it isn't fun or challenging any more, I'll just walk away.

I'm sorry that this has snowballed so badly. I can't believe when I was looking for a sense of direction for a small problem that it would generate such a firestorm.

I sincerely appreciate all your efforts with maintaining this site and the advice you've provided as I'm sure others do as well.

Dave Sytsma

David,

It hasn't really been a firestorm. If people provide ideas and comments back and forth that's what this forum is all about. I'm sure some picked up some new ideas.

..........

My response was the 6th post on the thread. .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/06/2021 12:41AM by John DeMartini.

So, in conclusion The World is Flat! Or is it?

Drew, just stay in the middle, don,t go near the edge..lol.

David S.

Continual improvement is what keeps me so passionate about this craft. There are always improvements to make and anglers are always looking for something different to give them an edge. And we have to find the best way to give that to them.

As far as this thread taking off, I see it as a good thing. This craft involves a lot of science and science is meant to be questioned and challenged. Some of the best information in the last year has come from long drawn out posts that slowly steered away from the topic. We have even managed to take a "marketing jargon" post and create positive dialogue from it. This is why I enjoy and read every post here. No matter how asinine or trivial a topic may present itself, there is usually some good thought provoked by the members here. I try my best to engage where possible and sometimes as a "devil's advocate" to provoke thought and create a positive discussion. This forum is a magical place and I attribute a lot of that to the removal of anonymity.

TLDR; Sometimes a good snowball can create an avalanche of thought.

Kent, i just want to add that i like your version of the spiral wrap and would use it if i liked mon or flouro type lines because of the straight path but i,m a fiberglass fan and use braided line to restore rod sensetivity..with braid i can place the butt guide closer to the reel..the softer braid has no problem making the sharper turn on the cast with no loss of casting distance like mono would..with braid i can get the line to the bottom and the torque out of the way in one fell swoop..i think this makes for a more sensetive rod allowing vibrations to travel down without fighting rod torque so much and the torque is spread out over the larger stronger butt area..stay well.

How does one determine the "accuracy" of a fishing pole? Do you: (1) Argue that a certain guide placement will result in the greatest accuracy or (2) Test cast a blank with various guide placements and actually MEASURE which (if any) guide placement provides the greatest accuracy? The crowd which prefers to shun measurements and argue seems to prevail. It's the rod builder's version of the "big one that got away" syndrome: loads of fun to discuss but of no practical value.