number of guides

[jimmyjoe]

   I've always associated more guides as an indication of a better rod, and fewer as an indication of a lower quality rod. The reason is that more guides straighten the line flow, lessening line slap, and more importantly they distribute stress better and lessen line rub when fighting a fish.

   I'd think that a moderate action rod would benefit more from a higher guide count, because it flexes more. Yet I've seen no moderate action rod at 7 feet long that has over 9 guides. I've seen fast action rods with fairly stiff tips that have 11 guides.

   Why?

 

   Thanks for your help.     jj

[.ghoti.]

The tip section of a fast action blank produce more flex in a shorter distance than slower action versions, requiring more guides in the tip section.
 

Strictly speaking, a rod should have the fewest guides to perform at its best. Fewer guides, less thread and less epoxy, particularly in the tip area, will produce the most sensitive version of any blank.

[MickD]

I generally build with 1 more guide than traditional recommendation, which is the number of guides should be one plus the length of the rod.  Meaning that a seven foot spin rod would have 8 guides plus the tiptop.  I use 9.  Never have felt that it cost me anything exc the cost of the guide.  The stress test looks better.

 

On spiral cast, same number.

 

On traditional "on top" cast builds with micros, maybe 2 or 3 plus from traditional.  Never have seen an issue with doing it this way.

 

The argument for fewer guides is that the less weight you will have in the tip section, the more sensitive the rod will be.  So the logic would tell you to use the fewest guides, as Ghoti recommends.  But what is the "fewest guides" is not easily determined.  Regardless, it is not world peace, and the differences in performance are very small and ultimately not really measurable.  Go with what you like based on your interpretation of a good, well executed, stress test.

[jimmyjoe]

  

16 minutes ago, MickD said:

Go with what you like based on your interpretation of a good, well executed, stress test.

 

   You give me far too much credit! If I knew how to do a well executed stress test, I wouldn't be asking you fine gentlemen these stupid questions.   ???

   But seriously, I think I see the reasoning behind the comment from @.ghoti. about the difference in flex between a moderate and a fast action.

   I went to Scheel's today and picked up a St. Croix Legend Elite rod for the first time. It was a 7' MH/F casting rod, and it had 11 guides plus the tip. I flexed it, and I could not for the life of me figure out why they had that many guides on that stiff a rod.

 

   But now I see why, at least, they don't have that many guides on a moderate action rod.

   And one point I might make, by the way, is that sensitivity is a non-issue with moderate actions .... at least for me. On steady retrieve rods, I feel that fiberglass is just fine and dandy. Just heavy, that's all.

   This is all about the possibility (I said possibility, not probability) of having another rod made. It would be a 2-pc, like the 1st one (which I love, BTW), but it would be MF or Moderate action, not fast. That's why I was asking why no Moderate action rods with high numbers of guides.

   The comment about spiral wrap is intriguing, especially WRT a 2-pc rod. Hmmmmmmm ....... ?

 

   Thanks.     jj

[spoonplugger1]

Jimmy,

If you watch the GPS Fuji video I think you'll see many of your assumptions are a little off, more guides alone is a poor way to improve a rod of any sort, if you haven't control of the line in the first 3, or 4 guides you've already lost the fight and more won't help.

[jimmyjoe]

3 hours ago, spoonplugger1 said:

Jimmy,

If you watch the GPS Fuji video I think you'll see many of your assumptions are a little off, more guides alone is a poor way to improve a rod of any sort, if you haven't control of the line in the first 3, or 4 guides you've already lost the fight and more won't help.

 

   What's the "GPS Fuji video"? I googled "GPS Fuji" (guide positioning software), but couldn't find a video.

   What do you mean, "control" of the line? What control?

   And which fight have I lost?

   I think there's something here that I'm not quite understanding.   ??      jj

  

[Delaware Valley Tackle]

The ultimate number of guides and their placement is best determined by static load testing. You want just enough guides to provide a line path that closely matches the rods bend under load. I find as does Mick, that a fast action 7’ bass rod takes 9 plus the tip top. More is not necessarily better. Line slap is controlled by use of correct guide sizes and spacing. Where low framed or micro guides are used, line touching the blank under load is harmless as long as it does not drop below the blank. 

[.ghoti.]

Agree with Mike and Mick. A 7’ fast action rod built by me will typically have 9 guides. A 7’ moderate will typically have 8. The extra guide on the fast rod will be in the tip section. Or, to put it another way, the first 18-24” of the fast rod will have the guides a little closer together than the moderate rod.

 

jimmyjoe, here’s how i do a static load test. I use a piece of fly line about 10’ long, and a piece of 20lb mono. I put the guides on the blank using small pieces of surgical tubing. Starting at the tip, the first few guides are placed about 4 or5 inches apart. I eyeball the rest, placing the stripper guide about 16” in front of the reel seat. I run the fly line through the guides, leaving about a foot extending from the tip. The fly line has  1/16oz weight glued to it. Just enough weight to keep the fly line under a bit of tension, Keeping it straight, but not enough to put any real load on the blank. I use fly line because it is a larger diameter, and is bright yellow, making it easier for my old eyes to see. The mono line is tied to the tip. Use the mono line to apply a load to the rod. Start by flexing only the tip section, then gradually increase the load the put more bend in the blank. Look at the fly line while doing this. Move the guides to make the fly line path match the curve of the blank. You will be moving guides in the tip section when the blank is under a light load. As load increases you will be working on guides further down the blank. Do not use the fly line to flex the blank; use the line tied to the tip. At this point i mount a reel ang go outside for some test casting. This is to get the stripper guides in the best location. If the stripper gets moved very far, i will repeat the static test.

 

Hope this helps you,  and does not scare you off. After you’ve done this a time or three, it gets easy.

[MickD]

https://anglersresource.net/static-load-tutorial/

 

This tutorial is a good one for the two line static test for running guides.  It says for running guides since the software for spin rods for their guides locates the reduction guides.  

 

Many think that because the method uses two lines that it is harder to do, but it's actually easier since the line that loads the rods doesn't go through the guides and doesn't stress the guides.  Therefore you can move guides without unloading the rod and their attachment to the blank doesn't have to be a strong as with the single line method.

 

This method is basically the same method that Ghoti details above.

 

[MickD]

12 hours ago, jimmyjoe said:

I think there's something here that I'm not quite understanding. 

The guides on a rod have two functions.  First they control the line for optimum flow and second they load the rod properly.  The first function is accomplished in the first couple guides on a casting rod and the first three or four on a spin.  There are many ways to do this, and many different opinions by builders on which is best.

 

To place them properly to load the rod is the job of the staic test.

 

Reduction guide sizes are determined by proper placement, height, ring diameter, and the line specs you plan to use.  To put it simply, the limper the line the smaller the diameter you can get away with.  With light braid the design of the reduction system can be just about anything and it will still work pretty well.  

 

For the running guides, since the lighter the guide train is the more sensitive the rod will be, the optimum guides will be the smallest that will pass any knots you plan to use.  This is an issue only with the guides that are popularly called "micros."  Ring ID's less than about 5 mm.

 

Keep asking your questions; there are a lot of very good, helpful, builders on this forum.  But keep in mind that there often are different ways of accomplishing the same thing and many opinions on which is best.  Often the best is what works the best for you.  

 

There are a number of good books that will help you with the principals involved in building and many videos on line as well.  The Mud Hole site has some, Getbitoutdoors.com also, and the series by Flex Coat are very good.

[jimmyjoe]

      @MickD, @.ghoti., and @Delaware Valley Tackle, I thank you all very much! It looks like my decision might be easier to make than what I thought.

   See ya after I get out of the "classroom".   ???     jj

    

[ArthurLK11]

To play devil's advocate here. Saying that more guides increase casting distance seems to go against the laws of physics. The more guides you have the more guides the line has to rub up against creating friction and slowing the line down. It seems to me that on spinning rods which is all that I use that only the first couple of guides straighten out the line and then the ones towards the tip just create more friction and resistance. 

[MickD]

If the rod is loaded properly by optimum guide placement then it logically will cast a little longer than one not loaded properly (by having too few guides).  But the differences will be small. 

 

The friction of the line to the guides is very small.  The effect of air resistance is likely more than friction, and the argument that micros cast farther than bigger guides is based on the reduction of the size of the loops going through the air.  (Last week I had a line to leader loop fail on the cast of 1/8 oz maribou jig and I immediately noticed that the cast was about 2 times the distance of what I had been getting.  Then I found that the lure only had about 4 feet of leader on it-no line to the reel.)  But the biggest influence of all on minimizing guide/line friction/air resistance is the line.  Use light braid and almost any configuration will cast the proverbial mile.

 

It has been found that the height of the reduction train, where most of the controlling of the line on a spinner takes place, is more important than the size of the ring.  Which is why Microwave and Fuji KLH systems utilize higher than normal reduction guides.

 

The ones near the tip load the rod properly.   The way builders find out if the configuration is costing distance is to tape the guides on and test it, then start reducing the number of them, placing them per the static test, then retesting them.  But most don't waste their time on it going instead with the number of guides equal to the length of the rod + 1 or 2 as mentioned above.  (or more with casting rods with micro guides wrapped on top).

[jimmyjoe]

3 hours ago, ArthurLK11 said:

Saying that more guides increase casting distance seems to go against the laws of physics.

 

   Not really. Let's say you have two different situations: 1) fewer guides, with the line relaxing off-center between guides, and 2) more guides with the same line, so that the line stays centered more between guides.

   In #1, the friction of relaxed line rubbing against the guides from a wider entry angle CAN create more friction than the net friction of line passage in #2.

   Maybe.

   I'm not being dogmatic about this. If I were, I wouldn't be asking questions.  ?

1 hour ago, MickD said:

The friction of the line to the guides is very small.  The effect of air resistance is likely more than friction, and the argument that micros cast farther than bigger guides is based on the reduction of the size of the loops going through the air. 

 

   And that might be the answer, and a good reason not to be dogmatic.   ??    jj

  

[spoonplugger1]

More guides doesn't increase casting one little bit, in fact it's a hinderance. Competition casting rods have less guides, many less to the point they are virtually worthless as a fishing rod, guides are on the rod to protect the blank from failure under load and nothing else. A bare blank is at it's best efficiency, everything we put on it ruins that efficiency.