MickD

Yes.

http://www.mudhole.com/Graphite-Arbors-FA?quantity=1?quantity=1 The shims above come up to almost 30 mm, and are the Pac Bay shims. These are the most rigid and solid of the ones i've used. Only problem with them, and not that big a deal, is they are black, so the dust is black and it stains a bit. I always paint the ones I use so that there is no color difference between them if I use more than one on a rod. Fast drying hardware store paint is fine. Cobble a paper clip to hang them from.

No problem, ghoti. I respect your work and opinion, too. If one likes a bigger diameter foregrip, it can still be made from rigid poly. But it will be very difficult to finish with epoxy cleanly if it's on the rod when the finish is applied. Do the final finish before putting it on the rod. Regarding the diameter, if you've tried an uplocking seat with the ramp about the same diameter as the hood and didn't like it, fine. Different strokes. But if you haven't tried it, I suggest you do. It feels much different than a downlocking seat. Larger diameter, smooth. For finesse fishing it works very well. I'm really interested in seeing the final build and how it works out.

I agree that it looks like it will be almost impossible to get the grub onto that hook. The barbs look much like those on my favorite darter head jig, and I had real trouble getting a Z man minnow onto it without screwing up the orientation on the jig.

I have made many rods with the seat shims for ramps, and have had one failure. It "collapsed" from finger pressure. Post mortem showed that I had not filled the bore at the front adequately with epoxy, and there was a void which didn't support the material properly. I repaired it and it's going strong. All of the rods pictured in the article are going strong with no distress, no dents, no dulling, no scratches, only a yellowing of the epoxy. This shows on the rods with ivory painted shims, but not on darker colors. It is not slippery when wet. With some fish slime, probably, but so is cork. Carbon fiber grips are often finished very smooth and with epoxy, and no one is complaining about them. It is the shape that determines grip, for the most part. I have not used this stuff for butt grips, thinking that might be too stressful. I don't carry my rods around in the back of a pickup. I think transporting rods improperly is where many get damaged and where, if the front ramps are going to get damaged, it will happen. Just be sure not to leave any voids like I did on that one of about a ten rods. You might cobble up a rod with an uplocking seat and the diameter of the front ramp equal to that of the front of the rod seat hood and see what you think of the feel. I think you'll like it. The approx equal diameters let the hand go where it wants with almost no perception of going on and off the ramp.

I have no idea if the price is right, but the boat looks like new. One comment from experience from my old Monark, if the rod locker on the side lets the rods move fore and aft, then it is possible that they will move while trailering and break the tips off as they contact the bulkhead. Not hard to cobble a fix, but be aware. I broke 2 rods in mine before I figured it out. I have a Rebel 1650 SS and love it.

I agree with balance comment. Especially when I hear talk about a rod by itself "balancing well."

i have no data, but I cannot believe that EVA will be as sensitive as cork. But I think either will be fine. I don't use EVA because I don't trust it for long term durability, long term in sense of it working for my kids. Most sensitive and lightest is carbon fiber, clearly. Don't do a foregrip, not necessary. If you want something there other than the blank to touch, turn a piece of rigid poly reel seat shim to the shape you want, just under the diameter of the front of the seat paint it to match the look of the rod, then a couple coats of wrap epoxy for top coats. I do this all the time, light sensitive, durable, good looking , good feeling to the hands. Make sure you generously apply epoxy to the bore and blank. This stuff can fail if you leave voids. If you want it larger in diameter than the seat, completely finish it before installation. If you make it bigger than the seat diameter putting the last coats of wrap epoxy on will be very difficult to do cleanly. Keep in mind that burl cork is almost twice as heavy as regular cork. If you want weight behind the reel, it may be a good option in order to gain a little weight. http://clients.criticalimpact.com/newsletter/newslettercontentshow1.cfm?contentid=9599&id=1069

Now consider the guides. For casting I really like the Fuji system, with the #6 RV, then a couple or three KB's then the rest KT's to the tip. I like 4.5's for casting. I see no real need for spiral with guides as low as these and a power as low as you're talking about, but whatever you do, keep the guides on the upper half of the rod small and light for max sensitivity.

I have built a number of Immortals or what was called RX8 before they called them Immortals. I have built 3 RX7's or Revelations as they are called now, same blanks according to Rainshadow. I have to state that the REVIP70M popping rod is one of my favorites. It is a medium power, a little shy of medium per CCS power=319 grams, action angle 65, which means med-fast. It is a great rod for a lot of things, like small hard jerks, 4 inch swim baits on a bullet jig (jerked off bottom in a good cadence) , small cranks. The surprising thing is that the rod has such fast recovery. Feels very sensitive. Makes jerking very easy, and it gives a sharp enough twitch to entice Lake St Clair smallies without feeling too stiff. Too stiff will give a fast twitch, but with little or no feel. I'm not explaining it well, but it's a surprisingly fine blank for the money. I would not hesitate to take the word of Rainshadow regarding the small differences between REvelation and Immortal. They are not going to tell you they are the same, so if they say "little difference," it has to be a very little difference. I am not recommending the 65 degree AA blank for your use, just commenting that REvelation is very sensitive, very high performing for the money. A real sweet spot somewhat unappreciated, like American Tackle Bushido fresh water blanks. I'll bet, based on my experience, that the 6-10 ML XF Revelation is one sweet blank. It sounds to me to perfect for your intended use, and with the endorsement from Rainshadow for your use, even better. Keep in mind they could have tried to influence you to the more costly Immortals if they didn't believe in this new Revelaton.

Yes, a few. I have not used it under really good conditions for a surface lure, however. A good friend who fishes similar waters says it's a killer.

I have not used the WP very much, no experience with what you mention. With many other lures, especially spinnerbaits, smallies will many times just whack it with their heads. I notice this by getting a lot of hits without hookups, then I'll get one in that's foul hooked. It means that they are not fully committed. Something is not quite right, like skirt color, spinner blade color, etc. If I experience that with the WP I'll change to another type surface lure, probably a Chug Bug and work it slower. I don't think color is that big of a deal with surface lures.

My CCS for the 5 level MF70 is 452/77. The ML XF will be lower in power, of course, and where the action angle will end up is a question, but it should be at least 75. At the time I took these numbers my biggest likelihood for errors was in the action angle. I've not seen any other blanks faster than this 77 measurement. I really love my 70MF SC5. St Croix 's are a little more powerful at ML than most other makers ML's .

It is possible to do CCS quite accurately without a board taking up all that space. If you are interested in what I did, a setup that can be put up and down easily and that takes up much less space, e-mail me.

With all due respect for Ghoti, who I know is a fine rodbuilder who knows his blanks and rods, I think you will be disappointed in the walleye rod for your use. The blank will cast what you want to cast well, but the issue is, in my opinion, in the hook set. I think you probably want to be able to do a fairly aggressive hook set, and I don't think this blank will give you that. But as I said before, you cannot have too many rods. If it doesn't do this job well, it will be a nice Ned rod.

My son has a Crestliner and loves it. I have a Lund and I love it. Both are high quality boats with good features, excellent build qualtiy, excellent structural feel. There is one difference of consequence to me, and that is the Crestliner has a welded hull and the Lund has a riveted hull. I used to have a Monark welded hull boat. Both my son's boat and the Monark would "wander" at speeds just above a troll, like the speed you use going out a long entry to the lake. My Lund does not do that. It tracks straight. I asked a Monark engineer one time why the Monark had no keel and he said the keel is only necessary at low speeds to keep the boat tracking well, and if it tracks well enough, they don't put a keel on it. These two boats do not track well enough for me. I think the welded hull gets the keel because it is necessary in the construction of the boat, probably the boat's backbone. My Lund also has a nicer live well, no post-it has a plug in the bottom and the overflow a screened port in the side of it. One thing I've done when not sure of a big purchase is I insisted on a try-out of the boat/tractor/car/etc before the deal is complete.

Make sure your tiptop is not missing its ring, and while you're at it check all rings for cracks by rotating a Q-tip inside them. The cracks will catch the fuzz on the Q tip.

Oh, I think I get it, you're suggesting that when the screw eye is turned into the Devcon it have a thin coating of vasolene to allow it to be removed later? I would use Devcon without the vaslene, but it makes more sense now that I've figured it out.

I use the walleye S72ML built as a spinning rod, and it is a nice blank for Neds and for its intended use, jigging walleyes. But I don't think it will do well for what you intend. I think you want a more powerful rod with a faster action. While this blank is called a fast action, I CCS measured mine and the action angle was found to be 65, typical of a moderate or moderate-fast action. I believe my data are correct based on observing its curve under load. I don't think this is the right blank. Its power was found to be 190 grams. I would shy away from the Bass ML power S72ML unless someone comes on with some real experience as it too may not really be a fast action. And ML may not be powerful enough. The 610 extra fast is rated at its low end for lures right about where you will be working, and an XF action would be better for finesse, in my opinion. But I have no experience with either of the latter blanks. If you could get some CCS data on the latter blanks, it would be great. Based on my other rods I've tested for CCS, I think you need a fast or extra fast action with power of 325 grams or slightly more. Based on a couple builds of Point Blank blanks by Anglers REsource, I think the blank you are looking for is the PB691MLXF, 6 foot 9 in, medium light power, XF action. The lure recommendation is 1/16 to 3/8 oz. Keep in mind that different makers rate power and action differently, but CCS gives objective data. This rod will be about 370 grams, action angle about 76 degrees, definitely an XF action. Point Blank blanks are terrific blanks, more pricey than Immortals, but the fact that you have pretty good objective power and action numbers, it may save you a build if the others with no objective data don't work out. Regardless, you will be really pleased with this blank for other uses if it's not quite right for this build. You simply cannot have too many rods. Come back and let us know what you built and how it works. I built two PB691MXF's for my son, built as casting rods, and he loves them.

$150 or a little more won't scare me off. Lures from 1/4 oz. Of course, but some are a heckova lot better than others. Current reels are Curados and Revos, prefer the curados. Less than $200 max. Or close.

I've never owned a Daiwa casting reel. I love their spinning reels and would like to try a casting reel. I'm not interested in a top of the line, but more a reel in the "sweet spot," at the top of the price range where spending more doesn't get much more functionality but spending less costs significant functionality. I know, not very definitive, but I think you know what I mean. Which reel for fresh water bass fishing, casting ease without backlash is a priority. I like braid. thanks,

This post is good testimony in support of your "The true facts of fishing are neither believed nor desired."

Thanks for the clarification, ghoti. I thought they were closer together.

Thanks, I'll try your method. I've been practicing for the last hour , and what I have found is that the suggestion to tie it "long/loose" is giving a much better looking knot than I was getting as the wraps end up alternating cleanly rather than some being on top of each other. I settled on 6 wraps each way. One thing I did which I think will prevent unraveling is putting the tag end through twice before tightening, then wet it, and progressively tighten it while gently pulling on the tag end now and then to prevent a loop in it from being trapped. In the end, the tag at the end of the knot is tightly trapped. I also am probably now pulling it tighter than I did before which has to be positive. It takes me longer than a double uni, so I'll use the Alberto when I need a more compact knot and don't want to spend the time tiying an FG. I hope I don't come back with "Well, that didn't work either." By the way, once I tighten it very firmly, then give it a bunch of hard jerks, that tag end is going nowhere, not a mm.

It may be bulletproof for you , but it's obvious it isn't for everyone. I've never had a palomar fail, maybe because there is hardly a way to do anything wrong. It's a "robust" design. I've tried for a couple years to do the Alberto following the diagrams, and still there is something going wrong. It's a "fragile" design. Even you admit to "give or take an extra wrap or two." Why, if it's such a robust knot when tied according to the diagrams, would you ever add an extra wrap or two? Not trying to cause trouble, but just pointing out what appears to be a logical discrepancy. I'm looking forward to trying some of the ideas presented. Might make it more robust for me.