Hello All.

Tom, I always thought that CP was nothing more than watered down Elmers glue.

I just went into my shop and pulled out 5 different types of CP and they all have a milky look to them, just some more than others.

The milkiest one is Flex Coat, followed by U-40, then came ChromeaSeal, the two least milkiest were about the same they were Cason's Crystal Clear, and Gudbrod #811.

Most don't say what thy are beyond that they are a "Water Based Polymer" except for the Cason's, it says it has ammonia and acrylic resin, the label on that is kind of hard to read.

Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.

Sorry double post.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/02/2023 04:54PM by Robert A. Guist.

Good color preservers are more than just "watered down" Elmer's glue. If you check your back issues you can find several articles written by Ralph O-Quinn as to the general make up of most color preservers and the busting of the "Elmer's Glue" myth. It is true that several companies sell the same product under their own brand name. Others are different products with different compositions.

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

I usually agree with Tom 99.9% of the time but not on this one . You will definitely notice a difference if you only use a coat of CP compared to using epoxy on all the guides on a long distance casting rod . Especially with the way most people wrap guides and their usage of epoxy ( Which you can see for yourself in 90% of the images in the Photo section, exceedingly long thread wraps with exuberant amounts of thread epoxy applied ). While it's true that the distance increase won't be night and day there will be a distance increase nonetheless and if competing in a distance casting competition I think it's worth it .



One of my surf rods just has CP on the wraps and I haven't had to replace any guides all last year , I don't use it as much as my others that have epoxy on the wraps but this notion that you need to rewrap on a regular basis is nonsense . My rods are meticulously cared for and never come into contact with other rods etc.. so maybe that's why I haven't had issues I don't know. Three coats not one

>>"I usually agree with Tom 99.9% of the time but not on this one . " Exactly what statement of Tom's are you disagreeing with? I don't think you and Tom are really in any disagreement.

Regarding how mass on the blank, especially towards the tip, affects rod recovery speed, it's not really debatable that mass on the blank slows recovery speed. And it follows that slower recovery speed will negatively affect casting distance. How much distance? Might be major , might be minor. But theoretically, it's there. So here I become repetitive, and mention that if you want to know how much that mass is affecting recovery speed, you can find out using the TNF process. For example, you can test the bare blank, then add your guides, under-wraps, exuberant amounts of epoxy, and retest and see for yourself if how much the blank has been slowed in recovery speed. It will be slowed. It's in the science. And with lighter guides and trimmer wraps and less epoxy it will be slowed less. And it will feel cleaner, crisper, and more like the blank feels when you first take it out of the shipping tube.

Regarding the original subject of this thread of posts, it is clear that if you want rods to last without attention for many years, as I do all of mine, you will not simply apply CP and call it good. You will apply epoxy or Permagloss to assure the rods will still be good for your kids when you are gone.

chris c nash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I usually agree with Tom 99.9% of the time but not
> on this one . You will definitely notice a
> difference if you only use a coat of CP compared
> to using epoxy on all the guides on a long
> distance casting rod . Especially with the way
> most people wrap guides and their usage of epoxy (
> Which you can see for yourself in 90% of the
> images in the Photo section, exceedingly long
> thread wraps with exuberant amounts of thread
> epoxy applied ). While it's true that the
> distance increase won't be night and day there
> will be a distance increase nonetheless and if
> competing in a distance casting competition I
> think it's worth it .
>
>
>
> One of my surf rods just has CP on the wraps and I
> haven't had to replace any guides all last year ,
> I don't use it as much as my others that have
> epoxy on the wraps but this notion that you need
> to rewrap on a regular basis is nonsense . My rods
> are meticulously cared for and never come into
> contact with other rods etc.. so maybe that's why
> I haven't had issues I don't know. Three coats not
> one


Chris,

Please note that I specifically said "if kept thin..." and was not referring to the high-build type application that most use. It is not at all hard to apply epoxy so thin that most will think it is either CP or varnish.

.........

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> chris c nash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I usually agree with Tom 99.9% of the time but
> not
> > on this one . You will definitely notice a
> > difference if you only use a coat of CP
> compared
> > to using epoxy on all the guides on a long
> > distance casting rod . Especially with the
> way
> > most people wrap guides and their usage of epoxy
> (
> > Which you can see for yourself in 90% of the
> > images in the Photo section, exceedingly long
> > thread wraps with exuberant amounts of thread
> > epoxy applied ). While it's true that the
> > distance increase won't be night and day there
> > will be a distance increase nonetheless and if
> > competing in a distance casting competition I
> > think it's worth it .
> >
> >
> >
> > One of my surf rods just has CP on the wraps and
> I
> > haven't had to replace any guides all last year
> ,
> > I don't use it as much as my others that have
> > epoxy on the wraps but this notion that you
> need
> > to rewrap on a regular basis is nonsense . My
> rods
> > are meticulously cared for and never come into
> > contact with other rods etc.. so maybe that's
> why
> > I haven't had issues I don't know. Three coats
> not
> > one
>
>
> Chris,
>
> Please note that I specifically said "if kept
> thin..." and was not referring to the high-build
> type application that most use. It is not at all
> hard to apply epoxy so thin that most will think
> it is either CP or varnish.
>
> .........



I must have missed the "If kept thin part" , I'd agree with that . I have built rods that have a super thin coat of epoxy on the wraps where after drying you can still feel the threads with your finger which I don't like . I'm nowhere remotely close to being as talented as you're with applying epoxy but I wish I was . I just don't build enough to get that proficient, I just build a surf rod or two a year at most for my personal usage .

My rod building strategy is to do everything possible to save weight without getting weird or giving up durability. I agree with Tom that you give up durability to use CP instead of epoxy. The tiny weight savings just doesn’t seem worth it for how I fish. Most of my builds are used in situations where failures are far from desirable. Bass fishing doesn’t lend itself to having a backup rod for every technique. Salmon and steelhead fishing demand dependability as does travel based inshore fishing. I always pack back-up rods, but they need to serve multiple purposes and they are truly plan “B’s” to the primary rods. Only so many rods fit into a tube that you can check without exorbitant fees.

Obviously a very specialized case. The guy is looking to absolutely limit weight on the upper portion of the blank as much as possible, while also making it a simple process to quickly replace a guide. A coat or two of CP seems like a great treatment in his case. Clearly not jamming the rod into a bass boat rod locker and careening 20 miles down the lake strapped to a 300hp motor, then yanking it back out to load the livewell before the tournament clock expires...

I have a fly rod that only had CP on the wraps. Didn't realize that it wasn't finished, when I took it fishing in a rain storm. The CP held up OK, but it is water soluble, even after it dries. The CP became very milky looking, but was fine, once it dried. I applied Permagloss over it, years after the original layers of CP, and the wraps are perfectly fine.

George Forster
Fort Collins, CO



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/06/2023 11:08AM by George Forster.

CP as a finish is definitely not a long term solution, but as mentioned, works just fine. I have rods where I've used CP for a quick repair or CP as a finish just to see how it would hold up. It's usually good for several years worth of use for me. If I would have used Forhan Locking Wraps, I likely would not have had the couple of guide pull outs that have happened.

CP as a finish is great if you want to experiment with various guide trains. Guides can be moved or replaced quickly and easily with very little work required to remove evidence of the guide. CP as a finish is durable to fish the rod for a period of time to evaluate the performance of a guide train in a variety of situations. For the competition casting application mentioned originally, it seems like a great option.

It's also great for quick repairs on an extended fishing trip. Repairs can be done in a few minutes in the evening with a small hand wrapper (whether brought along or improvised) the guide and thread only need to be adequate to serve until a proper replacement can be done.