Hello folks,

First time poster. I am interested in building an ultralight spin rod from a fly rod blank to throw 1/64-1/8oz lures, mostly trout magnets jigs to be exact, but I would like to throw some bigger marabou jigs as well. I already use a Frankenstein setup where I put the top 3 sections of my 9' 5wt 4 piece fly rod on the bottom section of my 6 foot 2 piece spin rod. It casts those trout magnets really far, but I'd like to go ahead and build something. This thing comes out to be almost 10 feet long which is awkward on my wooded creeks and I don't know if I'm setting the hook too hard, but often on a miss I will send the lure about 40 feet straight up out of the water. My questions are to the folks who have done this is what is the explanation of length, weight and action in the real world? Where does the power to throw that big lure compared to heavy line come from exactly? Is it simply that all fly rods have a tip with more flex and the trout magnet jig will be heavy enough to engage that flex no matter the other factors? Is it the long length creating extra speed at the tip creating a catapult effect? Is it the action that's giving that lure the distance? And how exactly does the weight factor into this now that I've canceled out the "meaty streamer" issue? Will a 3wt snap the first time I hit a 5lbs small mouth? Will a 3wt cast a lighter lure than a 4wt and if so, why?

Obviously these are questions that would probably be answered in some kind of guide on building spin rods from fly blanks, but I have not been able to locate any kind of resource like that yet. My gut tells me that the shortest, fastest action and heaviest weight will be the best combination of ease of carry in the woods while maintaining that awesome casting distance, but then I notice that most shorter rods are lighter weight and heavier action. My gut then tells me that's because the characteristics between fly fishing and spin fishing are just totally different , but at that point I realize I have no idea how any of these thing effect anything else.

The goal here is to pick a rod that can launch a trout magnet, without a bobber, as far as physically possible while being short as possible. That very well may be a balancing act that I have to make some decisions about, but I'd like to make those decisions in an educated manner without going broke through trial and error. Any information you have on the topic would be helpful to me.

Thanks for reading.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/15/2016 10:33AM by Adam Hurst.

Fly rods are designed to cast line, spinning and casting rods are designed to cast lures. So there is a fundamental difference in their design parameters. To me flyrods built as spinning rods feel sloppy (soft) when casting, and thus lack crispness, responsiveness, and sensitivity. This sloppiness is due to the length of the rod combined with a more moderate action that bends further into the blank. A fast action fly rod is not the same as a fast action spinning rod. Such rods will work for casting lures, but it's more like catapulting then a casting. Some people like this very soft feel, I do not. I would use a 6.5'-7.5' ultra light to light spin blank, some can be found as two piece blanks.
Norm

Comments deleted



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2016 04:16PM by John E Powell.

Actually, both spinning/casting and fly rods are designed to cast the same thing - weight. The rod has no idea if it's coming from a lure or a weighted line. Rod blanks are simply tapered tubes and made the same way regardless of whether it's a spinning or a fly rod blank. Fly rod blanks are typically designed with less than extra fast actions, although some are. Spinning blanks are mostly available in fast actions, although some do feature more moderate tapers. But there is really no fundamental difference.

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

The "name" you give to a finished rod (fly, spinning, jig-and-pig, etc.) is less important than its measurable qualities. I would guess the vast majority of anglers can't explain the measurable difference between a fast-action blank, a heavy power blank, and a square-lip crank blank. Marketers have done their job. Several years ago I built an 8 1/2 foot Rainshadow Hot-Shot blank into a fly-rod blank. The blank didn't know the difference, but the finished rod performs beautifully.

The "name" you give to a finished rod (fly, spinning, jig-and-pig, etc.) is less important than its measurable qualities. I would guess the vast majority of anglers can't explain the measurable difference between a fast-action blank, a heavy power blank, and a square-lip crank blank. Marketers have done their job. Several years ago I built an 8 1/2 foot Rainshadow Hot-Shot blank into a fly-rod blank. The blank didn't know the difference, but the finished rod performs beautifully.

The "name" you give to a finished rod (fly, spinning, jig-and-pig, etc.) is less important than its measurable qualities. I would guess the vast majority of anglers can't explain the measurable difference between a fast-action blank, a heavy power blank, and a square-lip crank blank. Marketers have done their job. Several years ago I built an 8 1/2 foot Rainshadow Hot-Shot blank into a fly-rod blank. The blank didn't know the difference, but the finished rod performs beautifully.

The "name" you give to a finished rod (fly, spinning, jig-and-pig, etc.) is less important than its measurable qualities. I would guess the vast majority of anglers can't explain the measurable difference between a fast-action blank, a heavy power blank, and a square-lip crank blank. Marketers have done their job. Several years ago I built an 8 1/2 foot Rainshadow Hot-Shot blank into a fly-rod blank. The blank didn't know the difference, but the finished rod performs beautifully.

I think that everyone knows that rods are designed to cast a weight. But I also submit that there are design differences on how a rod stores and transfers energy along it length to effectively cast a certain type of weight. There is no question you can cast fly line with a spinning blank and you can cast a lure with a fly blank. However, one has to admit that fly rods and spin/cast rods are designed differently. These difference in design are what makes a flyrod cast fly line nicely when used as a fly rod but feel sloppy when used as a spin rod. I know that feel is a very subjective and personal term but none the less very important. I think that most fishermen know what I am talking about regarding 'feel' and it plays a major role in choosing and liking certain rod blanks . Again these are the things that makes a custom rod custom. Go with what you like.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/15/2016 01:42PM by Norman Miller.

Look fellas, I respect everyone's opinion, but that's not really what I'm after. I know how the rods work under their intended functions, but I'm specifically interested in how the rod's characteristics effect real world performance when casting lures. Regardless of your opinion, it's a thing people do and I'm going to as well. The simple fact is that my Frankenstein rod casts trout magnets like a dream. I'm trying to figure out why that is, if it can be done even better and how the different characteristics effect this performance.

Again, thanks very much. I don't mean to be flippant, I'm just really interested in this right now and there are limited resources for learning about such things. I'm hoping I can find someone who has actually done this so I can pick their brains. That might be asking a lot. I don't know. But sincere thanks anyway.

It works because they're all made the same way - they are the same except for the different tapers which are available in a wide variety in both spinning and fly. Your trout magnet rod has the taper/action that works for what you're doing. It has nothing to do with it being a fly blank or a spinning blank. It's the particular power and action and how it's matched to what you're doing. There is nothing magic about it.

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

I have a 9 1/2 foot steelhead spinning rod built from an expensive North Fork steelhead spinning blank. When I checked the CCS on it the numbers were almost identical to my Forecast RX6 F866-4 fly blank. Within a couple %. Both pennies and AA.

While I agree that most spinning rods built from traditional fly blanks feel a little loose and sloppy, I have a 3 wt 7 1/2 foot AmTac fly blank built into an ultr\a-light spin rod that is pretty good, and it casts 1/8 oz cranks very well. AA is 65%, which is not that sloppy. Overall nice spinning rod.

Most ultra lights from the past were no longer than 6 feet, more likely 5-6, and that's just too short for good casting and hook sets, IMHO. Now there are some really nice ultra-lite spin blanks in 6 1/2 to 7 which are faster than fly blanks, and for those who think fly blanks are too sloppy, they are the answer.

Of course it's not magic. That's exactly my point. But obviously I'm missing something here. Let me ask you some questions, Tom.

1. You say that it has nothing to do with fly or spin blank in particular. That means that my understanding that fly rods flex more than spin rods in general is incorrect? That's important because right now I'm thinking that any fly rod would throw the magnet better than any spin rod. I thought that fly rods just flex more.
2. So if it's power and action, what is the equation, for lack of a better term? What powers and actions are good at throwing what weights?
3. I'll just straight out ask. I like to understand concepts more than being given answer, but do you think a 7'6" 4wt would work just as well as my crazy Frankenstein rod?

That really was helpful. I just need to understand what you're saying better.

Micheal,

I totally understand the sloppiness and I like it. So how did you go about choosing a rod for this? What's the equation? I'd like to be able to hit trout and smaller bass on a short rod with tiny lures, but the only blanks I can find in a sensible price range for a first time build in a short length are 4wt in moderate action, but I don't have any context for how that would compare to my experimental rod. The last thing I want to do is spend a lot of energy building something that it work better on a 9' 5wt. I'll use a 9' if that's the answer, but I just have a general preference for short rods. Any further explanation of your process would be greatly appreciated.

Adam

A couple on point links follow:

ww.fieldandstream.com/blogs/fishing/2009/08/merwin-spinning-reels-fly-rods

[rodbuilding.org]

With regard to your question as to whether a 3 weight fly rod will snap if if you hit a 5 pound smallie, the answer is no provided you know what you are doing. The more important follow on question is whether or not it is truly sporting to target a 5 pound anything with such light or ultra-light gear.

Adam,
I've built spinning rods from fly blanks often, generally when the customer wanted long casts with small weights .
I've also built fly rods from spinning blanks.
Both perform as anticipated. Beautifully.
You should be cautious how much weight you hang on the intended blank.
Placing many large diameter heavy insert spinning guides on any long blank will slow the blank response making it "sloppy".
Casting 1/64 ounce jigs on any blank is a challenge. Adding a fly line will successfully propel that jig over 80'. If you can cast a fly rod.
Select the blank you wish, build it with the lightest and fewest guides, yes fly guides work for spinning rods.
Spool your reel with the lightest line you can use and set the drag appropriately. A 1/64 ounce jig isn't intended to pull 20# braid from a spool.
If you fish canopy utilize a shorter rod down to 6'.
Learn to cast a fly rod for very light weight presentations. Not impossible just requiring time and practice. Then you can cast 1/100 ounce.


Gene

There is no set amount of power for a "4-weight" rod. They differ from manufacturer to manufacturer. One company's "4-weight" is another company's "6-weight."

As far as what powers and actions work good with what and for what, that's not an easy answer because what you prefer is not going to be the same as what somebody else prefers. You need to get a baseline for what you're doing and compare from there.

I think you might benefit greatly from the Common Cents System. It won't tell you what blank will work best for your particular application, but once you dial in the numbers for what you have now that works well, it becomes an easy task to find similar blanks with the same power and action, or up or down a bit.

[www.common-cents.info]

And don't get mired down in the idea that the CCS measures fly rods - it doesn't. What it measures are action, power and speed, which are characteristics that all rod blanks have.

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

Your Frankenstein rod, as you mentioned, is a hybrid rod with a flexible and light tip from the flyrod and an apparently more powerful stiffer butt section from the spin rod. The light tip enables it to load properly with a light lure and the more powerful butt adds some punch by transferring additional energy to the tip. So I agree with you on your thinking that a shorter faster action rod might be the solution, but you still need the light tip to load the rod properly with the light lure. So going to a heavier wgt flyrod may not be the answer. I also agree with you that a blank designed with these parameters are hard to find. I have seen a few extra fast fly rod blanks from MHX that are 3 to 4 wgt and 7.5' to 8.5' long. Could also try to build using only the first three section of a long 4 piece fly rod. This will give you a shorter rod with a light tip.These options may work but only you will able to determine that. Another option might be to try one of the longer fast action ultralight blanks, the longer they get the softer they feel.
Finally, A lot of people give me broken rods and I love experimenting with them. Using tip sections from broken fly rods and butt sections from other rods I have been able to piece together some ultra light rods that will cast very light lures extremely well. Similar to your Frankenstein rod but shorter. If you have a broken rod stash you may be able to make a rod, Trouble is you may not be able to make a second one that matches.
Norm

Comments deleted



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2016 04:16PM by John E Powell.

Adam, the 3 wt fly blank is the AmTac AMF763, 7 1/2 feet. I chose it based on knowing that I needed about a 3 wt to cast the lures I wanted to cast and the length, which for boat fishing, is ideal for an ultra-light. This blank is a little faster than "traditional" fly actions, IMO. If I were fishing streams and wanted a little shorter rod I would consider cutting it from the butt. It is my guess that cutting more than 6 inches will alter the action/power so much that it won't be a similar blank any more.

At the time I chose this blank I didn't have the capability to test Common Sense, which I have now. Tom is right about CCS, it easily allows you to know what the characteristics you like are in solid numbers, not vague descriptions. So on my favorite blanks I know what the CCS numbers are. If I want to duplicate that feel/power/action with another brand's blank it becomes a problem if they don't publish their numbers. Good for Anglers Resource and Pac Bay for publishing CCS on some of their blanks. Too bad all don't.

An interesting finding I made after having CCS capability was that my favorite light baitcast crankbait rod by Loomis (an irreplaceable blank) is matched almost identically by the action/power of the Bushido light crank blank. So when I broke the Loomis (dumb mistake), I had an acceptable replacement. They felt the same, and when I checked the CCS numbers, lo and behold, they were essentially the same. By the way, I think that blank would make a very nice light action spinning blank.

What Tom is saying, that seems so hard for some to accept, is that a blank is a blank, and it has characteristics that can be measured. It just so happens that some sets of characteristics work better for most people if they use spinning reels, so they are called spinning blanks. Same for the characteristics that work best for most people fishing with fly lines and reels, and they are called fly blanks. My earlier comment on the North Fork blank are consistent with this argument. The blank is called spinning, but its characteristics match another blank called a fly blank. It just so happens for the specialized steelhead technique, the same characteristics that work for it also work for a 6 wt fly with "traditional" action. If I were to build this blank into a fly rod I would have a "6 wt fly rod with a traditional action."