built a rod on an NFC Delta SW764, or Delta SW765 blank? I ordered one each yesterday that I will be using to build a swimbait / glide bait rod, for bass fishing. I don't really see myself, at least for now, throwing any baits that weigh more than 3 oz., with the majority of them being in the 1 1/2 - 2 oz range. Hud 68 Special, S-Waver 168. Rago Thunderhawk Cha Cha ..... baits in that size range.

I'm just wondering if anyone has built a rod on either one of those blanks, and if they think either blank will be a good choice for what I'm looking to do with them.

I know there are other blanks that may be better for the task, but as I said, I've already ordered them, so no offense, but I'm not really looking for other blank recommendations. At least not at this time. Just information and thoughts about those two specific blanks.


Any thoughts shared will be greatly appreciated !!!

I use both for A rigs and love em!

David the SW765 bends in between the SWB806 and SWB807, I'm pretty sure it will fit the task. You could probably use it for targeting dorado with live bait too (being serious) or smaller grade tuna both on 20-25lb leaders. I've caught >50lb tuna on lighter actioned blanks than the SW765.

Thomas and Ken, thank you both very much for the responses. They're much appreciated.

Thomas, from looking at the pictures of their bend profiles on NFC's web site, the 765 is a lot more stout than the 764. Is there one rod built on those blanks that you lean towards more than the other?

Ken, from what you're saying, and from what I'm seeing in the pictures of the bend profiles of the various blanks, the 765 is a pretty stout blank. A 50 lb tuna would turn pretty much any freshwater fish inside out in pulling battle. I'm just wondering if it's maybe a little too stout, which is why I ordered the 764 as well.

I've got probably the best muskie lake in Ohio about an 1/2 hour away. And while I'm really not a fan of catching them, at least when I'm bass fishing, it sounds like the 765 may make a better muskie rod, than a bass rod?

Again, thank you both for your responses. They definitely give me stuff to think about.

David the SW765 is a stout blank but it will work for what you are looking to do. Considering it's somewhere between the SWB806 and SWB807, I don't see how it wouldn't work, although it may not be the best for a 1oz bait. Understanding you can't feel those SWB blanks bend in hand, take a look on Rodhouse (see link below). If you mainly throw 1-2oz swimbaits, I would probably go with the SW764. If you are throwing 2-4oz baits, SW765.

[www.rodhouse.fr]


I also found this link discussing glide baits and the SWB blanks, just keep in mind the SW765 is a little stiffer than a SWB806, the SW764 is a little softer than the SWB806.

[www.rodbuilding.org]

I think the nice part about the SW765 is you could use it for light offshore fishing, or maybe even for inshore work if paired with a 400 class baitcaster. The SW764 would definitely work for inshore fishing.

Ken, thank you for the additional response. I truly appreciate it. I don't have actual experience with the blanks yet, but your feelings mirror mine in thinking the 764 will probably fit the size baits I'm throwing, a bit better. I've thrown the Hud 68 on a rod I have built on an MB 709 that I use for pitching and flipping, and it handles it pretty well. But, I have it counter weighted with 2 1/4 oz added to the butt for rod and reel balancing purposes, and the added weight makes it a bit sluggish when actually casting with it. The SW764, and MB 709 are really close as far as lure weight rating and the bend profile picture that NFC shows for the respective blanks.

I've used Rodhouse's blank comparator in the past, but hadn't thought of using it for this particular build. In trying to access it right now, Firefox and Microsoft Edge aren't allowing me access without a password. Something about security concerns. I don't have an account, so I don't have a password to enter. I'll keep trying though, as I really like being able to see the bend profiles of various blanks with different loads on them.

Thank you for the link to the thread on this site you provided. It is one of the threads I read when researching before ordering the blanks. They mentioned bottom bouncer blanks in that thread, and I took a serious look at maybe using one of them, as well.

Again, thank you very much for the added response and thoughts. They have me feeling pretty good about my choices. Much appreciated.

I have some other questions if there is anyone that would like to offer opinions on?

I wondering about my guide train. I've been wanting to try guides from Alps for some time, so the first blank I build on, (whichever one I think will best fit my initial needs) I'll be using Alps guides. Their MN series. With the bigger heavier baits I'll be throwing, and the chance of a big ole toothy critter (meaning muskie) taking my bait when I fish the lake I referenced earlier ..... of if I just want to go and fish for muskie, I'll be using 65# braid, with either a 20 or 25# fluorocarbon leader. Certainly with the line sizes I'm talking about I'll need to up size my running guide size to at least a #6. But I've never used a leader when using that size braid with that size leader, so I'm thinking I may want to go to a #7, or even a #8. I've used a uni to uni knot in the past when I have tied leaders on to braid. And that's what I'll be using now.

So knowing the particulars, do you think I should be looking at at least #7s for running guides, or should I bump it up to $8's? Additionally, I'm wondering if I should go with a 4 double foot reduction train, instead of a more traditional 3 double foot reduction train that I've used on the majority of the casting rods I've built.

I'm not worried about beefing up the reduction train based on the size bass I may catch with these bigger baits .... it's the size muskie I may run into while bass fishing with them, or while just plain going muskie fishing. I've had one fish that was a shade either side of 50" on for about 30 seconds before it thankfully got off. And I've two (it may have been the same fish) that have followed my spinnerbait back to the boat that were definitely over 50" Biggest fish I've ever seen in person. I'm thinking if I happen to hook one of those, the extra double foot further up the blank may be, beneficial.

Would it be a good idea, or am I making too much of it?

As before, any thoughts or suggestions will most definitely be appreciated.

David on most swimbait builds (most) you will see double footed guides throughout. I think you can still go with a 12/7/6..6, a 12/8/7..7 or similar to your liking, but I would go 100% double foot guides. No need for underwraps. 8's would be overkill, unless you plan on using non-FG join knots on 50lb or 65lb braid to >30lb leaders. The only way I would use 8's is if you know you will use a >30lb casting mono or fluoro leader (i.e. you plan to cast the knot through the guides), then the join knot will be happier with the 8's than 6's or 7's. In that case I would do a 16/10/8..8 layout.

Also, no need to epoxy under the guide frame, just keep it to the wraps, it will look great.

David,

Are you building a bass rod that might catch a muskie....or a muskie rod that might catch a bass? Or a cross-over hybrid rod?

Not a Blank Recommendation: I built an NFC SW 806-1 and I have a Shimano TranX 300 on it loaded with #65 Power Pro and #30 leader with FG knot. (I think #40 braid would have been plenty. The heavy leader is more for preventing snapping off a heavy lure on a backlash or guide wrap. I know I set a World Record cast with an S Waver this way once with a #20 leader.) I spiral wrapped this rod and used a KW 10mm double-foot butt guide and KB 6mm single foots the rest of the way. Passes the line and FG knot without a hitch. I think 7mm would be plenty for your runners.

The TranX's spool guide is approximately 1.5 inches above the top of the blank. A Curado 200 is approximately 1.25 inches above the top of the blank. Keep your spool guide height in mind when choosing your butt guide....I know you are.

On a side note, I know double foots have more resistance to torque, deformation, rough handling, and pull out - which makes sense to me with very heavy fish on heavy gear. However, I confess I do not know where that cut-off point is....where one NEEDS more than one double foot butt guide or there is trouble ahead. (I understand the aesthetics, peace-of-mind aspects.)

I know you'll build a great rod for your purposes!

Ken, thank you for the additional response. I appreciate it. Thank you for the recommendations for guide trains. As far as double foot guides all the way out ...... Les asked the question, am I building a bass rod that might catch a muskie, or a muskie rod that might catch a bass. To answer his question ...... I'm building a bass rod that I am absolutely certain will catch a muskie. Catching one in the36 - 40" range is all but a given at one specific lake I fish. Michael J Kirwin Reservoir, in northeast Ohio. Locals call it West Branch.

Anyhow, getting back to double foots all the way out .... I'll definitely consider that for at least one of the rods. The one I'll build on the SW 765. That's a stout blank and will most likely turn out to be a muskie rod that I'll probably end up selling, in the long run. Muskie are extremely cool looking fish, and they're fun to catch, but the novelty of catching them has worn off for me. I'd be fine if I never caught another one in my life. lol And I'll consider using all double foots on the 764 as well.

The biggest leader I'll be using is 25# fluorocarbon to 65# braid. Sounds like if I'm going to use 6' for running guides, I'm going to need to learn to tie an FG knot.

Les, thank you for the reply as well. I definitely appreciate it. like I said, I'm building a bass rod that I know, if I fish it at West Branch, will catch a muskie at some time in its life. But I don't fish West Branch very often, so the majority of the time it's just going to be a bass rod. And the measurements you gave for the Tranx's spool guide height are super useful, because the 300 Tranx is the reel I plan on using. Thank you for posting that !!! It verifies what I was thinking, and what Ken recommends with going with a 12 as the butt guide. I was definitely planning on going that route, and those measurements confirm I will need to go with a 12.

For single foot runners I will be using Alps guides that are like Fuji L guides, because they're easier for me to do a locking wrap on. I'm not a spiral wrap kind of guy, so I'm wrapping it conventionally, with probably 4 double foot guides if I go with single foot guides, as runners.

Can't wait to get these blanks in hand and put a good flex into them to get an idea of what I'm dealing with. And thanks for the replies guys. They are truly appreciated.

Been following this thread with interest as I'm getting ready to spin up a couple of swimbait rods. Got some Stryker and NFC blanks that I've put up on the board to check deflections and get CCS numbers...

Anyhow, what really peaked my interest is the discussion on guide trains and double foots vs single foots for the heavy swimbait / musky rods. I was leaning towards going with single foots for my runners and was also going to experiment with one rod conventional casting and one spiral wrapped.

Curious what other opinions/experiences are regarding the single vs double foot runners for these type of heavy freshwater builds?

David keep everyone in the loop on your build.

Kevin, I'll definitely post updates when I get the blanks in hand, and get an idea of what kind of power I'm dealing with. Right now, from looking at the pictures on NFC's web site with the blanks loaded, I'm thinking the 764 is going to be close to my MB 709s in power. If that is in fact the case, then I'm most likely going to use single foot guides as running guides. Reason being, I just don't see myself throwing any baits over 2 oz in weight. The baits I'll be throwing won't be overly heavy, and they aren't baits that you snap cast, so I'm thinking lob casting is going to put less stress on the guides. Of course I may be totally wrong in thinking the type of casting I'll be doing with the rod, has anything to do with stress on the guides.

I've caught a couple of muskies close to 30 lbs, and quite a few others that would have topped 20 on my bass gear with no signs of guide problems caused by fighting the fish. And I've put the screws to a couple in the 20 lb range, so I have complete confidence that the single foots will handle the any pressure when I do run into a muskie. My main concern is having one hit me right at the boat. I had an encounter a couple of years ago when that happened, and I ended up holding half of a rod in my hand. I'm thinking double foot guides won't help with that.

Were I throwing heavier 3 - 6 oz baits, I would definitely go with double foot guides all the way out. Or if one of the rods were going to be dedicated muskie rod, where I'd be doing figure 8's at the boat. I'd go with double foots all the way out.

One thing that was mentioned to me when talking about this build on another rod building forum, one member brought up that the moderate action may not be the best for the top hook Huddleston 68 special I have. He was mentioning he likes a fast action for that type of bait, which makes perfect sense to me. I guess I'll just have to see how it works out. Maybe the 765 will be a better choice for baits like the Hud because of its' added stoutness.

Kevin I think it's hypothetical that you absolutely need double footed guides, however most rods built with a +15-20lb minimum line rating will likely be found with double footed guides.

In the end, I wouldn't say 100% no to the single footed runners. One of the best retail swimbait rods I have used ran 4x double footed then all singles to the top. Never had an issue with it. If you look around at the popular swimbait rods out there, the large majority of them are double footed throughout, maybe it's a trend or maybe they have a good reason for it. There are a few specific brands I have more trust with & respect for, and they use double footed throughout on their swimbait sticks, so I have always followed that mindset as well.

I prefer the 764