New To Rod Building.

[Nu2Cal]

Hello everyone,

I have been making/modifying lures for years now and I have decided to give rod building a try. I am interested in building a 7' MH fiberglass crankbait baitcasting rod with specs as follows: line 12-20 lb, lure weight 3/8-1 oz., butt size .658", tip 7.0/64th. I would like to put an EVA foam split grip on this rod as well and I have some questions about the components/materials.

As far as guides go, I have done some searching on this forum and have found little information on what sizes to use for a rig like this. So, I would appreciate any clarification on what size guides to use for this particular set up.

I am also curious to know if I can use an epoxy like Devcon, or is there a rod building specific epoxy? And if the butt size is as stated above what size reel seat should I use?

I will probably have many more questions to ask in the future, but if there is any other advice you can think of that would be useful to someone just starting out it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Joe

[Mattman]

You can buy sets of guides that will accomplish your guide selection for you.

Personally, I tend to dislike sets as I feel they are typically too large and have too many sizes. But, it does take some experience to get to that point. You need to be able to factor in your line sizes, line connection knots, etc.

I'd go with a size 12 double foot, a size 8 single foot bridge, and size 5 fly guides for the remainder of the guides. Spiral wrapped.

Do NOT use Devcon. Great for baits...POOR for rods. Flex Coat, LS 2000 Supreme, Thread Master, etc. There are a good number of thread finishes out there. Use them.

The reel seat and guide sizes have no relation. Most Bass rods are using a size 16 seat.

[Nu2Cal]

Thanks Mattman. I was actually thinking of using the Devcon to set the grip and reel seat, but I will look into getting some Flexcoat epoxy. I'm assuming the fly guides are single foot, correct. I don't have any experience casting the spiral wraped guides. Will it have an effect on casting distance?

Joe

[freon1112]

Do not wrap a rod that you plan on casting with a spiral wrap, this is very good for trolling, but will add a lot of drag to a casting rod. look at rodbuilding.com and mudhole.com and you will be a rod building genius in no time, they have full pictorials and videos that show you how to properly wrap a rod and have rod size and spacing so that you get them close. I like to add more eyes so that it keeps the line off of the blank and makes the lure go farther, just my opinion.

I am certainly not a guru on rods, but I have built a few "good ones"

here is an example

[zaugrishak5150]

Flex Cloat, Diamonite II, Permagloss all have worked well for finishing rods in my experience. For mounting reel seats and grips I only use Rod Bond now.

If you spend the time to set up the eyes right, a spiral wrap will cast a mile. I built one to use as a mini surf-style baitcaster for pier fishing on Lake Michigan, it works well. Having said that I have built 7 "normal" baitcasters since.

I agree about Mudhole, great place for one stop shopping, especially since they added lure making parts recently.

[Mattman]

I whole heartedly disagree with the spiral wrap comments. They do NOT impact casting distance. That is a false claim.

I spiral wrap all of my personal casting rods. The biggest reason is because there is no down side to it. Only ups.

Benefits to spiral wrapping as I see it…

• Eliminate rod torque. With the guides on the bottom the pressure from the fish isn’t trying to spin the guides to the underside of the blank because they are already there and there is no twisting torque applied to the blank.
  
• Eliminate line scrub. With a guides on top rod when you flex the rod the line can then touch the blank.
  
• Reduction in weight. With a spiral wrap since line scrub isn’t an issue, fewer guides can be used. That helps with weight. With a spiral wrap single foot guides can be used even on the heaviest rods since there is no side pressure on the guides. The loss of an extra foot, thread and finish is a big help with the reduction in weight.
  

A reduction in weight (fewer guides, fewer guide feet, fewer wraps) is going to aid in sensitivity. All of those things add some encumbrance to the blank and reduce its efficiency in transmitting vibration.

You can see in this photo...two identical rods...one spiral wrapped and one conventional wrapped...both mounted in ball bearings...both with the same weight strung from reel seat, thru the guides... http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t288/Otterods/Reference/Spiral.jpg The conventionally wrapped rod wants to turn upside down because of the guides being on top of the rod. Once turned, this rod is very difficult to turn back. The spiral wrapped rod remains stable.

And here you can see how a blank twists... http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t288/Otterods/Reference/bentrod.jpg While most graphite rods can resist that force, it is still there. And if you can get rid of it, why not?

Devcon will work for assembly. However I would use an epoxy designed for assembly, like Rod Bond.

Fly guides are single foot guides.

[freon1112]

I whole heartedly disagree with the spiral wrap comments. They do NOT impact casting distance. That is a false claim.

so then I must be missing something, it you turn a casting rod into a spinning rod and you want to use less eyelets, that doesnt make a lot of sense in my book. If you followed that theory, why not just wrap a spinning rod and use three eyelets?

the reason you use more eyelets is so that you get less line slap on the blank and by twisting line around anything, you are adding more friction and increasing your ability to have your line slap your rod blank even more. I do believe that you are doing well with your rod, but I would have a very difficult time believing that if all things were equal, that you can outcast a rod with more eyelets and in line then with a spiral wrap and less eyelets. Using a flyrod with not enough eyelets will quickly prove this. Just my two cents worth. In any case NU, I hope you wrap the rod of your dreams.

[Mattman]

so then I must be missing something,

Yes you are.

why not just wrap a spinning rod and use three eyelets?

Why would you ever use that few guides? Sure, if you carry it the ridiculous, you'll have issues. As with anything.

Using a flyrod with not enough eyelets will quickly prove this.

At no point did I ever say to use not enough guides. Again, if you're going to carry this to the ridiculous, you'll have poor results.

You always need to use enough guides to get the job done. With a guides on top rod most add more guides because when the blank is flexed, the line scrubs against the blank. You can get rid of those extra guides by putting them under the rod where the line will never touch the blank.

and by twisting line around anything, you are adding more friction

This is the falsehood that most cling to. If you look at a spiral wrap, the line just is off to the side of the blank by a small amount. So many that have never done one or looked at one get this idea that the line need to take this long circuitous path around the blank. It doesn't.

but I would have a very difficult time believing that if all things were equal, that you can outcast a rod with more eyelets and in line then with a spiral wrap and less eyelets.

Properly set up and constructed, you will not lose casting distance.

Read the literature. Set one up properly and see for yourself.

I’ve done hundreds of them. Not only have I never had a single complaint, most rave about the performance and don’t understand why the factories don’t build spiral wrapped rods. Gary Loomis tried back in the 80’s but the public wasn’t ready.

[freon1112]

Matt, while I dont agree with your logic, I do think that each of us finds what works for us. I do have two spiral wrapped rods that I use for trolling and I have wrapped unconventional rods because they work for me.

with that being said, I dont think either of us are going to make much of an impact on the other, but one day, I will probably try wrapping one just because you are so passionate about them.

Good luck with yours and I hope you slay some fat fish on them.

James,

[Mattman]

Anyone and everyone is certainly able to prefer one or the other for various reasons that often times can't even be explained definitively.

However, if that reason is a loss of casting distance, I would argue strongly that the rod wasn't built properly.

[Lil'skeeter]

Every rod I've built has been micro/spiral wrapped and I've taken several of my older rods and converted them to micro/ spiral wraps. Also you can't use less guides just because they're on the bottom. You want your line to follow the contour of the rod as closely as possible or you defeating the purpose of the action of the blank. Some people like them, some don't. You do have to use a good line though, one with as little memory as possible.

[Ggeorge]

Not to be an antagonist but having read the two sides of the spiral wrap discussion and looking at the photos related to the fellow who suggests spiral wrapping is no advantage I have to conclude that these two have profoundly different perspectives of what constitutes a well built rod.

 

I've been knocking together rods for 25 plus years on an amateur level and started out wanting to do designs and mixed color cork set ups and was drawn in by the shiny gold guide frames and all that sort of thing. Then one day one of the best in the game, a builder who managed a Loomis facility as well as a custom retail outlet for Loomis / Sage / Fenwick / Lamiglas.....you get the idea..... pointed out the great benefits of less is more on a rod. Less thread, less epoxy, less cork, lighter reel seats etc etc etc. I don't use hook keepers or metal winding checks or trim colors on most of my guides, I don't even use reel seats unless it's a baitcasting / trolling design (as this discussion pertains to). I stick to just cork and slip ring reel seats in most cases, I add little tape or a wire lock to keep them in place. Sparse as possible, less to break, less to lift and cheaper overall. Bells and whistles are noisy.

 

Based on the photos posted showing the work of Freon I'd say this builder has not in any way grasped the less is more concept, for him it seems weight and un-compromised blank action are low priorities. It certainly appears that the thread art and cork inlay work is intricate and complex as well as highly refined. In my opinion these qualities add nothing to the function or usefulness of a rod and unless heavier and stiffer with a dulled sensitivity is the goal.

 

Contrastingly Mattman seems to be very focused on action, function and the idea that a sparse and light approach gets you the best result.

 

Spiral wraps do make sense because friction through guides is consistent regardless of the guide ring axis orientation. Line drag is related only to line qualities and guide qualities. Angle of contact remains unimportant, regardless the friction coefficient between line and guide is the same.

 

Blank torque on the other hand is negative and eventually most blank breaks occur as a result of either compression or rotational torque. If a blank spends tons of time in a rod holder arched toward a heavy lure or downrigger and also torqued sideways due to standard wrapped guides, the wear / stress factor is amplified. Same function occurs during casting but is not sustained so breakage is further away but it will eventually occur if side load rotational torque is repeated often enough.

 

These guys are arguing apples and oranges here in the sense that they appear to have very different view points regarding what constitutes a well built rod.

 

I happen to agree with the idea that less is more, in all aspects. Less thread, less glue, less stress on the blank all results in less stress to the user which keeps you sharp and fishing longer better....thats the "more"

 

In terms of pure engineering and physics there is no difference between spiral and standard when it comes to the efficiency of line traveling thru the guides. However if you are going to spend or expend the effort for a high end custom casting or trolling rod with or without Captain Morgan woven into the butt wrap you might as well get the most life possible out of it. The standard wrapped blank will fail sooner than the spiral wrapped blank due to rotational stresses. Might be talking about an almost immeasurable situation due to variables of day to day fishing experience but under strict controlled testing I'll guarantee the rod that bends in a straight line outlasts by a huge amount the one that is twisted or torqued constantly

 

Want to test this yourself, take any fragile and bendable stick, pipe, rod blank you don't care about or Golf Club, or hockey stick and bend it till you get the sense it's near breaking. Once you have your test item stressed this far twist it without increasing the bend. It should be obvious without actually doing my lame experiment that this amounts to extra stress and will eventually cause breakage. But if you don't believe me give it a try.

 

People are freaked out by change

Edited March 19, 2013 by Ggeorge

[Lil'skeeter]

A member of our bass club won a rod that I built in a giveaway that we do each year. It was a 7'3" MHX heavy that was micro/spiral wrapped. Yesterday he brought me two NEW Duckett Micro Magic rods and a Cabela's Prodigy the he wants to be converted to spiral wraps.

Everyone will argue their point until they're blue in the face.    Both sides argue convincingly.

 

You just need to decide if you like it or not.

 

I have personal rods that I WON'T convert......just because i don't want to!