Ron

Thank you for sharing that experience it was very informative..

Your story proves to me that one uses just enough guides to accomplish a specific task, in this case how many guides do I need to be able to use 2# test line and this blank for a world record Striper.

In your example the weight of the line determined the number and layout of the guides.

The bottom line is, rods should be configured to meet the needs of the user.

Have fun

John

OK...got it. Differing opinions for sure! However, as a result of all your responses, I don't feel as if the ten guides I have on the rod at this time is necessarily too many. That said, I must find myself on the side of those who are at least partially coming up with their formulas with respect to the length of the blank. Actually, it seems to me to be an issue of how much blank length is available for guides after the handle assembly has been completed. I would bet that differing lengths of handle assemblies on two identical rod blanks might optimally result in either a change in the number of guides or at least a change in their positioning.

THAT SAID....I have a question regarding the placing of stripper guides and choke guides. I've seen formulas for the positioning of both, and they don't seem to jive most of the time. In one of these threads, Tom responded to someone who revealed that if he followed the formula for placement of the choke guide, the tip top would in fact be the choke guide. I know it's true because I have done some of that math myself. For a 7' to 7 1/2' rod, after all is said and done, it seems that the recommended placement of the stripper is 19 to 20 inches give or take an inch or so. Once placed, the next two reduction guides are placed appropriate distances from each other in order to get that consecutive "bulls eye" conformation through those three guides. Those distances from each other will be what they will be I assume.

Now the choke guide! If one follows the "formula", who knows where it will be recommended to be placed. But some information from Angler's Resource suggests placing that choke guide a distance from the last reduction guide such that when sighting in the bulls eyes down the blank, the bottom of the choke guide ring (with the guides pointed to the sky of course) should ideally just dip into the line of sight of the last reduction guide. This seems to make more sense to me. The remainder of the guides then are ideally placed with some respect to what amount of length is left of the blank, and a static test.

Am I assessing all this correctly?

The location of the choke guide has nothing to do with rod length. That's why on short rods with large diameter reels the choke would fall beyond the rod tip, which is correct. In that situation, you do the best you can and end up having to use the tiptop as the choke guide.

Remember that for the same reel, on two different length rods, the butt guide and choke guide placement from the reel would be identical. Any additional rod length on the longer rod is simply taken up with more running guides. The reel and the line are concerned with butt and choke guide position, not rod length.

The "bulls eye" sighting is originally from the 27X system and is simply a means of verifying that you have a straight line path from butt guide to choke guide. It is a good way to check the line path.

...........

There is a lot of flexibility in setting up a guide train. Tom’s original 27X system was designed to give an average choke point suggestion for a NGC layout based on the size of the reel spool. It works well, but it’s position is not locked in stone. Both the choke guide and/or stripper guide can certainly be moved in or out somewhat to accommodate guide number and spacing in accord with both static and cast testing, without affecting performance. The KR concept is similar but is a little different, and was originally designed for use with braid and micro-guide runners, and it’s squeezes the choke guide closer to the reel. Both Fuji and the KR GPS at Anglers Resource calculate the choke point as distance in front of the stripper which is approximately equal to .42 to .45 times the distance from the stripper to the tip top. As you can see Fuji considers the choke point as a movable point. For example, with all things being equal, longer rods will have a longer reduction train length. This does make sense in that you don’t need to add more guides than necessary with longer rods. As Tom states it is also logical that once you have found a choke point position that works for a given reel you can keep it the same no matter the length of the rod. However, this necessitates using more runners with longer rods, and thus increases weight. Both ways work extremely well, as well as a compromise between both. In my opinion the KR GPS doesn’t do a great job with very short rods or very long rods. For the rods you are using it does a great job of giving you a good starting point. I normally add at least one more running guide than the GPS recommends, and I don’t hesitate moving the choke point in or out a little to accommodate the progressive spacing I like. As I mention above, there is a lot of flexibility in setting up an optimal guide train, and braid is very forgiving. The best way to determine for yourself how to set up a guide train is to experiment.
Norm

I've only seen one NEO and it was a casting rod, however I bent it in both guides up and down. it had 10 guides on top and looked fine, guides down it definitely had more than needed in the tip, certainly no more than 9.

Ernie brings-up a good point with his statement “For a 7' to 7 1/2' rod, after all is said and done, it seems that the recommended placement of the stripper is 19 to 20 inches give or take an inch or so. Once placed, the next two reduction guides are placed appropriate distances from each other in order to get that consecutive "bulls eye" conformation through those three guides. Those distances from each other will be what they will be I assume”. The ring size and height of Fuji KR Concept reduction guides will produce a bullseye AND progressive spacing whether the choke guide is 22in (“kinda” standard) from the butt guide or 10in or 40in. I am not advocating deviating much from the 22in; just making a point that one will automatically get progressive spacing when the guides form a bullseye (and vice-versa).
As usual, I agree with all that Norman said. Virtually all of my trout spinning rods employ the KR Concept using KL-H reduction guides, KB / KT choke and runners and a LG tip top. As John, I use the old rule-of-thumb "a guide for each foot of rod plus one" which would be 8 guides for a 7ft rod but usually end-up 9 sometimes even 10. The KL-H butt guide is 19in from the spool lip, the choke guide 22in from the stripper and then 2-line static load test to fine tune the final positioning. I do not even bother with test casting anymore = the rods cast and fight fish perfectly each and every time thanks to Fuji and Norman.

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

To answer the question, has anyone ever broken a rod because of too few guides ..... yes I have. It wasn't one of the rods I've built. It was an old (it wasn't old at the time it broke) Shimano 2552 fighting rod. I can assure you I was not high sticking the rod at the time it broke. I can't be sure, but I probably had 10# test Berkley Sensation line on it, and I had hooked what looked to be about a 30# muskie. I can't remember how many guides were on the rod. It was a 5'6" spinning rod, and snapped midway between the stipper guide and the second reduction guide. I was holding on for dear life when it broke.

Anyhow ...... going to the optimum performance thing that is being passed around, I will just say that the definition of optimum performance as it pertains to the number of guides on a rod, can differ from person to person. For me, optimum means the path of the line closely matches the natural bend of the blank. I believe that doing so, enhances the attributes of a fishing rod that I find most important.

And path of the line is a function of guide number and placement.

I think everybody knows full well that you always want to position guides where the blank naturally bends on it's own without being influenced by anything else . I don't think you will ever find a person who disagrees with that basic premise . It's one of the very first things you learn in rod building . That's never been an issue or something of contention , the difference in opinions is how many to use to accomplish that task . That's where the opinions will vary wildly . What size frames and ring sizes is another topic entirely .

Try to use a number of guides that maximize hook setting power and fish control as described earlier in this topic..You can easily feel a rods hook setting power especially well if you use braided line in the hook set teest described above..Please be careful with braided line if your testing a graphite rod..I build and fish glass rods because I prefer to use braided line which provides as much sensetivity as a graphite rod, maybe more.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2022 09:12AM by ben belote.

Careful Ben; you’re walking on a greasy floor with that one.

Well of course Ben , that's the # 1 reason for making sure your guide positioning's match the natural curvature of the blank as close as possible , doing so maximizes the power the blank has to offer . Once again , how many is the question lol.

Regardless of performance, if the number of guides you put on a rod makes you happy, enjoy them!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2022 04:47PM by Phil Ewanicki.

Mark, Is two guides plus tip going to have anywhere near the hook setting power you need? Additional guides are needed..so you add a guide then another guide, then another until the hook set feels as solid as that rod can make it..you can test each guide set up and feel t he change in the hook set power..You will come to a point where there is no change or so little there is no reason to add more guides..Where did I slip up? I need your help here..There is no reason to put on your guides and not know what they are doing or if they are enough..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/03/2022 04:49AM by ben belote.

The nerve of those guys who fished with a long stick with a line and a hook tied to the very end, no guides needed at all. Just lower stick lift up and 'walla' , a fish .



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2022 09:38PM by chris c nash.

Chris, way, way back we didn,t use a stick, just a hand line for eels and cats..crude and lewd..lol.

In many cases, the problems with setting a hook when a fish picks up a hook is a dull hook.

Forget about line type and stretch, just keep a nice pocket diamond hook file in your pocket, and sharpen your hook any time the hook gets the least bit dull.

With a sticky sharp hook the type line and rod almost become irrelevant.

But fishing is subjective and often there are hours and hours of non productive time - depending on the situation, where folks wonder about this or that or something else.

Simply put, fish in waters where fish hang out. Fish using productive methods. Present your bait and or lure in front of the target fish in the right way - and you will be a successful fisherman - almost without regard to the particular pole or type build you use to make that pole.

You can preach on this subject or that subject, or what guide to use or not to use. At the end of the day - get the lure or bait in front of the fish with the right presentation - and you will be a successful fisherman.

You can catch fish on $3 snoopy poles. You can lose fish on $3,000 fly rods using $100 line. You can catch fish using 30 lb line with a number 003 hook and have it hooked to a jug floating in a fishing area.

You can wade the waters of cat fish waters wearing sneakers and shorts and a good glove to protect your hand to pull 80 lb cat fish out of their resting places in the murky waters of cat fish country.

As the saying goes, "Pick your poison so to speak, when it comes to fishing, boating rod building and other associated activity."

Do a little, or do a lot and enjoy the profession if you are a professional rod builder and build beautiful expensive rods, if that turns your cranks and puts money in your bank account. Or, build $50 rods and enjoy them with your kids and watch the smiles on their faces as they feel that first tug on a line caused by a hooked fish and be excited with them as they enjoy the success of bringing their first fish to heel - so to speak whether it is dragged up on shore, pulled up to a dock, or pulled into a blue water boat when fishing the sea of Cortez for bill fish on a $5,000 week long charter of this wonderful fishery.

"Simply put, fish in waters where fish hang out"




Anglers have sought this type of advice for centuries .

And for ages anglers have contended with fish stories about the location, size, and numbers of fishes!

Ben,
I was referring to your comment “...I build and fish glass rods because I prefer to use braided line which provides as much sensetivity as a graphite rod, maybe more”. CF rod proponents can be pretty defensive, just as you and I about FG. It was intended to be more humorous than serious. Sorry if it did not come-across that way.

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