John -

I use a fly tying bobbin to temporarily affix my guides for testing. Use the bobbin like you are wrapping a guide to secure the guide foot - and you don't have to be that neat and perfect; I will wrap about half of the the guide foot down with overlapping wraps until I feel it is secure. I use a pull-thread to finish the temporary wrap. The key for me is to get my guides really close to where I want them (with bands or tape) before I fix them down for testing with the bobbin and thread. Two-line static test first....get the guides close....then, bobbin-wrap them down before test casting.

It DOES take a little more time with bobbin-wrapping. However, the fly bobbin technique won't "pop loose" or "go sideways" nearly as much as tape. It is a bit of a time trade-off, but if I am at the testing stage, a guide "going sideways" because it came loose costs time and frustration, too. I value knowing I have that guide at that location locked down....and do not mind IF I have to cut it loose and move it and re-do it so it is right. The time it takes to get it right is insignificant when compared to the time I will be fishing the rod for the rest of its life.

The bobbin thread (I typically use 70 Denier fly thread) can be easily cut loose with a razor blade along the edge of the guide foot if needed to move a guide....and it takes only a minute or two to reposition and rewrap with the bobbin. MAYBE more time than cutting tape and re-tapping?! Maybe not?! We're not talking about more than 30 seconds difference between the two techniques in my experience....and the bobbin- thread technique removes the slippage during testing for me. Others may have a different experience. No arguments with what works for them or for you!

I'm not sure I even like the 703.....but I keep picking it up to fish. Why??? Because I keep catching fish on it. The SJ 703 is a very versatile rod. I threw Micro Neds (1/15 oz.) with it the other day and guess what? Yeah. Caught fish. Senkos, Neds, Flukes, Jigs.....all of it. Caught fish. I'm sure it has its niche where it excels, but so far it just excels with what I have tied on at the time. (My fishing buddy caught a #24 blue cat on his 703 on a small crankbait...so yeah, the rod has chops.) If I purchased another one, I'd extend it 4 to 6 inches....but then I wonder WHY.

chris -

I admire your expertise and experience in long cast reels as well as guide trains! Wow! You have this down pat!

I would love for you to detail out your favorite Long-Range Bomber rigs for posterity!: (The chris c nash B-1 Bomber Concept)
Reel.
Line.
Rod.
Guide Train (concept and spacing).

Just give it to us straight - What is your ultimate rig - or the rig you reach for first.

I don't ask for much, do I?

I see a difference between making casts of 100+ yards (down to the backing knot) with a surf rod, and freshwater casts that may not exceed 40 to 60 yards. David is dialing it in for his freshwater rigs that fit his fishery and casting distance needs. No doubt, there is overlap between fresh and salt fishing for superior/efficient casting. We're all on the same page here. We all seem to agree that the K-R Concept is a great way to achieve what we want.

Last point:

In-leader or out-leader or no-leader, the 3+1 specification is no different than the 3-guide specification. Pay attention to the size of the line and knot that may pass through the guides!

If you throw a leader that is NOT inside your tip top (OUT leader), go as large as you need. It makes no difference if you want a #100 leader and knot that will not have to pass through ANY guides.

If you have a leader that WILL pass through your guides (IN leader), then consider the leader test/diameter and the knot that will need to pass through them. Fuji figured most of this out already! For example, Fuji maxes out their IN leader recommendations at #25 mono/fluoro for the 25H guide group with 6mm tip group rings in the 3+1 specification. The max for IN leader is #14 for the 25H guide group with 5.5mm to 6mm rings in the 3-guide specification. You can throw a larger # IN leader with the 3+1 than with the 3-guide spec because of the design of the concept. (This is based on what Fuji suggests, not what GOD HATH COMMANDED! Haha!)

Fuji makes recommendations based on their extensive research. I have found a bit of wiggle room within those suggestions. However, the recommendations are an excellent starting point for exploration of what may work for you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/16/2024 01:38AM by Les Cline.

Les, to be honest I don't have any secret or magical rigs, what I use the long cast reels for is mostly metals to reach far out predatory fish attacking schools of menhaden off the beaches . I whole heartedly agree with everything you said above , I want to make it clear I'm not criticizing anybody over what they like and use . When John said he was told early on that the leader should be at least twice the length of your rod I know what he's talking about but it was related to throwing heavy payloads where the main line could easily snap on a powerful cast and the leader length which wrapped around the spool a few times prevented the main line from taking all the stress , it was purely a safety precaution .

I have never heard of extra long leaders for light freshwater angling but I'm not criticizing it either because what John said about the benefits of not needing to constantly change leaders when the end of one gets chaffed up is a valuable point . My philosophy on it is that as long as your knots are solid and don't interfere with the guide train then it's a good and positive thing , no downside I can see . I wouldn't be using any knots like the a double Uni knot for instance to connect the line to leader though as it's not nearly as slim as the FG etc..

Chris. True, spool diameter has nothing to do with how tightly you can spool line, on a reel. I wasn't referencing that. I was and am referencing how tight the line coils are when using smaller diameter spools. The coils are smaller in diameter ..... tighter circles I guess is the best way to describe it. Spool diameter definitely affects that. Hope that clears up the confusion.

The meant for main line use fluorocarbon lines of today, are leaps and bounds better than they were back when I first started using fluorocarbon on spinning gear. But it's still not as supple as say Berkley XL or other similar supple nylon mono filament lines. And we all know it's the same when it comes to lighter, and even heavier braided lines. I'd even go as far to say that my well broken in 65# braid that I use on my frog rod, is as supple as 10# Tatsu. If not as supple, it's dang close.

I don't know that any of the reels I mentioned have a description of being a long cast reel. The Vanford and Sustain have Long Stroke Spools. The stroke is longer, by a 1/4", on the Vanford than on my Saros, and Ultegra reels. And the Vanfords spool where it carries the line, is 1/8" inch taller. Now I don't know which is more responsible for the increased casting distance .... the longer stroke of the spool, or the larger diameter of the spool, but my 2500 Vanford casts noticeably better than my 3000 series Saros and Ultegra.

The distances you mention casting are phenomenal. Curious how much weight you're using to cast those kind of distances? Whatever it is............. wow, that is some major casting distance. For me, a 70' cast would be the maximum distance I would need with a spinning rod. I wouldn't feel comfortable fishing anything I fish with a spinning rod, at distances greater than that. For me, spinning rods are for fishing closer to the boat. 40, maybe 50' max.

Good stuff though, that's for sure.

This diagram is helpful to me in the context of reel up sweep angle and the NGC and K-R Concept 3-guide specification. Does it matter that much or not? You may be surprised at my conclusions....or not.

[anglersresource.net]

The diagram shows the spool axis line strikes the blank in the exact same location.

The illustration shows the Butt Guide (20H) is placed in the same location and follows the spool axis angle.

Both Concepts show the spool axis as part of the design considerations about guide location.

However, the placement of the Belly/choker (first running guide) is different. Also, the placement of the rest of the Reduction Train guides is different.

Therefore, the simple, clear, and straight-forward answer to whether reel up sweep angle matters is a Definitive Yes and No! It seems to matter for the Butt Guide in both the NGC and KRC (Yes). It is in the rest of the guides that the concepts start to diverge (No).

Perfect, right?! My answer is both YES and NO! ("Maybe" and "Sometimes" are under appreciated answers, IMO. Dialogue and not Dogma is where the real gold is mined in my philosophical, rod-building brain.)

It all makes sense to me as Fuji seems to suggest choking the line immediately from the spool with the Butt Guide at an efficient distance and angle to the spool axis. (The Butt Guide location range often falls between 19 and 21 inches as per the KR GPS calculator.)

Where the line goes after the Butt Guide, Fuji has discovered, can be more rapidly brought down to the blank and the Belly/choker guide than previously thought. This is especially true with supple and thin braided lines (up to around #20+/- braid); and ALSO within a limited range of stiffer mono and fluoro lines (up to #14). The larger the line, the larger the guide ring sizes suggested. Intuitive.

The KR GPS and Up Sweep Angle:

I think the KR GPS suggests the location of the Butt Guide based on the average up sweep angle data from different reel sizes. In general, the larger/taller the reel, the further away from the reel the Butt Guide and Belly/choker guide is located. The GPS is looking to show that Goldilocks location that is just right...or close to it.

Up sweep angle is accounted for with the GPS, and is also factoring in all the other data points that chris rightly notes as important to rod performance: Line size, line type, micro or conventional guides.... All the factors need to be considered in a custom build. (And for fun, if I had a parallel reel, I'd ask chris for advice on how to get the max out of it! However, I suspect if I loaded it up with light braid, it would cast pretty well in any case....maybe even installed backwards?! JK!)

(Side note: Interesting the KR GPS seems to max out the Butt Guide placement at 21.5 inches from the spool axel tip for rods from 8 to 12 ft. in length. I'd enjoy chris chiming in if he has found this a good location for the Butt Guide on his long-cast surf rods. Also interesting is the ratio of 0.42 of the distance from the Butt Guide to the rod tip for placement of the Belly/choker. Chris? got a take on this? These ratios worked well on my dinky 703.)

K-R Concept and 27X:

And here is the tie-in with the 27X method of locating the Butt and Belly/choke guide for me - BOTH the KRC and the 27X are bringing the specific reel into play in the guide lay out. (Norman made this point already and he is absolutely right, IMO. The reel is the deal.)

General Similarities:
* KRC: The larger/taller the reel, the up sweep angle strikes the blank further out. Therefore, the further out the Butt Guide and Belly/choker guide is suggested to be placed.
* 27X: The larger the reel, the larger the spool diameter, and the further out the Butt Guide and Belly/choker guide is suggested to be placed.
* It makes sense there are similarities between the two Concepts even though they place the Belly/choker at different places. They both work (and I have rods built on both concepts).

Back to the KR GPS again...

The 3+1 specification is exactly the same as the more common 3-guide specification in terms of the Butt Guide and Belly/choker location. Place both where suggested as a starting point. So, where the KR GPS suggests placing the 'choker', that is where the High Profile Belly Guide (5.5L; 6L; or 7L) is located. Place the rest of the Reduction Guides, KB and/or KT guides from there out to the tip guide.

I'm sorry for beating a dead horse here. I want to give those who are at various places on the learning curve some suggestions about how to approach the K-R 3+1 specification as it appears to be "different" and perhaps harder to layout. It is not harder, IME! There appears to be interest out there in this specification. Great to see this!

With all that being said, I am firmly in the camp of doing what works! There is no right or wrong WAY to do almost anything. I don't consider Fuji the final source of all rod-building knowledge. I DO think they are on to something with the 3+1 specification, and they have the engineering data to back up their investment in this unique concept. I hope we can collectively build a solid base of experience with the 3+1 so many current and future builders can consider it as an option to improve their enjoyment of fishing a built rod.

My grandmother, Zelda, as a young girl, fished with a cane pole, a paper-wasp nest of larvae for bait, salvaged string for line, and a safety pin hook to catch crappie in Oklahoma creeks and sloughs. Whoa! That worked perfectly for her set of conditions! I would have had so much fun catching fish with her back then! Now, here I am talking K-R Concept and Up Sweep Angles. It humbles me to think about it. And I'd never say her rig was lacking in any way - besides, she'd have stretched my ears if I did!