Hello,

My first post here. I tie flies and the pandemic has 'driven' or perhaps 'guided' me to rod building. I have build two rods (6wt fly and 6' light spinning) and looking to diver deeper in! So, thanks in advance.

I am interested in short spinning rods which are my preference when jigging for Walleyes. I am looking at the Arctos ASJ691, which is a ML 5'9". Pac Bay doesn't provide spacing recommendations for the Arctos rods and all the guide spacing charts don't address this non-standard length. Any recommendations or resources anyone could point out?

Thanks.

Chris Baker

[anglersresource.net]

I would start there if you want KR layout.

The library button on the top bar has useful information on static guide placement for runners. [www.rodbuilding.org]

A.P.

Chris,
2X Aaron’s reply. You will undoubtedly have more questions and there are many members willing to help you; all you have to do is ask. There is no such thing as a dumb question, only dumb ignorance.

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

The Arctos blanks are a high modulus blank and this particular blank is well suited for the Microwave Guide system from American Tackle. The Microwave system is an excellent choice for lighter spinning applications and come in multiple finishes (Chrome, Black & TiON) Microwave guides sets come with specific spacing for the first 3 guides from the reel seat and suggested spacing for the rest of the running guides measured from the tip. Start by taping the guides on the blank and run a line through the guides. With a heavy weight (or an immovable object) tied on the end of the line, lift the rod to see how the line bends at each guide - this is called a static test. If the angles at each guide are approximately the same, then look at each gap to see how far the line is from the blank between the guides - if the line is too far from the blank, then you need to add one or more running guides into the train. When you have a spacing and number of guides that meet both of these considerations, give it a practice test cast - that will be the proof of the pudding for your guide placement.

As a general rule, guide spacing charts can only be used as a starting point, as custom rod builders can opt for handle and reel seat options that change the distance from the reel to the first guide, thereby affecting the efficiency of the first (or sometimes called "Stripper") guide. If you do use a spacing chart, also do the static test described above and adjust accordingly for a guide train that casts well and utilizes the entire blank evenly without any points where the load is disproportionately heavy.

Richard basically offered good advice, especially “guide spacing charts can only be used as a starting point”. MicroWave guides vs Fuji KR Concept will remain a hotly-contested debate; in the end, they both work; Richard likes MW, I prefer KRC.
With all due respect to Richard, his single-line static load test for guide placement is not as accurate, if not misleading, compared to the two-line static test. With a single line running through the guides and serving to both load the blank and view path / angles, the blank is forced into an unnatural bend dependant on where the guides are placed. To load the blank naturally, independent of anything else, a separate line affixed to the tip top is used to load the blank while a second, separate line is run through the guides with only enough minimal weight added to straighten-out the line to view the path / angles. No matter what brand, type or size of guides, the two-line static test for placement will produce a perfect guide train.
With more information on reel size, line type and size, I can suggest a Fuji KR Concept (KL-H, KB, KT) guide spacing that will be pretty dang close to what the static test reveals.

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

I would put the first guide at 19 inches, and put the remaining 5 guides where they are needed to keep the line following the contour of the loaded blank.

This is exactly the same method that I use with any rod that I am building.

Best wishes.

Thanks for the quick replies. Glad to see this is an active forum with lively debate. I have seen both the MicroWave guides and the Fuji KR. I have to admit I have the Fuji's in the online shopping cart but will have to take another look at the MW for the future. In my first two builds I just took the guide spacing from a chart and haven't tired the static test. I will have to give that a go on this next project.

Chris

Mark Talmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
"> With more information on reel size, line type and
> size, I can suggest a Fuji KR Concept (KL-H, KB,
> KT) guide spacing that will be pretty dang close
> to what the static test reveals."

Mark I would take you up on this, it would be nice to have something to compare the static test to. The reel will be a Shimano 1000 - low to mid range model opposed to a stella etc - if weight makes a difference. Line will be 6 or 8 lb mono/flouro. If I said light test braid, would that make a difference?

Thanks.

Chris

With that information, a Fuji KR concept will work quite well. With a 1000 size reel with 6-8 lb mono (or light braid) I would use a reduction train consisting of a KL16H, KL8H, and KL5.5M, followed by KB/KT runners in the size of your choice, with a matching LG tip top. I mostly use size 4.5 or 5 runners, you could certainly go to size 4 runners with no problems. I use one or two KB guides following the reduction guides. The stripper will be placed about 19” in front of the reel spool, and the choke guide (first runner guide) about 19-21” in front of the stripper. The choke guide can be moved in or out a little to get the spacing you like. For your rod I would use 7 or 8 guides total. Basically to get a good starting point you place the stripper and choke guide then progressively place the other two reduction guides between them, then progressively place the remaining running guides between the choke guide and the the tip top. When you get things positioned to your liking, then do a static test to fine tune the spacing. All a static test does is to insure that the line smoothly follows the curve of the blank when the blank is under a load so to properly distribute the load along the blank. In my opinion the KR GPS doesn’t do a good job with short rods, it makes the reduction train a little to short with non progressive spacing, and does not use enough running guides. Here is a tentative 7 guide spacing layout I have used with a 5’9” spinning rod I recently made. The distance from the rod butt to the front of the spool was about 11-11.5”.
The distances are in cm from the tip top.
10, 21, 33.5, 47.5 (choke), 63, 80, 99 (stripper). This should give you a good starting point with progressive spacing that should give a good static test and cast very well. I use the metric system because it is so much easier to use than working with fractions of an inch. If you want to use 8 guides you can try the following layout.
9, 18.5, 28.5, 39.5, 52 (choke), 66, 82, 100. This places an extra guide in the tip section, if needed.
If you have any questions let us know. Hope this helps.
Norm

Chris,
Phil gives good info, a guide spacing chart only works if you use the same components as the person making the chart. If they use a 6 inch rear grip and you use an 8 inch right off the bat you're off two inches on the stripper guide spacing.

Chris,
There is no need for me to continue because Norman has said it all. He is the KRC Guru ( and Jim Ising of course) and also my mentor, so I would just be repeating what he said. Thanks for saving my fingers, Norman!!! I build all my ULs using the 16H, 8H, 5.5M reduction guides. Although a bit unorthodox, I use as many KBs as the diameter of the blank will allow because of their stouter foot. If you think there is a possibility of ever using heavier mono / fluoro (10-12lb), stepping-up the reduction guides to 20H, 10H, 5.5M will add that versatility without compromising too much for the lighter lines.
Any spacing suggestion I would give you would ONLY be suggestions for a starting point and shouldn’t be considered for “comparison” against the 2-line static load test. Norman’s spacing suggestions should be considered in the same fashion. While I am confident his or mine would be pretty dang close, the static test will prescribe the optimum position for your particular blank. Even two “identical” blanks of the same make and model can / will have different optimum guide positions.

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

Good info on GPS data for shorter rods. That is usually my first step followed by the two line static test.

This will assist me in my Phenix 5'6" Elixir build next month.

Yep, Norman is most definitely the spinning rod guide guru ..... I would just say that you mentioned fluorocarbon line. With a 1000 size reel. You're going to have to use one of, if not the most supple fluorocarbon line you can find. I have a lot of experience with fluorocarbon line on spinning gear, and this is just my personal opinion, but with a 1000 series reel, unless you are a talking about using 4# test, I wouldn't consider any of the fluorocarbon lines. Reason being, the extremely supple fluorocarbon lines are really nothing more than more expensive nylon mono filament lines. And you're going to need a supple line, with that size reel.

The stretch and abrasion resistance of the very supple fluorocarbon lines are basically what a quality nylon line would have. Knot strength isn't going to be what you would get out of nylon line, either.

I use fluorocarbon line as the main line on all of my spinning gear. I use Seaguar Tatsu exclusively. For me and what I am looking for out of a line, is has the best combination of properties on the market. And even though Tatsu handles extremely well on spinning gear for a fluorocarbon line, it's still more stiff than a quality nylon mono. Since I believe that spool diameter plays a huge role in using fluorocarbon line on spinning gear, I use either 2500 or 3000 series Shimano reels on my spinning rods.

I use between 6 and 10# test line. When I put my information in the KR GPS, I use 10 - 14 mono for line choice, because of the stiffness of fluorocarbon compared to nylon. I use KR concept guide trains and use a KL-H 20, KL-H10, and KL-H 5.5M for the reduction train. I know spool size has a lot to do with the KR GPS calling out those guide sizes, but my using the higher test mono bumps the guide sizes up. While the KR concept may have been designed with braided line in mind, it works great with fluorocarbon if you bump the reduction train guide sizes up a bit.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2022 07:32AM by David Baylor.

Thanks guys for the replies and Norman for all that detail – and saving Marks fingers. I am going to use your suggestion to make my purchase and am excited to get started. Naturally this has raised a few questions. The number of guides and size Norman indicated is a bit different than commercially available rods and the guide spacing charts. They seem to include/recommend larger size and less number of guides. I have my assumptions as to why but I will keep this short. So, why are smaller and more guides a better option or why do commercial rods/charts recommend less and larger guides? Also, since we are on this topic, how does this apply to fly rods (my true passion, its just easier to jig for walleyes).

Not to answer for Norman, but commercial rods are built with the general public in mind. They're built to work with various size reels and different sizes and types of line. Because of that, they generally use larger guides because larger guides are more accepting of different reel sizes and line types.

As far as the number of guides on a factory rod goes. Factory rods are built more with cost effectiveness in mind, than they are performance. Fewer guides result in lower building costs.

As far as the guide sizes that Norman recommended goes. They are a different type guide. The KL-H is a high frame match guide type of guide. It's more than likely that the guides on factory rods are a Y or A frame type of guide. Those guides have shorter frames, so to gain height, they use a larger ceramic ring. Which results in the guide train weighing a lot more than a KR concept guide train. Lighter guides equals much better rod performance.

Go to the Angler's Resource link on this page and read about the KR concept and you'll understand its' benefits.

Anyhow ... welcome to rod building. It is a lot of fun. And once you get into it, very eye opening.

I appreciate Mark Talmo's comments and response to my earlier post. I was unaware of the 2-line static test and can instantly see the advantages. Even an old dog can learn new tricks! How did I not know this after 53 years of rod-building!!

Thanks, Mark!!

Richard,
Thankfully, you were not offended by me down-playing your single line static test in favor of the 2-line method. Others may have considered it insubordinate. You obviously keep an open-mind and accept and implement new ideas, even if different than what you have been doing for years. Unfortunately, for them, many others do not.
I have only been building rods for 6+ years and learned of the 2-line static test (and a wealth of other information) on this site. It is referred to quite often so I am surprised you have missed it. But now that you have it, rest assured your guide trains will be precisely positioned.
By the way, I am envious of you; I wish I would have started building rods when you did!

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

Thanks David, that all makes sense and thanks everyone for responses and discussion. I will post my progress or when its done.

Mark,

You may be envious of my experience, but don't be envious of my 70+ year old body! I just returned from my Cardio Rehab session a little while ago!

FYI - I never take offense when someone disagrees with me, as we can both learn from the dialogue if we keep an open mind and leave emotions out of the equation.

With regard to static testing, it was not noted in any of the literature when I began wrapping rods. My primary education source was Dale Clemon's "Fiberglass Rod Making" picked up at Shoff's Sporting Goods in Kent, Washington. I found a Fenwick Graphite "second" in a bin (for $5) and picked up the book, cork, guides, thread, and whatever else I would need, spending less than $30 in total. Graphite was a new rod material back then, and I wanted to try it out! I fished that rod for 30+ years, and was heartbroken when if went into the Deschutes River, never to be seen again! Dale's book had numerous guide spacing charts, but did not mention static testing. I does however does have a short description that could be the origin of the test, but it only concentrates on making sure the line does not touch the blank under load.

Up until 10 or so years ago, my primary test was to guestimate the spacing, tape on the guides, and practice cast. This worked well for me, but since I learned to "Static Test", my rods have only gotten better casting! I hope this newfound knowledge will again improve my craft!

Rich Bowers

Mark,
You made a comment about using a guide with a stouter guide foot on a lot of your builds.

I wonder why?

Have you ever in all of your builds ever had a guide foot bend or fail due to force from a fish while casting, playing and landing a fish?

I never have and would find it difficult to believe that that could ever happen such that the line would break much sooner than a guide would ever bend.

But, maybe you have had such guides bend before and I would be curious as to the incident.

Take care