would it be silly

[1984isNOW]

I'm sure it's generally negligible, but I meant the 3 combine (double feet,more thread, more epoxy) to add exponential weight. Still slight I'm sure, but compare that to the weight savings of Ti guides... worth the money?

 

Wanna spend over 100 bucks on Ti guides or just use small single foot guides with as little thread and epoxy as possible. Get that Ti gain without the Ti price.

 

The difference is a few grams at most either weigh, but consider the cost is my perspective.

 

Also the additional feet create additional rigid spots on the blank dampening the vibration transmission and altering the speed and action.

[corey90]

1 hour ago, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

Also the additional feet create additional rigid spots on the blank dampening the vibration transmission and altering the speed and action

how

[1984isNOW]

Imagine a tuning fork, perfectly tuned to ring out a C note when struck. It's a bare metal rod that vibrates consistently with repeatable results.

 

Now add a couple of single foot guides on that fork, thread/ epoxy and all. It will alter the sound.

 

Now double the amount of interference by using double foot guides. That tuning fork is no longer allowed in the orchestra no doubt.

 

Those vibrations that it's hindering, that's the subtle bite of a bass vibrating up through your rod. Where you might feel a bite with single foot guides, if it's just in the cusp of transmissable then having double foot guides all the way up make it indiscernable.

 

Now for the action - hold your hand palm down and hold your fingers straight. Now bend them.

 

Now tape a pencil along the length if them. Did it affect how easy it was to bend? That is the unbending metal feet wrapped in thread and epoxies on your rod.

 

Recovery speed? Just flick the tip of your rod and watch it spring up and down. Now tie a 1/4 oz lure on and do it again. Now 1/2 oz. Any additional weight on the blank will affect its recovery speed, nothing like a half oz lure - but it all adds up.

 

It's all part of the system, the tool we use to chase that feeling we get when we set the hook into a log - and then the log starts moving.  That heart thumping adrenaline pumping kinda light headed and dizzy sensation hoping we do all the right things to get our hands in this fish's face feeling.

 

All double foot guides and maybe you don't feel the subtle take. Maybe the rod is stiffer than expected and less forgiving and the hook gets yanked out. Maybe the speed is awkward in its distribution of bend profile and the casting is wonky so you hit the bushes instead of just beneath them, where that 8 pounder is eying your t-rig or spinnerbait just dangling inches above the water and thinking "that looks delicious, wish I was a bird"

 

I build rods to maximize performance, if I wanted a pretty stick I'd hook up with Kate Winslet or Kate Moss or Kate Beckinsale or Kate Hudson... shoot man maybe you're on the right track afterall

[MickD]

It's not just the amount of weight, it's where it is on the rod.   I don't know if fat/long wrap finishes are significant or not, but the recovery speed from deflection of rods changes (goes lower) when running guides are added.   On some blanks it is significantly different when comparing the effect on recovery speed between stainless and titanium running guides, even when the guides are small micros.  On some blanks even the difference between stainless and titanium tiptops is found.

 

What does this mean to the fishing of the rod?  Faster recovery speeds make for a crisper, cleaner feeling rod with less "wiggle" after deflection.  Enough weight out there would be expected to affect sensitivity negatively.  It would depend on the characteristics of the blank how important this all is. 

 

 

[Chris Catignani]

I love @corey90 comment above "how". Sure, the extra weight from a two footed guide will have an effect on the rod...but maybe this is desirable.
I can think of plenty of reasons for two footed guides...that main one being "Its what I want". 

 

<flame on>

One thing I cant stand about the rod building world today is that everyone is an expert. OMG..."I read it on the internet."
I see people post pictures of their first crosswrap and the comments are: "You didnt center it up right.", "Its not packed tight enough.", "I would cut it off and redo it.". We have a good group of builders here (at BR) and lots of sound advice. I think we should put a little more thought on where the conversation (OP) needs to go.

<flame off>

 

Has anyone actually measured how much sensitivity is lost with a two footed guide? (please provide actual data...no "you can feel it." answers.)

[1984isNOW]

@Chris Catignani

 

I hear you my dude, I'm not knockin his idea to do double feet if its desired for appearance- just want him to be aware of all that comes along with it. I'm sure you expiremented and learned through different building projects. But if someone had told you what the results would be you would have more opportunity to make an informed decision.

 

You're right, the best answer to "why do that" is "because I wanted to." Like I quoted you on before, I can dig it.

 

And I agree about the feedback some people give, generally unhelpful and sometimes hurtful. Either way unnecessary. There's another forum that's run by the most impactful and best rodbuilder that ever lived. He says it's the best place for rod builders of all levels to join.

 

But I've seen people join, post a few times, and essentially get chased away by pitchforks and torches. There's a few really solid dudes over there, but also some real jerks. It's the internet, so that's a little expected, but in such a niche interest you'd think there'd be less politics... NOPE.

 

It's weirdly a microcosm of our typical political and general American culture.

 

And to answer your question - I think Shimano did some testing. Maybe you don't, but the Shimano Poison Adrena is 140% more sensitive 😉

 

I get the feeling Mick is gonna hit you wit the TNF. IDK if you put any credence into that, but something is being measured. What the implications are we could question, but he's measuring some affect of the added weight with different components etc.

[MickD]

39 minutes ago, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

I get the feeling Mick is gonna hit you wit the TNF

Already did in a way.  My previous comments on what happens when weight is added were based on quite a bit of TNF tests.  I might add that 2 other builders and I did a multi blank correlation test on CCS and TNF.  I and one other used TNF to measure natural frequency and the third used a video process he had developed for natural frequency.  Correlation was quite good between processes and builders.  And as usual the "premium" blanks had higher TNF's.  I'm convinced that with rod blanks you do get what you pay for.  At least most of the time.  I'm sure there are exceptions.

 

140 % more sensitive than what?  

[Chris Catignani]

2 hours ago, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

...

But I've seen people join, post a few times, and essentially get chased away by pitchforks and torches. There's a few really solid dudes over there, but also some real jerks. It's the internet, so that's a little expected, but in such a niche interest you'd think there'd be less politics... NOPE.

...

Yep...its been that way for a long time.
But a funny thing...if you ever get a chance to attend any of the rod builder gatherings, you will never meet a group of nicer people.

 

[1984isNOW]

2 hours ago, MickD said:

 

140 % more sensitive than what?

Now you're gettin it 🤑

 

@Chris Catignani the internet can do that, turn nice people ugly, and some of the nice people just don't jump in the mud puddle.

 

I've had some very pleasant exchanges with builders since joining this little community about a year ago, and connected with some pretty good dudes, yourself and mick included.

 

I couple others from the tar pit... I mean other forum, were good dudes too - surprisingly kind and generous.

 

I'd love to go to a convention, considered trying to find a way to make one happen up here in MA since they're usually down south, Midwest, or west coast.

 

The best rod builder in the world holds an international rod building expo every year, maybe this is where he gets to share his brilliant ideas that have become the rods of the new world order. He has single handedly contributed more to the fishing rod industry than anyone else ya know. I sure hope I can grow up to be like him one day

[MickD]

15 hours ago, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

The best rod builder in the world holds an international rod building expo every year, maybe this is where he gets to share his brilliant ideas that have become the rods of the new world order.

And just who is this guy?  

[uno]

No one on that forum has a bigger ego than the guy who owns it now. He knows everything about rod blanks. Too bad he can't sell his (admittedly pretty good) product without lies and endless sales. And yet the sales always get me. Guess I'm the sucker.

[Delaware Valley Tackle]

On 10/24/2023 at 11:23 PM, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

@Delaware Valley Tackle

 

There's another forum that used to be owned by a guy (he still kinda runs it) who literally told me he knows more about building rods than anybody in the game, said he had a part in many of the innovations in rod building over the years and we see his ideas at work all over the place, he even has his own magazine.

 

He said there was an experiment done where the guides were not wrapped at all and merely epoxied in place. They held for years.

 

@MickD is definitely right about the challenges of wrapping in metallic thread, it can be a pain to deal with. To add to what he mentioned, tension too tight and it snaps easily.

 

@Chris Catignani was right, do what you wanna do. But do consider the implications of how it will impact performance and sensitivity with all that added metal, thread, and epoxy.

With all due respect I m aware of the site, magazine and individual, and your quote is not 100% accurate and lacking context. Finish epoxy is a self leveling resin and not an adhesive. I have a link to that discussion but choose not to redirect people from here. 

[spoonplugger1]

Delaware, The guides were Permaglossed in place, they held up good enough that they have pictures of them trying to remove a double foot guide with a pair of pliers and the guide is already a twisted mess and still on the rod. Permagloss is a far better adhesive then epoxy finish which is a potting resin, tougher and more flexible also. Tom K. is a sharp cookie that can explain difficult concepts in a way most can understand and can demonstrate it too, developed rodbuilding.org that is the #1 forum out there and no other is even close. Rich Forhan has changed the look and development of bass rods, what you see on the racks today are things he was doing in the 90's for tournament champions, and he holds patents for many lure and hook developments besides. Steve Gardner brought micro guides to bass anglers, developing his concepts for a decade before it became aware to the rest of us. You can go on and on, there is enough accolades to go around. 

[Chris Catignani]

On 8/11/2023 at 12:23 AM, corey90 said:

i just ordered a carbon 4 7'6" medium heavy blank with the gloss finish so i was thinking using all double foot black titanium k frame giudes i was thinkink a 10-8-6 allthe way to the 6 tip top.

@corey90 I think those guides would be fine.

[1984isNOW]

19 hours ago, MickD said:

And just who is this guy?  

I'm not the type to name names my man, but if you're in *you're in*

 

14 hours ago, Delaware Valley Tackle said:

your quote is not 100% accurate

 

12 hours ago, spoonplugger1 said:

The guides were Permaglossed in place, they held up good enough that they have pictures of them trying to remove a double foot guide with a pair of pliers and the guide is already a twisted mess and still on the rod.

Thanks for clarifying spoon. @Delaware Valley Tackle I apologize for recalling incorrectly, I stand corrected it wasn't epoxy. This is why I love when @spoonplugger1 posts, dude just always drops knowledge. Don't ever leave us spoon, the game needs you!

 

15 hours ago, uno said:

And yet the sales always get me. Guess I'm the sucker.

 

I feel you bro, just knowing Gary Loomis is involved draws me in. I wonder if the guy who used to own the site ever worked with Gary, definitely one of the inspirations for me why I started building. The old owner sounds like he's worked with just about everyone, he's gotta be like 100 years old lol.

 

As for the other guy who owns it now, I don't know enough about him, but from his posts I can see what you're saying. I've been thinking of creating an account over there to get in on the action, but I've seen how some of the new comers have been treated.

 

Makes me leary of posting, I'm still pretty new to building. Even though I have some years under my belt I don't have many builds yet because of time and life.

 

But even the old owner can be a way sometimes, seen him be pretty curt with people. On a third forum some people said he was a jerk, mentioned there was some builder beef over the decades. Some other builder group forum thing and I guess it was pretty nasty. Made it sound like he went out of his way to really make things hard for that forum and the Clemens clan.

 

I'm sure he's contributed greatly to the building community, like I said I'm pretty sure he's a dinosaur and been there since just about the beginning. And I have seen some good things from him, but sometimes he's just way off and won't listen to reason.

 

He has a theory about rod sensitivity that is just utterly ridiculous. Says that no matter what a longer rod is more sensitive than a shorter rod. He says that vibration and feel have nothing to do with a rod's sensitivity, a fiberglass rod that is longer than a high modulus carbon fiber rod will be more sensitive.

 

For all he's done for building this is just a ridiculous thought and flies in the face of Gary's and many others' contributions to carbon fiber and blank improvement.

 

Take two different lengths of a metal poles and clank them with a hammer or something. You'll feel the vibrations more strongly on the end of the shorter one.

 

No way an 8 foot fiberglass rod is even comparable in sensitivity to a high modulus carbon fiber rod that's 5'6. Throw a 3/8 spinnerbait bait on both of those and tell me what you feel in each. Guaranteed to feel nothing in that longer "more sensitive rod."

 

I'll keep stalking that forum for now, sometimes he says something that makes sense. But lots of other guys on there have some good stuff to say so I might end up joining.

 

But also there's a lot of rod builder groups on Facebook with a combined thousands of active members - that other forum has like 10-20 at any given time it seems.

 

Plus the group here is solid, never seen that mob mentality here. All the dudes who have posted in this thread have are awesome!

[MickD]

Regarding:  "He has a theory about rod sensitivity that is just utterly ridiculous. Says that no matter what a longer rod is more sensitive than a shorter rod. He says that vibration and feel have nothing to do with a rod's sensitivity, a fiberglass rod that is longer than a high modulus carbon fiber rod will be more sensitive."

 

I don't think this characterization is quite accurate.  He states that with two rods of similar power the longer will be the more sensitive when sensitivity is defined as the ability to feel a bite.  He does fail to recognize that a bite, or thump, is actually a single cycle of a vibration, so if a rod transmits vibration more effectively than another, it should transmit a thump or bite more effectively.  When challenged about the differences in modulus and their effect on sensitivity he sort of dodged.  (in my opinion) 

[spoonplugger1]

The concept that a longer rod is more sensitive is just simple physics, the same input on two objects of different lengths will effect the longer more, just like a longer lever can lift more. There is a reason steelhead and salmon anglers have always used the long rods. There was an extensive discussion between rod builders including many who are composite engineers maybe 15 + years ago on the rodbuilding.org site. Fastest way to find it might be to search Emory Harry as the author, all dates. An XF rod is more sensitive then a more moderate rod because of the lighter tip. We are simply feeling a difference in input, more or lack of, there are no vibrations, etc. that many talk about, holding a rod tip to your throat while humming God Bless America shows you nothing. Aleks is the CEO of North Fork Composites, if he hasn't got it right, Gary is right there to correct him.

[1984isNOW]

I respect both your opinions, but drag a jig outside on the pavement with any rod at all. You'll feel vibrations, not the rod loading under resistance. It will be very fine cyclic impulses. The definition being "to feel a bite" is just shy of circular reasoning, most anglers mean the ability to feel a bite when talking about sensitivity.

 

You're right about the way a rod acts as a lever, advantage for the fish no question. A longer rod is more sensitive to an opposing force (in the action of the lever), but not to oscillating blank feel. We feel like the fish is pulling harder, but we don't feel a fish "not pull" as in just bump or swipe a lure.

 

If we polled a million anglers, a very small percentage would define sensitivity as "a fish pulling against you" (maybe none, I've only heard that in that other site and now you two) but the vibration which helps you determine bottom composition, is this a log or a fish take, feel a spinnerbait blade. Or to "feel a bite."

 

Sometimes a bite is literally a fish just ever so slightly lifting a lure and chucking it. That would potentially create a one cycle of disturbance in the rod without creating enough force to feel the resistance or cause deflection regardless of the length of the rod.

 

That is the average anglers take on sensitivity, not feeling resistance, but feeling one or more cycles of vibration.

 

So when defining sensitivity let's stick to the most common definition and not give into the the fallacy of ambiguity or equivocation. Maybe this sentiment hasn't been shared on the other site, or at least not with the proponent of this "new definition of sensitivity."

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sensitive

 

Most anglers, when referencing sensitivity, mean something along the lines of the shared understanding of the term. Not some other definition.

 

I'd say more specifically definition 1, 2, 3, and 3.d. I particularly like the example given for 3.d ie: sensitive scales. A rod is like a scale that can measure vibration, or its at least the device used to transfer the vibration and we measure it with our 🧠

 

He's only right when you follow a definition that nobody else means.

[uno]

Here's my thought on sensitivity. Take a lure attached to a rod via a loose line of any kind. Do anything you want to the lure without making the line tight. Can you feel that in a rod? Nope. You can only feel it when the rod tip moves because the line is pulling on it. You can also feel when the line is being pulled less. That's how you feel a lure like a spinnerbait, alternating more and less pull. Is that vibration? In my mind a pull/no pull cycle is not vibration. I could be wrong. Does the string between two cans vibrate when you talk into one can? I dunno. Deep thoughts.

[corey90]

im happy to say its my most sesitive rod i have i use it for carolina rigs

[spoonplugger1]

The tin can phone is a vibration that changes state multiple times till it vibrates the air which moves your eardrum sending an electrical impulse through a nerve to your brain. If it a vibration in can be measured in Hz, vibrations per second. You are simply feeling irregularities in the pavement, minute pulls (tension) and releases. But call it what you want, as long as everyone understands your measuring system, ie: inches, pounds, gallons, etc. we will all get the same final repeatable result.

[1984isNOW]

I've seen videos of rod sensitivity being measured by calculations of vibrations through the blank.

 

The other perspective, that sensitivity is "feeling a fish bite" (in regards to a longer rod creating more opposing force) couldn't measure those minute pulls. A 4ft rod or an 8ft rod if the opposing force doesn't have enough strength to alter the position of the rod tip then that theory won't measure sensitivity. Now send minute irregular pulses through those rods (dragging over a boulder or stump or gravel or sand) and the crisper lighter carbon fiber blank will transmit that information more readily.

 

Think conductor vs insulator, a longer fiberglass rod will insulate those pulses while a carbon fiber rod would better let them pass through.

 

Because I'm pretty sure we could all save some loot if the opposite were true.

 

I'll try one of those 8'x salt water rods at Walmart to check myself, I'll drag it on the floor there and see what I feel.

[spoonplugger1]

Kites, If you step over to www.rodbuilding.org they are talking about your very concept, as you state it right now, however they also explain why what you see on the video is only part of the story. You can study something and get a result you like, but some very sharp fellows poke a few holes in the tested results that need a bit more work to hash out, with evidence of their own, it only becomes a theory or fact if under repeated testing and scrutiny by others they get the same result. Some of this concept was started by Emory Harry a couple decades ago when he was measuring the differences in rod oscillation, as you added more guides and also the difference seen depending on where those guides were placed on the blank. 

[MickD]

1 hour ago, spoonplugger1 said:

only becomes a theory or fact if under repeated testing and scrutiny by others they get the same result.

Yup.  Sort of like peer review in the medical publication field.

[1984isNOW]

The scientific method is reliable, more people should apply it I agree.