MickD

I don't think it's pointed enough, but give it a try. As long as you're not applying a lot of force, you won't hurt anything. Try anything pointed. Something that will allow you to to pick at it. The initial suggestion of a razor blade will most likely work, but I thought it might be too easy to cut a finger or the rod.

I suggest a pointed tool like a fly tying bodkin, carefully try to pick it off. It probably has not bonded that well. Don't get sucked into any suggestions to use heat.

If the rod is really important to you it is possible to replace the reel seat. Careful use of a Dremel type saw to cut it and the grip longitudinally, then split it off and clean up the blank so that masking tape arbors can be applied to make a cylindrical form on which to epoxy a new seat and grip. Make sure the tape arbors are totally encapsilated with epoxy befoe sliding the seat and grip into place. Not a piece of cake, but it can be done.

Those buying new spinning reels should be aware that many makers' new reels do not have anti revervse switches. If you want one don't go Shimano, Pflueger, or some others. Check the details before you buy. Daiwas still have the switch. Does it have an anti reverse switch? No. If it's important to you, this doesn't work. If it's not, looks like a good buy.

Daiwa Tatula LT in the size you prefer. Very smooth, reliable, light so it balances well with most rods. Off subject, but rod builders out there, don't copy the location of the keeper on this rod unless you've tried it out and like it. I did one once and have disliked it every time I've used the rod. The only thing good about it is that it keeps the lure hooks out of the way of any really long rod sleeves you might use. But it's easy to snag a hand on a lure and it's not as handy as keepers just in front of the front grip/seat.

I'm with you. It is also overkill, IMHO. Easy to screw something up when most likely just taking the reel down to what I call the "1st level," is sufficient. If I think one needs in depth cleaning/lube I'll send it to an expert.

ERN is a derived number, not an exact measure of the weight it takes to deflect a blank/rod. Best to consider IP, which is in grams the weight it takes to deflect the blank/rod to 1/3 of its length. But ERN is easier to understand relative to the weight/power of fly rods. So I talk ERN. Take your choice. The universal chart is what you need to convert IP to ERN. I have it in .pdf which is not allowed on this forum. So I cannot provide it. Go here: https://www.rodbuilding.org/library/nfc_urrs_masterchartv1.0.pdf CCS is a static test, frequency (TNF) is a dynamic test, two totally separate measurements of blank/rod performance. CCS is about power and action, TNF is about recovery speed/sensitivity.

The Point Blank 701MLF is way overpowered for this application, at ERN 19, not sure what the RAD is but I think it's on the PB web site. Moot point if it's way too powerful. Where is your data for the P700 coming from? I cannot find it. 5.7 ERN ("magic rod") is about 110 grams CCS. 177 is almost a 9 ERN CCS. This subject is under discussion on two different building forums, and it's plagued by the use of subjective descriptions, which are a crap shoot. The fact is that this BFS is a relatively new application and requires, if I understand it correctly, a rod that is about 7 feet long, "low" power, relatively "fast" action compared to the usual short "ultra lights," and there are very few blanks if any that fit. Trying to find one with the usual subjective descriptors of "drop shot," "ultra-light," "medium light", etc is just not going to cut it. While many have reservations with accepting the objective descriptions of CCS, there really is no other way to be confident in finding a blank that satisfies the requirements of this application. I thought that the P700 was the "magic" blank that worked, and that it had an ERN of 5.7 and an AA of 65, but if that is incorrect, show me the data. Stick with it, folks, we will get to the right answer.

I have purchased their 4 strand twice, was delivered quickly. lt is a little noisy in the guides, but all 4's are, and it performs well. I have not yet tried their 8 strand. Yes, 4x is 4 strand, 8x is 8 strand. Look at the schematics on their site.

Could be that 4 pound test is simply too fragile for the application you're using it on? Alberto knot is easy, but I recommend finishing it with two tightly set overhand knots of the tag over the main braid. Keeps it from unravelling.

Light and Med Light spinning rods of about 6.5-7 feet in length are not normally in the 5-6 ERN range; they are generally over 10. Point Blank's 701MLF has an ERN of about 19. Which makes them too powerful for the ideal BFS application (based on comments that the P700-1 is right for BFS and has an ERN of 5.7) They most likely will work, but probably are not the ideal solution. The only spin blanks with 5-6 ERN's are usually the short whippy ultra lights. And they have sloppy actions with AA's sometimes as low as 30 degrees. The challenge is to find a blank of about 6.5 - 7 foot length with a moderate to fast action AND an ERN in the 5-6 range. Believe it or not, it appears that there are only a couple out there, the P700-1 being one and the APFG710-1, the other. (both NFC)

Oops!. Yes, it was TBilly. Still would like to know what the rod which was felt to be too heavy actually weighed.

What does it weigh?

Rod has to be based on the light lures being cast and its loading properly on the cast. Not on the target species. IMHO. It could be that BFS doesn't make sense for bass in cover. If the line is too weak to keep the bass out of cover, it doesn't matter what rod is used. I cannot find a fly blank that really makes sense. I think the 3 and 4 wt blanks available are not powerful enough. The 5.7 ERA mentioned before cannot be matched in a length that makes sense. Take a serious look at the NFC P710-1. I think this is the blank referenced by Spoonplugger. If you go with too much power the rod will feel like a broom stick with really light lures.

Never used it, cannot tell how many strands it has. I really like 8 strands or more. Tackle Warehouse reviews are all positive except one that says the color runs all over everything. Comments include that it's a little stiffer than other braids.

To prevent unravelling I suggest adding two overhand knots of the braid tag end around the main braid line, tightly set. Doesn't make the knot bigger and has fixed my "mystery" failures.

Rod guides and tiptop rings are easily checked with a Q-tip. If a ring is cracked it will snag on the fuzzy Q-tip. Could old line, too. Try pulling on the line against itself at a number of points along it to see if there are weak sections. Or just try some new line, mono is pretty cheap. You mention two different reels and lines, but not their age/condition. Or what pound test? Light lines can be pretty fragile.

I never thought of trying a nail knot, but it should be fairly easy. It's done without stressing/bending the rod, can be done a ways off the tube of the tiptop then slid into position and tightened. Worth a try.

I would toss it, PIA to try to straighten it. I don't think all the "tow it behind the boat" or "hang it with a weight" will do any good, but I've been wrong before. To straighten FC fly leaders the best way I've found is to put on leather gloves and pull the leader through tightly-pinched-together thumb and finger creating some heat as you pull it through. A few pulls usually straightens it quite well and it does not damage the FC. Old FC subjected to lots of use and line conditioner may not react as favorably, but worth a try.

Here is another idea. https://www.rodbuilding.org/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/8277/title/ice-rod-drying-6double-pole-stand/cat/500

Yes, it can get tricky. One thing to consider is that it doesn't really have to be wrapped. But yes, it does look better. Put your last support as close to the tiptop as you can and still have room to work and have the next one close also. Another builder has cobbled a support-I'll see if I can find it. This video shows a tool you might consider, or cobble something similar. It shows the principal involved with the close supports. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpmNA59iaQU

Just go to a source like Tackle warehouse and see what you find. Hard to believe a person couldn't figure this out by themselves.

Top 3 blanks: Point Blank for the absolute best regardless of price Amtak Bushido and Rainshadow Revelation for the "sweet spot" between price and function Top 3 Guides: Fuji KLH setup for spin, RV then KB/KT to the tip for cast. No second or third places Top 3 Seats: Uplocking Fuji DPSSD size 17 for spin, Fuji ACSM for cast . No second or third places Top 3 grips: Minimal ramps off the seat + butt knob turned from exotic burl rings for spin, NFC carbon fiber grips/butt knob for cast. No second or third place.

Yes, WC53! If one really thinks that the "magic rod", the different animal, is the way to go then the problem is that there are very few blanks other than the ultra light short blanks with an ERN of about 5.7. And they are too short and too slow in action. Most Ned and drop shot spin blanks test well over 10 ERN. Very few blanks available in this ERN/length range except for the "shorter" fly blanks. Build one into a casting rod and I think you will be very surprised, and pleased. A 4 or 5 weight (usually fly blanks test up almost a full ERN from their published "weight.") 7 or 7.5 foot fly blank described as moderate-fast or fast. If 7.5 is too long, cut off the butt a few inches.

Sounds like you didn't make contact with the best source of info at Rodgeeks. I've had good experience dealing with Rodgeeks, but this is hard to understand.