Learned this one the hard way. Align the blank with the reel seat, tip up. No issues.

Although I started building rods on the spine simply because I thought that is the way everyone did it, I learned from this site that the vast majority of builders build on the straightest axis which I have adapted also. However, I still like to know where the spine is. But as stated in my original post, the straightEST axis is only that, the straightEST axis but not necessarily straight. There are plenty of blanks out there which may have more than one crook or a crook near the tip and a curvature somewhere else. Hence, if the guides are aligned to the curved blank axis, the rings will follow that curvature. While such may enhance performance (Function), it may be difficult to explain and accept the rings not aligned line-of-sight (Form). Afterall, Form Follows Function carries a lot of merit.
Chris may be correct “Just playing the devils advocate...I really dont think it matters (much)”. As stated in my original post “All of this may be splitting hairs but then that could be considered a prerequisite in this trade”. I see no reason to consider this subject exempt while others are not. No one really knows yet until more information is provided. There may be more evidence than Mike’s as to why guide ring line-of-sight alignment may not be as good as aligning to a curved blank. Please bring it on! I am still here to learn.

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

Chris Catignani Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mike Ballard Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I ignore the spine nonsense and build on the
> > straightest axis so there is no crook or curve
> to
> > deal with.
>
> If there was a crook to begin with...wouldn't
> there still be one even if you build it on the
> straightest axis?
> It would curve up (or down).
>
> Say I have a rod who's guides were on the spine,
> and it was bent to one side.
> The rod would certainly orient to the spine on
> cast and with fish on.
>
> Just playing the devils advocate...I really dont
> think it matters (much).


If the curve is up or down, it doesn't affect line-of-sight for the guides - they can all be on the same axis.

Rods do not orient to the spine under load - they orient based on guide positions. Guides are lever arms. This is why spinning and spiral wrapped casting rods are inherently stable. If the guides are on the underside of the rod, the rod will not twist or torque under load. If they are on top, the rod will attempt to twist or torque under load regardless of where the spine is.

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

Tom Kirkman Wrote:

> Rods do not orient to the spine under load - they
> orient based on guide positions.

Thats not true...they orient in the direction you cast. If the guides are on top...and I make a side handed cast...the rod bends sideways.

> If they are on top,
> the rod will attempt to twist or torque under load
> regardless of where the spine is.

Again...not true. (well yes under a heavy load) but under a light load the rod will bend (and torque) along the spine.

I have seen and read too much documentation and video to change spots...I'm in good company at spine camp.

For many years I brought a spiral wrap demo device to the Expo and challenged rod builders to set up a rod that would not twist or torque under load (we used only a single pound of load). The spine people were never able to do it. The spiral wrap people could do it every time, regardless if the spine was on top, on the bottom, or off somewhere to the side.

The lever arm effect always trumps any spine effect. I may bring the device back to the Expo this year and offer something like a $100 prize to anyone that set up a rod on the spine, guides on top, and have the rod not flip upside down when the load is applied.


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

I have had some spine guys tell me that if you build a spinning rod off-spine then when you have a fish on the rod will twist so that the guides end up on top. Really? C'mon now......... There's a reason we put gimbals on guides on top rods--- they are going to twist and turn no matter where you put the spine. Granted the more the load the greater the lever arm thing will be but even under small freshwater fish any guides on top rod is going to try and twist on you if the guides are on top, spine or no spine. I cannot believe this argument is still going on. It's physics.

The beauty of the demo device is that it takes the argument out of the theoretical and into the practical. I just looked in the shop and I still have it. It’ll be at the Expo this year.

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

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For many years I brought a spiral wrap demo device
> to the Expo and challenged rod builders to set up
> a rod that would not twist or torque under load
> (we used only a single pound of load). The spine
> people were never able to do it. The spiral wrap
> people could do it every time, regardless if the
> spine was on top, on the bottom, or off somewhere
> to the side.
>

That makes total sense....and not everyone wants a rod spiral wrapped.
So doesn't it make sense to always put the spine on the bottom?
There is no theory to this...it is also physics.

I don't think so, because spine orientation isn't going to stop rod twist once the rod is even a single degree off the 0 axis. It also puts the blank in its weakest position. By weakest position I mean the least amount of deadlift capability. It's also worth remembering that the stiffest and softest axis of any blank are rarely 180 degrees opposite each other, but that's another topic.

I will bring the demo device to the Expo again. It's been since the event was in High Point (2012) that I last brought it so it'll be fun to have the builders playing with it again.

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

On casting rods the torque generated by the guides is much less with micro guides than it was in the old days with higher guides. Now, with most setups using micros (I know, micro is not the right term, I should say low profile small guides that are only a couple mm's off the rod surface) , the only guide that has significant height is the first guide. And the torque generated by the guides is less significant.

The reality of life......, when ever I show off a rod I built the inspection goes as follows but in no particular order.

They look at the at some of the wraps and rub it with their thumb, next they flick or swish it back and forth and then they sight down the rod.

I will put money on the table that if the guides are not aligned, the response will be "nice rod" and they will politely change the subject or walk away..

I build on the straight axis and position the guides in line.

Michael Danek Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On casting rods the torque generated by the guides
> is much less with micro guides than it was in the
> old days with higher guides. Now, with most
> setups using micros (I know, micro is not the
> right term, I should say low profile small guides
> that are only a couple mm's off the rod surface) ,
> the only guide that has significant height is the
> first guide. And the torque generated by the
> guides is less significant.

Obviously the lower the guide the less lever torque generated by the guides. But until you can get the line inside the rod blank you can't eliminate it.

The demo device will be at the Expo. Micro Guide proponents tried it back when and were not successful. Perhaps they'll do better this time out.

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

Thanks to those who replied with requested information but I am out of here; the original subject has been too diluted to offer any more knowledge on the original question.

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

roger wilson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr. Kirkman,
> I totally understand the idea of making the blank
> straight and then placing the guides so that they
> are in line.
> However, as has been stated previously, when the
> blank is taking out of the fixture, the top of the
> guides will not be in a straight line and as Mark
> notes; is objectionable for any one sighting down
> the rod.
>
> In addition, when a rod is used for casting, the
> blank does not get straight when casting. Rather,
> it stays in its relaxed or crooked state. As a
> result, the sides of the guides will not be in a
> straight line, and as was suggested, will have a
> small amount of negligible friction.
>
> But, as Mark suggests, for myself and I expect
> many other rod builders and customers who
> routinely sight down the rod on a new build or a
> new rod purchase, I believe that it is more
> objectionable to the folks sighting down the rod
> and seeing guides seemingly out of position, even
> though they are in perfect alignment on a straight
> rod.
>
> So, for myself, no matter the nature of the rod
> blank, I will build on the straightest axis and
> will let the rod remain in its normal relaxed
> crooked state and align the guides so that when
> sighting down the rod, the guides themselves are
> in line, in spite of being on a crooked blank.
>
> Best wishes


Roger,

It is impossible to have the guide ring centers on a straight line when placed on a curve, unless you place them on multiple axis. If you put them all on the 0-degree axis, there is absolutely no way that they will be in line.

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

Chris,
Just for example: Lets say that you have a rod with a severe bend.

I suspect that no matter where you line the guides up on a rod, when the rod is put under pressure - like trying to lift a 10 lb log out of the water, the rod is going to bend - just exactly where the line puts pressure on a guide and pulls it down or to one side or the other.

I doubt very much that when putting significant pressure on a rod - by pressure from a line going through the guides that the rod is going to bend in any direction, except where the line pressure on all of the sides of the guide cause the rod blank to bend.

Spine, no spin, or curvature or no curvature in the blank.

Tom,
Of course you are right - about the placement of guides being placed on a rod with a bend in it.

So, of course the average rod builder if that person decides to build on a rod blank with a bend or multiple bends in it - it would make sense to place the guides on a side of the rod blank that is as straight as possible when sighting down the blank.
Whether, the bend is up, or whether the bend is down - is entirely up to the builder.

But, as long as a row of guides are in a straight line - what ever the blank - I rather expect that when the line puts pressure on the blank that the rod is going to deflect exactly in line with the pull of the line.

I would doubt very much that any spine on a rod blank is going to change the way that the rod blank bends when put under pressure from the line on the guides that then transfer the pressure to the rod blank.

But, for myself - I never debate or even wonder about the issue.

I take a rod blank - find one side of the blank where I can put a row of guides down the length of the rod blank and have them all line up in a straight line - and build the rod.

Thanks much for your thoughts.

roger wilson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chris,
> Just for example: Lets say that you have a rod
> with a severe bend.
>
> I suspect that no matter where you line the guides
> up on a rod, when the rod is put under pressure -
> like trying to lift a 10 lb log out of the water,
> the rod is going to bend - just exactly where the
> line puts pressure on a guide and pulls it down or
> to one side or the other.
>
> I doubt very much that when putting significant
> pressure on a rod - by pressure from a line going
> through the guides that the rod is going to bend
> in any direction, except where the line pressure
> on all of the sides of the guide cause the rod
> blank to bend.
>
> Spine, no spin, or curvature or no curvature in
> the blank.

Roger...every baitcasting rod ever made with guides on top is a contradiction to what you just wrote.

roger wilson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom,
> Of course you are right - about the placement of
> guides being placed on a rod with a bend in it.
>
> So, of course the average rod builder if that
> person decides to build on a rod blank with a bend
> or multiple bends in it - it would make sense to
> place the guides on a side of the rod blank that
> is as straight as possible when sighting down the
> blank.
> Whether, the bend is up, or whether the bend is
> down - is entirely up to the builder.
>

Not quite - the rod will attempt to turn-twist and point to the direction the load is coming from due to the lever arm effect of the guides. It can't do anything else. But this is why having guides on multiple axis isn't necessarily a good idea. The guides are lever arms and each will turn the rod towards the applied load until the guide is directly in line with the load. The idea that the guides will stay on top, or on the side, etc., is false. It is the guides themselves, under load, that are twisting and turning the rod towards the load. This is the point of the spiral wrap - it removes the torsional stress on the rod.
..............