Hello,

There is a ton of information on spinning rod reduction train setups but less so on casting. There is also a well established recommendation from Fuji related to low profile casting reels (KW10/RV6, KW5.5). I would like to know how to determine proper guide height and distance from reel for other baitcasting/conventional reels. In my case, I will be building a 11’6” surf rod. I have read guidance online for surf rods and have even read the rod maker magazine article on surf rods but none of these take into account my specific reel. The article certainly gets me in the ballpark for what guide sizes I should be using but I’d like to dial it in a bit more.

I know test casting should be done, but are there rules of thumb for how the line should be oriented going into the butt guide when first setting up? Should it go through the middle of the guide when the rod is straight?

Will, I don't think there is a simple answer. The height of the reel's line guide has to be the #1 consideration, but where you place the butt guide will determine its' height, and its' height will be determined by its' placement

I can offer some measurements that may give you a possible guide line. And I can also offer what I look for when determining the distance between the reel's face, and the butt guide.

As far as the measurements I took go .... Dimensions are in mm since that is how Fuji lists their guide heights.

I just measured the distance from the bottom of the reel foot, to the center of the reel's line guide on a Shimano Curado 200 K casting reel. That distance is 30 mm. I also just measured the distance from the bottom of the guide foot, to the top inside of the guide's ceramic ring of a Fuji KW 10 with a Torzite ring. That height is 12.46 mm. So the height of the inside top of the guide's ceramic ring, is about 40% of the height of the reel's line guide. I can't say for sure, but Fuji may well have used that number in conjunction with the distance of the butt guide to the reel's face, which from what I've read in the past, seems to be 19 - 21" from the reel's face as a starting point, in determing the height of the KW 10, or RV6.

Anyhow ... what I take from looking at those numbers, is that because the butt guide is so much shorter than the height of the reel's line guide, and where the butt guide is placed, the line is not meant to pass directly through the center of the butt guide. If it were, one would think the guide would be much taller. And when you start putting tall guides on a conventionally wrapped casting rod, you're inducing even more rod torque that results from the leverage affect of the guides.

What I look for when determining where to place the butt guide, and that is the angle of the line from the reel, to the inside top of the butt guide's ceramic ring. I'm looking for a shallow angle. I want some angle as I believe it helps smooth the flow of the line. Which based on watching videos of Fuji's casting guide trains in action, is what I think they're looking for as well.

I think you want some angle to the line entering the butt guide. And how much angle is acceptable, will be based on line choices.

Based on my experience with the lines I use on casting gear, which is either straight fluorocarbon, or nylon mono filaments, if I bring the butt guide in closer, it increases the line angle and causes the line between the reel and butt guide to slow too much, which leads to the beginnings of back lashes. If I push it out too far, it lessens the line angle between the reel and butt guide, and the line gets too sloppy, which leads to the beginnings of back lashes.

More supple lines will be more forgiving than stiffer ones.

Oh well, not sure anything I just wrote makes sense. Hope it does. lol

Thanks for the feedback, David. This makes sense and is something I’ve thought of - essentially making guide height and distance proportional to that of a low profile setup. An additional consideration for surf rods would be to ensure the line clears both the foregrip and one’s hand when holding the foregrip.

I’m open to anyone else’s thought process when it comes to setting up guide height/location.

Ditto, on what David wrote. Minimize the angle the line bends at the butt guide without getting it so far out that slapping or other line control issues occur. My longest casting baitcasting rods, with fluorocarbon line and low profile reels, have the guide set pretty close to 21 inches out with the top, inside surface of the ring being about 12mm high. I’m not saying slight to moderate deviations from this are less advantageous. It’s just my observation from an ample set of rods that include a range of lure and line weights. This is also consistent with modern guide heights and how many layouts are being done. I can tell the difference in casting length with butt guides closer than about 20 inches out. Not every variable is the same in this, but most are with several rods in play.

Will hits on a key issue with regards to the KRC and casting layouts - I think there IS theory and testing behind Fuji's recommendations, however, there is not much ink spilled in describing it.

Baylor's Formula: (Reel Spool Height) x 0.4 = Butt Guide Height with placement of butt guide 19 to 21 inches from the reel face is a great observation. It is the first ratio-based formula I have seen.

Using constants, like 40% and 19-21 inches, means the angle of the line leaving the spool guide will remain the same +/-? Is this angle of line then a good indicator of where the second guide and choker should be placed = inline? It seems so to me. Also, I wonder if the angle is the important factor - and the distance to the butt guide from the spool face is a variable amount to achieve that angle.

I get away with using an RV6 butt guide at 500mm, or 20-inches, from the spool face for all my casters up to 8 ft. with reels in the Curado 150 to TranX 300 low-profile sizes. I follow the angle/line this creates from the reel spool to my first runner and go on out to the tip with the same size guides. This may or may not be best for your particular rig since it sounds like it is larger than the reels I use right now.

Since casting reels have no "upsweep" toward the rod like many spinning reel axles, Baylor's Formula creates a similar "down sweep" toward the rod. Like David said, to achieve this down sweep, the line must hit the butt guide at the top of the ring to be directed toward the rod and lower running guides. Getting the line down to the running guides as quickly and efficiently as possible is most of the ballgame with casting or spinning rigs, IMO.

I'd start with Baylor's Formula and work from there!

Yes, angle seems to be the name of the game here. Steeper angle/slope gets the line to the height of the running guides quicker but too steep of an angle could create issues. Fuji’s KR concept video explains this but does not go into how they determined a KW10 was the right size for low profile baitcasters. Therefore it is not intuitively obvious as to how to extrapolate to larger reel sizes. I think angle is the best variable to hold constant. This can be done by using a ratio (like David mentions above). This ratio can be used to proportionately determine both guide height and distance from the reel line guide.

One issue with the ratio method is that reel line guide height is not only dependent on the reel but also the taper of the rod and reel seat size. Therefore, I think this method will put you in the ballpark of having the right line angle but only measurement of the angle (or visual approximation) will ensure you end up with the correct angle.

Will,

I think you have a good grasp of the concepts involved. You are on your way to a thoughtful and intentional custom build.

This is just my opinion, but I think Fuji was looking at guide height, more than ring size, when they were considering line flow. That is, the KW10 created an efficient flow of line to the smaller running guides in their tests. That's because the KW10 created that Golden Angle of Efficiency, IMO. Is it the Ring Size or the Angle? This is a great question for me because line size and type plays a roll in my thinking in a spinning build with the KRC. Why would it not play a role on the casting reel side?

Too small a ring size, regardless of height, may create trouble - just as too large of a ring will create other troubles down the line. Where is Goldilocks when you need her?!

To be honest, I have not seen any info where Fuji recommend the RV6 as a butt guide on casting rods. Don't know where that came from! I just tried it and found it worked great. Is the KW10 recommended because of the guide height or ring size? Or could the RV6, with almost the same guide height and smaller ring size and lighter weight, do the same job? I can't say I know for sure. Nevertheless, the angles of reduction of the line remains the same.

Variables (like reel seat choice and blank diameter) can make changes. How much this changes the angles to make a significant difference I do not know. If you have the patience and resources, try more than one set up of reel seat and guide train. Mock-up the components, test, and draw your own conclusions. Takes time and a little more money to follow this path = Custom Build = likely closer to what you want.

I liked your quest for some "rules of thumb" to get in the ball park. All thumbs are different - but not wildly different. I bet thumb length follows a range of Ratios to the other fingers. Same same with rods and reels. There ARE some basic, proven principles involved when considering line size/type, guide size, etc. as David has stated.

Master the principles. Like a public library card, you become a Citizen of Possibilities. It takes time, trials and experience. This forum is flush with that for sure!







:

Not saying I have this figured out, because I don't. I'm just guessing at what the folks at Fuji may have been thinking in regards to the angle of the line as it enters the butt guide. I think they're looking for some line friction at the butt guide, to smooth the flow of the line as it travels towards the tip.

I've only ever tried a butt guide other than either a KW 10, or an LN 10, on one of my rods. And that is my jerkbait rod. I went with a KW 8 as the butt guide on that rod. In a thread a while ago, I shared an on the water experience of how the shorter butt guide, as well as it being closer to the reel, affected the casting performance when I went to a heavier line than I had planned on using on the rod, when I chose the guides I'd be using. When building the rod I had thoughts of using 10# fluorocarbon on it the majority of the time. With 12 # fluorocarbon being the largest line I would use. And the casts beautifully using those two size lines. It casts slightly better with the 10#. Anyhow ..... one particular day on the water I didn't want my bait to get as deep, so I switched out reels on the rod, for one that had 20# fluorocarbon on it. It did the trick as far as keeping the bait higher in the water column, but it cast horribly. Backlash city basically. I was able to tame it somewhat by changing my weight system and spool tension knob, but I could never really eliminate it. Especially when I'd really try to bomb a cast.

It was clearly the stiffer line causing the problem. It just wasn't turning the corner as easily as the lighter lines I normally use. I had a shorter butt guide, 2" closer to the reel (because of the rod's length) than any of the rods I normally use heavy line on. I have a KW 10 on my short spinnerbait rod placed the same 2" closer than I normally do on my heavier line rods, And it casts pretty well. Not as well as it would if I moved the butt guide out, but good enough for the shorter casts I make with that particular rod.

As far as the RV 6 versus the KW 10 goes, the RV 6 is about 2 mm shorter than the KW 10. Because Fuji went to a size 6 ring, I think it's the height of the guide that they're looking at. I don't really like the looks of the RV 6 so I don't see myself ever trying one, but I am curious as to where people that use them, place their butt guide? What distance from the reel face? As for me, I'm thinking that if you brought it in much closer than 21" from the reel face, that you may start having the same kind of issues I described on my jerkbait rod, when I put heavier, stiffer line on it. I'm guessing 21 to perhaps 23" from the reel face would be the RV 6's sweet spot if you're using it on a rod with lines like 20# fluorocarbon. Or stiffer larger sized nylon mono filament lines?

19 - 21" from the reel face on a rod that's 11' 6" long seems very close to the reel. As Will said, you have considerations on surf rods that you don't have on bass rods. Also, chances are you're dealing with taller reels with greater line guide heights than low profile bait casting reel like the Curado. I gotta think the butt guides gotta be taller than a KW 10. Perhaps a KW, but with a larger ring size to gain the height that a taller reel would require, if line angle entering the butt guide is that main factor to consider.

Anyhow ..... can't wait to find out what you come up with Will.

The KW-10 is used because the height at the top of the ring matches that of the RV-6. They do recommend the RV-6 in the Angler's Resource catalog.

David makes solid points. There is a dance between guide placement, guide size, and lines involved. Experience.

Saltwater or freshwater have no bearing on how well your rod and reel serve your fishing. Newton's Apple falls on us all the same way. People often think in terms of "salt vs fresh". If you are casting for King Fish on the cliffs of New Zealand, or pitching jigs to weed mats in New Jersey, the rods and reels may be different, but the physics of fishing remain the same.

I agree with Lynn that guide height, rather than ring size, is a significant factor for an efficient rod and reel system.

Lynn, the RV 6 is 1.7 mm shorter than the KW 10. So at the inside top of the ceramic ring, it's going to be 1.7 mm shorter than the KW 10. That's assuming that the frame's ring is the same dimension. Does the RV 6 appear to have a difference in frame thickness?

Anyhow, be that as it may ....... It's a different story when you start talking about the height of the inside bottom of the ceramic ring for each guide. While I don't have an RV 6 on hand to measure. logic based on ring sizes and each guide's height, would have the bottom inside of the RV6's ceramic ring, 2.3 mm taller than the KW 10. Or at least in the neighborhood of that.

As reference for why I questioned where folks that use the RV 6 for a butt guide, place it in relationship to the reel face. I mentioned having a KW 8 as the butt guide on my jerkbait rod. The KW 8 is only .6 mm shorter than the RV 6. I have the butt guide on my jerkbait rod, 19 1/2" from the face of the reel. On the short spinnerbait rod I mentioned earlier, I have the butt guide, a KW 10, the same 19 1/2" from the face of the reel. That rod has either 20# fluorocarbon, or 17# Big Game on it.

My short spinnerbait rod casts those heavy lines much better than my jerkbait rod does

Dave I don't have a RV-6 to measure. I just know that I was told by the "man" that the KW-10 was the correct height at the inside top of the ring to substitute for the RV-6.

Lynn, I know who you're talking about when you say the "man", and he dang sure is the man !!! And there is no doubt based on Fuji designing it, and lots of people I've seen mention their using it, that it works great.

Be that as it may ..... it's shorter than a KW 10 at the inside top of the ceramic ring. Which is why I wonder about how well the RV 6 works with stiffer lines, when it's brought in closer to the reel face. While casting rods are certainly far more friendly to different line types and sizes when it comes to guide size, and guide placement, line type and size has to be somewhere in the picture.

BTW, haven't seen "the man" post in a while. Hope it's just because he's been too busy fishing.

The RV6 is very close to 12mm high at the top inside of the ring.