I may have had a problem with too many guides on a 7" light fast tip casting rod. I like using "too many" guides. On this build I used 9 plus the tip double footed guides. The rod broke at the front of third guide from the tip while landing a smallish speckled trout. I'm not sure, but I think it broke because of the wrap coupled with the double foot stiffened the blank too much at a very sensitive portion of the blank. Maybe one less guide would have prevented it. It was a real drag because it was a donated and @#$%& item that brought $450 for a high school benefit. I did make the purchase good with an identical rod, with one less guide. So far so good.

Breakage was probably due to high sticking. It would have happened no matter the number of guides used or how they were positioned. In my experiences high sticking results in a break almost exactly where you described. Explain to the person what high sticking is and how to prevent it.
Norm

It seems that the number of guides one uses is very subjective, even when doing a static load test. For a 6’10” KR drop shot rod I use 9 guides total, 3 reduction guides and 6 running guides. Two more running guides then suggested by the KRGPS. To me it gives a nice progressive guide layout, a good static test, and casts well. Different stokes for different folks, and that’s fine. I also like the two line static test just because it’s easier to fine tune guides, but again that just me.
Norm

When I was working on KR GPS we actually discussed the addition of the extra running guide that seems to be "missing" from the readout. It was a cost consideration to leave it out. I'm confident the prescribed number will do the job but I will now admit publically that I always add one to my results. In size 6 or below...it can't hurt!

good stuff Jim..do i hear rod length plus three guides..lol..actually i use three more guides more often than two mainly for better hook sets and better fish control..

Definitely not high sticking. I witnessed the break. Could it have been the physics of the double foot not allowing the fast tip to gradually bend? Thats 3/4" of a thin tip not being allowed to bend gradually. Instead, that 3/4" was straight and stiff at a critical section of there blank.

I think the double-foot stiff section break is unlikely. Not sure I have ever seen that. More likely a burr on the foot scored the blank in a very delicate narrow tip...or something along those lines. IMO. Or an earlier "ding" at that point.

Or the blank could have been previously damaged by striking something. I don't believe the difference between a single and double foot guide can cause a failure. If it was not high sticking, then previous damage is the most likely cause.

I wouldn’t make the claim that David’s approach is wrong. It might be better than the one I used. I saw, while trying to figure out my build, that Rainshadow’s recipe was twelve guides. The GPS system recommended a total of eight. I looked at similar G. Loomis and St. Croix factory rods that I’ve owned for years and they had eight. I saw one similar factory rod with seven. Static loading showed reasonable angles with the total of eight (four running guides), if they were placed to work with the bending characteristics of the blank. A really deep bending of the blank will change this, though. I’d probably choose his build for when a maximum sized smallmouth is diving under the boat. I hope that my build makes it easier to hookup on more of them, but I don’t know this for sure. I’m so nascent on building spinning rods that I’m paying close attention to results. If my rod breaks (highly unlikely), I can blame Jim.

Read everyone's replies and definitely some things I'm going to have to experiment with. I totally over looked the fact that the rod guides contribute to hook setting power. Makes a lot of sense, just not one of those things I would have thought about.

I'm curious as to how long the "general rule" of the length of the rod in feet, plus one, for the number of guides needed on a rod, has been around? I know it's more than 30 years old, as I have been seeing it mentioned for at least that long. Things have changed drastically since then. At least when it comes to spinning rod guide trains.

Even before I had any idea of what static load guide placement was, I never thought my factory rods had enough guides. I would see how my factory spinning rods flexed when under pressure, and it looked like they were being over stressed between guides. When I would put my factory casting rods into a deep flex, the line would pass below the blank between guides. I now know that those blanks were definitely being over flexed between guides.

As far as the number of running guides the KR GPS suggests ...... no offense Jim, but leaving a guide (or 2) out because of cost considerations coming from a company like Fuji, is IMO, pretty weak reasoning. Even if you're talking Torzite, we're talking less than $14 for one KT 10. And if you're using Torzite, cost probably isn't part of your consideration. I don't know .... perhaps the number of guides recommended for a rod, is based strictly on casting performance?

While we're on the subject ... there is something that Kendall brought up, that I have always been curious about. And that is, how deeply do you flex the blank when setting up for static load guide placement? Personally, I flex it as if I were doing a CCS test for IP. In fact, I do IP and AA measurements for the rod before I start positioning the guides. Anyhow .... something that doesn't make sense to me, is doing static load in stages, like the static load article in the library suggests. Why wouldn't you just go to the full flex of the blank and place your guides where needed?

I could understand if we were talking about using a smaller drill bit to drill a pilot hole, before using a larger bit to finish the process. The added step of drilling a pilot hole makes it easier, and in a lot of cases, faster. I can't say the same about doing static load, in stages.

GPS recommends a full complement of guides. A number that will support the bend of the rod and be lightweight and cast well. The "extra" guide we are discussing here is a debate that "crazies" (said with great affection) like this group enjoy talking about. And, you would be shocked how often we have to field accusations that "Fuji just wants to sell more guides" when we suggest adding another guide. It matters a lot to many builders.

The 90-degree bend is considered a top position for rod power. Positioning guides to work well in this position is logical but certainly not essential. The rod travels through every possible bend configuration in every fish-fight you ever get into. You have to pick a bend - why not make it the one that puts max pressure on the fish?

Jim, I have no problem at all believing that you have to deal with accusations of Fuji just wanting to sell more guides. I see that kind of comment on other fishing related web sites I belong to, all the time. Not directed towards Fuji, but at other manufacturers. The most famous of which would be, Gary Yamamoto and the Senko.

Did you know that Yamamoto purposefully makes Senko's less durable, just so they can sell more of their high priced baits? It has nothing to do with the make up of the bait, and what that make up results in. It's just about the money they can get from us stupid fisherman that think we have to be using them, or we won't catch any fish. lol BTW, there are other ways of getting a Senko in the generic sense, to weigh the same as the original, and be more durable. But it's way more costly than salt.

Anyhow .... I absolutely love the KR GPS. It does an awesome job of getting the line from the reel, to the choke guide. After that, count me as one of the crazies that like to talk about the need for that extra guide or two. lol



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/09/2022 04:40PM by David Baylor.

yeah...me too.

Fortunately I worked long distance with Jim when the GPS system was introduced gathering reel information from different manufacturers to be loaded into the GPS system. That being said a few factors I consider when building a 7ft medium lite spinning rod is the reel that will be used and the length of the handle from the back of the reel seat. Going from a 8.5 inch to an 11inch grip will reduce the number of guides I use by 1. Then with the known reel and GPS inputs usually puts the stripper from 17 to 20 inches from the front of the seat. That difference will again reduce the number of guides by 1. So if I was originally going to use 12 guides plus the tip, that reduction in guides puts me at 10 guides plus the tip. I am using the number of guides as an example. As lite as our guides have become now days I have no trouble using more guides. When the rod is loaded fighting a fish I personally like the weight distribution of the extra guides. For example, on a 7ft 10in XXHM rod for large swim baits I will use 14 guides plus the tip, and customers have had no problems.

Yeah, me three! O-rings are great for holding the guides on the blank while the two line stress test is done. Guides can be repositioned with absolute ease. I have not "taped a guide on" for a very long time, and never will again. Wacky o-rings will work for larger dia. blank areas.

When we first published GPS (NGC) I intended to build a much larger library of reels with the help of the rod building community. Because everyone was a little skeptical to begin with, I got very few reel measurements from the field. If you have measured a reel, layed it out according to results and it performed as well as expected, I would love to have the A, B, C measurements so I could add the reel to the library. Be sure to include model number etc on the reel. Mail to info@anglersresource.net

Herb:

Thanks for the O-ring tip. It will save me time and trouble. I worry about guide numbers as well as guide placement - looking for the minimum number of guides without degrading casting performance. The O rings will simplify and speed my efforts.

Jim Ising Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> The 90-degree bend is considered a top position
> for rod power. Positioning guides to work well in
> this position is logical but certainly not
> essential. The rod travels through every possible
> bend configuration in every fish-fight you ever
> get into. You have to pick a bend - why not make
> it the one that puts max pressure on the fish?

That is a good question. When I am using a spinning rod, I am seldom in the “maximum pressure” scenario. I usually choosing to hold anything else when ultimate power is the objective. Even with your wonderful Torzite guides, I got my best balance and grip length combination by going with rod length plus one. I build rods for myself that I probably wouldn’t build for customer sales as I have caught a wide variety of saltwater and anadromous fish in current, under boat, just above waterfall, and mangrove type of situations. There are many fishing skill areas where I need to make big improvements, but I am pretty experienced at pressuring and controlling fish runs while protecting rods and leaders. Western bass waters allow for a more conservative take, as well. We just don’t drop shot near thick vegetation very much.

I've not found any O rings that will hold micro guides in place with a single line method of stress testing a blank. The only solution I've found for easily stress testing a blank with micros is the two line method in which the guides do not load the blank. In that method O rings work as does tape. Each has advantages and disadvantages, and I often find myself using both. Tape for the bigger guides, O rings for the smaller ones. With an extra O ring or two in case I want to add guides during the process.