MickD

Thanks. So the average difference is a little over 4 grams. or water. I think you've proven Tom's and my point on weight variation. The variation is not significant to fatigue or durability. Other factors are significant to durability, like some defect in the blank that was not detectable during the manufacturing process. I'd like to point out that I stress each blank I receive and I've never had one break. The only rods I've broken have been due to abuse, not a problem with the blanks.

Better than the deflection charts would be CCS data which give numerical values for power and action. I test all my blanks for CCS so I have a growing data base of values. These values do vary more than weights of blanks (and components) due to blank variations and test error, but they are still adequate for describing blanks. For example, they will show the difference between power of a blank spline up or spline down. Few blank manufacturers offer them in their nomenclature, not sure why, but I suspect it's due to two reasons: 1. Few fishermen understand them so would add to rather than eliminate confusion with most fishermen, and 2. I think they fear some builders will mis-use the data to falsely claim advantages/disadvantages. http://www.common-cents.info/ I would be interested in hearing how components can vary in weight. I can only see cork density as a component variable, and it would be minuscule. The guides, wraps, epoxy, decals, seats, keepers cannot vary significantly.

Since you've weighed several hundred you should be able to produce data on say maybe, 10 of the same model? Right? It really doesn't matter whether custom or production, they are all made from some model of blank, and the producer doesn't know when they are made whether they are going to a rod manufacturer or a custom rod builder. And obviously, the rest of the components are not going to vary much at all. How could they?

As a builder who weighs every blank I get, I assure you that weight variation is very small. Always either right on or at most a few hundreths of an ounce off. The other components will not vary that much, and even the wraps and epoxy will be essentially the same for all rods of the same design. How many rods of the same model have you weighed? Tom is right on.

My experience with their blanks has been all positive. Not so much with their guides.

AmTak Bushido Mag bass blanks are very nice, also at a very good price. I'm sure the guide train will work, but if I were doing it I would buy the Fuji RV 6mm reverse casting guide, no transition guide necessary, but won't hurt, so if you want it, do it, then buy the right number of KB and KT tangle free guides to make the number of guides right. I would use KT's near the tip, where the tip diameter is small, and the rest of the running guides, KB (bigger foot, stronger). If you do the transition guide, it would be a KB. The issue with the LN is that it is about 4 mm lower than the Fuji recommended guide height for the first guide. And the KB's are more tangle-free than the L's. If you prefer dark guides, use the T2 RV guide and if you prefer bright guides the regular titanium RV , which works well with bright stainless guides. The T2 is not yet shown in the Fuji catalog, at least I've not found it, but vendors have it. The Fuji Fazlite ring with their new corrosion control stainless frame is a very high performing, inexpensive guide. I would use a SIC tiptop for max grooving resistance. ONly a buck or two more. It's obvious I'm a Fuji devotee', but I really like the RV, KB, KT combination for cast.

This is not rocket science. Get a postal scale and weigh them. Or buy one of many other nice, very accurate scales on line.

Depends on the rod also. With a moderate action rod and a few feet of leader (mono or FC) braid works very well for cranks. I especially like my ML power moderate-fast action 7 ' spin rod (Rainshadow RX7 ISP 843) with 15 pound braid for small cranks up to Rapala DT6's. In the spring when SMB are fairly shallow, using small squarebills is effective and this outfit is ideal. Advocates of moderate action (crankbait) rods with mono or FC should try light braid-much better feel of the lure to detect weed fouling and strikes feel like strikes rather than snags.

Unless you are really proficient with a BC outfit, don't go FC. Its advantages are minuscule, and its problems are not. Expensive, fragile, stiff. It's good for leaders (leader grade FC.). OK, FC fans, pile on.

Your MH suggestion is good for a rod. Unless you're fishing really weed-choked areas, I see no need for more than 20 # braid. 15# leader is fine, too. If you're running a 15# leader, heavier line doesn't do much exc cost you casting quality. If it's really weedy and you're running over 20# braid, then use a 20# leader. I like what I consider the better feel I get with spin. Not sure why this should be true, but seems like it to me.

Yes. I recommend, if you want to do it yourself, flaming the thread fuzzies, then clean the surface by gently rubbing with fine steel wool, or preferably, Scotchbrite pad. Wipe clean, no alcohol, and apply epoxy. A light coat will unlikely cause a blob, but to be sure, just turn it every 15 minutes until it's jelled. Check its condition by touching the epoxy in the mix container, not the epoxy on the rod. With the color of the thread, and the fact that it is such a small area, any liquid epoxy will work just fine. Thin coat!

The torque argument is less of an issue now that we are using "micros" and other small guides that are located very low to the blank. I personally don't feel the advantage, but some do. It can easily be demonstrated, as stated above. The more powerful the blank the more the torque advantage can be felt. I agree with those who say there is no casting advantage or disadvantage to spiral. A custom builder may be able to cut one guide from the count with spiral, and since it will be near the tip, that is advantageous to sensitivity. With very light power blanks the use of spiral will prevent the tip from twisting 180 degrees when under heavy load. I like that, although I have rods that do that and they have never broken. With the small guides used today, spirals don't look as "goofy" as they used to.

If I think the reel needs to be disassembled, I let a pro do it. Both BC and spin reels these days are way too complex for me to risk screwing them up. I just take the covers off and do what I think necessary there. If I have to go deeper, I send it in. Exc for disassembling spools to service the drag on spin reels; that is not a problem.

If easy and effective casting is a priority, then match the power of the rod to the weight of the lures you intend to cast. It has to load properly to cast properly. From there, you go to action. I think fast is the default action for most techniques. It is very versatile, and with proper fisherman technique, can do anything.

My opinion (that means no data) is that if you get a snap swivel that is strong enough, it will be so big it will adversely affect lure action and might be seen by fish as something to be avoided. There are very good snaps available that are pretty small yet have breaking strengths well above 20 pounds, and that is what I buy and use when I want to quickly and easily change lures. For some lures, like cranks, I think the snaps are better than direct tying in that they don't affect action. It is also my opinion that the swivels on snap swivels really don't prevent line twist unless they are premium ball bearing swivels, and I'm not convinced that even they will prevent twist. I don't fish spinners very often. With some finesse baits I just tie to the leader/line.

The lowest part of the boat is the bottom of the lower unit, and it's easy to measure from the transducer to that. I think mine is set for 1 foot and I just know that when the display reads less than 3 feet, I'd better pay attention. It's all about how you want to use it and your personal preference.

Surprising only one mention of blades. Walleyes love them too.

Regarding a post up there somewhere, proper loading is imperative for easy and effective casting, but you can get proper loading with any action. I submit that Extra fast actions are more versatile, loading effectively for a wider range of lure weights than the other actions. Consider an extra fast action, stiff butt that goes well out toward the tip, but a light power tip. The heavy weight lures will cast well because it is the butt power that controls the load; the tip becomes inconsequential to the loading of the rod. With light lures the butt is inconsequential, but the tip power is the controlling parameter, and it is light power. So the extra fast rod just may, given it's right blend of butt and tip power, cast a much broader range of lure weights. Easily and naturally.

i own a lot of Daiwa reels, both spin and BC, both under the name of Daiwa and Cabelas Prodigy and whatever else they called them. They all are very smooth, last for many years, and it's hard for me now to consider other brands. My "revelation" came after many years of loving Shimano. Shimano is good, but when pressed for my fav, it's got to be Daiwa. For everything. I just don't think they will ever offer a product that is not excellent. Fuego CT, for this issue.

If you're not using braid, you will make a big step in sensitivity by changing to it.

For some reason most keepers are not made of the best material for corrosion; in builders' catalogs most are called stainless steel, but no specs. I've started using the REC titanium alloy keepers which are bullet proof for corrosion. The location I like, but which doesn't seem to have universal appeal, is the same on spin and cast, just in front of the seat on the bottom. High quality small single foot fly guides work well, too. They can be bent if you like to lie flatter than 90 degrees to the blank.

Agree, however that can happen with keepers, too. I've never had anything but surface scratching from this, and always right at the keeper, not the guide frame.

I don't see a problem with using a guide frame , not the ring, the frame. Those opposing this, what is your reason? All a guide frame is is a piece of "wire." Like a keeper is a piece of "wire." No guide is going to be distorted by the forces involved with doing this. No ring is going to be scratched (although rings are most likely harder than hooks anyway). Both are equally close to the blank, so the risk of scratching the blank is about the same for both. I don't put keepers on my fly rod builds, just use the first guide frame. Also keeps the leader loop out of the tiptop when wrapped around the reel. Some keepers on cast and spin rods can get tangled in the line while fishing if not positioned properly, so sometimes less is more. What's the problem?

Like my dad used to say when I was concerned about something like this, "50 years from now, who'll know the difference?"

If you want the rig to also serve as a surface outfit, you do not want FC. It sinks and will, not maybe, but will, screw up the action of most surface lures. Exc for the Whopper Plopper, which is basically a lure that can be retrieved with the line out of the water.