I've been reading a lot about the new micro guides and how people are getting more casting distance using them.
But I'm a bit confused on exactly what's making the difference.
If the same blank, say a 7' casting rod, is built with guide sizes 10, 8, 7,6,6,6,6,6,6 vs 6, 4,4,3,3,3,3,3,3,3's, and casting the same weight, why would this be true.
Is it due mainly to reduced weight?
Straighter line path, less slapping around in the guide rings?
Line following closer to the blank?

Or is it mainly that when casting braid vs mono you're getting the added distance?
I've yet to build and cast a rod made with micros. (guides less the #6's)

You got it ! All the above. And the braid ( comparable strength to mono) will cast farther than mono due to the limpness, diameter, less friction, no memory.
Of course that's just my opinion,and I could be wrong.

J.B.Hunt
Bowling Green, KY

If the line can still pass easily, then the reduced weight will result in quicker reaction and recovery, greater sensitivity and better utilization of the imparted casting energy which often means greater distance.

This isn't anything new - it was true 100 years ago and it's true today. Using the smallest guides that will still pass your line and any required connections, and hold up to the task at hand, has always resulted in a better rod.

...................

It doesn't matter why - buy a set and build it for yourself and see if you are able to make it work for you. If it does great. If not, go back to doing what you were doing before.

Less line "bunching" = more energy for use in the cast. You only have so much energy in a cast, so why not eliminate the waste and transfer more into the lure/line?
I have noticed that braid will cast further than mono but that is true for "non-micro" guided rods as well.

It is just a better mouse trap. It is only as good as the party casting. More guides less stress on the blank. The more guides the softer the rod and no stress point of intersection point of guide to line. even transition

Good Wraps Bob

I was a non believer in micro guides. Thought no way a little bitty guide is going to cast farther than a regular rod. Then I met Bill Stevens at the rod expo. He took me outside the pavilion with one of his rods. He gave me a brief intro on how and why the rod was built. He had a 1/4 oz weight tied to the end. He handed it to me and said, bring it back when you're done and walked back into the pavilion. Three casts later I was hooked and have made several micro guided rods since. I can cast further than buddies using spinning rods and the same lure. I use all 3's on a 6'6 blank with a split grip and a 200 curado. Build one. It will be all you use!!!

Being a dumb fireman I would imagine the biggest benefit is the weight reduction. In my mind taking more weight off of the tip section of the rod means that more of the energy of the cast is going into throwing the lure and not overcoming the weight of the guides/finsih/thread.

They are not an absolute fix for all rods...but when used properly they are a distinct improvement. Your best bet is to build a test and see how it goes.

Scott Sheets
www.smsrods.com

Being a simple minded person myself, I see the biggest benefit coming from (like Scott) weight savings and better line control. Less torque on an "on top" build compared to higher framed guides also.

-----------------
AD

Alex if you are worried about torque, build a spiral wrapped rod.

Good Wraps Bob

Been there done that Bob!

Still don't see how a spiral wrap reduces torque when the blank is deflected sideways. I find the blank deflected in many directions when fishing (for the species I build for - not true for all fishing types). So I go for straightest line path - something I personally don't see maximized using a spiral wrap.

-----------------
AD

Straightest line path - what tip tops are you using? Most tops don't line up with the smaller sized guides, whether on top or spiral.

I still use braced 5.5 or 6 rings. Gotta work with what you got. I haven't gotten into spliting tubes.

I agree with you billy about them lining up. Only saving grace I see is the line having a bit of upsweep prior to curving down.

My issue is that transition area to get the line under the blank - once under - all is good. I'll post some pics later of what I mean - need to find some BRIGHT line to illustrate. I could just be "spiraling out of control".

-----------------
AD

Billy I am glad you are now able to exercise your fingers with the new PC - keep it free of virus and other deadly plagues!

I have samples of the new braced Fuji Micro Tops

They are on rods and being put through tough use

One of the guys fishing with the new micro tops collapsed a Alconite Tip Top Size Six Ring which was on a spiral - it was on a flipping stick with 50# braid - he hit it hard enough on hook set to collapse the frame braces and bent it inward - some of the bassers are just as destructive as the NYC party boat demons! What a wonderful world!

Paper work from Anglers Resourse

BMCAT - Alconite Concept Micro Top - Black

BMCOT - Aluminum Oxide Micro Top - Black

Tube sizes to 6.0

Anglers Resourse told they are on the way and will soon be available from Fuji dealers

Question of how long got reply of about three more weeks

I am really not sure why (or if) micro rods cast farther. I know weight is a factor. Personally, I am not sold on the line control theory just yet. About the only way to test that would be to use two rods with the same number of same weight guides with different ring sizes. Maybe the PB Minimas can help with that. I do know that, done right, they are easier on the body to fish with all day. I also know that it is easier and more economical to stock a couple sizes of "smallest guides that will do the job" in the shop than bins and bins of 10, 8, 6 df and sf guides.

Great news on the little tops Bill! What is the ring size? I hate splitting only because the thread and finish gets into the line path for me.

I have 5 micro rods in the boat now, and, although my day job kept me from fishing much this year, they were used most of the time I fished. On the last trip I used my old Falcon Lowrider and the tip weight was horrible. It is amazing how much I got used to the lighter tipped rods. I love that blank so I will strip it and convert it (after CCS).

I finally got a break from customer rods and did a few for myself and my wife. I'll be testing a couple of Castaways on Sunday. I did a 964 with 5, 4, & 3mms to the 3mm tied on tip, and an 802 with the same. The all up weight of the 8' cranker was about 3.6 ounces. No real effort made to keep it light. It's got a couple metal trim rings, 10.75" split grip, and a large holo decal. The rod balances just in front of the reel seat. I was just on TT looking at the crankbait wars. The rod weights blew me away. Granted, some of them are glass, but even a 6' 10" glass came in at seven ounces. Ouch.

For me, ease of storage, less fatigue, fewer wind knots, and cheaper, faster, easier building are enough reasons to go small.

I have been using some very tiny (1/32" ID) model airplane fuel tubing to hold guides while wrapping. It is working well.

All of the Fuji packaging was marked 4.5-N

I am assuming the frame size is consistant with Fuji's use of the internal ring diameter and denotes a 4.5 ring size -

I did not measure the internal diameters of the rings and am assuming that the Alconite and the Aluminum Oxide Rings were different thicknesses. A casual glance did not bring a significant difference in ring ID to my attention.

It is clearly evident these tip tops have been redesigned to provide for a proper height to the amaller ring for continuous line flow. The tilt of the ring and the method of frame attachment, kind of ovaled, look like they have considered line looping over tip tops. Looks like it was actually thought about! The complaints of custom builders got some action -

I hope they will take the beating that is headed their way!

Thanks Anglers Resourse!

Not that it adds to anything...but I just use the same size single foot line guides all the way from the stripper through the tip. Yes, I am saying I don't stagger the guides, and yes I am saying I use the same single foot guide for the tip. It is the same size ID as all the other guides. They are just all the same size. No worries about matching the tubular tip top.

I expect all the theories mentioned are in play, but I think the biggest advantage of micros is that they get the line moving straighter than larger guides. Consider that the line on a long cast has to be moving something like 120 feet per second. To move line that is perfectly straight (I know it's not perfectly straight, but it's straighter with micros than 6mm guides) at 120 fps is much more efficient than moving a line that is slightlty looped at 120 fps. The loops constitute increased area, increased drag coefficient, relative to a straight line. You are trying to move the looped line, which has to have a surface area far exceeding the diameter of the line. I think the losses in efficiency in getting the line relatively straight are less than the losses of allowing a less straight line to be moved at 120fps. Think of drafting in NASCAR. With straight line it's a lot like a line of cars drafting. Only the first car has to really force the air out of the way. All the others have an easier job. Just like the first part of line (or the lure) forcing the air out of the way and all the rest, considering it straight, getting a free ride (with less drag).

Where this all falls apart is if NASCAR has a tunnel on the track that is smaller than the cars. Like a micro trying to pass a knot.