MickD

I think these two jigging for walleye techniques are very different. The much higher current of the Detroit River requires much heavier jigs, I believe, and would require a much stouter power than what would work well on the Saginaw River or Saginaw Bay. At least from my experience. Jig weights of 3/4 and 1 oz are what most use on the Detroit River, I think. Better do some research before expecting one rod to do both. I think for what you are looking for now the SJ842 would be the best choice. For the Detroit River the SJ843 probably would be. Or use a casting outfit for Detroit River.

You mean I can use my Ned rod for other lures? Got snow up on the 45th? 🙂

Would I not need a pretty large number of them to handle various blank sizes? Pretty pricey for each?

Thanks, Michael. This is a good solution if constructing a fighting butt or butt knob from scratch. I'll give it a try. Another option to closing the hole that I like is to install a rubber auto trim panel bumper into the hole with epoxy. Finishes off nice, gives a soft "landing" if standing a rod up, looks nice, unobtrusive. I'll try to get a picture today. The one weakness that I see of the option shown is getting the butt knob hole drilled out to the blank diameter concentrically if one is starting with an already assembled butt knob, like I often use as fighting butts on fly rods. . I've had trouble doing that. Any tips on doing that would be appreciated.

Got a pic of this? Not sure I understand.

The more you use CCS the easier it is to be predictive, and to match a blank's characteristics that you like. If the length, IP and AA's are the same, the rods will be very similar. The differences after length, power, and action would be weight and true natural frequency. If they also match then the blanks will be for practical purposes identical with respect to feel, casting distance, sensitivity, and how they fish.

Great data! Gives a really good understanding of how the blanks will perform. For bottom contact I would prefer the faster actions, SJ842. If you want to stick with Rainshadow, SP 843, but I'd like a faster action, and more power. If RS calls that M power, is there a kit with MH power? I'd call 329 grams light or M-light power. More like a Ned rod. There is a kit based on the SB842 which I think is a good fit if you want to stick with RS. I have a travel rod, SB841-3 which is a great rod, very fast action, about 575 grams. Called a ML power, most would call it medium. This whole exercise shows the futility of selecting what you want when the subjective ratings are all over the place, even within the products of one manufacturer. For example the SB841-3 is more powerful than the SJ842-1. 841 is called ML and the SJ842 is called M power. CCS tells the story accurately.

I've seen your builds, and I think you are beyond the kit stage, if you want to be, especially if you're considering switching out parts. Kits can be constricting. Have drill press? You can easily turn cork on a drill press, if you need details, let me know. Here is a site that has a lot of CCS data, although not the ones you are looking at, but close. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r3zv1ygtuUjPBa-c5LT9RTYeDR_pnCDIkVIdDv0YoeQ/edit#gid=988464562 SJ SJ 842 84 550 78 19.24 1 This is the blank just under the 843, and the AA of 78 is quite fast, the power of 19 about what most would consider medium. SJ SJ843-2 84 786 75 25.31 This is the two piece version of the SJ843, a little slower action and significantly more powerful, I would call it more like a M-H power. No data on the SP843, but I expect it to be more in the range of the SJ842 for power, but a little slower. I have a couple RS RX6's and they are very nice rods, but different models. I also have built and fished a 6 1/2 foot MHX, and it too is a very good quality rod. By specifying your own parts you can get whatever guides you want, which would include the Fuji KLH guides, very affordable in SS. If you need tips on them, let me know. KLH reduction guides with KB/KT runners is all I use on spin. Love them.

Don't toss it until you cut it into small pieces so wildlife won't get tangled. Yup, for any kind of line.

Just saw an email on TW discounts on rods. My opinion is that for spinning, it's mostly about the rod, with casting it's mostly about the reel. It will vary with techniques, but this is where I would spend my money. Daiwa reels, both cast and spin, are good at any price point, and the higher you go the better. I would say the sweet spot is about $200, but there is a lot of good stuff for less. I build my own rods and am not familiar with the commercially built stuff any more.

I will not build blanks with ridges. There is no reason for the ridges other than to save some money in the blank process. I also don't see any other advantage for an NFC blank over many other blanks, and I am not fond of how they are managed. Contrary to what many believe, I don't think there is any magic any longer in the name Loomis. Others have caught up. I do like their carbon fiber grips and will buy them. Most if not all of their ridged blanks are available in a mirror finish as mentioned above which has no ridges, so that is an option if you want NFC but don't want ridges. I suggest you buy a little of both A and D and see what you prefer. Both work just fine but D might be easier and A might work better for really small guides near the tip, like Fuji KT's. There will be an appearance difference, but I don't think it's a major consideration. See what you think by trying them both. These are my opinions. Keep in mind that all you get for the most part on forums are opinions with little or no real data. We all have our own specific expectations, and differences in them often affect our opinions. Also, opinions are often biased in other ways.

I have "tons" of A thread and have no interest in starting over with D to accommodate this gimmick of marketing. There are plenty of blanks out there that are as good and don't have ridges.

I must be missing something. I have to wrap up the foot of the guide towards the ring, and the ridges are what they are, so how do I change the direction of my wrap with respect to the ridges? I concede that many don't have a problem with the ridges. My opinion is that they offer no functional advantage, and can impede me in wrapping, so I won't contend with them. But help me understand how to change the direction of the wrap with respect to the ridges without wrapping down the foot. Thanks

I would ask NFC if this would void the warranty before I did it. I would think making the transition from the "burnished" area to the ridged area would be an issue, too. Before doing this I would wrap over the ridges. PIA, but not impossible. Some builders don't even see it as a PIA.

Some NFC blanks are offered in mirror finish which does not have ridges. I personally won't build the ridged models after building a couple of them. One thing to consider is buying an inexpensive blank or a kit to get you oriented and learning without investing a lot of money. There are a lot of good blanks that don't cost that much. Also look for sales.

I'm not going to look into those models, NFC has so many and so many materials it's just very confusing. To check on power and action you might go to https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r3zv1ygtuUjPBa-c5LT9RTYeDR_pnCDIkVIdDv0YoeQ/edit#gid=1592691333 If you are unfamiliar with CCS go to: https://www.common-cents.info/ You can do searches on line for videos, just search "video then subject" and you'll find a lot. Mudhole.com and FlexCoat.com have a lot of good tutorials. Anglersresource.net has a good tutorial on the two line method of determining guide spacing and good software for locating the reduction guides on spinning rods with their KLH guide series, which is all I use for spinning rods. For that series of guides make sure you use the KR software only In general the best way to determine the power of a blank without having CCS info is to use the recommended lure weight numbers. That's my opinion anyway. You'll find a lot of divergence in opinions on rodbuilding so you'll build and learn and come up with your own. One can never have too many rods, so don't get too hung up on nit-picky specs. Whatever you build will find a use.

Why the heck would anyone take apart a new reel? Don't get it. Maybe one might consider just using a new reel, then reacting to any problems, rather than creating problems.

The most critical part of the process is making sure you get adequate epoxy (buy some rodbuilding epoxy-I think some of the hardware stuff is pretty stiff/brittle) along the inside of the sleeve. Don't skimp, use 90% alcohol or denatured alcohol for cleanup of tracked epoxy before it hardens. If you have questions as you go through it, message me and we'll work them out.

Barlowe's blade bait blanks with a single hook on the tail work as well as any I've found. Single hook gets the fish, not so often a line tangle or the bottom trash.

The Common Cents System (common-cents.info) RodbuildingCCS - Google Sheets The problem is that Loomis and SC and all others have their own SUBJECTIVE ratings for power and action, and they don't correlate with each other's ratings. The only way to know what you are going to get is to compare OBJECTIVE numbers on power and action. While not all blanks and rods are included in the data base I provided, you can set up your own tools to measure yourself. Then the further you go into this rabbit hole the more knowledgeable you are, and the more confident in what you purchase. Not a perfect world. If you need help in setting up a CCS rig, let me know. There is a major difference between these two. Major Major. These most likely will be way different in how they fish because the shorter the rod the more influential "extra fast" becomes, and at longer lengths the more forgiving a slower action is. So these are most likely very different. But CCS could tell you how different.

Only way you're going to really know is to measure them for CCS numbers. What lengths are you considering? Seems that's pretty important to a comparative discussion.

If faster means where it will first bend, it will get slower when you shorten it. Do CCS on it to prove it if you doubt it. If faster means faster recovery speed then it probably will speed up a bit. If you still have both pieces intact I would recommend doing this procedure on it. I've done it probably a dozen times, and all the rods were successful after doing it. My last was the second repair (broken near the tip first, then repaired and it fished fine, then got stepped on and was broken farther down, repaired again) on an 8 wt fly rod and just got the report that it casts as well as ever and landed two bonefish just fine. https://www.rodbuilding.org/library/repair-oquinn.html This procedure if done right will result in a rod that fishes just as well as the original. I have never liked how a rod shortened from the tip feels. Note that it's not that important whether you use glass or graphite for the sleeve. I actually prefer graphite because it is thinner walled and makes a less obtrusive appearance.

If you are still apprehensive then do the microwave routine then do a test wrap and see what you have.

Short bursts on the microwave are in no way risky or unsafe. This is standard operating procedure for renewing crystalized epoxy, both wrap and adhesive.

For all reels, or just round reels?