Microwave Wave vs MW 25

[dv616]

When do you guys upsize to the spinning guide set with the 25 mm butt guide?  I am going to build a NFC HS7600 and just need to put the guides on it.  I was going to go with the regular Microwave set, but since I want this to be a long casting rod, I might upsize the reel a bit.  I usually use a 2500 size reel, but might put a 3000 on this one.  It will get braid and fluoro leader.  Probably 10-14 lb. braid to a 8 or 10 lb leader.  Guessing there will be no real gain to the larger guide set.  My goal is to have this rod cast as far as possible with light lures.  Same for an upcoming SCV 76mlxf rod.  

[Chris Catignani]

Rods as short as 5' can have a 25...a  '5 6" could have a 30.

This info is from Fuji's spinning rod New Concept Guide.

CONCEPT GUIDE PLACEMENT

 

I really think it comes down to which reel you use....but you should be fine with a 25 to start on most rods.

[spoonplugger1]

A NFC 7600 wouldn't be my choice for light lures, I use mine for steelhead, coho salmon, bonefish, shad, etc. The lower the modulus the better for your needs though if you choose to go on be advised it's tip is far stiffer than the MHX 9600 blanks mentioned earlier, or the St. Croix. It was designed to back troll/drift crankbaits downriver. Tip closer to the MLF St. Croix mentioned in other post. 

[MickD]

I never use a 25.  Always use braid and Fuji KLH 20 or 16 are what I use.  KLH 20-KLH10-KL5.5M or KLH16-KLH8-KL5.5M.  Reel size isn't important; I use up to  Stradic 4000's with these setups.  I'm not familiar with the blank, but the blank power should be chosen based on the weight of the lures expected to be used most of the time.  The length of the blank shouldn't affect the guide design.  I know some will disagree.

 

I use premium braids, mostly Hitena Pureline 21 pound test.  With cheaper braids I can't go as high as that, limited to about 15.  

 

Spoonplugger, why the statement about a lower modulus being better?  I would think that the SCV ML would be ideal for light lures/long casts if designed right.  And they are very high modulus.  Mine cast like crazy.

[MikeK]

If you have used Microwave guides before and are satisfied with performance the standard set will probably be OK for what you describe.   Do yourself a favor and look into what Chris and Mick are saying and do a side by side comparison on your own between a Microwave setup and the Fuji KLH/KT setup.

[dv616]

I realize the H7600 is more powerful than the St. Croix MLF and MLXF rods.  Looking to use it casting a little heavier and larger stuff than what I through on those rods.  I am thinking things like 3.8” Keitechs.  Maybe launching 4” Senkos.  

 

One reason I like using the Microwaves is in case I swap reels around.  Also, as I build rods and switch things up, I would like to be able to give rods away to relatives and friends that fish, so the Microwaves should be more flexible for whatever reel they want to throw on them.  

 

I have a St. Croix (factory) Legend Tournament 8-0 ML rod that has a the KR concept guides on it and, in my opinion, it casts poorly compared to my other St. Croix ML rods.  So, it kind of left a bad impression on my that it is too specific of a guide set up.  I should redo that one and see if I can make it better with different guides.

[MickD]

If you want the flexibility to go up on reel size and line pound test you can simply use the Fuji KLH 20-10-5.5 reduction train and it will work just fine with lighter lines and smaller reels.  There is very little influence by the reel in spite of it being considered in many recommendations.  I use the 20-10-5.5 with reels from 2500 to 4000 and cannot tell the difference. 

 

The biggest thing to consider is line, and as I stated, the Fuji 20-10-5.5 will work well up into the 20-30 pound test range, especially if you use the 8-12 strand braids.  While those lines are more expensive than the usual braids, they last for years without deterioration, so are more economical than one would think if just considering their intial cost.  21 pound Hitena casts well with both the 20-10-5.5 and the 16-8-5.5.  I think the offering from Hitena Pureline now is 19 pound test instead of the old 21.

 

I use 2 KB's 4 KT's on 7-71/2 foot rods, all the same size. (9 guides + tiptop), use the Anglers Resource software, and have never been able to improve on it by test casting.  I don't even test cast any more.

 

I use size 4 runners with the "improved" Alberto (tie it like the charts then add two half hitches of the braid tag, tighten down tightly).  If one is not good with a small knot it would be better to use size 5's.  

By the way, one of my favorite spin rods for finesse, from Neds up to and past Keitech 3.8's is my Point Blank 701MLF.  Point Blanks are wonderful rods, very versatile, can be used effectively for just about anything.  It has the Fuji KLH system, 20-10-5.5,

[Chris Catignani]

19 hours ago, MickD said:

There is very little influence by the reel in spite of it being considered in many recommendations. 

@Mick D ...since I guess your addressing me...

Why do you think that the reel is insignificant? You wouldn't but a 40 on a short ulta light and you wouldn't put a 16 on a surf rod.

 

You earlier referenced

19 hours ago, MickD said:

...the Anglers Resource software, and have never been able to improve on it by test casting.  I don't even test cast any more.

Well...part of their set up has EVERYTHING to do with the reel.

Reel Measurement Tutorial

 

Is there some other underlying reason you tend to be combative to anyone who offers an opinion  other than yours?

[MickD]

Sorry, didn't realize I was combative.  I realize that the software uses the reel characteristics, but some subjective testing by others has shown that the reel spool angle has very little if anything to do with casting distance.  I should have been more specific, I guess, since the height of the reel is possibly significant.  The higher guides allow smaller ring sizes.

 

Having said that, I cannot see any difference in the performance of my 20-10-5.5 setups between size 2500 and 4000 reels.  They just all work fine.  I stand by my opinion that the biggest factor in casting performance is the line.  With a low enough pound test decent braid any reasonable guide train will work fine.

 

Is there some other underlying reason why you are so sensitive?

[Chris Catignani]

1 hour ago, MickD said:

Is there some other underlying reason why you are so sensitive?

See...there's the combativeness I was referring too. I wouldn't really call myself sensitive as much as defensive.

 

[MickD]

13 hours ago, Chris Catignani said:

See...there's the combativeness I was referring too. I wouldn't really call myself sensitive as much as defensive.

 

I reviewed all the posts in this string and I cannot see where I was combative, and I was just using your words back in my last comment.  My question to Spoonplugger was not combative; I simply asked for clarification of his opinion.  The rest of my comments were simply stating my opinion and offering alternatives that have worked for me.  I'll leave it at this.  

[Chris Catignani]

OK...then if you didnt mean anything then I apologize for bringing up. But since you asked...it was this line from your second post (which I quoted before).

19 hours ago, MickD said:

There is very little influence by the reel in spite of it being considered in many recommendations.  

Since I was the only one that made a recommendation about the reel...I assumed you were talking about me...if not specifically me than, indirectly me.

Here is the definition of spite. 

I'll leave it at that.

[MickD]

11 hours ago, Chris Catignani said:

OK...then if you didnt mean anything then I apologize for bringing up. But since you asked...it was this line from your second post (which I quoted before).

Since I was the only one that made a recommendation about the reel...I assumed you were talking about me...if not specifically me than, indirectly me.

Here is the definition of spite. 

I'll leave it at that.

That comment was made because while the reel is involved in Fuji's and some other guide calculations, other quite rigorous testing has shown little to no influence.    "Despite" would have been better, but "in spite" is also correct  (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/in-spite-of-and-despite).  With the KLH 20-10-5.5 reduction train you can use just about any size reel and never detect a difference in casting performance.  

 

My statement was not an attack on you; it was only a comment to clarify that there is another well-founded opinion on the subject of the importance of the reel.

 

You really think my comment amounted to this? "a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice."  I assure you, that was not the case.

 

 

[Chris Catignani]

@MickD No problem MickD...thanks for clearing that up.