This may help in the placement of guides on any rod. Guides may be placed in almost any fashion that will allow the line to move from the reel to the tip. The real question is how can we place the guides to allow this to happen with the most efficiency possible. First, if we establish a set of criteria that we want to meet we will know when we have accomplished it. I use the following criteria to set the guides on all rods: 1. The line should flow as straight as possible from the reel to the tip. 2. The line should form as small an angle as possible at each guide. 3. The line should touch only the top or bottom of a guide, never the side of the guide in all fishing positions. 4. The guides should be placed to eliminate line "chatter" (line vibrating between the guides). 5. The guides should be placed so the rod will "track" (the rod should move forward and backward with out torqueing or twisting). In addition the rod should be balanced and stabile. If these seven points or criteria are met the rod is set-up correctly.

Use the following tests to determine if you have met the set of criteria.
First tape the guides on the rod using any technique/procedure you please. Place the reel on the rod and run a line through the guides and tie the line to an object about 10 feet away. Now move the rod through all fishing positions, not to exceed a 90 degree bend. Check each of the criteria in virtually ever position. Does it fulfill the criteria? Yes, go to the next criteria. No, go back and make adjustments. Continue this process untill you have met the criteria, and then your rod is set correctly. Yes, that will take a great deal of time.

Within this concept, the equal angle and the progressive angle technique will mathematically ensure that these criteria will be met in the tip section of the rod based on the curve of that unique rod. My experience with setting the tip guides was very haphazard at best so the equal angle approach was a way to reduce the chance of error and the extra time necessary to move- tape-test-move-tape-test, etc. To be frank I have used the technique with probably over 1000 rods from ultra lite spinning, fly, casting to 80 lb. trolling rods and it works on on the guide placement for the tip section (down to the point where the bend starts) on all of them.

There are many ways of setting-up the guides for the straight part of the rod but the criteria should remain in effect until it is satisfied. Just writing an article for simple guide placement does not seem very difficult but some how the words and the mental pictures don't always turn out the same. We will have several programs related to this topic at the Conclave where you can see the words.

I have read with interest the posts concerning Don's methods. He has done a great job at providing another method to accomplish a task that is bothersome and difficult for some rod builders (especially newbies) to do in a reasonable amount of time. Don's is like other methods, it gets you in the ball park for further fine tuning.

What everyone must remember is that rod building is a work of "compromise". We want to attain the best setup for a specific rod based on criteria we establish for 'that particular rod' or rods of similar type and action. There is no magic, single or best method to do this. After your first couple of rods you develop a feel for how the next rod should be set up. 99% of the time, if you find a setup that works for one particular action, it will work for all other blanks of that action.

What are the some of the compromises related to guides? My main ones are the following.

1. Am I using the fewest number of guides sized and spaced to keep the line off the blank?

2. Am I using a guide of proper design and strength relating to line weight, type of line, blank strength, expected use of the rod, etc.

3. Does the setup 'look' right?

The final judge/s of how well you have accomplished this is you/your customers. Theories are good but until the rod is built and used, you can't be sure if you have it right.

I don't think that I have ever built a rod that I could not improve. I have one 12' surf rod here that I have built at least three times. I keep finding something else that I want to do with it. But, nothing I have done to it so far has 'drastically' increased performance. Putting a spiral wrap on it drastically reduced performance so it has been changed back to a standard wrap.

I put little faith in claims that a rod will cast farther using one system or another. If you hand a normal "run of the mill fishing person" a rod that is accompanied with a 'claim' that it will outcast any other rod, that guy is going to do his best to make the rod do just that. On the other hand, if you hand an "experienced fisherman" and just simply tell him to use it and give you his opinion, you will get a much better indication of performance. He will tell you what you want to know without you having to answer specific questions.

For example, I built a 7' new concept spinning rod for 6 people to take turns using on a 2 week trip to Panama City this year. I told them to just try and wear the rod out that I didn't care what it looked like when they got back. I didn't tell them anything about why the rod was built like it was. All of them were also carrying the identical spinning rods that I had sold them prior to this and that I had been designing based on my guide criteria for many years. When they got back I simply asked them how the rod did. To a man they said that the guides were too small and too lightweight and it didn't cast as good as their other rods. This was 'their' perception and unbiased opinion of how I built the new concept rod. They had no reason to @#$%& me because they had already bought and used other rods that I had built.

What I am long windedly getting to here is that there are many tools and methods out there to do just about anything you want them to do. Test casting with guides taped or rubber banded on is only a test. But, until you build and actually fish the rod, you won't have a clue if you have accomplished you goals. Don't be scared that you are going to make a mistake. It is simple to cut guides off and move them around until you find the performance that you are looking for.

That is why I have converted to the new Fuji concept method or I use the Roberts Wrap (spiral or acid wrap). I have had great success with both
Goog luck and have a Happy New year Bob

I can't disagree with either Mike or Don, and good information from both is appreciated.

Don has got to be the mathematic master of explaining and representing a systematic, and perhaps as scientific as one can get with guide placement and performance. Indeed, no one can disregard the dedication and thought put into this as his equal and progressive angle placement grids and tools which can produce valuable information at rodbuilder's disposal. Don also approaches beauty with function in rodbuilding with his math and systematics which often is very well explained, but also one can appreciate the complexity of all variables that go into a fishing experience and the use of rods. The systematic and scientific approach is a thing of beauty to explain much about blank vs. guide placement and line flow behavior.

The only thing which one might add is the practical and artistic nuances that can be introduced with explaining systematic absolutes in rodbuilding. For example, why does one particular blank just "Feel" right to one expert and yet may be mediocre no matter what degree of 'perfection' with optimal guide placement? What may be a tool of mastery in the hands of one 'perfectionist' may be something another would care to further 'tweak' to his methodology of perfection that may not be based on any particular scientific or mathematical fact.
But facts do speak for themselves, in terms of the simplest fundamentals as Don points out for determining the 5 basic criteria for best rod performance and line path. I doubt anyone would disagree with this basic approach which really makes a lot of common sense.

What can add more to the 'mystery' of 'mastery' can be in things we might take for granted such as not evaluating the variables between what is optimum 'other things' being used on the rod, such as line, the reel size, weight, type of guides (size?) and even maybe something to do yet with material composition of the blank which is not fully understood yet that could present wrinkles for casting performance?
Variables are variables, which means that rodbuilders will still do the 'tweak' with perhaps moving guide placement a bit to accomodate a 'system' (concept?) or size (high frame, thinner ring?).
My belief is that these can add much more variability than simply determining optimimum guide placement and alignment. All things being equal though, the idea of equal angle placement and 'best' progressive angle placements are an excellent starting point and probably save time that is left more to the fun part of 'tweaking'.

In the end really, the beauty of custom rodbuilding is maybe sort of like judging a figure skating event with systematics for best function (performance), as well as artistic impression- they both go together as does Stucture and Function, Fit and Appearance, Artistry vs. Performance, etc. Don't think these can easily be separated, otherwise we would not talk about how does the rod "Feel"? We must also understand fundamentals and limitations that are basic, which we need to progress with for the best transmission of line out from the butt end to the tip end and beyond. This is what Don and guys like Kirkman do very well in presenting to us.

Don, as you point out, in many testings of thousands of occurrences the thing 'works'. That in itself is not scientifically defining in terms of degrees or comparisons. Also, mentioning earlier that that guide placement in any fashion will carry the line from the butt to the tip, which also 'works'. These are yet the ideasYou are to be congratulated greatly on the new concepts you present though, and this is highly appreciated and thought provoking.

(of course, I've a habit in my student days of harrassing the science professors with this type of provocation and making them 'feel' like explaining even more).

my thoughts

Rich
Solyrich Custom Rods

If someone prefers the old cone of flight spin rod to one with a PROPERLY executed New Guide Concept system, they are not being objective. To say the guides were too small and too light for what? To cast well just can't be the case. I see a night and day difference between the old cone of flight rods and the new guide concept. The problem with so many of these things is that rod builders don't set them up right.

A guy I knew who built rods told me the spiral wrap system was awful and he would never use it again. When I looked at his rod I saw why he thought it was awful. The line actually touched the blank as it went to the underside! No wonder he didn't like it. But it didn't mean the spiral wrap was bad, just that HIS spiral wrap was bad.

Never before have we had the kind of information and information exchange that we have now. But it won't help you if you don't study it and use it correctly.

I'd go along with most of that. Some things we know to be true. The New Guide Concept when properly set up will outcast any other spinning guide set up. The spiral wrap will best any guides on top casting set up for stability and cast at least as good. But you have to arm yourself with a little information in order to get them right.

I think it is refreshing to see rod builders actually going out and trying new set ups in different ways. I can't tell you how many professional builders I know who use guide spacing charts and make every rod the same way, for whatever reel or person walks through the door. And they call these 'custom' rods.

These are good times for building rods!

Sometimes I wonder if it is even worth posting opinions rather than just answering technical questions. Wish I had a delete post button.

I doubt any of this was aimed at anyone personally. I know that some of the newer techniques really are gimmicks made to sell stuff, but other techniques are the real deal if you set them up correctly. This is a great board where a lot of information gets swapped back and forth. You take what you can use and bypass the rest.

My first attempts at the new guide system were straight from the Fuji website. I used their spacing and sizing and didn't like what I got. I lost distance over what I had been using previously. And quite a bit at that. I dumped it until I read the system as it was presented in the July-August Rodmaker last year. I tried it that way and got much better results. Better than my usual type guide setup. There is no question that are many ways to do the same thing and some are better than others. I say keep playing around with things until you either run out of options or stumble into something better. That's how we learn.

When I first tried the Fuji New Guide Concept I was met with results that were much less than I had hoped. But the concept made sense to me and I thought it might work with a better means of implementation.

I spent quite some time working with the concept and figuring a better way to set it up. Now I have a system - the one in the July/August 2000 RodMaker, that lets me set it up in about 3 or 4 mintues and I know it will cast as far or farther than any other set-up I am aware of. It will also be lighter. Enough so, that you can feel the difference in the hand.

I have recently made some improvements to the information we printed in that issue last year, which makes it even quicker to set up. The update will be in the next issue of the magazine.

I recently set up a light spinning rod with the Concept system. In my own tests I was unable to set up the same blank with any other guide placment, sizing or configuration would could best the simple and direct Concept system as outline in the magazine. Some got within 2 or 3 feet, but no closer. Overall the Concept system gave me perhaps a 5 to 10 foot increase over anything else I tried.

One word of caution, you cannot just utilize the Fuji Concept guides and place them in a casual manner and say you are using the New Guide Concept System - you aren't. There is a line path that must be adhered to and it will determine the sizing and placement of the guides. Many factory rods use the Fuji Concept Guides but none that I know of use the New Guide Concept system.
..........................

Mike,
Nothing at all wrong with the observations and opinons expressed. The idea of having an experienced user of the rod for testing performance is something I rely on more than you can imagine. When a tournament angler can grab a rod of your 'concept' and prove that it is what they like in a rod, it only helps to improve your rodbuilding to a higher level. I enjoy the opinions expressed here, whether they are theoretical, factual, experimental, or make good sense. If things are flat out unacceptable, I am sure someone will step in and help correct falacies. Nothing really is engrained in stone about rodbuilding, and I would also agree about the idea of "compromise" as that is probably the only way of deaing with all the variables including human behavior in rod casting.
For example, side arm casting can throw some real curves into the 'perfect' spiral wrapped rod just completed. What a variable? not considered, but it's the only way the guy will cast. Who is to argue if you design a particular spiral variation to take this type of motion into considerations and have success with it? It may be the exact 'wrong' thing for a so-called conventional overhand casting person, and we thought we had it all correct? right? Another variation may be to see how the person is holding the rod while casting as to where the wrist is angled in relation to the release. Something less thought about, but can often restrict performance.

Now, I am rambling with opinions. but to wish a good post deleted based on opinion and observation would offer less to the viewer in terms of a balanced picture which experienced custom rodbuilders wish to present.

Don't be embarrassed by your post. It give good honest observation which often is good to know about true 'field testing' by others using our custom rods or if we just need to find out what can work better.

Rich